“Old holder” - issues or concerns?
 

I’ve seen passing comments about cards graded in older PSA or SGC holders not always being as desirable for sale/purchase.

I’d be curious to hear from others why this might be… is it just an aesthetics issue (for example, I really prefer the new SGC holders with the sharp black surrounding the card)

Or are there also some issue with grading standards changing over time?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Jeff

Marketing, new is always better.

For me, it's both. Earlier graded PSA cards are almost always at least a full grade more generous than they should be, and in some cases even 2 full grades more generous than they would be if cracked and resubmitted today (as PSA is currently grading too harshly since the shut down IMO).

But it's also about the aesthetics. I much prefer the look of modern SGC slabs over the ones with green flips, and I much prefer the lighthouse slabs with PSA over the earlier ones. I'm so OCD about it that I will send in anything to be reholdered that is not in a modern slab.

Also, the older PSA slabs are easier to counterfeit or tamper with. Plus, they just sell for less on the open market.

I wouldn't hesitate to buy an old PSA holder. Buy the card. I do like the more modern labels though. My very large pet peeve are the holders with the sleeves that are in place to hold the undersized cards. These 'baggies' are a big turn off and distract from the beauty of the card itself.

Anyone else down on the PSA holders with the sleeves? Would a badly wrinkled sleeve prevent you from purchasing the card?

When I see old flips/slabs (PSA/SGC) and people not wanting them, I see "opportunity". I don't care about the flip/slab, I care about the appearance of the card. There's never a consideration for the NUMBER on the flip when I pick up a card. If it looks good, I'll take it. I've picked up, what I consider, under graded cards for reasonable prices and refuse to pay a premium for a NUMBER. I'm not a slabhead or a registry freak. If it looks good, that's good enough for me.

I actually prefer the older PSA slabs for a big reason. For example, if you see a Wilt Chamberlain rookie graded in PSA 7 - yes, it is in an old holder, but it was submitted when it was worth like a thousand bucks. Why does this matter to me? Because the cards were so much cheaper back then, so it means there is a lesser chance that it was altered.

The cards in newer slabs have a much higher chance of being altered simply because they are worth much, much, much more.

I pretty much agree with all of this, and I too have been re-holdering old SGC slabs for new ones. The modern ones look soooo good!

I agree with all of this except for the part about SGC slabs. I find their previous look (with the barcode and green border on the flip) much more appealing than their current ones.

Earlier graded items demand a premium and at times a very large premium, in the coin world. The thought in that hobby is that they don't grade 'em the same anymore. There are people that collect coins based on nothing more than the design of the plastic holders. Interesting world we live in and the mentality of the collector.

The new slabs are great and all the rage until a year or two down the road when a new flip comes out. At that point, the same exact card is worth significantly less to some. My collecting interests are much more long term than a year or two. It's nothing more than an opportunity to me. Most of the slabbed cards I win in auctions are in the older slabs. There is probably some correlation there.

I don't mind having a phone that is a generation or two older than the current model either. I never was the type to camp outside a store for the new model on release day. :)

But when will the CAC sticker arrive for cards?

To answer the question: I have no issues or concerns.
I have absolutely no interest in the age or appearance of any undamaged slab.

It's impossible to ignore how aesthetically amateurish the really old PSA slabs look compared to the newer ones...

Attachment 490854

No pizzazz, just a label seemingly typed on an extremely old Underwood. Of course, the only thing that matters is how nice the card looks, but I know if I was selling an 'old label' card, the offers would be much lower than what they would be if it was encased with a 'new' label.

Amen. Outside of a few specific things I’m collecting (the 1975 Topps set in a PSA 8, my Robin Yount Topps master set in a PSA 9), I’m buying almost exclusively ungraded now.

I don’t care about the slab. Never have. Unfortunately, so many times, I’ve found it’s just easier to buy the slabbed card when building a set or run. Ungraded examples with the eye appeal I’m looking for get snagged up quickly, and sent en masse to the TPG. At least, the star and rookie players do.

The difference between a PSA 9 and a 10 is so slight, and yet the price increase is astronomical. I became convinced long ago that chasing high grades like that, needing the 10 instead of the 9, was more about hobby dick measuring. “I’ve got the highest registry score for _____!!!”

Congratulations. You’re a master of the universe.

When one card is submitted to the same tpg three times, and each time it comes back with a different grade, just how useful is the tpg? What service do they provide, besides taking some green out of your wallet, and making you wait for a really long time to get your card(s) back?

I can look at a card, and after pulling out my 60x jeweler’s loupe, and my black light, I can nail the condition within a half grade (or ex to ex+, ex+ to exmt), and feel confident as to the card’s authenticity. I have “exemplar” cards-beat to sh#* examples of every year, showing me what the card stock and surface gloss are like, showing me the typography, etc. All the reputable dealers I buy from allow for returns, so if something isn’t kosher, I can send it back. I’m just out return postage.

You can either play the game, or you can collect for the love of the hobby and the sport. I may never have the kind of collection that gets the oohs and ahs. But I have a hell of a lot of fun doing it, and enjoy reading your posts, seeing your cardboard treasures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Asthetics aside
 

I will expand on a previous post in sharing my experience.

