PWCC Certified High End

MattyC · #1 04-01-2018, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrackaJackKid

So decent/good looking cards graded 1s with a pinhole can now be assessed at the high end level for their grade. I guess I better get with the program. Lol

“High End” to me rypically refers to the most expensive example of all examples. But when you categorize by grades I guess anyone can call anything they want.

I just wouldnt feel right saying I had a high end example of a card when it’s recieved the lowest numerical grade. To each their own.

Would you feel right saying you had a high end example of a card if the flip said 7 or 8 and it cost a ton, yet it had tilt or was OC or had a weak corner or a focus/registration issue? Because a card can certainly be the most expensive based on its flip and still exhibit those eye appeal flaws— which to those who stress the card over the pricetag, would not make it the highest end example.

Unless you think both of those Shoeless Joe Jackson CJs are equal cards in all respects, there certainly is a spectrum within each grade. Some call it the high and low ends. The market readily acknowledges that all 1s are not the same by the prices they command, and so collectors simply follow suit in terms of language.

CrackaJackKid · #2 04-01-2018, 09:45 AM

Referring to the JJs I would classify one as very rough and the other as a nice looking example but not high end.

MattyC · #3 04-01-2018, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrackaJackKid

Referring to the JJs I would classify one as very rough and the other as a nice looking example but not high end.

That's certainly fair; it just seems a case of preferred language. The evolving jargon has become, "that's a high-end 3," for example. I have also heard a "strong 2," etc. All saying the same thing.

What PWCC has done is take the terminology that evolved among us all and monetize it— though I have some friends who would say weaponize, lol

irv · #4 04-01-2018, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattyC

That's certainly fair; it just seems a case of preferred language. The evolving jargon has become, "that's a high-end 3," for example. I have also heard a "strong 2," etc. All saying the same thing.

What PWCC has done is take the terminology that evolved among us all and monetize it� though I have some friends who would say weaponize, lol

This^

Peter_Spaeth · #5 04-01-2018, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattyC

That's certainly fair; it just seems a case of preferred language. The evolving jargon has become, "that's a high-end 3," for example. I have also heard a "strong 2," etc. All saying the same thing.

What PWCC has done is take the terminology that evolved among us all and monetize it� though I have some friends who would say weaponize, lol

It's stupid though. With a large scan anyone can see for himself whether the card is high end for the grade. Brent's say-so doesn't add anything.

frankbmd · #6 04-01-2018, 10:51 AM

In my laundry room HE stands for �high efficiency�.
In the morgue HE stands for �hepatic encephalopathy�.
In the chemistry lab HE stands for �helium�.

Therefore in the baseball card world, HE means

�The Card was soaked by a drunk seeking to elevate the grade of the card unsuccessfully.�

Q E D.

barrysloate · #7 04-01-2018, 11:14 AM

At every grade level there are cards that exhibit nice eye appeal, and others that look kind of crummy. So there is nothing wrong with stating that a card with great visuals is high end for the grade.

The problem is that so many dealers say that about too many cards. How often do you see the words "this should have gotten a higher grade" or "this looks better than a 3." So some discretion is needed.

Rookiemonster · #8 04-01-2018, 11:25 AM

Maybe we need grades within grades. Like a psa 1 that is borderline authentic grade. Need to be called a psa 1 - then go up from there psa 1+ psa 1 gem.
This might also bring a end to the grading a card above a mint 9. Just call it gem mint 9 .

MattyC · #9 04-02-2018, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrysloate

At every grade level there are cards that exhibit nice eye appeal, and others that look kind of crummy. So there is nothing wrong with stating that a card with great visuals is high end for the grade.

Well said.

Leon · #10 04-01-2018, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrackaJackKid

Referring to the JJs I would classify one as very rough and the other as a nice looking example but not high end.

I think a large majority of collectors would disagree as to that 1 not being a high end 1. I have learned, over the course of time, that if I say the sky is up there will be some that disagree. It's America!!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PWCC Certified High End Cards:	samosa4u	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	44	10-28-2017 12:52 PM
20 retraction high bidder PWCC	Peter_Spaeth	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	89	09-05-2017 08:03 PM
(Sold) 1951 Bowman Mantle PSA 2 (high end certified by me)	Leon	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	7	10-14-2016 08:30 PM
pwcc 1952 topps high grades	1952boyntoncollector	Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk	2	08-30-2016 11:31 AM
PWCC Certified High End	Peter_Spaeth	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	66	06-03-2015 04:19 PM