Should there be a minimum percentage?

CDC4 · February 1, 2003 9:43AM

Does anyone think that there should be a minimum percentage of a set completed in order to list your set on the registry? Like listing one common card out of a 400 or 500 card set, and then not updating their set for months. Was it really necessary that they list one card out of a set?

Just curious about what everyone thinks....

bengineno9 · February 1, 2003 10:00AM

I agree with you!
Think its kinda pointless just to list one or two cards on a registry and not even make an effort to complete the rest of the set. But i guess some people just like to show off a high grade card or something rare?

BEN

dalew · February 1, 2003 10:16AM

I disagree. If you have one card, you have one card. What if I was 11 years old and only had one card, I could still see my name listed on the registry.

I do think that PSA should monitor non activity or even contact those that haven't had activity over a period of 30 days.

Perhaps those people have sold their cards within those 30 days and haven't either deleted their set or just got tired of the whole thing.

Dale

SayitaintsoJoe63 · February 1, 2003 10:33AM

Obviously there were some folks that registered a single card in a set in order to take advantage of the various Set Registry specials and never had any intention of building them. I'm kinda like you Dale.....I think PSA should maybe make an effort to figure out which sets have showed no activity in, i would say, the last 6 months, and then delete as needed to cure some of the clutter.

murcerfan · February 1, 2003 12:00PM

what the heck do you care how many cards someone ELSE has.
come one, come all

carkim · February 1, 2003 12:04PM

THE RULES OF THE GAME

Current sets that are not at least 10% complete and have not been updated for at least 12 months will be deleted from the registry.

waitilltheytrytosell · February 1, 2003 12:06PM

I believe a while back they mentioned something about a period of inactivity of a year, and then contacting the collector regarding the removal of the set.

braves72078 · February 1, 2003 12:09PM

Come on...............What difference does one card or 100 cards make to you?

Some have different budgets and can't build a set in a matter of months and do so slowly.

Let everyone enjoy the registry it can only benefit our hobby.

Billy

spacktrack · February 1, 2003 12:17PM

I disagree with the minimum percentage requirement. Why have to wait to have 10% or so of a set to register it? Why have to upload 79 cards at once from the 1972 Topps set so that it can be "official" when you can start with one or two and go from there over a period of time? Some have different collecting goals, different budgets, and different mindsets with which they approach the grading hobby. To each his own and why put on a limit on participation?

Also, SayItAintSoJoe said above that it was obvious that some listed just one card to get in on a Registry Special. This is slightly distorted because there was not a rule that you had to be involved in the Registry to get cards graded. Charlie and Joe said that any cards that were on registry included sets could be sent in. Cards with no registry set could also be sent in and added when the set hit the registry. I myself submitted 51 cards under the last special. I didn't have a set on the registry and some of the cards I submitted didn't have set compositions on the registery yet. However, I will take the cards I get back and enter them into the registry for my first attempt and a set. With the others, I will just wait.

spacktrack

edited for spelling

BigKidAtHeart · February 1, 2003 12:37PM

<< <i>what the heck do you care how many cards someone ELSE has.
come one, come all >>

Well Said.

If we worry about our own sets
then we will not have enough time
to worry about everyone elses!

Virtualizard · February 1, 2003 1:14PM

I don't think I'd ever consider getting more than another 2 or 3 cards from the 1981 Fleer Set graded, but I like to include a scan (front and back) of every card that I list on the registry. In this particular case, I have only one card listed (PSA 9 Rickey Henderson). I think it is helpful to other collectors to see an example of this card in PSA 9 condition to compare it to their own.

Why penalize someone for taking their time with a set or for just showcasing one card (or only a few cards) that they are particularly proud of?

I think that PSA does a good job of currently limiting the all time sets to only the top 20 - if you want to see the rest, you have to click on the current sets link.

Keep it the way it is. I occasionally do look at some of the lower % sets just to see what they are collecting (especially if they include scans - everyone should do this

).

qmayer · February 1, 2003 2:34PM

<< <i>Why penalize someone for taking their time with a set or for just showcasing one card (or only a few cards) that they are particularly proud of? >>

I think this would be solved with my idea. Have a registry "set" for single cards that aren't for an entire set or player set. Just a place where you can enter random PSA cards that you have and it would show a list of the random cards. Maybe title it "My miscellaneous cards" or "My 5 favorite cards." I also agree that they should do something about the sets with little activity over a certain amount of time. I say it should be bumped down to 6 months instead of 12. PSA would then email the owner saying they have 7-14 days to either reply to the email (clickable link to let PSA know you're still alive) or update their set. Failure to comply would get their set deleted.

Justin

CDC4 · February 1, 2003 3:15PM

qmayer,

I like the idea of top 5 favorite cards that would be a cool idea.

I wasn't trying to knock people on budgets (since I am one of them) but some sets I see have sat idle for months at a time without anyone doing anything.

