PSA 9 vs 10 -- challenge

[bk400]

I've always been of the view that PSA 9s are underpriced relative to the 10s in the modern segment of the hobby (and maybe more generally).

Here's a PSA 9, Charles Oakley, 1986 Fleer RC. I bought it for $59. The PSA 10s cost 6-8x the amount.

I challenge someone to find a PSA 10 that looks better than my 9.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by bk400

I've always been of the view that PSA 9s are underpriced relative to the 10s in the modern segment of the hobby (and maybe more generally).

I challenge someone to find a PSA 10 that looks better than my 9.

Methinks it's contingent upon you as the thread starter to do some heavy lifting by posting at least one 10 for comparison's sake.

[bk400]

I was going to do so, but the PSA 10s that I see are up for sale on eBay. And I don't want mess up someone's sale (noting that I am not suggesting that I am so arrogant as to suggest that my post could mess up someone's sale).

But to your point, BalticFox, I would post some examples if I thought it was gentlemanly.

[tiger8mush]

While I generally agree there are 9s that are as good as or better than some 10s, and yours may well be one of them, it'll be difficult without comparing the cards in hand.

Your pics are pretty small, but even high-res scans can hide imperfections that can only be seen by tilting the card in a light or using a loupe.

From the pics provided, your card look beautiful! Enjoy!

[bk400]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

While I generally agree there are 9s that are as good as or better than some 10s, and yours may well be one of them, it'll be difficult without comparing the cards in hand.

Your pics are pretty small, but even high-res scans can hide imperfections that can only be seen by tilting the card in a light or using a loupe.

From the pics provided, your card look beautiful! Enjoy!

Thanks a lot for the polite and charitable response. I've attached the highest resolution photos (per the site's limits) I can for your honest view.

[Zach Wheat]

Recent grading experience has shown me that I can't tell a grade 6 from an 8 or 10

[Peter_Spaeth]

It is irrelevant that a 9 may be as nice as a 10. That doesn't make the 9 underpriced. The flip, not the card, is now the commodity. IMO this is critical to an understanding of the modern market.

[Peter_Spaeth]

double post

[Bigdaddy]

Recent return from SGC. I thought the Yount would probably be a grade higher than the Brett, but certainly not this much disparity. And I used a 10x loupe to inspect the cards before submitting.

[BioCRN]

I love 10s.

I sell them or trade down to an 8 or 9.

I like sharp looking cards, but most 8's and 9's fill that need adequately and the markup on many 10s make me feel silly holding them.

Some people want the best, I just want a nice looking card. I'll take the cash overflow and use it to buy other nice looking cards.

[bk400]

Originally Posted by BioCRN

I love 10s.

I sell them or trade down to an 8 or 9.

I like sharp looking cards, but most 8's and 9's fill that need adequately and the markup on many 10s make me feel silly holding them.

Some people want the best, I just want a nice looking card. I'll take the cash overflow and use it to buy other nice looking cards.

This sentiment resonates with me. Even more so because I'm not even sure that 10s are actually the "best". If you were to take 100 late vintage / early modern 10s, break even open and re-grade them, how many would re-grade as a 10? It's another one of those areas of the hobby where suspension of disbelief is required.

[bk400]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

Recent return from SGC. I thought the Yount would probably be a grade higher than the Brett, but certainly not this much disparity. And I used a 10x loupe to inspect the cards before submitting.

+1. Yep.