What kind of collector are you? (Quality or Quantity)

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

One way of collecting is to purchase the highest graded cards one can afford. Using the great SGC service on www.vintagecardprices.com, I was able to see that there have been no auctions for T206 cards graded higher than SGC 88 in the past year (SGC 88 is the equivalent of PSA 8, if I have done my math correctly). And there have been exactly 5 auctions for SGC 88 cards in the past year:

11/19/06 eBay White (Foley, Houston) $3,999.00
10/4/06 Goodwin Dineen $1,485.20
10/3/06 Old Judge Davis (Phila. Davis On Front) $1,853.50
6/8/06 Goodwin Killian (Portrait) $4,200.73
12/9/05 Mastro Bender (Pitching, No Trees In Background) $6,407.28

If I were the winning bidder on all of those cards, I'd have paid about $18K -- or about $1,500/month. When I was putting my T206 set together, the average of my monthly expenses in my most active year was probably about $1,000/month. But I kept my bids to SGC 60 and below, generally speaking, thus maximizing the number of cards I could get towards completing the set. I think this makes might make me a "quantity" collector, as opposed to a "quality" collector. (Of course, now having achieved the desired quantity, I am now moving up in quality; but since I'd like to do this in my lifetime, I am still sacrificing quality for quantity.)

What kind of collector are you?

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe D.

I am not particularly a condition freak... so I would say I am in the 'quantity' camp.

But, the stuff I seem to like is expensive enough in low-grade so... 'quantity' is a term used loosely.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee

I go with quantity, but usually good looking cards. This is the only way I can collect all of the T206's and rare backs.

Lee

[Archive]

Posted By: JK

quantity - though appearance is definitely important to me so I generally try to only pick up low grade cards that present well. I guess I collect "Qualnity".

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

T-206,

I tend to believe it's a natural progression towards vintage quality items. First you (at least I did) start collecting the junky shiny stuff, then you find out more about the hobby and start collecting fifties and sixties stuff, then you go pre-war. Right now I'm not willing to pay a premium for high quality pre-war stuff, but of course if somebody offers me a good deal on a PSA 7 T-206 Christy Mathewson Portrait I would still jump on it.

But the way the market is right now people have no reason to offer me a good deal, they could simply consign to one of the auction houses and get 3 times as much as I would pay.

Petr

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Hines

I prefer lower grade cards because I like to think that they have "traveled" to me. For this reason I collect as many Cincinnati Reds cards I can get. If I limited to just quality I would probably have about 3 times more money invested and my collection would probably encompass about 10 cards vice the hundreds I currently have. I love picking up a dozen or more cards in a short span of time (it is like Christmas anytime of year!).

Tom

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Neither

As far as vintage cards in general


Scarcity over Common

The scarcer the more Im interested.

Condition unimportant (except for price)

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

as metnitoned before, 15 years ago i started collecting as many T206 cards as i could, mostly low-mid grade (quantity)...BUT, over the last few years, i have made an effort to focus on high grade (quality)...and because of that i only have a few dozen cards...but they are "pertty"...

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I am with you. Another board member who has super rare stuff, but only a few cards, feels the same way. I want stuff that is presentable but definitely gravitate towards rarity.....which sort of excludes quantity.

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

...i'll also add that i too, gravitate towards scarcer cards...one of my main focuses (which i have really upgraded & fine-tuned over the years), are T206 rare backs. i also love the variations, SLers...etc...

[Archive]

Posted By: E, Daniel

so if a particular card of an issue is rare (or SCARCE, Leon ) with a population graded by the big three of under 25 total, then a card that presents well is all that matters, SGC10 - 40 most likely.
If its a more common card with more than 50 or so graded, I like to collect at a grade that falls in the top 30% slabbed.
This allows me to enjoy my cards, feel I have something unusual in that it has survived in the shape that it has - or at all, and leaves me comfortable believing that a ready market for my collectibles are likely should I ever want, or need to sell them.
But i never, ever, buy for quantity - because for me then it would just be stuff. There are probably only 90-100 cards I have any desire to own, and if it takes me 20 years to get them, well, awesome.

regards
Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot Reader

I try and strike a balance between quantity and quality. My collection ranges from VG-EX to NM, with a target grade of EX to EX-NM. I love sharp looking EX-NM cards that have slight corner wear as the only noticeable flaw.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Quality--Must be PSA 8 or better-- and quantity--I am doing lots of sets in 8 or better.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

I prefer a quantity of quality cards. Unfortunately I get neither. I get a limited amount of junk. But it's happy junk!

