 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5
01-24-2011, 06:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
I think it depends on the card and how you rank card wear and damage. On your two examples, I would much rather have the 10, its just a much better looking card imo even with the paper loss than the other. I buy the card not the holder so while I consider the grade, it gets down to which I like better at each price point.
Here are two cards in my collection that I paid more for when I could have bought higher graded versions for less, I love exhibits with EX to NM++ fronts and back damage-  
|
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Flaking vs. paper loss | Orions father | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 10-13-2010 09:08 PM |
| WTT: HUGE tradelist of T205, T206, T207 & E90-1 | marcdelpercio | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 9 | 08-15-2009 10:43 AM |
| Whats the story on grading when there is paper loss? | cobblove | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 22 | 08-08-2009 03:50 PM |
| border chipping vs paper loss | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 05-06-2008 02:40 PM |
| paper loss | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 13 | 01-30-2006 02:09 AM |
Threaded Mode