Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

Lucky 13, just posted someone just hit on a 1980 Henderson PSA 10 anyone from this board?

Lucky 13, just posted someone just hit on a 1980 Henderson PSA 10 anyone from this board?
i know there has been a lot of action recently with unopened 1980 Topps Baseball.. i can only image seeing that pop..


1980 Topps 482 Rickey Henderson GEM-MT 10...........13

Comments

  • Big80sBig80s Posts: 2,758 ✭✭✭
    It wasn't me, but I've got eight crisp vending boxes at home just begging to be opened.
    Let's Rip It: PackGeek.com
    Jeff
  • Bosox1976Bosox1976 Posts: 8,528 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>It wasn't me, but I've got eight crisp vending boxes at home just begging to be opened. >>



    Oh yeah... let 'er rip!
    Mike
    Bosox1976
  • What does everyone think of the fresh PSA 10 on eBay
    It never leaves you...
  • wrestlingcardkingwrestlingcardking Posts: 4,555 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>What does everyone think of the fresh PSA 10 on eBay >>



    Spectacular
    BUYING Frank Gotch T229 Kopec
    Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
  • grote15grote15 Posts: 29,480 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>What does everyone think of the fresh PSA 10 on eBay >>



    If I'm looking for a PSA 10, I'm looking for a higher end example with better back centering and no chipping on bottom edge, which is a common issue with 1980 Topps baseball cards.

    Registration is really nice, though.

    I'd personally prefer a high-end 9.


    Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
  • DboneesqDboneesq Posts: 18,220 ✭✭
    ASKING PRICE IS THIRTY-ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS!!!

    JMO, but hard to believe that out of 13,000+ graded Rookies, this is one of the 13 best sent in.

    Can someone tell me how they measure T/B centering on the 80's? On the top, is it from the top of the pennant or the top of the lettering in the name?

    image

    image
    STAY HEALTHY!

    Doug

    Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
  • Gemyanks10Gemyanks10 Posts: 1,164 ✭✭✭


    << <i>If I'm looking for a PSA 10, I'm looking for a higher end example with better back centering and no chipping on bottom edge, which is a common issue with 1980 Topps baseball cards. >>



    I agree with this. I've seen many 9's with better front and back centering. I'm not one to put down cards that were assigned a certain grade or the fact that someone was lucky enough to land one in this grade, but if I'm spending this kind of money for a card of this caliber, it has to be perfect in every way. I'm working on the 1980 Topps set as we speak, and if I was in the market for a Rickey right at the moment, I would pass this up and wait for a nicer one to come along. That's just my obsessive compulsiveness though. Congratulations to whomever made this and hope it sells. 31,000 seems about 10,000 too high though. If this card were "pristine" in every way, then MAYBE I could see it fetching that much.
    Always looking for OPC "tape intact" baseball wax boxes, and 1984 OPC baseball PSA 10's for my set. Please PM or email me if you have any available.
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • MULLINS5MULLINS5 Posts: 4,517 ✭✭✭


    << <i>ASKING PRICE IS THIRTY-ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS!!!

    JMO, but hard to believe that out of 13,000+ graded Rookies, this is one of the 13 best sent in.

    Can someone tell me how they measure T/B centering on the 80's? On the top, is it from the top of the pennant or the top of the lettering in the name?

    >>



    I don't know anything about this set, my my best educated guess is that the centering is measured, on top, at the top tip of the ribbon. Hopefully someone with experience with this set will chime in....

    Just glancing at the other Henderson 1980s on eBay it looks like this card is prone to bad color registration and printing defects like fisheyes. This "10" has some, too, but not nearly as much as the others.

    Gotta agree with the comment above about getting a string 9 with better centering and no chipping. Did anyone see the bottom edges of the Henderson 10? Looks like they're chipped, too.
  • JustinsShoeboxJustinsShoebox Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭
    Not the strongest 10.

    Thought it's void of typical print defects and sharp, the registration is not perfect. The blue in the bottom lining of the A's banner should have kept it from a 10. Slightly too far to the left. T/B centering is fine.