The RULE - Cards in older holders have been graded less stringently than cards in current holders by both SGC and PSA.

The PROBLEM - The RULE frequently doesn't apply! I have seen plenty of cards that would likely grade the same (or better) in old holders and others that would likely grade worse (if resubmitted) in new holders.

The SOLUTION - The slab should be a starting point - then it's buy the card, not the holder!

I am with you 100%. I cannot stand to look at any card with the crumpled and wrinkled baggie holding it in place. And when utilizing the "baggie" they never seem able to get the card centered or sitting straight within the slab. It's almost like a diamond-cut presentation within the slab.

Same goes for PSA's slabbed photos. I so much prefer the clean look that I will pass on any "baggied" example that looks sloppy, amateurish and/or asymmetrical. When done right, they look great.

Ouch. I’m trying to get those beauty labels for a Gretzky collection. Three to go! :cry:
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...c953264a92.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't get me wrong, it's all perception. What the card looks like is the only thing that matters. If you're trying to buy an old labeled card, though, perhaps it's worth seeing if the seller will take a little less, because, man, that's an 'ancient' slab. Heck, it's worth a shot.

Agreed. I have bought cards in old holders, cracked them and resubmitted and gotten an upgrade. Buy the card.

Those old labels are so ugly they are charming to me

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

I have no concerns about the old holders, so long as the card meets my approval:


https://photos.imageevent.com/imover...riffith_bl.jpg

I just have OCD and wanted my display to look consistent. The new SGC holders just fit the look of my display perfectly.

Yeah, I just noticed that PSA couldn't put my items in the slab the same direction.....grrrr......as an example, Freeman was from a submission about a year ago and the deGrom was from the last month. Really seems like this should be easy to do......:mad:

Oh, and I just noticed while posting this that Freeman is a "Trading Card!" WTF.....

Wow, I'm infuriated by that and it's not even my stuff...

for me , its not the holder, its the grade date that matters. Application of grading standards have changed over the years and pretty much any card in an old SGC/PSA holder needs to be brought down a grade. When I look at a card in old slab its usually pretty easy for me to tell its overgraded. slab buyers beware.

This is so overplayed. Yes on average the standards have toughened but there are plennnnnnty of good-for-the-grade cards in old holders.

Besides the fee and the outrageous wait time to get it back, can't a card in an older PSA case just be sent in to have it reholdered? Or is it not that easy?

That's it! Instead of trying to fight, I'll switch, as the old Tareyton Cigarettes commercials used to say. +1 on this.

Ya, but it also means you are likely sitting on a card that would grade as a PSA 6 today if it were cracked and resubmitted. I actually have this exact card in a modern PSA 7 slab. I challenge anyone to find even one single PSA 7 in an older slab that's in better condition than this one. Hell, I haven't even found an older slab in an 8 yet that's in better condition. They've drastically moved the goalposts on us, unfortunately, and a recently graded 7 is nearly always superior to an older graded one.

Every thread needs a card...

In my experience, it seems like SGC has been more consistent (and more fair) over time than PSA.

The average is what matters though, in terms of why a "rule" exists to begin with. There is always a distribution of over and under-graded cards in any given year. But yesteryear's under-graded cards are today's accurately graded cards, while yesteryear's over-graded cards are often 2 full grades high today. I've seen just as many old-label 8s that would be 6s today as I've seen old-label 7s that would still be 7s today. The average or median grades from a given era are what matter in terms of driving the narrative. Not the exceptions.

+1 . well said

In the case of PSA Registry addicts though, isn't the grade really all they care about for the most part? And assuming so, why would those Registry addicted people really care how old the PSA holder and flip were, as long as it shows the grade they want?

And if that is the case, why would a seller ever give a discount for an older PSA holdered card, unless the Registry influence on PSA cards is declining? But if that is the case and the Registry aspect is no longer the main driving point, how does one then explain the pricing differential still favoring PSA over SGC/BGS? Is it possibly a carryover from new investors/collectors in the hobby initially seeing the PSA price advantage and not attributing it to the Registry? It has been said and noted by many that grading between PSA, SGC, and Beckett does not appear to account for the PSA price advantage, so the Registry has been given a lot of credit for this pricing differential in the past. But are the new investors/money that appear to have jumped into our hobby since the pandemic started into the Registry at all? The impression I get is that they don't really care that much about the Registry, as these investor types don't seem to be into building sets or collecting in a manner that the Registry is more suited for.

This is an overstatement. There are plenty of “undergraded” cards in old holders. On average I would say the earliest PSA holders are one grade easier at most.

So there’s two ways we could handle this. 1. I go find a group of undergraded old slabs and over graded new slabs (I have plenty of both in my collection). You go do the opposite. Or 2. We agree to disagree. I vote #2.

My point wasn't that you can't find undergraded old slabs or overgraded new slabs. I certainly have both in my collection as well. My point was that in general, or on average, they used to grade softer. I don't think anyone really disputes that here?

I agree on average they grade softer. We are good.