[QUOTE=Peter_Spaeth;1800909]Peter, let’s say you’re willing to part with your Beethoven RC Super Refractor PSA 8, which is a pop 2. However, the other dude who owns the other 8 puts his up for sale in the same auction. Yours, however, is better centered. Would you feel good relying on the eye test to ensure you get the higher price? Sure. But would you feel BETTER if there was a designation deeming yours slightly better? I bet you would.

[QUOTE=mechanicalman;1800914]I would hope the auction house would not put both in the same auction, but if they did, then if they had a large scan and they emphasized the centering in the description (just in case anyone somehow missed it), I would be secure. Let's not forget a seller is always free to call attention to a card's features beyond the number grade.

This.

And I really don’t want a “positive qualifier” on my flip any more than I want a negative qualifier, which is why I always check the no-qualifier box on my submissions. The grade is the grade. Just give me mine and let’s all move on to the next buy, sell, or trade.

With that said, we all agree that the grading process is far from perfect, and I applaud these guys for trying to improve it.

[QUOTE=Peter_Spaeth;1800917]You didn’t answer my question directly, so I’ll try again, but with a more likely premise.

The other Beethoven 8 sold 2 months ago, but was borderline o/c. It went for $2k. Now yours is up for auction with a postive qualifier. Does the qualifier make you feel BETTER or not about the probability of yours selling for north of $2?

[QUOTE=mechanicalman;1800923]Honestly, no, because the buyers can see that it's better centered and the AH can tell them that. I don't think the qualifier which just states the obvious adds anything. Would you add a sticker to a Picasso being sold that said, good eye appeal?

Well said. Why get your panties in a twist over a sticker? There are a lot of casual collectors that aren't as knowledgable as some on this board and might not know centering commands a premium in today's market. The stickers are for them and I think at the end of the day a fun way for Brady and Jeff to add a little of their own expertise to the mix.

[QUOTE=Peter_Spaeth;1800925]So, to be clear, if your card had a designation from the industry’s largest TPG implying that your card was aesthetically better than the benchmark, you WOULD NOT have any greater confidence that your card would sell for more. In fact, you believe nothing more could be done to drive the value of your card beyond a scan and the wildly impartial write-up of the AH compensated for selling your card.

OK. I don’t find that rational, so we’ll have to agree to disagree. I wish you a good rest of your Sunday, my friend. :)

[QUOTE=mechanicalman;1800934]May your evening be well-centered. :D

Funny, the last two posts show both of us as quoting ourselves, not the other.

The one thing a TPG does that is indispensable, assuming they get it right, is to determine whether or not a card has been altered. Most collectors can't do that themselves. After that, I don't know. The numerical grades are dubious at best, and really of use primarily to the registry crowd. And any collector can determine if he is happy with the centering. That's just a visual.

The 1971 Clemente is a beautiful looking card and deserves the choice designation, but I want that sticker put on by a third party, and not by the seller himself. If the seller did it, it has no meaning at all.

[QUOTE=Peter_Spaeth;1800940]LOL

That seems obvious to me as well but people see it differently.

I'm not sure where the exact cutoff would be, but the goal should be so that the top 5-10% of any card would qualify. I'm sure PSA could figure something out. 53/47 or so should work for most vintage issues.

So the TPG verifies that the card is not altered. Got it.
The numerical grade is needed only for the registry crowd. Got it.
But who authenticates that the sticker is authentic, and does contain the DNA of the seller. Such authentication would be of benefit to blind collectors.

It seems odd to me that the hobby's migration to "centering" as the primary quality with an influence in the pricing matrix seemingly rendering other grading metrics marginal. And yet that number and the three letters on the flip still carry a fair amount of weight to buyers, whether they can open their eyes or not to assess centering.

Buy numbers, buy stickers, buy flips and the company affixed to them, buy centered, buy scrap, buy rarity, buy scarcity or simply buy a card you want and sit back and watch the circus. Diversity should be lauded by all, even if there is absolutely no agreement about what this hobby is all about.

The centering train is the third rail of card collecting and more power to those of you who have a ticket.:D

And for those of you who disagree (and why wouldn't you?), rest assured that I am fully prepared to spend my "time out" in my sharpest corner as long as I can have cold beer in the meantime. Please do not make any offers, I have wrinkles.

But see, there are people for whom that is not a centered card. I see a huge slippery slope problem here and like anything it's going to descend into arbitrariness.

You have to draw the line somewhere. For any issue it's rare everyone will be pleased with where its drawn. But the point is I think this qualifier would be good for the hobby. I can see many of you disagree. But I think a lot of the guys who collect and pay a premium for centered cards will be in favor of this.

Explain this to me. As you say, plenty of guys are paying major premiums for centered cards. So why are you worried that when you go to sell your centered cards, guys won't pay a major premium unless PSA blesses the cards with a qualifier?

Maybe the new qualifier should be, "OCD". Well, maybe CDO because the letters need to be in order.

i dont think people need someone else to tell them how the centering is..

what i have said before is that PSA should keep pictures of all cards graded at one of their elite levels maybe $1000 or more and give a best in grade to a card...yeah future cards may now get best in grade so there would be two of them..but thats still a small size...as best in grades wouldnt be given often

Piccadilly Circus

I suppose I shouldn't be as every time I've sent one to auction I've been happy with the result. But it adds an extra element of risk to what is already a risky way to sell something. Especially when you broke or shattered a vcp record to get the card in the first place.

Unfortunately they aren't even consistent here. I bought this Bender T213-1 graded SGC 30 in Fall 2016 in REA. Cracked it, put it in my binder, then decided to sell it this summer. Sent it to LOTG, along with the original flip, and SGC only gave it an A. Its in their current auction, I'm sure it'll eventually find its way back to a number grade when someone else submits it ...

Very common from what I know --- many cards go through various holders before coming to rest in their optimum one, including rejections along the way. I've seen journeys like 4-A-6-A-5-7. Sometimes I think it can be genuinely hard to tell. There are highly skilled card doctors out there. Other times, maybe the grader wasn't so expert.

I know Rob, the whole process is very frustrating. Where is the consistency? Where even is the expertise?