    Justin
  • is that a fish eye under the outfield yellow banner and if so is that common on these?
    It never leaves you...
  • MULLINS5MULLINS5 Posts: 4,517 ✭✭✭


    << <i>is that a fish eye under the outfield yellow banner and if so is that common on these? >>



    Whatever it is I'm seeing them on a lot of others.
  • grote15grote15 Posts: 29,480 ✭✭✭✭✭
    There also appears to be a slight tilt on front, which is within parameters for a 10, but an issue many collectors are picky about.


    Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
  • itzagoneritzagoner Posts: 8,753 ✭✭


    << <i>The blue in the bottom lining of the A's banner should have kept it from a 10. >>



    ^^^^^^^^^^
  • Terrible ten. Several factors already pointed out, including the asking price.
  • JustinsShoeboxJustinsShoebox Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭


    << <i>is that a fish eye under the outfield yellow banner and if so is that common on these? >>



    I do not think you will ever find this card without that mark.

    Justin
  • CDsNutsCDsNuts Posts: 10,092
    Wow, you guys are really tearing this card apart. I see nothing that should absolutely keep it out of a 10 holder. The back centering is certainly within standards, the chipping along the bottom edge is pretty insignificant, and the registration is about 1 mm off. You could nitpick stuff like this on almost any PSA 10 from 1986 and earlier. PSA 10 does not = Perfection and never has.

    I would guess this card grades a PSA 10 about 30-40% of the time, and if it was a random common it would probably be a 10 about 60-70% of the time.

    Lee
  • itzagoneritzagoner Posts: 8,753 ✭✭


    << <i>Wow, you guys are really tearing this card apart. I see nothing that should absolutely keep it out of a 10 holder. The back centering is certainly within standards, the chipping along the bottom edge is pretty insignificant, and the registration is about 1 mm off. You could nitpick stuff like this on almost any PSA 10 from 1986 and earlier. PSA 10 does not = Perfection and never has.

    I would guess this card grades a PSA 10 about 30-40% of the time, and if it was a random common it would probably be a 10 about 60-70% of the time.

    Lee >>



    some folks may feel a stronger sense of opinion based on the belief that their own cards have been over scrutinized and downgraded due to similar flaws. it's quite natural to feel that way. it also leads to greater consideration of having a PSA 9 Henderson rookie sent in for review. there must be quite a few out there which would warrant a more favorable opinion from this crowd.


  • << <i>some folks may feel a stronger sense of opinion based on the belief that their own cards have been over scrutinized and downgraded due to similar flaws. it's quite natural to feel that way. it also leads to greater consideration of having a PSA 9 Henderson rookie sent in for review. there must be quite a few out there which would warrant a more favorable opinion from this crowd. >>




    Ned? Ryerson?

    BING AGAIN!
  • JustinsShoeboxJustinsShoebox Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Wow, you guys are really tearing this card apart. I see nothing that should absolutely keep it out of a 10 holder. The back centering is certainly within standards, the chipping along the bottom edge is pretty insignificant, and the registration is about 1 mm off. You could nitpick stuff like this on almost any PSA 10 from 1986 and earlier. PSA 10 does not = Perfection and never has.

    I would guess this card grades a PSA 10 about 30-40% of the time, and if it was a random common it would probably be a 10 about 60-70% of the time.

    Lee >>



    I think your assessment of odds of result for this card may be in line.

    Because it's in a PSA 10 holder, it is subject to such scrutiny because the asking price of this card as a 10 must demand it. If I'm going to spend a record price on a card, I would be looking for the best possible, strongest example for the grade. While it's exhibition of qualities may not keep it from a 10 holder for you, do you feel that it is the strongest 10 that you have seen?

    Justin
  • itzagoneritzagoner Posts: 8,753 ✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>some folks may feel a stronger sense of opinion based on the belief that their own cards have been over scrutinized and downgraded due to similar flaws. it's quite natural to feel that way. it also leads to greater consideration of having a PSA 9 Henderson rookie sent in for review. there must be quite a few out there which would warrant a more favorable opinion from this crowd. >>




    Ned? Ryerson?

