![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Kenneth A. Cohen
I too think that graders focus too much on the condition of the cardboard. Old Judges are a good example. I've recently purchased a couple of low grade OJs with beautiful image quality - but with back damage or pin holes. To me, and to most OJ collectors I think, such a card is more desireable than an EX-MT with a cloudy picture. The problem is that numerical grades are supposed to be attributed on a technical basis. We already bristle at the level of subjectivity inherent in grading. Injecting aesthetic, "non technical" factors such as registration will make it even moreso, which leads to the old cliche - Buy the card, not the holder. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Canadian Registration | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 05-06-2008 01:01 PM |
What are the qualities that factor into price volatility in T206s? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 17 | 10-07-2007 05:04 PM |
Why isn't Rarity the No.1 factor in determining a card's value? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 07-06-2006 06:59 PM |
Registration Fee | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 52 | 04-17-2006 03:16 PM |
the ex-cub factor as predictor of outcome | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 10-21-2004 03:34 PM |