Set Registry Valuations

toppsgun

Realizing this topic has been discussed previously, but not being satisfied with the conclusions, I've been noodleing on a refinement to the formula for determining set valuation of Registry Sets. Keep in mind that it is purely theoretical and I'm really a statistician/actuary/accountant at the core.

First the facts:
1. The SMR complete set price is a summation of the the individual card prices (unlike Beckett and other price guides for non-graded sets).
2. Population differences, especially in commons are widely variant and could skew the actual results.
3. Premiums do exist in the minds of collectors for willingness to obtain a complete graded set, while
4. Other collectors put a premium value on purchasing individual cards in pursuit of "The Chase."

Now the hypothosis:

To determine the value of a graded set with a GPA somewhere between two whole, integer grades, take the score to the right of the decimal point in the GPA and multiply it by the difference between the complete set prices. Add the result to the lower of the two beginning graded values. For example,

1965 Topps Baseball Set with a GPA of 7.68,
With a "7" set listing for $7,836 and an "8" set listing for $17,964.

(7.68 -7.00) x ($17,964 - $7,836) + $7, 836
= 0.68 x $10,128 + $7,836
= $14,723

Bring on the challengers.

zardoz51

Good luck on selling it to the "book"

LJB17

I guess this would beg the question of whether all 7.68 sets are the same. Since 10s seem to carry such a premium in most sets I believe that a 7.68 set comprised of several 10s and a few 5s and 6s would be of more value than a 7.68 set of all 7s and 8s. Does the cost of the upgrade from 5s and 6s to 8s equate to the cost saved by downgrading the 10s to 8s? I like the idea of the formula you created, but I believe it works better if the variance of the graded cards is not greater than 1.

Again even with that there may still be inequality of some of the cards that may carry the same grade weight and SMR as another card, but are definitely different in terms of ultimate cost due to the scarcity (whether that scarcity is actual or perceived is a seperate factor.) I think this would often apply to specific common cards within a set.

AlanAllen

There's also the problem that individual card weightings vs. SMR value are not proportional. For example, a 1952 Topps #311 Mickey Mantle is weighted 10, and #320 and #321 John Rutherford and Joe Black are each weighted 5. Upgrading from 7 to 8 for #311 would cost $18,000, while upgrading #320 and #321 from 7 to 8 would cost only $1700, but either would give you the same GPA increase. Your linear interpolation would only work if the GPA weights corresponded exactly proportionally with SMR, and, as LJB referred to, all of the cards in the set were graded either X or X+1. I don't see any way to value a heterogeneous set except card-by-card.

Joe

waitilltheytrytosell

He's right on the money. The way I figure it is you take a $25.00 a card average. You subtract the cost of a first class stamp-37¢ from $25.00 to get $24.63. This is your PFM number. You mulitply that by the number of cards in the set-598, to get $14,728.74. That's close enough for me.

waitilltheytrytosell

In all seriousness though card by card like AlanAllen stated is the only way to figure the value. You could put a 100 count common lot together of the easiest 1965 PSA 8's from the set. They are worth "x" amount in registry points. You would have a hard time selling the lot for 70% of SMR. If you put together a common lot consisting of the 100 hardest PSA 8's in the set, they are still worth the same amount in registry points, but you would probably be very happy and eager to pay 2x SMR value for them. So a 7.68 set missing the 100 hardest cards is worth a whole lot less than a 7.68 set containing all the hardest ones. It's easily a $2500 swing in real value even though your generic calculation will be the same for both sets.

Wabittwax

Wow, you've got a lot of extra time on your hands to sit and figure that out, lol

goodriddance189

i think as a GENERAL STATEMENT, his evaluation is pretty accurate in most cases. of course for certain sets it will be higher or lower, but across the board it seems pretty accurate

toppsgun

Waittil...LMAO. I forgot all about the $0.37 stamp. Of course, if you're buying raw cards at shows, for a $5.00 admission fee, one has to come away 31.054 raw cards to offset the fee with $5.00 worth of postage stamps. Then, as long as your raw cost, plus grading fee is less than $24.63, you come out ahead.

Back to the serious side, though. I don't collect 10's or 5's & 6's, but certainly one could calculate (or at least consider) the standard deviation of the set GPA. I'm range bound in that if I have a 7.68 set, it's pretty close to 68% 8's and 32% 7's, hence a pretty low SD.

Maybe zardoz can give some insight into 5's & 6's, otherwise known as GAI holders.
Good luck on selling those to the "book."


edited for crass comment re: Gai