Is NearMint good enough??

BobS

Now that I have been won over by this board, its many members, PSA graded cards, and the Set Registry, I would like to post a question:

Do any of you out there collect strictly PSA 7's and 8's, and believe the premium paid for 9's and 10's when they are available (I collect mostly vintage) just isn't worth it. I'm finally nailing down my 5-10 year collecting projections and need to make a big decision. By adding 7's to my sets and RC collection, I will be able to add many, many more cards over time and have a much larger collection. Conversely, my collection will never be "high end". I'm a centering freak, and the majority of 7's I own right now I'm very happy with. I've seen some 9's I wouldn't trade for.

I'm just curious if there is anyone else out there on a budget like me that thinks NearMint is just fine. Or is there anyone out there that thinks 7's will not hold any value and a premium should not be paid for them because there are still many 7'ish raw cards out there for less money (I'm not talking about pre-50's, mostly 60's-1980). I look forward to your opinions.

Mefer

I am working on a 1971 Topps baseball set and am on a limited budget. As such, PSA 7s are acceptable to me. I am enjoying putting the set together and find the 7s to be of acceptable quality. For this particular year, I think many 7s are still undervalued. As you all know, the black borders make this an extremely tough issue. Because my goal is to put a nice set together, and I would like to do it before I die, I would rather have a bunch of nice looking 7s then spend tons of money on one 9 and have no money left to fill other holes.

What it comes down to is budget. If I had more money, would I go for 8s and 9s? Probably. I don't have these funds but a 7 set will be good enough for me and something neat to pass along to my boys.

FB

Bob,

I think that it depends upon the set. For 60's cards and even early 70's (especially 71's) that PSA 7's are undervalued at this point. There are times where you can pick them up for less than the price of grading. I believe as high end material gets tougher and tougher to find that you'll see in increase in the value of 7's. But, definitely watch what you're paying for them.

For the mid 70's to early 80's I think that you're better off sticking with PSA 8's. They're still plentiful and you can sometimes pick up 8's for $5 - $6 apiece from 75 up. I think that it will take MANY YEARS before common 7's will be worth anything from 75 up.

Just my 2 cents.

mikeschmidt

Bob:

It depends on which sets you are trying to collect. Pre-war, PSA 7 Near Mint is an excellent and very collectible grade. Many will pursue such cards and they will hold value over time.

In the 1950s, I think PSA 7's will also hold value. Though they will never have the demand or prices of PSA 8's, some cards are very difficult to find in 7's.

Many 7's can be aesthetically pleasing. Especially to the non-collecting world. To prove this, try showing your wife or child a run of four of the same card -- one graded PSA 7, one graded PSA 8, one graded PSA 9 and one graded PSA 10. Show them the four cards, ask them to find the differences, and then explain to the the price structure between each one. Most will think anyone actively collecting 9s and 10s is criminally insane.

However, for 1960s to 1980s, I don't think that PSA 7s will really hold much value, but for star cards (And I would never look for them to appreciate in value, as they are way to easy to find in PSA 8). There are simply too many cards available in better grades to make 7s an opportunity for significant appreciation. However -- if you are only collecting star cards in PSA 7, they will be a fun and inexpensive way to add to your collection.

Everyone should collect what they love. If you are happy collecting PSA 7s, so be it. For many, a PSA 7 is a "mistake" and a "waste of a grading fee". But you can profit from others mistakes if you are happy with the 7s and can get far more 7s than many less PSA 8s.

I would suggest not collecting any post-1960 PSA 7's commons as a general rule, though.

carew4me

I have always been happy with a solid 7. Sometimes the premium paid for higher grade cards (hot 8's, many 9's etc)
is a break even propsition on the investment side.

However, as you stated, budget can be a major factor. Every one wants "the best", "all-time finest".
especially in our male dominated hobby.

While I make pretty good money, at one point, I just came to the conclusion that it was mainly ego that was
pushing me to buy the higher grades.

I soon developed a passion for finding PSA 7 at %30 SMR and PSA 8 at 50% SMR and my collection has
grown much larger becasue of it.

Most people do not have the kind of juice it takes to be all high grade, all the time.

There for concentrate on completing the set with 7 if need be. You will just as much sense of accomplishment.

I did.

waitilltheytrytosell

Since you're talking about cards from the 60's to 80's, then the 7's from those years you shouldn't have to pay much of a premium for. If you have to pay a premium, then wait, because there will be more of them coming next week. These cards aren't going to go up much in value, but they're also not going to go down much. They will be more stable than the big swings you will see in the 8's, 9's, and 10's. There's nothing wrong with having the 60's and very early 70's in 7's, but I would really try sticking to 8's in anything after 71 or 72.

