Advice on set building
crsportscards33
Posts: 337 ✭
New to the PSA aspect of collecting, I've been reading the board and found most to be quite informative. With that in mind, I pose this question. When shooting for a set, do you go after all cards first, even if they are a 6, or do you set a guideline in your head as to the grade of set you want to stick to? Any advice would be appreciated. Also, what would be the best way to possibly sell a team signed ball? Thanks for the help.
0
Comments
Josh
You find yourself firmly implanted upon the horns of a dilemma.
I've tried it both ways in completing large, vintage sets. I've come to refer to the two methods as:
(a) The Davalillo approach
(b) The Dude approach
The Davalillo approach, based upon rumor and hearsay, is to submit an entire raw collection, without regard for condition. You will rapidly achieve 100% completion, but undoubtedly be faced with upgrading your 5's and 6's or leaving them alone and not letting the "sore thumb" bother you.
The Dude approach, based upon painstaking observation, is to submit only cards you are convinced will be returned by the grader in acceptable quality. You will be disappointed in a few grades, but hopefullly less often than using the Davalillo approach. You will also be chasing that inevitable last card in PSA 8 until the end of time. Isn't that right, Mr. Al Worthington?
In the long run, I prefer the Dude approach until my patience wears thin. Then I settle for an offshoot of the Davalillo approach. I'm tempted to take the missing card(s) in any condition just to hit 100% and move on.
As the Texas redneck would say, "Kay, Serah, Serah." Who are those gals, anyway?
Regards,
Alan
Jery
My approach has been to
1)Submit the raw cards that I already own that I think have a shot at getting psa 8 or better Next 2500 will be all my Kahns sets from 60s, mid 60s football, eary 70s basketball, maybe some 50s-60s hockey and a couple of my nonm-sports sets. Dont think I am ready to submit 69,70,71, or 72 Topps yet.
2)Buy Sets or partial sets of psa 8 and better at attractive prices
3)Have arrangements with dealers that they are open to buy in any of my 110 sets or so at predetermined prices
4)Respond to myriad e-mails every day of set registry participants who want to sell me cards or buy ones I have.
5)Get larger outfits such as Superior and Sports Cards Plus to call me as they get in cards I need.
6)Lastly--selectively buy on ebay.
As I told you before, you are wrong in that I am becoming constrained and running into a wall on some of my sets--my dealers all insist no problem getting 8s and better in sets I am collecting.
Davalillo
Also--I have never bought a card graded less that psa 8 in my life.
Davalillo
2)Buy Sets or partial sets of psa 8 and better at attractive prices
Am I assuming that the partial sets all have been graded? Conversely, is it possible to buy a partial set of raw cards and have a healthy percentage of it come in at 8? If so, where would one look to pick up something like this?
is to submit an entire raw collection, without regard for condition
Are you talking about submitting a 600/700+ set to get graded at $8 per card??? That's quite a bit of money to throw out.
1961 Ramos, Lopez, Houk, Repulski, O'Dell, Wills, Gentile.
1963 Schofield, Power, Kline, Ramos, Stigman, Osinski, Dick Williams.
1965 McBean, Siebert, Lynch, Torre, Schofield, O'Donoghue, Spangler.
1967 Romano, Sims, Hamilton, Demeter, Osinski, Etchebarren, Hoerner, Horton, Davey Johnson, Wise, Sparma
You, my friend, are either delusional or incredibly arrogant. But I hope you prove me wrong. In that vein, which vintage, 400-card plus sets have you completed in all PSA 8 or better? Which are you closest to completing?
No doubt I am missing some of the toughest commons in many of the sets--my point which you do not seem to get is that I have no trouble spending my budget in cards I need. At some point, I will have to step up and pay more to get the low pops--no big deal.
It is also true that most of the sets I have completed are not the mega-card baseball sets--but I am getting close--and I hired one dealer this year just to help me close out sets--there are 10 sets or so that I need 5 or less psa 8s or better and probably another 8-10 that I need 10 or less psa 8s or better.
In response to your question on what large set I am closest to completing--1964 Topps which I need 3 psa 8s---but I view all the 1960s sets as easiest to complete in 8 or better.
