Building a set vs buying a set

[BobC]

The responses may vary greatly depending on the era a set is from. Pre-War sets tend to have their cards more often listed and sold separately, or in very small groups. So buying large lots and then filling in the holes is normally not even an option. Post-War and Modern cards you can much more easily find large lots, or even complete sets, for sale.

Ultimately, the question is going to more likely come down to and be greatly influenced by the specific set you're going to collect, as opposed to the type of set collector you'd like to be.

[Rhotchkiss]

I dont have the patience to assemble a large set card by card; I have back runs for that. I would rather buy the entire set complete, leave as is or upgrade, or at least buy a larger chunk at one time and fill in the blanks. Another issue I have with sets is that I want the HOFers in nice condition, and I dont care so much about the commons so long as they have a minimum grade. Many complete sets I see have HOFers with lower grades than the commons, which is ass-backward in my opinion. A final issue I have with sets is I just dont really care about the commons. For this reason, the few sets I have completed/worked on/bought are super rare and small, as its hard for me to spend real money on a bunch of commons

I have completed/worked on 6 sets, all of which are darn rare:

1. T206 524-card complete set - I bought an existing, near-complete registry set and upgraded and added to it. The beauty of this acquisition is that the set was missing many of the major HOFers, which I already had and could just add to the set.

2. E107 set - bought it complete

3. 1906 Lincoln Publishing - bought it complete

4. E104-II - bought near complete and added Wagner

5. D304 -- assembled card by card but did acquire about 40% in one chunk

6. M131-Newsboy -- only about 20% complete, but I have the Cobb, Wagner, Young, Speaker, and Evers so I have most of the cost accounted for.

I would love to own complete 1914 Cracker Jack, 1933 Goudey, and 1952 Topps sets, but I would have to buy them whole, as I do not have the patience to assemble

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Another issue I have with sets is that I want the HOFers in nice condition, and I dont care so much about the commons so long as they have a minimum grade. Many complete sets I see have HOFers with lower grades than the commons, which is ass-backward in my opinion.

Good point. We often get consignors of 1950s-1970s sets who have EX to NM commons and their Mantles and Mays cards are absolute train wrecks. Don't go cheap on stars because when and if you do sell low-grade stars will poison the commons.

[egri]

I voted one at a time, because that's how I get the most fun out of it. To keep costs in check, I have one main project (signed 1953 Topps) and a handful of smaller side projects that I'm ok with working on at a glacial pace. I will pick up lots from time to time, and cherry pick upgrades, but I don't like replacing cards I got signed TTM. Those ones stay in my collection.

[Leon]

Type card collector here. The T205s were fun to make a run at.

[doug.goodman]

I completed the 1948 thru 1992 Topps regular and insert complete run (everything pre 1973 card by card, from 1973 forward I bought packs at the local store to the point where the only cards I was missing were the ones where I felt like asking the lovely wife permission to buy them was the right thing to do.

That's when I sold them all.

Doug