Thank you Carlos for pointing out the rule, I was not aware of that rule.

JeffVN · February 1, 2003 9:01PM

I'm not really in favor of forcing people off the registry if they have lesss than 10% of a total set. I collect mostly Vintage Reds Cards, wih a few exceptions like Koufax, Hank Aaron, Joe Morgan, and Pete Rose. As such, I've got Reds Team Set on the set registry for I think 10 or 11 years right now. some of the cards that I have listed and picture posted are great looking card, like my 1967 PSA 9s.

My 59 Reds team is complete, but only comprises 7.94% of the 1959 set and ranks #19 on the registry out of 29 or so sets. My 74 Reds Team set is nearly complete, but only comprises 4.90% of the total set, and is #23 or so out of 53 sets on the registry.

Believe me if they had year other Team sets, like the 75 Reds Team set, I'd list it in the Team Set category. But so far getting team sets apporoved has been a huge and slow process.

FB · February 1, 2003 10:40PM

Check out the way that this reads...

"Current sets that are not at least 10% complete AND HAVE NOT BEEN UPDATED FOR AT LEAST 12 MONTHS will be deleted from the registry."

Collectors Universe is trying to keep the registry from being cluttered up with sets that loaded up on the registry and forgotten. The under 10% alone does not mean the sets will be deleted. If you go into each of your sets under 10% - 1 TIME PER YEAR - and delete 1 card and add that card back - your set will be able to stay on the registry indefinitely whether or not you have 1 card or 100 cards.

I have sets ranging from 2.7% complete to 100%. For me to have to simply take this approach once per year on the few sets that I have below 10%, I don't believe that it is too painful for a service that CU is providing that gives me so much pleasure.

Just my 2 cents.

Basilone · February 1, 2003 10:59PM

The registry only shows the top 20 sets at any one time....if you do not want to see ALL of the sets...do not hit the link to show them...problem solved.

John

jaxxr · February 2, 2003 1:02AM

Interesring views. I have no strong feeling either way, but wonder......

I have a little more than ten percent of the 1973 Topps baseball set in PSA slabs, a mike schmidt RC in 7, a few other 7s, mostly 8s and about a dozen 9s. While my main goal is get the high series numbers all in NM or better shape, not all neccesarily graded by PSA,, I currently don't plan on a complete graded set. I guess I could put up the cards on the registry and being over 10% in size it would be there indefinately. What would the advantage be, besides a remotely possible future expansion of the 73 set and this headstart of tedious entering data being done beforehand, of listing these cards on the registry ??

I don't mind any entering of cards into the registry for whatever reasons, except as only a sales aid, but personally feel for my cards...only sets which I may eventually get up to at least one third PSA graded, really belong on the registry.

The registry is a fairly new concept, so are graded cards realatively speaking, it will take some time and experience for a strong concensus to evolve. I suppose when there are seveal thousand sets with only a card or two, space limitations may force some minimum limits.

mikeschmidt · February 2, 2003 4:32AM

I collect team sets -- so if I build a Phillies Team Set from 1981 -- all in PSA 9 or PSA 10 grade, I tend to think it is pretty cool. However, it will never hit 10% on the Registry. I would never submit a 1981 Phillies Team Set for inclusion to the Registry. Perhaps 1980, but not 1981. Given that is the case -- why can't I list my cards in the Registry? They are some of the best grades out there -- it was a great team that has a lot of memories for me. It is not all common cards (Rose, Schmidt, Carlton), and since it is only a small portion of the set, it will always be near the bottom. Thus, if you don't want to look at it -- it will never be near the top anyway.

I think the current process does a great disservice to team collectors. I can name two or three Philadelphia Phillies PSA team set collectors. I can name one or two for the Chicago Cubs, and about half a dozen for the New York Yankees. Let us list our sets!

MS

JeffVN · February 2, 2003 11:04PM

MS

I totally agree. My team sets are for the reds, but the passion is the same. given that we have no other forum, I currently list my sets on the regular set registry. Look at the 1980 and 81 registry lists. You're Phillies set will be right at home. There are also some Pirates team sets on the regular registry (which is where i got the idea to list my Reds Team sets).

Wabittwax · February 4, 2003 4:37AM

I think with the current lack of collecting in today's market (as compared to 12 years ago), any collection of cards (1 or 1000) is good for the market and hopefully those people with only a couple cards on the registry will become more involved someday. If they are told that their collection isn't "worthy" to be on the Set Registry, it will turn them off and that can only be bad for the market.

hobbyexchange · February 4, 2003 6:24PM

I disagree with the minimum requirement. Some vards are hard to come by even ungraded, so for many sets, it takes a long time to comlete. I for one would be happy to know that somewone else is building the same set, even if he/she only has 1 or 2 cards listed.

Should there be a minimum percentage?

Comments