Thanks for hoping for me. I am not a good guy to bet against.
Davalillo
crsports,
Welcome to the boards!!!
I am building a 56 set and decided on the grade(PSA 8) before I started the set.I have plugged in three cards(PSA 7)from my own submissions(thought they were 8's) and I will probably pull them for 8's soon.I don't like spending the money on cards that I know I will have to upgrade.There may come a time that I may have to compromise due to scarcity of a card in my grade but I will cross that bridge when I get to it.The bottom line is that it really is your personal satisfaction that counts.
Vic
Welcome! When i built my 74 baseball sets I bought 75% in psa 9 before I started adding any 8's. Then I finished it in 8's and 9's and now I'm trying to upgrade the 8's. I just started working on the 1965 set again and I'm buying 9's until I get about 25% or so and then I'll start adding 8's. The only cards I'm looking for in less than the desired grade are the low pops. Buy those whenever you can because you may not so another example for years.
Wayne
<< <i>1965 McBean, Siebert, Lynch, Torre, Schofield, O'Donoghue, Spangler. >>
Owned most of them and sold them off to guys who would pay crazy, crazy money for them.
Let just say...if any on come on the market....they aint coming cheap....
Whoever doesnt have a Spangler shame on you...I believe I sold 2-3 this summer....and not for crazy money either!
John
"Thanks for hoping for me. I am not a good guy to bet against.
We should all live so long. Or at least plan to.
Be sure and let us all know when you complete that first one.
Are you King Kellogg?
Sorry to disappoint you but I have a lot of vintage sets in psa 8 or better. Just finished 1959 Fleer in 8 or better.
Keep talking--you sound more stupid with each post.
<< <i> Is it worth while to send in 300 cards to get graded for a set, if 150 or so would be high 6's or low 7's? That's alot of money just in grading fees. If so, how easy would it be to get my money back out of those cards, to upgrade to higher grades? It just seems to me that 6's or even 7's from some sets can be had for less than grading fees. While not true for low pops or certain sets, this seems to hold true for most 60's sets. One final thought to ponder, moderate income- try multiple sets at once, or try to pick one and get as close to completion as possible before moving on? >>
If you send in 300 cards from one set that could be a recipe for disaster.Grading is all about taking a chance and picking the best chances you have inside a 300 card set.You would want to pick the best of and set a standard for what is your minimum expectations.Most folks would shoot for 8s minimum say from 76 and back.
You are correct that 6s and 7s and sometimes even 8s can be had less than the grading fees depending on what set you desire to collect.Keep in mind that when flipping your dupes you
will experience the same
Take is from someone who is pigeon - holed to working on one set.
While I'm having fun working on what is so close to finished,I have
many other interests and sometimes feel like I'm missing out on a lot
of those interests and deals that are often passed on.
Passively collect a few sets if the budget allows,where a deal can be had in
one set you may miss out because you are focused on bidding on another
exclusively.
My Auctions
Your signature ways that you are working on 1960 Topps. For that set it is not worth submitting 6s. The commons can be had rather cheaply in that grade Ebay auctions Stars you could submit, but unless you are looking at solid 7s with real shots at an 8 they are more affordable to buy already graded. You could probably post a request on the Vintage trade forum stating that you are buying 6s. I would say that a set like that you will probably want to set your min level at 7 at the very least and probably more like 8. If you are going older than that like a T206 you could very easily drop your requirements to the 4-6 level. I think you would quickly get fed up with a PSA 6s in your 1960 set.
54 Red Hearts
and now 64 Stand ups
Not if it is 1960 or newer, for the most part.
I saw several of the cards he purchased and they looked great. Are you still working on this project alan? I still think it was the best idea I heard at nationals.
Wayne
You may be new, but you are already wise! nicely said
Not sure what kind of coin your planning on spending, but if you're really interested in starting out with a bang, you might want to buy a 2nd or a 3rd Near Mint 1960 set and keep the best of each for your own set before selling off the 2 lesser sets. This will increase your odds of getting better grades without dramatically increasing your outlay for raw cards (after you've sold off the 2nd and 3rd raw sets).
