Preference: writing or paper loss?

[usernamealreadytaken]

All things being equal, if you had to choose, would you prefer card that has writing or paper loss on the back?

[Snapolit1]

Probably paper loss.

[cincyredlegs]

I think it depends on where the paper loss is (and how much) and where the writing is.

I prefer writing over paper loss personally.

Mark

[SetBuilder]

Writing, depending on what kind, adds a bit of character to the card. That's not a problem.

Paper loss, on the other hand, is a deal breaker for me. Cards with paper loss on the back, especially cards that contain player information like Goudeys, are too damaged for my tastes.

[gregr2]

Interesting. I haven’t really thought about it but now that you bring it up, I think I would prefer a card with writing. With writing on it, I know the entire card is there, intact. Paper loss is just that, part of the card is lost.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jchcollins]

If it were minor enough on the back, I probably wouldn't care between writing or paper loss. On the front - paper loss - so long as it's confined to a corner or small area of the border.

[Sean]

Writing is the lesser of two evils for me.

[ls7plus]

It had better be a very tough card either way, but the extent/size of either is a big factor also.

Best wishes,

Larry

[Jim65]

Paper loss, intentional damage like writing, tack holes, trimming, etc is not generally allowed in my collection unless its a super rare item.

[brianp-beme]

I kinda like some nice writing on the back, and am okay if it is extensive as well. I also usually am fine with paper loss, as long as it is not too excessive.

Now if you have a card that has been attached to a wood plague and has had the write-up on the back of card transferred to the back of the plaque and has had a little cross-hatched engraving to boot, well, nothing tops that.

Brian

[bnorth]

Neither bother me if the card is priced accordingly. Here is my 55 Bowman Mickey Mantle with a spec of paper loss on the back.

[tonyo]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Now if you have a card that has been attached to a wood plague and has had the write-up on the back of card transferred to the back of the plaque and has had a little cross-hatched engraving to boot, well, nothing tops that.

Brian

I agree ! - that is way cool Brian. one of the favorite "odd-ball" items I have seen on n54

[conor912]

I used to despise both, but I now have several cards in my collection that have been written on where the writing actually adds to the card (for me anyway). I love writing that adds to the history of the piece (I.e. stats, notes about the player, etc ). I even have a couple where the writing was the whole reason I bought it.

[Thecafewha]

Prefer not to have paper loss on the front. The back can have either depending on the the rarity of the card.

As a Venezuelan Topps collector, I would prefer glue residue left on the card than paper loss. Some even have legible pieces from the original album still attached. Looks much nicer than a fresh looking surface tear.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dabigyankeeman]

On the back, writing is ok to me as its usually not big or oppressive.

[NonSportDaniel]

While I'm no fan of paper loss, for me there is nothing worse than writing on a card. No greater sin. I know that others feel differently but that includes autographs. Writing is writing in my eyes.

[celoknob]

It seems to me paper loss is always worse. If you don’t like the writing you can just remove the offending paper and transfer the card into state of ‘paper loss’ instead of ‘writing’. You can’t do the reverse.

With that said I can often accept cards with either.

[steve B]

I agree with the balancing act.

For me it's a combination of what card, what damage and at what price.
If it's a really common card I have kept several with paperloss, water damage, writing, tears etc. They came in lots I bought and I didn't have an example, so I just file them away with the others. Probably foolish, as the effort to figure out if a new card is an upgrade is often more than the value of both cards.


If it's an otherwise expensive card, any damage is ok with me as long as the price reflects the damage.

[Hxcmilkshake]

I was tracking a low price 53 Mantle on eBay. It had a giant "B" written then erased on the front. I was willing to live with it cuz it looked pretty nice otherwise but the wife, who knows nothing about cards, said "but there's a giant B on it, that's stupid"

So yeah. 2 viewpoints.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[ClementeFanOh]

I'd take paper loss, as a minor amount of paper loss is (sometimes) hard to spot, whereas writing tends to jump off the page as a flaw. SGC, which I prefer, is FAR too harsh on most paper loss.

[tonyo]

Not a fan of paper loss, but I can live with it if it isn't across the face or uniform logo or write-up text on the back.

Love me some period handwriting on the back. don't care for it on the front although I am partial to this card as it seems to say something about the day (I guess)