BobS

You guys are right in line with what I was thinking. I'm not building any 500 card plus sets (right now) so I'm also not buying to many common graded cards. In my opinion, the money spent on 650 graded commons for a set like 72 (sorry fab five) could be better spent on several mid-grade star cards from many years. The sets that I am collecting completely slabbed are small all mean something to me. So for those sets, I will spend the extra money for 8's and 9's, however I do actively look for the commons in 7 for those sets.

Good comments. Everyone enjoy your week-end.

By the way, if you're curious:1964 Giants, 1964 Stand Ups, 1970 Kelloggs, 1980-81 Basketball and 1951 Bowman Football.

jrinck

I disagree that post 1960 commons in PSA 7 are a bad investment. Maybe post 1980, but certainly not 1960. Just because they're not worth much now doesn't mean they'll always be cheap.

PSA 7's are extremely nice cards. In many cases they are hard to tell from 8's and even 9's. This is why they were graded in the first place. If they looked like crap then nobody would have wasted their $6 on them.

It's very easy to lose sight of the fact that PSA does not physically do anything to the cards they grade. It's still the same card it was before it was slabbed. Only now it has someone's well respected opinion stamped on it. Without the slab many PSA 7's could be viewed as MINT, and highly prized.

I collect 1971 Topps in PSA 7 (and 6) primarily because of budget, but have a few 8's (8OCs to be exact), and many times the 8's appear to be in worse shape than the 7's. The difference between NM and NM-MT isn't all that much.

As these cards age, and the supply of good material to grade wanes, the values of ALL grades will go up. 8's certainly will go up more than 7's, but the initial outlay in cost is also there, too.

You can't honestly say that the PSA 7 '71 commons I buy for $6.00 each in 2002 will be viewed upon as a bad investment twenty years from now, while at the same time PSA 8 '71 commons have skyrocketed in value.

As someone pointed out, PSA 7 and 6 commons, even for 1971, can be had for dirt cheap, and they are extremely nice cards. I'll put many of my $6.00 7's up against $15.00 (and up) 8's.

If I can buy a NM PSA 7 vintage card for less than or equal the cost to grade it, then I've essentially been given the card for free along with handy lifetime protection for it, and in some cases can be viewed to have been paid to take it!

How in the world can that be viewed as a bad investment?

purelyPSA

I suppose a clarification should be made: whether or not you're planning on submitting stuff yourself. If you're just going to put together sets by buying bulk lots of 7s that dealers get and just want to unload, then what's the harm? So you paid 23.00 for 10 slabbed 7s of 70 topps; I don't think that such a lot will ever go for much less than that, even factoring in a deluge of graded stuff from the era that could occur in the next couple of years. Also, you could buy lots like this, cherry pick the best looking cards, and resell the rest for about the same price. You could build a good looking set just by going this route, and it wouldn't cost a whole lot in comparison to other graded sets being assembled.

Now on the other hand, if you're going to submit raw stuff yourself, you'd have to try to bag 8s. Heck I've seen lots of 7s from the early 60s go for around the grading fee - and since I love the '63 set I thought about just going that route - so you're incurring a big financial hit just by getting them slabbed in the first place. Not really feasible. Feasting on a dealers mistakes is one thing, but living with your own lower standards for submission is a good way to go broke. JMHO.

brucemo

I collect 50's cards in 7. The cards typically have sharp corners and a nice picture, and that's what I care about. If I could afford triple or quadruple the money, I would collect 8's, but 7's have enough eye appeal for me, and I'd rather have four sets in 7 than one in 8.

It is important to pick the right grade when trying to do a set on the cheap and in finite time. If you are thinking of doing a set in 7, make sure that there aren't five times more 8's out there. It doesn't do much good to start a set in 7 if you are going to have to get 8's of 3/4 of the cards, because there are no 7's. It also doesn't make much sense to do a set in 7, if 8's aren't that much more expensive.

If I were doing a '72 or later 70's set, I would do it in 8 for sure. There are plenty of 8's, you can submit to get 8's, and 9's are expensive.

bruce

calleocho

i would rather see a mixed grade set than a stright psa 7 set. maybe go a little nuts and buy a high pop 9 or get lucky and sumit your own psa 9. for 1973 and up only psa 8 and 9's should do. after 1981 or 82 then only 9 and 10's.

a 50's psa 7 set is indeed a very nice set. but its just not amazing.

waitilltheytrytosell

jrinck - What you said above makes sense if you replace the word "investment" with "deal". There is an ever growing supply of common PSA 8's from the 1960's up. I don't think that the amount of new collectors coming into the hobby will increase at the same rate. I feel that twenty years from now you will still be saying - If I can buy a NM PSA 7 vintage card for less than or equal the cost to grade it, then I've essentially been given the card for free along with handy lifetime protection for it, and in some cases can be viewed to have been paid to take it! There will always be a market for what you are buying, I just wouldn't give it investment status. It will always be stuff you can pick up for a good deal.

jrinck

I agree I'm getting a good deal now. I'm in this for the fun. If I were an investor with money, then I'd go for the 8's and 9's as that would maximize my return in later years.