Then, as the others have suggested - DO NOT plan on sending in the whole kitandkaboodle... this is a recipe for overspending. Only send in those commons that you feel are PSA 8 quality and the stars on some sort of special. Then - if you can find more raw - either look to upgrade or fill holes.
But, if you send in commons that you're pretty sure will come back as 6's - then be pretty sure that you'll be using them to keep "drink stains" off of your coffee table down the road. You'll take a loss - generally 40% or more off of the grading cost when you go to sell.
Sets - 1970, 1971 and 1972
Always looking for 1972 O-PEE-CHEE Baseball in PSA 9 or 10!
lynnfrank@earthlink.net
outerbankyank on eBay!
RayB69Topps
Dav,
I didn't know '59 fleer was a 400-plus card set.
Answer: It is not. You still have yet to complete a 400-plus card set in all 8 or better. Now, who's sounding stupid?
Once again, let us all know when you've scaled that 400-foot mountain.
Glad that you could glean some helpful advice from the boards. Sometimes its tough amongst some of the over muck, but if you can ignore that - you'll find this an enjoyable and sometimes helpful place!
Sets - 1970, 1971 and 1972
Always looking for 1972 O-PEE-CHEE Baseball in PSA 9 or 10!
lynnfrank@earthlink.net
outerbankyank on eBay!
To the original poster, if you happy with 6's , buy them already graded and don't submit them. 6's are usually a product of large submissions from larger dealers where something was missed. they sell for less than grading fees and the dealers don't mind becasue they make up for it on the higher grades from the submission.
This post was started by a new collector looking for ideas on how to start a set and for some reason turned into dav bashing. CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG!!!!!!!!
packCollector,
Davalillo is the party who resorted to name calling. If you'll re-read my original post, you'll find that I, too, responded to the original thread. You'll also notice I associated two types of approaches to set building. Careful review of the entire thread shows no defensive or retaliatory comments coming from Dude. Just Davalillo. I'd say he's the person with the problem. What's he so defensive about? His petty "I'm taking my ball and going home" comments a few weeks ago found little solace amongst board members. Perhaps he's back after being humbled and ridiculed into submission by the SGC Board. Bottom line, Jim needs PSA and this board more so than we need him. There are plenty of Merkel-, Fogel- and Luchios-wannabes out there. But none so arrogant and petty, IMO.
Toppsgun is just one of those people who likes to find a way to criticise me. It takes time to build so many psa 8 or better sets and the shorter vintage football sets and the specialty baseball vintage sets go more quickly because they have fewer cards.
I expect to have difficulty putting all the 1950s baseball sets together in psa 8 but none of the 60s--they are time consuming but I do not expect any will be difficult to put together in psa 8 or better.
He is a petty little person who can find nothing better to do than to criticize my efforts. When I corrected his mistakes and informed him how I do collect, he tries to ridicule what I do.
Reading his last comment shows again what kind of person he is--read all the sgc comments--there is nothing negative and all were happy to have me aboard
Also Toppsgun, read recent threads of long time collectors who have seen my collection recently and go cry in your beer. Just because of your petty jealousies you have decided to ridicule my collection--fine, it will not be that of a Merkel or Fogel but there will be noone with as broad and extensive collection of psa 8 vintage sets.
Uh Oh...
Sounds like this thread could provide some reading material thru the weekend.
John
How many tickets do you think we could sell to the “ Davalilo vs Toppsgun” grudge match? I think I can get the MGM Grand to promote it. Winner takes all the other guys’ cards!
Oh, or we could all check our EGOS at the door when we post and just talk about cool cards and stuff!!!!
I am enjoying the well centered 1964 Topps project a great deal. I buy cards for less than the grading cost and generally get a nice looking card. In many cases, they are 10X more visually appealing than their PSA 8 counterparts.
Here's a few of them:
Granted, these aren't considered "investment grade" ...but some of the straight PSA 8 sets have turned into bad investments for their owners. BTW - I put the 1967 Wise in their to show that a high end 7 can be better to look at than a slider 8.
Regards,
Alan
Nice cards--I have some extra 7s hanging around I think--I will send you the numbers.
Jim
So what is the deal with the 7's...they look great for sure...are there issues with the corners and or the back of the card?
For the 1964's....what is the most common attribute holding these cards back?
