PSA 8 in an old slab versus a newly graded PSA 7?
 

Hypothetical question: would you pay significantly more for a PSA 8 in a super old slab that looks to the naked eye worse than a PSA 7 slab with a 7XXXXXXX certification number?

I've been seeing a lot of cards (especially from the 1970s) where the price point for the old PSA 8 far outstrips the price point for the new PSA 7, even though the new PSA 7 is a superior card. This suggests what the "market" thinks makes sense.

But how does this make sense? I've read threads about "buying the flip", but this phenomenon suggests that people are buying the flip while covering their eyes. Thoughts?

Sometimes you can believe what you read because all that matters to most is the number on that magic money making plastic holder.

Yes, registry collectors. However, on a consistent basis, I don't think the old PSA labels bring as much as the newly graded cards.

I would say this is true for the majority of collectors. Personally, I feel more comfortable with older grades as I feel a tad more comfortable they are less likely to have been altered and then slabbed by an unknowledgeable worker drone. (other than the first one, lol)

Having this thought pattern sometimes saves me a tad when I do buy a graded card.

There are undergraded cards in old slabs just as there are overgraded cards in new slabs.

From my experience (mostly post-war vintage), a PSA 8 in an old slab will outpace a PSA 7 in a new slab. That same card will almost always fall shy of a PSA 8 in new holder, provided that the new holder is actually a newly graded card, and not a re-holdered card from 20 years ago.

But given that, I'd will always prefer to buy the really nice, newly graded PSA 7 at a premium instead of the old PSA 8 of the same card, even if that old PSA 8 is discounted because of the age of the slab. And in a lot of cases, I've found great PSA 5s and 6s using the same logic. There have been other cases where I'm willing to pay a PSA 8 price for a really nice PSA 7, especially for an example that I think is much nicer than what I typically see when browsing for cards.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...8dd2178a_b.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...dece4389_b.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...59995fdb_b.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...f7dccf64_b.jpg

If they're looking the other way the knowledge of the work force is not the issue. Altered cards have been rampant forever.

+1 when it comes to post war there are so many examples of 6s and 7s that have superior eye appeal to many 8s there's no need to chase the monkey unless you're a registry guy.

PSA 8 in an old slab versus a newly graded PSA 7?
 

And herein lies one of the major problems with all professional grading. Standards are not supposed to change, um…but they do. PSA and SGC won’t necessarily update their language for each grade description when they change a standard, but make no mistake it happens. The subjectivity of the language has always allowed for this. What is / are “moderate” corner rounding or “slight” focus problems? Obviously these things can mean vastly different things in terms of eye appeal to different collectors. It is a reminder of the days before grading and Beckett’s condition guide with their “minor” and “micro” defects. Does this card have 2 minor defects or 1 minor defect and 1 micro defect? Silliness, really.

I digress. To answer the question from a collector perspective, ignoring price - I don’t care if the card in question is an old 8 or a new 7, as long as it’s in a nice slab that is not scratched up too badly. Really even if the standards are consistent, the notion that a card is an 8 one day and maybe a 7 the next is something that most reasonably knowledgeable collectors have accepted at this point. Card grading is subjective, not rocket science - and there will be variations in strictness even on the best of days. Personally I don’t care. No matter what the grade or the age of the slab, the card was at one point deemed deserving of the grade that is represented on the flip - even if it might not grade that high (or conversely that low…) again. That’s good enough for me. At the end of the day, I alone am the final boss / grader in terms of what cards that I own are or are not, lol.

I do think just me that it’s not a hard rule. Older grades on the whole might be more apt to be “lenient” by today’s standards or practice, but you can still find plenty of older PSA slabs from the early 2000’s or even the 90’s which appear to have properly graded cards in them. I often will look for deals like this on older slabs when buying online if I’m looking for something graded. But to me, affordability and just the eye appeal of the card I’m looking at - whether a PSA 8, 6, or 3 - is going to matter more than anything in terms of the slab and it’s history when I’m looking to buy.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Confession:

While I know that the mantra here is "buy the card, not the holder"...

I'm a bit of a set registry goon. So often I'm more focused on trying to get the best deal I can on the highest graded cards that I can afford.

