![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Has anyone observed a price premium with the new PSA holographic holder over the previous one? Is willingness to buy higher with the new look? Personally I think the slight change is more aesthetically appealing.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I offer more due to the less of a chance of the holder being a fake...though someone on the board may correct me on that
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Less chance of a bump
__________________
"Trolling Ebay right now" © Always looking for signed 1952 topps as well as variations and errors |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
less chance of wasting money hoping for a bump...
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I have sold numerous cards with the new holder. I have not noticed any sort of premium bump for it.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
As a buyer, I prefer any PSA holder except from the first few years. I would attach absolutely no premium to the newest ones. The new holders are nice; at least PSA didn't do a stupid change as SCG a year or two ago. Their holders from year 2000-on have been very consistent and I applaud them for that. ---Brian Powell
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have recently sold some cards with the new holder, I haven't seen any bump in price but it may have helped sell the cards.
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I don't think it matters to most people unless they suspect a holder of being fake, which with PSA is not really a problem. I will say that I don't like their earlier ones (where the printing on the label looks almost as if it was done on a dot matrix printer; slashes through the zeroes and that kind of thing...) but other than that I generally don't pay much attention. I do think SGC's new holders look horrible. When I first saw some online after not being that active in the hobby for a period of time, I thought they were fakes.
__________________
Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Cubs of all eras. Currently working on 1956, '63 and '72 Topps complete sets. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
On cards that tend to see fakes, I think it is worth a premium.
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Agreed. Some collectors feel PSA standards are tougher now and I could see them paying a premium for new holders on high end cards.
__________________
Successful transactions with peter spaeth, don's cards, vwtdi, wolf441, 111gecko, Clydewally, Jim, SPMIDD, MattyC, jmb, botn, E107collector, begsu1013, and a few others. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SOLD 1935 R309-2 Goudey Premium Indians Team Premium | TheBig6 | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 07-28-2014 10:58 AM |
New PSA Holder? | AMBST95 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 31 | 11-04-2013 10:20 AM |
WTB: 1939 Goudey Premium or 1939 World Wide Gum Premium - Joe Gordon | bcbgcbrcb | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 07-26-2012 08:59 AM |
New PSA Holder? | rp12367 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 07-24-2012 09:27 PM |
Is this just an old PSA holder? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 01-22-2004 04:39 PM |