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

For 80% of my collection, I buy the nicest cards that make sense for my budget, and I try and balance scarcity with grade as best I can. I try not to accept tears, pinholes, or writing but will accept cancellation punch-holes and will accept writing on cards where writing is common.

For the other 20%, I overspend for higher grades.

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Fred,

Sometimes I feel the same way you do. Laugh out loud. From the above it is apparent that quality has at least 2 components: 1) the grade of the card, and 2) rarity. Since almost everybody on this board is attempting to collect rare cards to some degree and visually appealing cards, virtually all of us are concerned about quality.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: steve f

I don't know what I'm doing in this hobby yet.

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

quanity.....i like cards and don't have the $$$ to afford quality.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brett

If any of you saw the last "Beater" Thread, you would already know the answer for me

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

On some sets, I am with Leon and Frank: Rare = take what you can find. Anyone who's seen my Lefty O'Doul collection knows that. Ditto for expensive cards. I'd rather have my T206 collection than a few T206 8 HOFers.

On common stuff, I go for the best cards I can find at the best prices. Example: my work in progress 1971 set, which I hand pick from 1000's of commons at shows. The dozen I sent in for slabbing (during a special, just to see what my eye is like) have pulled SGC 86-96 grades. On cheap stuff, best I can find. My late 1970s cards are stellar.

[Archive]

Posted By: fessgreg

I collect HOF's by quality but of course I have only a few. t206's are so nice though I wished I could make myself collect by quantity!

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard

I have very few cards, and they are almost all low grade. Crap. I guess I am neither.

[Archive]

Posted By: Wesley

Owning PSA 8 and PSA 9 cards of relatively common cards like T206s and Goudeys do not interest me at all.

Like Frank, Leon, Adam and many other collectors, I would much rather own cards that are rare, even if they are in lesser conditions.

[Archive]

Posted By: Blach

I tend to be eclectic. Like FKW I steer towards the obscure, less common items. If no one else has it I want it. With that attitude I guess I will choose quality over quantity though quality does not necessarily translate into condition.

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

i agree with the rarity thought...but you could also look at it this way: high-grade T206's (or goudey's, etc.) are rare as well...1/3...1/2...none higher, etc...

just some food for thought...

[Archive]

Posted By: Wesley

That is true. T206s in high grades are beautiful and I don't think you can go wrong collecting those.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Wesley,

Most of us do not insist on PSA 8 T-206s, so what would you consider a high grade. My rule of thumb for the T-206s is I would consider PSA 5 to PSA 7 to be high grades.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Grading is subjective, so who really knows how many "psa 8" quality cards there are of a particular T206, or any card. Where collecting rare issued cards is plain as day. Low quantity is quality.

[Archive]

Posted By: bruce Dorskind

Quality is Job 1 and always will be.

Our focus is type cards and New York Yankeees in pre WWII issues
and Bowman 53 Black and White (just for fun)

75% of our type cards are PSA 8 or PSA 9.

In a select few 19th century sets, there are SGC 80 or 84 and/or PSA 6 or 7
Some E Sets have fewer than 5 cards graded in 7 or above and so the
sample we have is a 6.

The 1953 Bowman B&W effort (about 35% complete) is all 8's with one 9.

The perference is to allocate resources to the best conditioned cards
available rather than lower grade cards.

Bruce

[Archive]

Posted By: dstudeba

Rarity over quantity and condition. Unfortunately there are a few others here who don't spend enough time away from eBay, or looking for rare coins. Otherwise I would have rarity and quantity instead of rarity in a single shoebox.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

I'd like to clarify something (ok, drop a bomb in the middle of the discussion which I hope doesn't take the thread too far off track).

When people indicate that they collect quality are you people stating that the card can only be a quality card if it's slabbed an "8" or "9" by some third party grading service whose subjectivity and skill at detecting alterations can be questioned? I suppose you could go as far as using a "5" or "6" card as a quality card if the inaccurate population reports reflect that those are the highest grades available for those cards.

You can have all the "8" and "9" cards you want but if you know (os suspect) that the card is trimmed or altered, does that count as quality?