However, in 20 years my 6's and 7's will certainly be worth more than they are now, so whatever spawned me to collect them, whether it be fun or investment, will not matter when/if I sell.

Treetop

Personally I collect the 1960 topps set in PSA 7…..90 percent of the cards I have are in holders issued basically since the beginning of the year. I personally believe that there has been an unwritten change in the grading standards since the first of the year and I think many of you would agree. I can look at cards pre 2002 and compare to cards graded recently and see the grading has become tougher. I believe many of today’s 7’s are yesterdays 8’s. With that in mind and as people become more and more despaired to submit cards, based on receiving lessor grades that many have been accustomed too, PSA will have to “loosen” those unwritten standards to have submittals pick back up, Thus, making today’s 7’s, tomorrows 8’s…..I’m not saying that when and if this happens, I going to crack all my cards out and resubmit, but I think collectors realize that serial numbers can tell you a lot about the cards and the grading standards, unwritten or not of that period. I think 7’s of this period pre 1963 are good long term investments and for maximizing your $$$

Thanks,
Mark W.

mcastaldi

Bruce> That's just what happened to me when I started building the 72 set. I initially set a minimum acceptable grade at 7. But over time, there were so many more 8s available via eBay and I was also finding plenty of PSA8-quality ungraded cards to submit myself. It didn't take long to realize that it didn't make sense to look for stuff in grades less than 8. If I got 7s from my own submissions, I put them into the set until I could upgrade them for reasonable money.

But I also think whether NM is good enough depends both on the set and your own personal standards/goals. If I were to build any set of the 1950s, it would be in PSA7. I actually started a 59T set in PSA7, but gave it up to work on the five other sets I had going at the time. On the other side of the coin, I'm also building a PSA-graded 82 Fleer set. There's absolutely no way I would build this set in anything less than PSA9. There are plenty of 9s available - and - I've been picking up a lot of PSA9 HOFers for less than $7 each. There are many 9s I've gotten for less than $6 each. FWIW, my 82F set is currently 7.12% complete with a GPA of 9.38. My goal for that set is to complete it with a GPA of 9.5. Not easy, but I think it's doable

Mike

69topps8

First, I would say determine what you want to collect. Avoid choosing a minimum grade based only on budget if you think you will be unhappy with the condition down the road. For me, PSA 8 is the benchmark. I think it's the best quality for the money, although with recently graded cards, I've been coming across some very strong cards in 7 holders. I'll take 9's when I receive them through my own submissions but rarely pursue 9's on the secondary market due to the high premiums.

For PSA 7 commons, I would say pick them up if you can get them for less than the $6 grading fee. I've sold many PSA 7 cards from the 60s that have gone for $2 or even $1. So you have to be careful about the resale value. Raw NM cards from the 60s and 70s are by no means tough to find. There populations may be low because people are afraid to submit marginal NM-MT 8 material which can tilt a submission into negative margin. I think the 1971 set and 1962 set are two good ones to collect in 7 since they are condition sensitive. For most of the sets you're collecting, you should be able to buy PSA 8 commons for very reasonable prices. If you're on a tight budget, I'd say get the commons in 8 and the stars in 7. If there are low pop commons going for hefty prices, settle for a 7 for those cards as well.

toppsgun

A well-centered 7 with corners that appear sharp to the naked eye is a fine collectible item IMHO. If PSA wants to charge me $6-$7 to encapsulate it and it cost me $3-4 to buy the card raw (basically that's pre-1964 commons), fine and dandy.

But when I spend double Beckett to buy "MINT" raw cards from dealers, submit them expecting slam-dunk 8's and PSA "changes the standards," it's not FINE and DANDY. Then I vote with my wallet by sitting out a couple of election cycles until I'm given a fair playing field.

Currently, I can't even get PSA to admit that a card in an 8-holder is TRIMMED when it shows at least three evidences of trimming (to the naked eye) without me even breaking it out of the holder!

Changing standards, refusing to acknowledge trimming, poor customer service. Not good and very harmful to the hobby. Somebody wake up the 600-pound gorilla and get out the tranquilizer gun.

zacojam

I really don't see anything wrong with collecting 7's. If this is what your budget allows, then go for it. You can always upgrade at a later date when funds become available.

Do what ever makes you happy and have fun with it.

PlayBall

I have already come to the conclusion that PSA 7 (or 6) is the way to go for me in my vintage sets. I'm more into the enjoyment of just "having" the cards, than having the "best example" of the cards. And when building sets, it's always nicer for me, to get 2 PSA 7's, than 1 PSA 8. Or for that matter, 4 PSA 6's, as opposed to 1 PSA 8. No ego here.

Bernie