Impact of Tape Residue

[Rhotchkiss]

Generally, we like and buy cards bc of the image on the front. However, in prewar vintage, sometimes the advertisement on the back is what drives the desire to own a card. If your example is the former, then Go For It and don’t look back. You likely got a relative steal based on a technical grade/flaw. However, if your example is the latter, then do not buy a damaged back when the back is the reason to acquire.

[jimq16415]

I think it matters if it's a popular card. If it's a Mantle, Cobb, or something like that there's a better chance of resale later if need be. If it's something that might not have as large of a pool of interested buyers (maybe it's vintage football from an obscure set) and you have to get past the back damage then you might not be able to sell it as quickly if you get a chance to upgrade or if you decide to move on.

[FrankWakefield]

I recall some of the several times I've been told a certain something I'm about to mention. And I recall being told this gem a few times in person. Yet several times, as I've collected, I've fallen victim to disregarding this bit of advice:

If you settle for a card in a worse condition than you normally collect, then one day you'll find yourself buying the card a second time.

I've found that too many times my collecting habits have led to me buying a few cards twice.

So, that means I'd most likely buy that tape residue on the back card. One day I'd try my hand at removing a bit of the tape to see how that goes. If it goes well, I try to remove a bit more. If it goes badly, then I stop tinkering with tape residue removal.

Is the tape residue on your card so much that you'll eventually buy then card again? If you're certain it is, then pass on it. If you think it's a good card for your collection, then great!

Have you bought a card twice before? Upgrading where you bought a filler card first? I heard of that with coins, and then stamps, 50+ years ago. It applies to ball cards, too.

[Cmvorce]

As others have said, it depends on the card. Here are my two examples - the tape residue on the back of my Aaron doesn’t bother me in the least because of how sharp the front, surface and corners are. That’s all I care about for this card.

The Hooks, though, I bought for the Hindu back, and that paper loss on the back greatly diminishes my feelings towards the card.

If the back matters to you, don’t settle.

[GrewUpWithJunkWax]

Originally Posted by Cmvorce

As others have said, it depends on the card. Here are my two examples - the tape residue on the back of my Aaron doesn’t bother me in the least because of how sharp the front, surface and corners are. That’s all I care about for this card.

The Hooks, though, I bought for the Hindu back, and that paper loss on the back greatly diminishes my feelings towards the card.

If the back matters to you, don’t settle.

Agreed, great Aaron, and that back tape mark matters not.

I have a few cards where if it weren't for some back damage or writing on the back then I wouldn't have been able to afford them. It's not always a good tradeoff, but sometimes you can strike the right balance.

[spartakid8]

Thank you everyone for all the feedback and appreciate that the sentiment is largely to go for it. Here is a pic of both sides of the card for reference.

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by spartakid8

Thank you everyone for all the feedback and appreciate that the sentiment is largely to go for it. Here is a pic of both sides of the card for reference.

Gorgeous card! The tape is certainly noteworthy, but the front is really great looking, and that card is all about the front. Indeed, but for the tape, the front likely wouldn’t look so good (preserved in album for years instead of handled, bent and created). If the price is right, I would get that ASAP and enjoy.

Here is my t206 Plank. Very similar situation. The front is incredible but the back has that tape residue. Without the residue, the card would grade much higher. I love the card and would not trade it for most of the 4s out there, because this is better looking.

Your Mays is the same. Get the card and enjoy owning an amazing example of a Mays rookie

[Vintagedeputy]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

If you settle for a card in a worse condition than you normally collect, then one day you'll find yourself buying the card a second time.

I've found that too many times my collecting habits have led to me buying a few cards twice.
.

I hope to buy a card twice….or 3 or 4 times. If I’m at a place financially where I can afford a Mantle that’s a 2, I’ll buy it because it’s real and it’s a Mantle. If a year later I can afford a three or a four then I will buy it again and I will keep upgrading until I acquire the best one that I can afford.

[Vintagedeputy]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Generally, we like and buy cards bc of the image on the front. However, in prewar vintage, sometimes the advertisement on the back is what drives the desire to own a card.

The back advertisement means very little to me. I collect for the player on the front.

[spartakid8]

Originally Posted by Vintagedeputy

The back advertisement means very little to me. I collect for the player on the front.

I definitely see the point, but as you’ll see below this isn’t the case for this card so I don’t think the back is as key for me personally…