    BING AGAIN! >>



    watch out for that first step. it's a doozie.
  • CDsNutsCDsNuts Posts: 10,092
    While it's exhibition of qualities may not keep it from a 10 holder for you, do you feel that it is the strongest 10 that you have seen?

    Certainly not the strongest 10 by any means, and I'm definitely not the guy to plunk down 30 large on this card no matter what it looks like. I'm just responding to the masses thinking it has no business being in a 10 holder, which I think is unfair.

    Anybody who has subbed 500+ cards in their life has experienced their share of cards graded both tough and generous. From my experience, this card isn't an overly generous 10. Sure there are stronger 10s out there, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be a 10.
  • ChiefsFan1stChiefsFan1st Posts: 845 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>some folks may feel a stronger sense of opinion based on the belief that their own cards have been over scrutinized and downgraded due to similar flaws. it's quite natural to feel that way. it also leads to greater consideration of having a PSA 9 Henderson rookie sent in for review. there must be quite a few out there which would warrant a more favorable opinion from this crowd. >>




    Ned? Ryerson?

    BING AGAIN! >>



    watch out for that first step. it's a doozie. >>


    Wow! I actually caught one of these without google!!image

    Needle nose Ned, Ned the head, come on buddy, CASE WESTERN HIGH!!
    I dont wanna grow up, Im a Toys-R-Us kid!
  • I see what you are saying, lee. However, the simplest way I can put it is that it's a very low 10 (quite possibly the lowest) and @ $31,000 I don't see any room for future gains. In fact, it may be 5+ years to even recoup your investment, maybe more. It could prove to be a huge bath of Olympic sized pool proportions.

    On the "flip" side:

    From PSA's standpoint, let this weak 10 slip out and you are looking at quite a few 9's being cracked out and submitted or even reviewed, which in turn could make said $31K 10 even less desirable. My guess is that the POP on 10's jumps 3 - 5 more spots in 2015.

  • ergoismergoism Posts: 315 ✭✭✭


    << <i>My guess is that the POP on 10's jumps 3 - 5 more spots in 2015. >>



    I'll set the over/under at 2 and take the under.
  • CDsNutsCDsNuts Posts: 10,092
    I see what you are saying, lee. However, the simplest way I can put it is that it's a very low 10 (quite possibly the lowest) and @ $31,000 I don't see any room for future gains. In fact, it may be 5+ years to even recoup your investment, maybe more. It could prove to be a huge bath of Olympic sized pool proportions.

    One of the lower Rickey 10's? Probably, but a sample size of 13 isn't exactly big enough pool to make any significant presumptions. One of the lower 1980 Topps PSA 10's in general? Not even close.



    On the "flip" side:

    From PSA's standpoint, let this weak 10 slip out and you are looking at quite a few 9's being cracked out and submitted or even reviewed, which in turn could make said $31K 10 even less desirable. My guess is that the POP on 10's jumps 3 - 5 more spots in 2015.



    I think you may be giving PSA too much credit, they aren't nearly that calculating. And I, too, will take the under.
  • mlbfan2mlbfan2 Posts: 3,115 ✭✭✭


    << <i>My guess is that the POP on 10's jumps 3 - 5 more spots in 2015. >>



    Put me down for $31,000 on the under!
  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,854 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Under.

    This card has issues that go beyond an internet scan. Not sure if it's placement on the sheet, bad plates, whatever. But we're not exactly talking about a small sample size. Hell, even a 9 is pretty damn tough. Not like some other cards where the 10 pop is low but a majority of submissions get 9's. That tells me that there are multiple issues with this card that seemingly plague all of them. So even if you get lucky on #1, #2 & #3 are there to poop in your soup.
  • We aren't talking about other 1980's cards. We are talking about the 80 Henderson and this is one of the poorest examples as explained by just about everybody else with significant criteria that does not qualify as a 10. fisheyes, blue lining, slight oc/tilt, the whole "9" yards.

