![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Ugh! If there isn't qualifiers for all flaws (pin holes, creases, round corners), then qualifiers miss the mark.
A better solution would be what Beckett started, but dropped. A breakdown of some sort.
__________________
Tiger collector Need: Harry Heilmann auto Monster Number 520/520 |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I do agree that Beckett's system was nice, no argument here. I always thought a factory grade (cutting, centering, print marks, registration) and post factory grade (creases, pin holes, corners, paper loss) on a card would be nice. I am stating that given the choices I don't mind the qualifiers, and prefer them at times (especially any and all miscuts).
__________________
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bn2cardz/albums |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
...
Last edited by Rollingstone206; 10-11-2014 at 05:16 PM. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I don't hate qualifiers, but I do have a beef with them since not everyone knows what they equal in terms of "real grade". I couldn't tell you how many times I have seen a card(s) for sale in a PSA 8(MC) holder that is being listed as the same selling price as a PSA 8 without the qualifier. Sometimes it seems like qualifiers are a loophole for sellers to dupe buyers that are uninformed on the subject. I realize that anyone in this hobby should get informed on anything that they are looking to buy or sell, but I'm just being realistic on the matter.
As far as a PSA 9(MC) equals a PSA 7 without the qualifier...well, that just isn't correct. I know some people believe the rule is 2-3 grades lower on an adjusted qualifier to no qualifier, but any card with an (MK, mark) qualifier, the adjusted real grade would be much much lower than a few grades if it were a NM or Mint grade.
__________________
T206's Graded low-mid 219/520 T201's SGC/PSA 2-5 50/50 T202's SGC/PSA 2-5 10/132 1938 Goudey Graded VG range 37/48 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Do vintage topps cards in PSA slabs with a qualifier sell decently or are they frowned upon by collectors?
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I do not line qualifiers, I feel a MC or MK to a certain extent should fall into a certain grade range. On the other end I hate how sgc treats erasure labeling as altered. It should be a 1.5 or 2 or whatever depending on appeal
__________________
Successful Transactions: Leon, Ted Z, Calvindog, milkit1, thromdog, dougscats, Brian Van Horn, nicedocter, greenmonster66, megalimey, G1911 (I’m sure I’m missing some quality members) |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Not a fan of qualifiers in the least and happy they seem to be going away. I am one who stays away as well. If it has a grade it should be a true grade and not a “if it wasn’t for this issue” imaginary grade. I find it as annoying as BCCG grading.
I love the honesty and clarity of an authentic or altered grade and have both in my collection. I don’t have a single qualified card as I have cracked any that may have come in. I would rather have it in a one touch.
__________________
- Justin D. Player collecting - Lance Parrish, Jim Davenport, John Norlander. Successful B/S/T with - Highstep74, Northviewcats, pencil1974, T2069bk, tjenkins, wilkiebaby11, baez578, Bocabirdman, maddux31, Leon, Just-Collect, bigfish, quinnsryche...and a whole bunch more, I stopped keeping track, lol. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1958 psa cards for sale all 7s no qualifiers SOLD | sflayank | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 3 | 05-07-2013 10:05 AM |
Cards with qualifiers | Theoldprofessor | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 14 | 01-07-2012 08:26 AM |
Cards with qualifiers...deals or not deals? | Archive | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 8 | 07-24-2010 03:35 AM |
What are all the qualifiers | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 06-12-2005 04:40 PM |
PSA 1 Qualifiers | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 05-01-2005 09:41 AM |