Opinion on Clemente RC and more generally on paper loss

[Peter_Spaeth]

See scans. Question 1, assuming price was reasonable and reflected the defect, would the paper loss dissuade you from buying the card? Question 2, how would you characterize the extent of paper loss? Tiny? Small? Moderate? Significant?

Thanks.

[ullmandds]

if I were selling this card the loss would be categorized as miniscule...If I were a buyer it's somewhat significant. Beautiful front...will surely do fine over time but the damage will hold it back valuewise to an extent.

[Leon]

For that grade it wouldn't dissuade me. Of course it affects price but it blows away an avg 2.5 to me.
.
A very small amount of paper loss.

[Tyruscobb]

Minor paper loss, which is how I’d describe it on your card, does not bother me. However, I do not like paper loss over writing or a player’s image. It’s acceptable when it’s in a random and obscure area. Just my two cents.

[V117collector]

wow, nice-looking card! As for the stain and small' paper loss, I would say it's graded correctly. I'd consider paying a premium on the 2.5 just on centering and eye appeal alone.

[samosa4u]

PSA 2.5?? You gotta' be kidding me! If I had been the one who sent it to PSA, then it would have come back as a PSA 1. The paper loss on the back is pretty bad.

[oldjudge]

For a common card like that it would end my interest in it. There will be plenty more opportunities to find an undamaged copy. For a scarce/rare card I have no issue with some paper loss, as long as it is on the back. I consider that amount of paper loss as somewhere between small and moderate.

[rand1com]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

PSA 2.5?? You gotta' be kidding me! If I had been the one who sent it to PSA, then it would have come back as a PSA 1. The paper loss on the back is pretty bad.

I agree. I have never seen a card with that much paper loss get above a 1.5. I would call it moderate. Granted, the front of the card is very nice and I would prefer this card over a 2.5 with poor centering and creasing but the grade is definitely not the norm for regular small time submitters to PSA IMO.

[V117collector]

SGC would most likely grade the Clemente RC a 2.5....But, yeah I guess it's all about who's submitting the cards.

This Mantle sold for a premium not too long ago. I was actually surprised it sold.

[JustinD]

No issue at all with minor paper loss on the back. The front is a different story, but I seek out cards like this honestly for the value.

[Wanaselja]

Originally Posted by JustinD

No issue at all with minor paper loss on the back. The front is a different story, but I seek out cards like this honestly for the value.

Same. Great looking Clemente.

[T205 GB]

Absolutely not at the least, and tiny speck of paper loss.

I would absolutely buy and may pay strong for and example of a card like described for the PC. Sometimes the significance of the front outweighs the back issues.

[paul]

Half the cards in my collection look like that. I love the discount I get for a little bit of paper loss. And since I'm not an investor, I can accept the fact that the card will appreciate at a lower rate than a high grade example.

[Rhotchkiss]

It depends on your intent and budget. That is a great looking card. The front is terrific. And that card is famous/desirable for the front. So, if it’s for your collection and you cannot afford or do not want to pay for a 5, this is a great alternative. However, if you are buying it for resale or you can buy a 5, don’t buy it and buy the 5.

Regardless, it is a great looking card

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

It depends on your intent and budget. That is a great looking card. The front is terrific. And that card is famous/desirable for the front. So, if it’s for your collection and you cannot afford or do not want to pay for a 5, this is a great alternative. However, if you are buying it for resale or you can buy a 5, don’t buy it and buy the 5.

Regardless, it is a great looking card

You can find a 5 with that kind of centering. The "6" level is where the Clemente rookies start to get tougher. Centering on the card is REALLY tough at all but the highest (8+) grade levels and the 2.5 you showed is REALLY nicely centered. With todays grading standards it appears fairly graded given the "small" amount of paper loss on the back. If I were selling it, I would definitely be looking for a premium over a 2.5 for the centering.

[Snowman]

I'd be all over this card. Would pay a HUGE premium over any other 2.5. Hell, I'd pay a HUGE premium over any other 3 that isn't also perfectly centered. I'd call it minor paper loss.

If this card is for sale, I'm a buyer.

