Opinion on Clemente RC and more generally on paper loss

[Peter_Spaeth]

See scans. Question 1, assuming price was reasonable and reflected the defect, would the paper loss dissuade you from buying the card? Question 2, how would you characterize the extent of paper loss? Tiny? Small? Moderate? Significant?

Thanks.

[ullmandds]

if I were selling this card the loss would be categorized as miniscule...If I were a buyer it's somewhat significant. Beautiful front...will surely do fine over time but the damage will hold it back valuewise to an extent.

[Leon]

For that grade it wouldn't dissuade me. Of course it affects price but it blows away an avg 2.5 to me.
.
A very small amount of paper loss.

[Tyruscobb]

Minor paper loss, which is how I’d describe it on your card, does not bother me. However, I do not like paper loss over writing or a player’s image. It’s acceptable when it’s in a random and obscure area. Just my two cents.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

Minor paper loss, which is how I’d describe it on your card, does not bother me. However, I do not like paper loss over writing or a player’s image. It’s acceptable when it’s in a random and obscure area. Just my two cents.

While it's a beautiful looking card with great centering, I also don't like the paper loss (small as it is) being over some of the writing on the back of the card so I probably wouldn't be a buyer.

[V117collector]

wow, nice-looking card! As for the stain and small' paper loss, I would say it's graded correctly. I'd consider paying a premium on the 2.5 just on centering and eye appeal alone.

[samosa4u]

PSA 2.5?? You gotta' be kidding me! If I had been the one who sent it to PSA, then it would have come back as a PSA 1. The paper loss on the back is pretty bad.

[oldjudge]

For a common card like that it would end my interest in it. There will be plenty more opportunities to find an undamaged copy. For a scarce/rare card I have no issue with some paper loss, as long as it is on the back. I consider that amount of paper loss as somewhere between small and moderate.

[rand1com]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

PSA 2.5?? You gotta' be kidding me! If I had been the one who sent it to PSA, then it would have come back as a PSA 1. The paper loss on the back is pretty bad.

I agree. I have never seen a card with that much paper loss get above a 1.5. I would call it moderate. Granted, the front of the card is very nice and I would prefer this card over a 2.5 with poor centering and creasing but the grade is definitely not the norm for regular small time submitters to PSA IMO.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

PSA 2.5?? You gotta' be kidding me! If I had been the one who sent it to PSA, then it would have come back as a PSA 1. The paper loss on the back is pretty bad.

You are joking, right?

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Question 1, assuming price was reasonable and reflected the defect, would the paper loss dissuade you from buying the card?

Question 2, how would you characterize the extent of paper loss? Tiny? Small? Moderate? Significant?

Thanks.

1. The paper loss would not dissuade me from buying the card. The front is spectacular.

2. I would characterize the paper loss as moderate. It's large enough to be a distraction, and very noticeable.

[parkplace33]

Agree, the paper loss is definitely moderate.

[Republicaninmass]

While the premium if graded a psa1 would certainly be great, the premium over a 2.5 would not be the same percentage. Suffice it to say, if it was cracked out "hoping for a better grade" likely it would come back lower. This would cause some to say its over graded, however the eye appeal is strong with this one.

[Gorditadogg]

Is it for sale?

The paper loss itself is minimal but the tape stain is moderate. Beautiful card.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk