Home PSA Set Registry Forum

Superior set listed on the registry.

The first of the seven sets that I sold in the Superior auction was listed on the registry today. Scott Wetzel purchased and listed the 1974 Topps Traded set. Wetzel's 1974 Traded Set

I heard from only one other winner (1974 Topps Baseball). I still have no idea who won the other sets.

Carlos

Comments

  • What plans does the winner of the 1974 regular set have? Will they break it or register it or keep it stealth?
    Please visit my eBay auctions at gemint
  • carkimcarkim Posts: 1,166 ✭✭
    From what I understand...

    He will build the set in PSA 8 and sell all the 9's.

    Carlos
  • Luxury Wines (from the board here) won the 74 set and is offering the psa 9's for sale. I received a spreadsheet with all of the cards and the pricing from him the other day.

    wayne
    1955 Bowman Football
  • gemintgemint Posts: 6,101 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Luxury Wines (from the board here) won the 74 set and is offering the psa 9's for sale. I received a spreadsheet with all of the cards and the pricing from him the other day.

    wayne >>



    That's right, he posted a message a week or so ago. I guess I'm getting old and my short term memory is shot. image
  • BasiloneBasilone Posts: 2,492 ✭✭
    What is strange about the All-Time Finest List is that if this set passes through 3 more collectors hands then the SAME SET will take up the entire All-Time Finest List.

    What do you guys think?

    I personally do not want to see (in the next couple of years) the same set possibly taking up the entire All-Time Finest List. Gee...if someone wanted to..they could pass the set along to 4 of their buddies and screw over the other set builders.

    You never know, it could happen...

    John
  • BobSBobS Posts: 1,738 ✭✭
    Bas -

    I have had this concern for quite some time and now it has come true. I still see no purpose in the all time finest set. If a set is sold or broken up, it is no longer a set (in its original form/owner kind of way). Carlos' set should be deleted from the registry period (sorry Carlos). I agree with you that in a short amount of time, especially with the likelyhood of complete set selling starting to take off, the top 5 spots in the all time lists will be filled with duplicate sets. How lame image
  • carkimcarkim Posts: 1,166 ✭✭
    John & Bob,

    In my HUMBLE opinion, I believe you are missing the entire essences of the set registry’s functionality. Again, IMHO, PSA has taken your concerns into account when they developed the registry’s format. That is why they have two lists per set (All-Time Finest and Current Finest). These lists satisfies all collectors…Those who are actively pursuing set completion (Current) and those of us who would like a historical record of their one-time accomplishment (All-Time). I feel there is enough room for all of us to live in harmony.

    Look at it this way…

    Pretend the All-Time Finest list is the sun, you can glance at it, but don’t look at it too long, because if you do it could cause permanent damage.image

    Just my insignificant two little cents,

    Carlos
    image
  • BasiloneBasilone Posts: 2,492 ✭✭
    Carlos-

    I have no problem with your set remaining on the All-Time Finest...it should...no question.

    My concern is focused on the future, where there is a possibility of the same set being passed around 5 separate times thus taking up the entire All-Time Finest list. These transactions could be legitimate (ie. auction house purchases) or some random a$$hole who wants to put the screws to the 2nd, 3rd place guys on the All-Time list or boost the egos of his buddies by just registering again. Yes..the concept is farfetched but there could be arguements between collectors down the road where this scenario could come into place.

    What type of "checks and balances" can be proposed?

    Just thinking in advance,

    John
  • dudedude Posts: 1,454 ✭✭
    I was concerned about this months ago and it was discussed on this Forum back in June. I really believe that if a set is sold or transfered to another individual, the ownership title should change and it shouldn't be a new entry on the all-time finest list. Just my opinion.
  • BobSBobS Posts: 1,738 ✭✭
    I'm with Dude.
  • carkimcarkim Posts: 1,166 ✭✭
    Dude,

    Are you suggesting that PSA does away with it's All-Time Finest list and only have a Current Finest list?

    Carlos
  • BobSBobS Posts: 1,738 ✭✭


    << <i>that if a set is sold or transfered to another individual, the ownership title should change and it shouldn't be a new entry on the all-time finest list. >>



    This is what I agreed with.

    I do not believe that the all time finest should be done away with. There just needs to be some sort of check in place to avoid duplicate sets.
  • carkimcarkim Posts: 1,166 ✭✭
    Bob,

    If I understand correctly...your concern is with the 1974 Topps Traded set that is 100% the same as my retired set, however, your ok with the 1974 Regular set that will be 90% identical to my retired set?

    If this is the case, then it would be to hard to monitor. Furthermore, what dupicate % is acceptable?

    I see your point...But it should be all or nothing! Therefore, we should have an All-Time and Current list OR just a Current list.

    Myself...I like having both lists.

    just my $0.02

    Carlos
  • ScoopScoop Posts: 168
    IMHO, I think a duplication percentage of no greater than 75% (sets < 400 cards), or 80% (sets > 400 cards) should be allowed on all time finest registry. This will prevent, for the most part, the scenario Basilone has presented.

    It would seem that any set collector would want to put his own stamp on a set, and these suggested minimums , at least, would allow for this.
    building 1956 Topps PSA 8/9
  • BobSBobS Posts: 1,738 ✭✭
    I took some time to think about this. Here is where I stand (I think). I'm not sure there needs to be any % placed on a duplicate set. A duplicate set should not be allowed to be registered (I take back what I said about Carlos' set). However, I think that any change to a set (following a sale or trade or whatever) deems that set a different set, and no longer a duplicate. The change could be as little as one upgrade/downgrade. So long as the new set (or even 50, 75, 95%set) does not contain the exact card compilation the original set contained. I think the registry (and especially the all-time finest list) is in place to serve the set builder. A place to showcase the wide array of combinations people have assembled for any particular issue. If I decided to purchase XXXXX #3 finest 100% set, and upgraded one 8 to a 9, then the set is mine. I have personally contributed to building it. It is no longer a duplicate set. I should then be allowed to register it. Does this make any sense???
  • carkimcarkim Posts: 1,166 ✭✭
    Bob,

    If I had a vote, I would vote for your last proposal...That makes sense to me.

    Carlos


    PS. All's well in registry land again.image
  • mikeschmidtmikeschmidt Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭
    I agree with Bob S. At the end of the day, nearly 99% of Compeltely graded sets will be changed in some way, shape or form. Whether it is upgrading cards, whether it is selling off the 9's and finishing in PSA 8, I envision very few instances whereby the set will stay in its complete and original form as it passes on through time. Thus, I believe that the current format seems to make sense, and generally agree with Bob S.
    I am actively buying MIKE SCHMIDT gem mint baseball cards. Also looking for any 19th century cabinets of Philadephia Nationals. Please PM with additional details.
  • NickMNickM Posts: 4,895 ✭✭✭
    I agree with Bob S. and Marc.

    Nick
    image
    Reap the whirlwind.

    Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
  • carkimcarkim Posts: 1,166 ✭✭
    Well it looks like we all (Nick, Marc, Bob and I) agree that the current format is ok. But have we addressed John, Scoop, and Dan's concerns?

    Carlos
  • BasiloneBasilone Posts: 2,492 ✭✭
    Im somewhere in the middle...between Dude and Carlos.
Sign In or Register to comment.