[Archive]

Posted By: anthony

for me its "eye appeal" or appearance....i like the way specific cards look even ifs it's not the player's best or expensive card. i'd rather spend $300 on a card that looks cool to me than the more popular $2000 card that everyone else is after...i also dig some of the cool looking backs like mello mints, red sun, lenox etc...

right now i still need the following 3 cards that just happen to be pretty popular with a lot of board members

1. mayo anson
2. cj jackson
3. zeenut weaver

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

A very good point. It seems that we have all defaulted to high grade = quality. Perhaps a better definition would encompass both rarity and grade. I am pleased to correct myself to state that I collect high quality cards

[Archive]

Posted By: Alan

I'm still just getting started in collecting cards of Jewish players.

The card must be really horrible condition - if it grades more than a PSA 1, it's too nice.

[Archive]

Posted By: DJ

Quantity, but scarcity as well. Not particularily fond of high grade cards and would rather have a shoebox full of something that one thing. I tried to start a similar post and I kind of figured the three that would go after Quality , but most are in favor of Quantity (or scarcity) as expected. I love those D380 cards that Keith just bought! Yummy...most certainly scarcity.

DJ

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott T

I have a very low grade T206 collection. Currently, I have 483 of the 524 cards (all SGC) with the average grade being approximately 24, about halfway between "fair" and "good".

With that being said, I am reminded of joke George Carlin once said, "I never had a 10, but one night I had five 2's"!

Put me in the quantity camp.


Scott

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

High grade is simply one form of rarity.

It is the rarer cards which contribute to the "specialness" of a collection.

[Archive]

Posted By: Billy Stair

My style depends.

Pre-war I am definately qunaity as the disposable income is not there for high grades.

Post-war to 1971 I am definately quality as I only have around a 100 cards but they are high grade / high dollar cards.

Bill

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Novotny

I guess I would qualify as a quantity collector. I am trying to complete sets and maybe one of these days I might just do that. Yeah....right!

[Archive]

Posted By: Bobby Binder

During that same time period while only 4 SGC 88's have sold there have been 173 PSA 8's and 14 PSA 9's


I did not take the time to add up all the numbers but would guess it to be around 1 million in sales.

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

...interesting numbers...

out of the 14 PSA 9's, i purchased 5 of them (and have since sold or traded them away)...too hot to handle...like a hot potato...

i am focusing on 7's & 8's...and rarities, (just traded tonight for an o'hara SGC 30, and a uzit SGC 40)...

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

As a collector of photos, I prefer rare. If someone has a baseball card set in Mint condition, that means the cards are plentiful. There's nothing inferior with collecting plentiful, but that's not what I'm interested in ... Creating a highest grade set usually is an attempt to create rarity out of plentitude.

From my collecting taste, unless it has diamonds or a hood orniment, I don't know why someone would pay five figures for something where 10,000 other copies exist. This is why spending $58,000 or whatever for a 1957 Topps Sandy Koufax seems bonkers to me. I could buy two Near Mint Koufaxes and a Clemente for how much?, and someone would have a hard time convincing me I own the inferior copies.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Does quality mean quality of condition/grade or the card itself?
Though I don't have any E107s personally, I would consider a vg E107 HOF to be a very high quality card, even though the technical grade is not that high. I think what counts for "quality" can vary quite a bit depending on the card, the set, the eye of the beholder, etc. As far as condition goes, my collection is all over the map - from pr/fr to mint. I think of them all as quality. But to specifically answer the question, more often than not I would rather have a $500 card than 20 $25 cards. But again, it depends on which cards. I would not trade my mid-grade T206 set for a handful of nm/mt HoFs.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: barry arnold

I can see why JimB and I are academics.
I thought through my response and had a similar series of vacillations.
For me, quality is not about the High Numbers granted by the external gods
of the various companies but more about the aesthetic beauty I perceive.
Admittedly, I also love the quantitative task of completing the whole, but
the wholeness must contain the aesthetic beauty for me to perceive it as
true wholeness.

But it's just pieces of cardboard, Barry. .....yeh, right.

all the best,

barry

[Archive]

Posted By: joe Brennan

I am a quanity collector when it comes to T206's. I like to find the best eye appeal lowest graded cards for my collection. My feelings are if it looks like a 5, (on the front) and it grades a 1, I've got the best bang for my buck. I'd rather have paper loss than heavy creasing. Personally I would rather have 100 PSA 2's ( 25 x 100= $2500.00) that 1 PSA 7. It's a hobby for me and I worry less about the value and more about enjoying the cards. Ill stick to the stock market for money issues.

People said it was a million dollar wound. But the government must keep that money, cause I ain't never seen a penny of it.