As a result, I'll take the older cert every day of the week if it means I can get a better deal.

no.

The 75 mini set is a poster child for this debate because tightening grading standards have had a huge impact on this particular set. I probably have 50 graded cards from this set now and the old label 8s have become new label 7s and 6s. It’s really blatant. A few of my PSA 8 old labels are nearly miscut in the back. I’ll try to throw up a few pics when I get out of bed.

It is still possible to find nice old label 8s but there are a lot of dogs out there. As a collector who might sell the set some day those 8s help value but in so many ways it makes sense to just get a new label 7. Also I have so many raw commons in my set that in the old days would be a guaranteed 7+ but in the two recent subs I did I got 2 <7s out of ten cards and lots of 7.5s and 8s. This is a registry sensitive set so PSAs go for quite a premium over same grade SGCs. If I find nice SGC8s I try to grab them. Recently got a Hank Aaron 1 in SGC 8 got less than half the price of a PSA 8 so that was good. They aren’t easy to find though.

Here's an illustration. #499 Marty Perez is a legit tough mini to find. There are 0 10s and only 5 PSA 9s. The below is one of 67 PSA 8s. I don't think it would get a 7 today. Definitely an example of me buying the slab not the card, but it was priced accordingly and it's tough enough finding this card not cut factory short, let alone in nice condition. Check out that o/c back; it's a whisker from miscut. Compare it to this new label Fisk I got recently which is super nice for a 7.

https://i.imgur.com/vxSxXka.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/e4XS79k.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/wN0yC4E.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/G4R1DU7.jpg

Telling examples indeed. I suppose this illustrates well the power of the set registry.

What a thought-provoking debate. I think it comes down to what you're buying at the end of the day...

are you buying the card itself or the number on the sealed case. I don't think there's anything wrong with

buying a card for its grade rather than its true physical health -- at the end of the day when you buy memorabilia,

you're buying a story, and part of a card's story is its grade. But then again, I also see

how the OG card collecting community would argue to just care about the cardboard.

Either way, very interesting hypothetical you pose, thanks so much for sharing.

I'm not sure I see the same thing. To me the Fisk doesn't look any better or possibly worse than the Perez. The Perez looks like it would fit the 8s I see today. The back merely needs to be 90/10 even for a 9. And the Fisk has a decent amount of white showing on the bottom corners. The Perez does have the spot on the edge, but that's not a chip in the paint, just a spot where the color didn't hit right. I see lots of those, just like fisheyes, which are common for the time.

Here is a pic of a Hank Aaron #660 PSA 8 that's newly graded. It's no different than what you commonly see in older slabs. (Note pic taken from Ebay, not my card).

Personally, my experience lies mostly within 1975s. I have almost 200 PSA graded 8 or higher from all generations of slabs. That said, I think the old slab vs. new slab difference is a bit overblown. As has already been said, there are variations old vs. new. I think you really do need to focus on the card within the slab. For those of us with a grade focus, it often comes down to do we pass on a card and wait for the right one? I'd rather wait for an 8 I like than buy one I don't or "settle" for a nice looking 7. 1975 is the only year, I am that damned picky though. I do admit that when I first got back into it, I bought a card for the grade. Now I am much more selective and pass on a lot of 8s, because I don't like the centering or some aspect of it. Just trying to be patient. I have upgraded some early ones.

And, I do think 1975s (and 1971s, but don't personally have experience with subbing any) are difficult because of the colored borders. One of those can have the same exact level of corner wear as a card with a white border yet look much worse. I consistently see newly graded 8s and 9s that look worse than ones I have and pass on grading. Or worse than ones in old slabs.

Lastly, I am guilty of contradicting myself here, in that I tend to pay/bid less for a card in an old slab vs. a newer one. Personally I think the Lighthouse label looks better. Ultimately newer slabs do command more money in general (10-15% maybe?) but a high end 7 selling for more than an old label 8 would be the exception rather than the rule, IMO. Whether that translates to 3-6s, and on 50s and 60s cards, I couldn't say.

Ok, so here's a bit of a fun test. See the photos (front and back) of two 1977 Harry Carson cards that I recently purchased (I am on a bit of a Harry Carson kick, but that's a story for another thread), front and back. One is a newly graded PSA 7 and the other is an old PSA 8. The price of the 8 was double the price of the 7. Can you guess which is which?