John
Chris
"they are time consuming but I do not expect any will be difficult to put together in psa 8 or better."
A fool and his money are soon parted.
"but there will be noone with as broad and extensive collection of psa 8 vintage sets."
Don't you mean 7.87 sets?
Jim, you are showing your weakness and ignorance. You've spread yourself so thin, you can't see the forest for the trees. Many on this board are experts on one or two years, maybe several years. You and your "dealer buddies" have no idea how difficult it will be to find a handful of cards in these years. You'd be better served to shove some humble pie into that pie hole of yours instead of ridiculing Kellogg's collectors and post-1969 collectors. You seem to be able to dish, but not take.
Basilone, let's hope not. There are too many excellent matchups of the non-Registry variety to keep up with this weekend.
Acowa -- those 1964's look awesome. Kinda makes me want to jump into the fray...
I don't know the history between toppsgun and davalillo. But from reading this thread, it's painfully obvious that toppsgun called out davalillo for no reason at all. There seems to be lots of anger inside toppsgun, as I didn't see any logical reason for such a low-class act. It doesn't matter who is right, the fact that toppsgun ridicule someone's collection and the way someone collects is the cardinal sin of collecting.
Others don't agree with me -- but that's their prerogative. It is why this is a great hobby... Couldnt be said any better.
Toppsgum/DAvilloioolioi
Glad to see some else nit pick at each other then me and Alan/Acowa. I thought I was picked on because I am the Rodney Dangerfield of the boards ....My Boggs set gets no Respect. But with a collection like Davilioilioi I am sure his collection garners some respect. (never seen it)
James
I guess you will have to stay tuned.
7.87 now, we will see how they improve over the next year. I have made no efforts to complete sets--just active buying of 8s or better in all the sets I am working on. Recently, many sets have been completed in 8 or better(1954 Bowman Football, 1951 Bowman Football, 1959 Fleer, 1964 Topps Giants,1969 Topps Supers, 1961 Fleer Basketball, 1961 Goilden Press) but more importantly many have advanced to that 7.87 area where they are now achievable in 8 in the next year. You think I won't find those low pop commons in the 1960s set--I say I will--wanna bet against me? I have also sold low pop commons in sets in the past year to free up more funds in unlike the very high end collectors I do have a budget.
Laurelanzotti69,
I am glad others can see it too--I describe how I put together my sets and I am "arrogant and delusional". Again, I have having a great time striving for what no collector has come close to doing--putting together over 100 vintage baseball, basketball, football and ultimately hockey sets in psa 8 or better. It will take time but I have made tremendous strides over the past two years. I also have received tremendous help from many of the leading participants on this board(Jay Wolt, David Vargha, Marc Schoenen, Jim Hoffman, Wayne Ellis, John Basilone, Luxury Wines, Zardoz) and numerous other collectors on the registry and for that I am very appreciative.
Lastly, I love collecting cards--I do not view Kelloggs as vintage but nothing wrong with collecting post-1970 modern sets--it may break the Kellogg fans hearts but I speak with Luxury Wines, Machodoc and Zardoz and have corresponded on a regular basis with two of them for some time. As Tom said, Jim and I love to talk about Kelloggs because the Kelloggs collectors are the most sensitive bunch we have seen.
Mike
One example of a strong investment he made was with his 1955 Bowman set (see -- I always talk about this one...) He had a very high-grade raw set -- better than most out there. However, PSA is often as brutal with 1955 Bowmans as they are with 1971 Topps. Too many centering problems (front and back), edge chipping, and dark-grain borders make it a collectors nightmare. One of the key cards that was in Davalillo's raw set was a Hank Aaron second year card that graded out at PSA 9 MINT. Now, that card is 1/3 in PSA 9 Mint condition (With the third one graded between April and November 2001 -- none since), and it is a very important card of a notable HOFer. The other two examples of that card are housed in private collections -- albeit all three are on the Registry. Point is that he spent less on the raw set than the Aaron PSA 9 is worth today. Good stuff in my opinion. That he also had a large number of other 8s from the set is also notable -- quite a few originating from that original set he purchased.
