![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Finally, some cold, hard facts! I was getting sick of people comparing all their anecdotal evidence. Looks like some solid work there.
Although I disagree that SGC slabs look better than PSA's. I like the minimalist, thin, transparent holders. I think they put more emphasis on the card rather than the case. But then again, that's all subjective ![]() |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Wow, that is really cool.
Personally, I do not care about the grades, whatsoever. Not anymore. However, I absolutely love the black casing used by SGC. To me, it just looks cooler. I do hate, hate, hate the "unknown backs" in the PSA pop reports, but oh well... Really cool work in the OP. Thanks. Derek |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Very interesting research. Thanks for sharing Jason. From all of the discussions on the board, I thought PSA was the best way to maximize your value for vintage cards (42-79) and SGC for pre-war.
Maybe the size of the holder plays a factor? I would imagine 500+ PSA cards take up significantly less room than 500+ SGC cards.
__________________
Mantle Master Set - as complete as it is going to get Yankees Game Used Hat Style Run (1923-2017): 57/60 (missing 2008/9 holiday hats & 2017 Players Weekend) |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Great report. I do like the SGC holders. The cards present much nicer then PSA. However PSA does bring higher $$$
__________________
Ruben |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Great work Jason with the stats.
I just wanted to say that there are many sales(private transactions) that don't get recorded on VCP. And then you have the crossovers that don't get recorded. So, there's probably a little wiggle room on there in either direction with population & prices realized. But I think you've given the most accurate breakdown that someone could possibly give- nice job !! I buy cards graded by both companies (well, all three including BVG) and I don't think much about resale value because I don't plan on selling any of mine until decades from now (knock on wood) and who knows where things will be then. I do know one thing- the cards will be that much older ![]() Thanks for the breakdown, this was a cool read !! Sincerely, Clayton |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
PSA has more "supply", so more cards hit auction, more cards hit sales, more cards hit BIN's. If there wasn't a 1:2.67 ratio of PSA mid grade to SGC do you think they would demand more?
How many of these deviate higher or lower in price for each grade? The sheer volume difference IMO makes this simply an average of prices and not a reflection of the current market... Many more factors would need to be involved for a market value. The numbers being used can't be absolute because there is no way to know someone is going to pay exactly $23xxx or 64xxx for a set in whatever grade Last edited by Sean1125; 02-17-2013 at 06:06 AM. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jason,
Useful information--thank you. Please consider expanding your post into an article and publishing. Scot |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
If all the cards were of equal value theoretically, lumping all the grades and cards together would have more statistical validity.
This is a nice overview and interesting, but may be flawed from a pure statistical point of view. Without getting into p values and questioning the percentage of and which hall of famers are in each group, incorrect conclusions could be inferred from the numbers. In other words there could be some apples and oranges issues contained within the data presented. For example, if the higher valued cards are more likely to have been graded by PSA, then comparing average card prices by grade between SGC and PSA could be due to either higher prices for one company's slabs for the same card or a different distribution of cards within the subset and not a real difference in price for the same card. In no way should this be interpreted as criticism of the work in terms of accuracy, but merely a caution to members in terms of drawing too many conclusions from the data presented. I would add that I am not a statistician capable of validating presentations of this type, but merely a math guy who knows that numbers can be manipulated to validate assumed conclusions.
__________________
RAUCOUS SPORTS CARD FORUM MEMBER AND MONSTER FATHER. GOOD FOR THE HOBBY AND THE FORUM WITH A VAULT IN AN UNDISCLOSED LOCATION FILLED WITH WORTHLESS NON-FUNGIBLES 274/1000 Monster Number |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Funny i was thinking the same thing about SGC...I HATE how they don't differentiate the variations of a certain card....for instance, they don't differentiate the e90-1 variations of keeler, which there are 3.....this happens throughoutnthenentire set which make you extrapolate the true pop... |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Very cool post. I would definately like to read a more researched article. If you are interested in writing one let me know.
|
![]() |
|
|