View Single Post
  #8  
Old 09-27-2022, 05:38 AM
x2drich2000 x2drich2000 is offline
(DJ) Rich.ard.s
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,200
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason19th View Post
Today I received my Mantle for the 1960 set I am putting together. It’s a beautiful card with great centering and nice corners and a clean back. But it’s got paper loss on the right boarder so if I sent it in it would at best grade a 1 ( and that would be correct grade under current standards) The problem as I see it however that there are many other cards that would grade a 1 (my 1959 Mantle for instance) which look much worse to any objective viewer.

Here is my solution. Grading companies should only give numbers to 6-10 (ex-mt - gem) Everything else is just authentic. This allows us to correctly value the actual condition scarcities and then let collectors (an investors) value everything else on a card by card basis. This eliminates all of the artificial handwringing about one crease vs two, a mark vs wax stain , a pinhole vs paper loss, off center vs miscut. It comes how does the card look and what do you want to pay for it.
I think a better solution is for collectors/investors to stop thinking of the grading companies as gods who dictate pricing and what is acceptable. There is no rule saying you must agree with the grade on the label. Just pay what you want to pay based on how the card looks to you regardless of what the number or letter or company on the label is.
__________________
Current Wantlist:
E92 Nadja - Bescher, Bridwell, Cobb, Donovan, Doolan, Doyle (with bat), Lobert, Mathewson, Miller (fielding), Tinker, Wagner (throwing), Zimmerman
E/T Young Backrun - Need E90-1, T216 (all versions)
E92 Red Crofts - Anyone especially Barry, Shean, and Evers
Reply With Quote