Everything depends on where you place Davalillo on the "value" chain. There are a number of noted collectors who spend high into the six and many into seven figures per year on sportscards and related memorabilia. It makes for extremely tough competition on the issues that they collect. I do not think anyone has really set forth to do what Davalillo is doing -- a broad run of sets all in PSA 8 condition or better. Davalillo does have a budget. However -- if you look at the progress he has made on SO many of his sets over the past year, the clear conclusion to me is that soon enough he will have less easy-to-find commons to add to his set and thus can utilize his budget on obtaining those rarer PSA 8 cards.
Davalillo also has a good number of vintage trade bait still in many of his vintage sets. To the extent he could ever in the future leverage his PSA 9s and 10s for similar copies in PSA 8 plus a hoarde of 8s he needs, I would be confident that he has a lot more opportunity than anyone else to have a Hall of Fame type collection. You have to remember that Davalillo is never looking to be the "leader" in any one of his vintage sets -- there are a number of spirited collectors, and a handful of egomaniacs who do insist on being the leader. Davalillo has a fairly modest goal (PSA 8s) -- which can be fairly easily obtained over the long-term as long as the money is there. All indications are to me that the money will be there, and that his goal will be realized set by set.
Just glancing through Davalillos list of set View Here, it is evident to me that Davalillo has made significant progress on many of his sets -- and that the future years will primarily be about fine tuning the last few cards of each. In most vintage sets, the low population commons do come up fairly regularly -- just at a price. I cannot think of any Bowman set that hasn't had the low population commons trade hands both publically and privately on more than one occassion in the last year or two.
MS
<< <i>Lastly, I love collecting cards--I do not view Kelloggs as vintage but nothing wrong with collecting post-1970 modern sets--it may break the Kellogg fans hearts but I speak with Luxury Wines, Machodoc and Zardoz and have corresponded on a regular basis with two of them for some time. As Tom said, Jim and I love to talk about Kelloggs because the Kelloggs collectors are the most sensitive bunch we have seen. >>
Dav, you really are obsessed with Kellogg's (we know you love these cards and sleep with them under your pillow). Anyway, why would we care if you speak with Luxury, Macho or Zardoz? That just proves that they're tolerant fellows.
<< <i>There seems to be lots of anger inside toppsgun, as I didn't see any logical reason for such a low-class act. >>
Read some of his posts. He loves the one liners and to criticize. I can't understand the logic
of breakin a guy who has a load of Psa graded sets on a Psa board. Davalillo's collection
is incredible. How he goes about acquiring the cards is his concern.
The comment stating there are two ways - The Davalillo vs The Dude way is insulting.
He knew it when he wrote it. And it is not true either.
aconte
Thank you. You understand where I have come from and what I am trying to do more than anyone. I will get to the stage where I am down to a few cards in a lot of sets and then I will do what needs to be done.
Gemmint,
It is all part of a plan to overthrow the leadership of Kelloggs--remember the new world order. I could add the Stump to this list as well. Just want to tell others that with the exception of the evil King Kellogg, that it is all in good fun.
aconte
Thanks. I think that he thinks you are one of the sgc crowd that drove me off the boards there. Actually, I think the sgc posters are a smart bunch and I enjoy contributing to both.
I also love the Red Man sets--maybe we could do something sometime with them.
Jim
Public forum of opinions opens us all to ridicule and criticism. I say bring it on. I thrive on it. Too many namby-pamby nattering nabobs in the world as it is. To the Rodney King apologist, Epithath on America's tombstone...."She was politically correct."
Back to my antagonist, funny how he "never buys PSA 7's" but is quick to compliment Acowa on his, offering to give/sell some of his rejects. At $5 a card, Alan, I say take 'em all.
Aconte's just pi**ed 'cuz he owns all those SGC cards. But then, so do I.
As for my original comment (Dav. way vs. Dude way), once again, where is the angst from the Dude camp? There was equal props and insult in both. Dan, your silence is makin' my case. Speak forth and bury me.
The differences are two:
1)As Aconte says, your characterization of the way I build sets is totally inaccurate and is meant to be demeaning. I patiently described to you how I did it in steplike fashion. You ignore and start the personal attack--pretty obvious to all.
2)Dan doesn't feel the need to respond to people like you.