    PSA is definitely calculating. They are a publically traded company, they are supposed to be. $7 specials. They are controlling growth. They have a good backlog of submittals and making a $7 special during the shortest month to play catch up is key move vs. more hiring and overhead.


    Granted it's a card plagued w/ issues, but so is the entire 79 series. Both the Rose and Ryan were dead locked at 5, both jumped up to pop 7. Quite a significant rise when put into percentages, usually spawned by 2 factors. 1. Outrageous sales price 2. Weak version surfaces. Both lead to higher submittals in the following months. The 79 Rose experienced a 28% spike in number of submittals compared to the average monthly numbers in the following months after the $5100 hammer price. The next 10 went for $5888.

    More submittals result in more 10's. Not science, just facts. And should, by some miracle, this 10 sell anywhere near the $30K plateau, I can assure you that the over will be met easily!!!

    And please adjust the over under to 2 1/2, so there is a winner. 2 is a lock and I will still take the over.
  • mlbfan2mlbfan2 Posts: 3,115 ✭✭✭


    << <i>And please adjust the over under to 2 1/2, so there is a winner. 2 is a lock and I will still take the over. >>



    Maybe you can offer to give away a nice card in your collection if there aren't at least 2 more 10s in 2015. You should have no problem doing so, since, you know....it's a lock.
  • My collection isn't all that great, but i'm all for a friendly wager of cards. PM if ya want, think it'd be fun!
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Some food for thought. Every high grade card that was coveted three years ago has moved up significantly in value.

    A Jerry Rice has moved up nearly four fold. A Montana in a 10 three fold. This card is probably not priced to far away from reality if at all.

    This was a $12,000 card all day three years ago and there is no chance that this card can be owned at that price now.




  • That's some good food! I don't really follow that card on a daily basis, but did watch the PWCC auction with some popcorn. Would be a good thing to mark the number of cards graded now and the influx of reviews and resub's that will occur with that sale in the pending months as a result.
  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,854 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm not sure you understand the difference between faith and fact.
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I'm not sure you understand the difference between faith and fact. >>




    Who are you talking to?

    If me.

    There is a robust private market. I learn about sale prices and the asking price is not a stretch.


  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,854 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Evilpenny.

    No matter how much one believes a future occurrence will happen, nothing is a certainty.
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Evilpenny.

    No matter how much one believes a future occurrence will happen, nothing is a certainty. >>





    The idea of reviewing is obviously nothing new. There are 1,459 PSA 9's and I would bet hundreds of those are regraded cards.

    High priced sales of certain cards may bring out some reviews but it is not like this card shot up to super stardom over night. PSA is the gate keeper and they won't be bumping many if any.

    I have come to the conclusion that once a card becomes platinum the grading standards get even tougher. It only makes since. The tougher the grading standards. The higher prices and the more cards get submitted to PSA. They are not dummies.






  • << <i>Evilpenny.

    No matter how much one believes a future occurrence will happen, nothing is a certainty. >>



    oh, gie of little faith, i'm quite certain I can make the distinction between fact and faith. it's the placement of the spoon and knife in regards to the fork that always gets me!

    however when it comes to faith, I don't need any. i'm not personally invested in the 80 Henderson at any level.

    we all know that death and taxes are a certainty. and so is change!

  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    $25k without the buyers premium.

    The auction is in extended bidding.



  • begsu1013begsu1013 Posts: 1,943 ✭✭
    still say 2 more hit this year! ; )
  • grote15grote15 Posts: 29,480 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>still say 2 more hit this year! ; ) >>



    What happened to 3-5 more? image


    Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
  • begsu1013begsu1013 Posts: 1,943 ✭✭
    ergosim set the over/under @ 2, right?

    but 3-5, what the hell was I thinking*

    (*even if the 79 rose 10 went from pop 5 to pop 8 in a mere 3 month span)

    still see 80 wax falling slightly and the hendo surpassing $30K

    still think I have a strong shot at the over and maybe to 3.

    5 aint gonna happen though.

    edit to add info:

    1/10/15 - 1452, 13 higher.
    5/15/15 - 1468, 13 higher.
Sign In or Register to comment.