I mentioned earlier I was buying PSA 8, 9, 10 cards as I believe they are undervalued
theump
Posts: 634 ✭✭
A week or two ago, I mentioned how after many years of not collecting I was slowly getting back in. I'm using my 28 years of Wall Street experience and buying things that I think are undervalued, mostly PSA 8, 9, or 10 cards of commons and minor stars.
I just received in the mail this today
tell me how I can get hurt on purchasing something like this, and if it goes to zero, I'm out $8.+
I've picked up about 20 cards so far, the most expensive being 1971 Bobby Clarke (second year) PSA 8 for $60 total.
0
Comments
Always liked Clarke cards but he did kharlamov dirty.
Kiss me twice.....let's party.
I mean a 9 with OC qualifier is equivalent to a PSA 7. The card has little value now and will continue to have little value in the future as it’s not high grade and not prominent players.
If you like the card, sure not a bad buy for 8 bucks. Or if you’re putting the 80/81 set together and want slabbed cards. If you’re trying to find a market inefficiency I think you’re barking up the wrong tree there.
As a Wall Street guy. Buying this is the equivalent of typing in 3 random letters on your keyboard and buying that Stock symbol, except without the upside.
HOF SIGNED FOOTBALL RCS
Just in case you aren't aware, the value of a 9 OC (or any other qualifier) is very, very different from the value of a straight 9!
You purchased a card that is over 40 years old - in a PSA holder for $3.51. Think about that for a moment.
Undervalued you say? Many would consider it to be worthless. So, it another 40 years, it's worth what? $7. Maaaybe $20? Doesn't sound like smart buying since it sounds like you are thinking more in terms of investment. I would suggest on finding a different approach and not make purchases like that anymore unless you are simply buying to build a set or because you want to crack a card out to get it signed.
Comments above are spot on.
Nic
Guides Authored - Graded Card Scanning Guide PDF | History of the PSA Label PDF
As one who is relatively new to all this, I can attest that it's not easy to pick up on such distinctions as "(OC)" right away. The original poster should view this as a very valuable lesson obtained for just $8, rather than $80.
And the card can always be resold for a comparable amount.
Buying graded commons instead of star players as an investment is like buying penny stocks over Microsoft as an investment.
Storage fees? Seriously, if you're collecting what you like, that's great and we're all excited for you. You're not going to get hurt financially, but you're not going to make much of a profit, either.
Early on I bought more than a few 9 OC’s because I thought that was the grade in between 9 and 10. I based that on the way SMR shows prices.
Live and learn.
High grade common cards from the 70's/80's is the most likely to drop in price down the road. Zero sex appeal.
An exception may be 1971 Topps baseball.
Look for the overlooked cards of the elite Hall of Famers. Less than 25 years ago the 1921 Exhibit Babe Ruth was a bargain and wasn't even considered a 'baseball card' by many. Look at it now. Same for the Exhibit Lou Gehrig Rookie card. 1907 Ty Cobb Post card.
There are still cards out there of elite Hall of Famers that are way underpriced compared to other cards of the same player.
Cards from the last 60 years or so year with qualifiers even for HOF's are the "kiss of death". It is a nice way though to get HOF cards at a low price but for investment purposes there are far more efficient ways to turn a larger profit. Commons with qualifiers well in most cases the slab is worth more than its contents.
My .02: There is no wrong way to collect but I do believe there are wrong ways to invest. Time of course is the ultimate arbitrator but better to not have to wait decades to double or triple the original cost 'specially w/inflation.
Apologies for my brutal honesty. However if you are doing it as collector for the love and or memories of the cards then you are doing just fine.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
did you work for Bears Stearns? just kidding.
In my book, undervalued means that the card has the ability to attain a higher value later. It doesn't mean cheap cards.
With the $100 grading price you could corner the 70s graded common market (like the Hunt brothers did with the silver market). Buy up all the PSA graded commons in the decade, cracking 90% of them out and sending the tags to PSA so the pop count goes down. If you could do this before PSA lowers their grading prices - registry set collectors would be forced to go to you for the remaining commons. You could then charge more due to desperation. It would be a game of wills for registry set builders - pay you $75 each, pay $100 to PSA and have a chance at a 9 or 10 or simply wait until grading prices come down.
I would not recommend this strategy as you would need to first outlay the cash to buy thousands of cards, hoping that the demand for the last 10% is enough to buy you out before grading prices come down.
This is the only way I see 70s PSA commons in grades 8 and below moving up significantly.
So glad they got rid of qualifiers. Never made any sense to me. This one is a 9 except for the pin hole and the tire tracks and it's missing a corner.
There’s no wrong way to collect, but don’t think you’ve got the secret to millions buying mid grade cards of mediocre players. I think those days when you could at least buy raw and grass cheaply and make a profit are gone and never coming back.
I agree with the others, it's been said well. They're cheap for a reason. My suggestion is this...take whatever your budget is (say $50/week) and instead of buying 5 $10 commons, buy 1 $50 vintage HOF'er.
I agree with the comments above. For me, "undervalued" are either hall of famers in various sports that were not flashy and don't get the recognition they likely deserve (see Tim Duncan) or cards that are very difficult to get in a grade. I'm a 70's collector and have noticed PSA has become absurdly hard on high grade hall of famers when subbing. So, any hall of famer in a 9 or 10 from the 70's, especially in an iconic set like 75 is where you want to "invest" IMO. I'd go as far as to say any 10 from the 70's you can get for less than what you've seen past Ebay auctions go off for would be worth buying, as like I said PSA isn't handing out 10's very easily these day, and those cards aren't growing on trees. Buying 7's or 8's is not an investment IMO, it's a collector grade card. So, buy those if you like them and want to keep them, not because you think you are investing. JMO
Jeff
Collecting:
post world war II HOF rookie
76 topps gem mint 10 commons 9 stars
Arenado purple refractors(Rockies) Red (Cardinals)
successful deals with Keevan, Grote15, 1954, mbogoman
I agree with one caveat on 1970's in PSA 8 and that is 1971. 8's for that year probably are investment grade.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
Ain't nobody gettin' wallstreet rich buying psa 9(oc)s.