[Snowman]

I have a similar Elgin Baylor RC in my 61 Fleer set. Minor paper loss on back, dead centered on front. Also got a 2.5.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

Minor paper loss, which is how I’d describe it on your card, does not bother me. However, I do not like paper loss over writing or a player’s image. It’s acceptable when it’s in a random and obscure area. Just my two cents.

While it's a beautiful looking card with great centering, I also don't like the paper loss (small as it is) being over some of the writing on the back of the card so I probably wouldn't be a buyer.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

PSA 2.5?? You gotta' be kidding me! If I had been the one who sent it to PSA, then it would have come back as a PSA 1. The paper loss on the back is pretty bad.

You are joking, right?

[Carter08]

My kind of card. I would hope to get lucky and that it would have a discount attached to it but, even though paper loss generally is no fun, I’d pay a little premium. The front is that good.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I'd be all over this card. Would pay a HUGE premium over any other 2.5. Hell, I'd pay a HUGE premium over any other 3 that isn't also perfectly centered. I'd call it minor paper loss.

If this card is for sale, I'm a buyer.

I agree, I would expect that card to shatter the VCP record for the grade. I would also be bidding.

I would describe the paper loss as minor.

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Question 1, assuming price was reasonable and reflected the defect, would the paper loss dissuade you from buying the card?

Question 2, how would you characterize the extent of paper loss? Tiny? Small? Moderate? Significant?

Thanks.

1. The paper loss would not dissuade me from buying the card. The front is spectacular.

2. I would characterize the paper loss as moderate. It's large enough to be a distraction, and very noticeable.

[parkplace33]

Agree, the paper loss is definitely moderate.

[Republicaninmass]

While the premium if graded a psa1 would certainly be great, the premium over a 2.5 would not be the same percentage. Suffice it to say, if it was cracked out "hoping for a better grade" likely it would come back lower. This would cause some to say its over graded, however the eye appeal is strong with this one.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by JustinD

No issue at all with minor paper loss on the back. The front is a different story, but I seek out cards like this honestly for the value.

^^This.^^

[MattyC]

I’ll take it.

[darwinbulldog]

The paper loss itself is no worse than moderate, but it's a fairly significant area of damage if you include the surrounding stain. Still, with front as nice as that, I'd probably go as high as whatever the PSA 3 VCP average is.

[jbl79]

Don't mind paper loss on the back if the front looks nice. I'd definitely pay a premium on that '55 Topps Clemente. Love high eye-appeal cards with a lower technical grade.

[Gorditadogg]

Is it for sale?

The paper loss itself is minimal but the tape stain is moderate. Beautiful card.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

For a common card like that it would end my interest in it. There will be plenty more opportunities to find an undamaged copy. For a scarce/rare card I have no issue with some paper loss, as long as it is on the back. I consider that amount of paper loss as somewhere between small and moderate.

I would agree with Jay. The paper loss attributed to tape removal is at least moderate IMO and in a prominent place (I consider the paper loss and tape stain to be one defect). I would pass, absent a really good deal, and even then, would likely just hold it for resale.

[profholt82]

Beautiful 2.5. For important cards like that, issues on the backs do not bother me. I would definitely buy that Clemente with no reservations.

Along these same lines, I purchased a 51B Mantle a while back that is an SGC 2. The front is well centered and presents very well, much better than a 2 in my opinion, but the back has some wax/gum staining and a similar amount of paper loss as your Clemente. I'm quite happy with it. For important vintage cards like that, it's all about presentation for me. The backs are not nearly as important.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by profholt82

Beautiful 2.5. For important cards like that, issues on the backs do not bother me. I would definitely buy that Clemente with no reservations.

Along these same lines, I purchased a 51B Mantle a while back that is an SGC 2. The front is well centered and presents very well, much better than a 2 in my opinion, but the back has some wax/gum staining and a similar amount of paper loss as your Clemente. I'm quite happy with it. For important vintage cards like that, it's all about presentation for me. The backs are not nearly as important.

I completely agree about blank backs. I love writing and damage on them as they generally sell for a lot less and look the same to me.

Even this amount of damage to the back border doesn't bother me, knowing I paid a low price for it, relative to it's eye appeal. There are almost an infinite number of ways to collect.
.