PSA 4 Cutoff in the SMR How and Why ???

mrichards

Hi Everyone,

Maybe you can shed some light on this subject. PSA's SMR cuts off in 1941 for PSA 4 grades. There is an enormous market in lower PSA graded cards. Not everyone can afford a PSA 8 Clemente Rookie. A PSA 4 of that card brings almost as much as a PSA 5 (sometimes more depending upon how nice the 4 is). In my opinion, I would rather have a nicely centered 4 with a bad corner over a PSA 5, which has terrible centering. How/when does PSA determine to add a column for PSA 4's. From 1948 Bowman on, they start at a 5. I think it would create more of a market for lower graded cards. As it is now, if you have a vintage Mickey Mantle card (any year, any PSA grade, qualified or not) the card will always sell and sell for a high price. The 1941 PlayBall set is obviously 60+ years old. Is PSA going to wait until 2008 then add a PSA 4 column in the SMR??? What is the cutoff?

Thanks,
Mike

brucemo

I think the idea is that there is little or no premium for stuff under their cutoff. This is probably an out of date assumption, at least with regard to star cards and eBay buying.

bruce

dalew

Why aren't 10's listed?

more6

i'm definitely one of those fools who will pay a premium for a psa 3 vintage card over a VG raw card. as brucemo notes, there's definitely a market for low-graded graded cards of star cards or cards that are otherwise desireable (e.g., high numbers).

mrichards

Hi Guys,

I agree with you. They should maybe have a 50 year cutoff because a 50 year old card in a 4 is still in great shape and much more affordable. The reason why (dalew) they do not list 10's is simple. Why would PSA want to kill off their client base with heart attacks? more6, I think we are all fools in respect to certain cards. I would pay and have paid alot of money for low graded 52 Topps Mantles, Cracker Jack Shoeless Joe cards, etc. I want the card. The last time I can remember a PSA 1 Honus Wagner went for about $60,000 at Teletrade. No mention of it that I can remember in the SMR. Meanwhile, that card went for more $$$ than 75% of the 8's and 9's from T206's up out there. I look at the low grade card market as the "Blue Collar" market. Some people make a fixed income and can only afford a Koufax rookie in a 3, maybe a 4. Those are the people who also appreciate the card more than some of us (not speaking for anyone in particular). For guys like us, maybe we can afford a Koufax rookie in an 8. But, I can not afford any of the 1914/1915 Cracker Jack star cards in 8's or a couple of T cards in PSA 8's. Thanks for the posts. I think this is a great topic.

Mike

1420sports

I agree that PSA should have PSA 3 as a start for pre-war cards. I have many 1933 Goudey HOF players in PSA 3, and there is a huge market out there. There are alos a lot more potential PSA 3 and 4 Goudey, Play Balls, T206, etc than PSA 9's. NO QUESTION!

I would also like to see an annual or semi-annual price guide for all cards PSA has graded.

LuxuryWines

I too would like to see SMR pricing for PSA 3 for Prewar cards.... However I think it comes down to a space commitment with the magazine. A simple solution would be to offer an expanded SMR online for those who wish to use it......

qualitycards

<< <i>Why aren't 10's listed? >>


DALE - There are so many vintage cards that do not have a PSA-10 graded yet, it would be utter chaos to make an educated guess what one would be worth. And in the instance where there are 2 of a player, my bet is that the prices fluctuate so much that a guide price would be useless. Take the '65 & '66 Topps Baseball sets, two sets that I am very familiar with. The '65 has over 34,200 cards graded and yet only 23 are PSA-10's, the '66 has graded over 22,400 with just 16 that are 10's. So why list a price when over 95% of these sets do not contain any 10's that were graded?. And I suppose the #'s would be in line for earlier sets too....jay

mikeschmidt

Dale-

Agreeing with Jay on why the prices for 10's are not listed. Frankly, there are many vintage sets that do not have a sufficient "critical mass" to properly establish PSA 9 pricing. The SMR has a guideline in place for such cards -- but it is often a very unrealistic one given market conditions.

For many pre-1960 sets, PSA 9's are either so thinly traded, so infrequently traded, or so often their prices are at the mercy of five or fewer collectors, that it is somewhat disingenuous to place a price on such a card. Also, those cards with populations so low often can have a staggering implication on pricing if just a single example is added in the population.

Looking at the 1955 Bowman set, for example: To this date, well over half the set has still not received a PSA 9 grade. SMR lists a price for PSA 9 cards -- but is has been way off for years. There are at least three major collectors who actively pursue PSA 9 commons -- and more who follow the stars and umpires. The last three PSA 9 1/1 umpire cards all finally sold privately for a price that was many multiples of the SMR. With so few PSA 9s in the set -- the vast majority end up being 1/1's anyway. At the end of the day, the SMR prices for PSA 9's are way off -- and truly determined by too few people to really have any meaning in the context of the SMR. You take PSA 10s, which exist at a rate of something like 1 for every 15 PSA 9's -- and then pricing them is almost merely a speculative joke that can be determined by the whims of the hobby gods on any given day. This same thinking applies to many of the vintage sets.

As another example, consider how much of an impact a single collector (John Branca) has had on the pricing/value/SMR of the 1951 Bowman prices over the last two to three years.

Marc