Buy the card, not the holder (example)

[Archive]

Posted By: Jaime Leiderman

This card shows the theory pretty well.

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1023368524

JL

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

ouch......nice "graded" card......nothing like buying a holder.....the good news is it is a serious learning lesson when you try to sell the "holder" (wait, that's the bad news...there is no good news) !! Makes you want to cry, I tell ya'.......I bought a holder once and negotiated the price down nicely because the card did not justify the grade.....actually got it for more than a grade less than the holdered value......best regards...

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

I personally have been under the theory that grading is subjective and if you can't grade cards on your own you shouldn't be buying them. It still blows my mind that people would pay more money a slabbed card than a card of equal card that is unslabbed. I thought the one great benefit was at least the card was authenticated, but after being on forums like this I am not ssure that is always true.
My other gripe about grading services (PSA in perticular), how do you rate a card EX o/c, or marked? I was always under the theory that o/c and marks on cards were part of the grading.
The only slabbed card I own is a T202 Cobb/Moriarity SGC 30 Good that is sure believe at it's weakest is a VG, there a no major flaws in the card. But hey I picked it up for $215. One time where I think the seller got screwed.

I'm done venting, Thanks

[Archive]

Posted By: HalleyGator

Vorthian and I think alike. I only buy graded cards, because I just know that if and when I ever send in an ungraded card for grading ... I will end up disappointed. If it is true that the "big boys" get favorable grading, then there is no way I will ever get lucky with my ungraded cards.

Simply put: I get my cards graded so that my son will know that they are REAL when I leave them to him, and his son will know the same, and then his son, and so on and so on. I am collecting for ME, not the rest of the World, so authenticity on the old vintage cards is what I am looking for more than the grade itself. Converesely, on my modern cards, I only want the best graded cards, because otherwise my card will be no different than the two billion other ones in circulation just like it.

[Archive]

Posted By: vorthian

<< This card shows the theory pretty well. >>

However, a 1952 Topps Mantle PSA 10 recently selling for $275,000 pulverizes that theory.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

Halley Gator, I like the logic that you collect for yoourself and children to have them graded for authenticity, but as far as the recent cards, why would you pay that blowen up price for cards for the 80's on up? If this are the recent cards you are talking about. Heck, You can pay unopened wax and vending boxes for a fraction of the cost and there is no telling how many of the same card you will get at the same grade.

I still don't understand the logic to paying these high prices for new cards when you can get vintage cards at the same prices or less. But Heck it's there money to spend where you want. (My gripe to people how pay high prices for new cards).

[Archive]

Posted By: HalleyGator

Lee: I do not "collect" modern cards for exactly the reasons you mentioned. But, since I collect Hall of Fame cards, there are some modern cards that I am forced to acquire (Ripken, McGwire, Bonds, etc.).

I guess the reason I pay more than $.05 each for these mass-produced cards is because I want them to have at least SOME objective value 50 years from now when the collection gets passed down.

Granted, if the 1985 PSA 10 Topps McGwire rookie card drops from $5,000 to $5 then I will look like an idiot ... but at least I will still be able to say that I have the "BEST" such card in my collection.

Again, it isn't as much about the value of the card to the rest of the World ... it is more to me about the feeling of knowing that there are none out there BETTER than mine.

I would LOVE to be able to say this about a true vintage card (such as a PSA 10 Goudey #188 Babe Ruth card) ... so I guess I am looking forward to doing so in 50 years!

[Archive]

Posted By: John

If you still have those cards 50 years from now,then there wont be as many around as there are now(obviously)... encourage mothers to throw out cards,it will makes yours worth more

[Archive]

Posted By: JMK

Hi all,

Just wondering what it is about this card that makes everyone think that an 8 is so out of whack. I see the roughness on the lower left front. Is that considered a serious detriment or am I missing something else?

J

[Archive]

Posted By: vorthian

<< Granted, if the 1985 PSA 10 Topps McGwire rookie card drops from $5,000 to $5 then I will look like an idiot ... but at least I will still be able to say that I have the "BEST" such card in my collection. >>

What if another copy is centered better?

<< ...it is more to me about the feeling of knowing that there are none out there BETTER than mine.
I would LOVE to be able to say this about a true vintage card (such as a PSA 10 Goudey #188 Babe Ruth card) ... so I guess I am looking forward to doing so in 50 years! >>

If I am not mistaken, Hal, you try to attain each HOF in the best condition? If you could exchange your entire quest/collection for one PSA 10 vintage card (of equal value) - would you do it? You would have the "BEST" and that seems to drive you, to a lesser extent.

[Archive]

Posted By: Vognar Julie

So there's a miniscule ding lower left, and a miniscule ding by the "MICKEY" right above it. Borders are not quite even. I don't own this card (I don't like this card), but maybe it's a little pale?
Am I missing something vital?

Julie

[Archive]

Posted By: Jaime Leiderman

Rough corners are common on '53 topps.
The paper loss on the red area is HUGE.
Take a look at the corners, centering and color brightness.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jaime Leiderman

Looks like PSA doesn't follow any kind of pattern.
These are examples of a NM-7 and a NMMT-8 from last Supeior Auction.

Both cards are nicer than the one on eBay.


http://www.collectors.com/auctions/lot_detail_old.xhtml?&StartingDate=07%2F01%2F1999&EndingDate=10%2F28%2F2001&auctid=10893&siteid=399&task=2&lotid=1722619&DsnName=OldDsn

http://www.collectors.com/auctions/lot_detail_old.xhtml?&StartingDate=07%2F01%2F1999&EndingDate=10%2F28%2F2001&auctid=10893&siteid=399&task=2&lotid=1722620&DsnName=OldDsn

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

It sure looks like the 7 is better than the 8. The "8" seems to have the rough cut again, sure seems funny that they seem to ignore the fact.

[Archive]

Posted By: halleygator

No way!

It is much more important to me to have all my HOF'ers than it is to have ONE super-valuable card.

On the other hand ... if I was being offered a card for $300,000 that I knew I could turn around and sell immediately for $500,000 ... that would be a tough call!

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Just got back a 7 and 8 from PSA, just as expected - I wouldn't have even submitted them with rough edges and paper loss. I have a '55 Bowman Landry football card that would probably be an 8 or 9 except for a barely discernable surface paper wrinkle on the back - since this is fairly common in that issue, will PSA ignore it? I doubt it, but it certainly takes away from the card less than a rough cut and paper loss.