8 on the left?

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Tough call, but I'll second this opinion.

Maybe it's just my screen, but both of them almost look like they've got some wavy spots on the edges. Could just be I'm over-paranoid about card doctors and trim jobs these days.

Not a lot of conviction here, but I'll go new 7 on the left. I can't tell what is going on with the bottom right corner of the card on the right. That could be enough to kick it down to a 7.

The 7 is on the left.

Indeed, there is a fairly noticeable chip on the lower right corner of the 8, and the borders are more yellowish. It's close, but I think the centering is a touch better on the 7, and there is a small, but noticeable stain on the back of the 8.

In my humble opinion, the 7 is a better overall card and, therefore, a bargain at half the price of the 8. But herein lies all the debate.

I cheated. I could tell which is which based on the case holder construction without even looking at the card. :D
But yeah, I feel the 7 does look a little nicer.

I am a relative newcomer to slabbed cards, but it sounds super impressive that you can tell just from the card holder construction...

The 7 has some surface noise that the 8 doesn't. Aside from the ink in the lower left border, there's also stuff in the lettering near the top (dirt? ink overspray?. Near the beard too. Just not as clean of a surface/image.

Centering has zero effect on the grades here. Personal eye appeal, perhaps.

Most of the time, small issues on the surface is what knocks cards at this level.down, and it's the easiest to miss.

Agree with that. Also surface issues are the thing that just won’t show up on a video screen unless the poster points them out. I have seen many a 9 that has a surface blip that the grader either missed or decided it was just normal grain of the card. This seems especially true with mid/late 70s Topps cards as the printing process seemed to produce a lot of loosey-goosey surfaces back in those days with veining and bubbling being an issue on so many cards.

Here is another quiz. One of these costs a few hundred k less than the others. Which one is the lower grade that is also newly graded? All three were sold recently and I will reveal results once some guesses come in. Good example of what we was being discussed.

I'm going for the one on the top as being the lower grade. It looks like someone tried to light the top edge with a match.

The middle Mick looks nicest to me although the lower right corner is a bit touched.

Any other guesses before the $300k reveal?

I think it is the bottom Mick. Looks like a stain and light wrinkle in the Mid to bottom right area.

I would expect the middle one to have the greatest hammer price. The centering advantage is powerful.

Sent from my motorola edge 5G UW (2021) using Tapatalk

I'm scared to see the grades. The top Mantle appears to have a dimple in the cloud at far left, second from top. The top edge is also damaged. The bottom Mantle appears to have a wrinkle/crease between the 2 trees on the right bottom.

And the reveal!

Top is 8 $300k at HA.
Middle is 7.5 $132k at HA.
Bottom is 8 $372k at REA.

The 7.5 is newly graded. A $240k difference vs the bottom 8! I will take that trade all day long.

Speechless

Whoever bought that 7.5 is probably feeling pretty good about his purchase.

Unless it’s a scan thing and the damage is not actually on the card, I would get a 3 on both of those 8’s if I submitted them today lol.

Any other pricey examples you can think of like this Mantle one?

My experience is that most of the time, it’s very difficult to distinguish between 8s, 9s, and 10s with the naked eye, and extra so if you’re looking at scans on a computer screen. And sometimes you might even find that the lower grades look better than the higher grades. To add to the fun, grading standards have shifted over the years.

As luck would have it, for just about every major star or HOF player, and even a lot of lesser known players, the jump in price at the higher grades starts to get pretty dramatic, particularly when you get to the highest grade, and extra so when there are only a handful in the pop report. Certainly this is the case with PSA grades cards, and is largely a function of the set registry competition driving the pricing in ways that don’t seem very rational just based on a strict eyeball comparison of the quality of the cards.

So my guess is that you could pick just about any card and start to play this game with the highest grades. And invariably you would find that the quality differences are small or imperceptible (particularly just looking at scans), yet the pricing spread is often gigantic.

Having said that, the Mantle example is particularly striking because we’re dealing with a swing of 6 figures. But I suspect while the raw dollars might be smaller for other players, the percentage swing will be similarly dramatic as you climb to higher grades.