Home PSA Set Registry Forum

Common card bashing

I am fairly new to this forum, but ever since I began reading the posts a few months ago, I have noticed several off hand comments belittling the collecting of common cards that don’t have high values. Comments that imply that putting $1.00 cards in $8.00 holders is somehow stupid or even embarrassing, are really starting to gripe my butt! I, along with a bunch of other people, are SET collectors. How in the heck are you going to complete a set without all the commons? As a matter of fact, the little common cards are always harder to get in high grade than the star cards. HOF and star cards always come along sooner or later, but try finding that little $1.00 card in PSA 9 and you might be waiting and digging for years. This not to say that the really old HOF cards are not tough. I realize and appreciate the difficulties in collecting pre war cards, star or common. But mid seventies Topps sets are vary challenging in their own right, mainly due to the commons. This is what makes the chase interesting for me. You so called big time collectors who thumb their nose at common cards probably don’t know who George Theodore is. But let me tell you, when I finally got the 1974 #8 in PSA 8, I would not have traded it for 10 Mantle cards.(well, maybe I would, but I pulled a good drunk that day celebrating!) My whole point is, these $1.00 cards may not have book value, but they are the most important part of complete set collecting. This gives them a subjective value that goes far beyond the SMR.

Ken

Comments

  • mcastaldimcastaldi Posts: 1,203 ✭✭✭
    Sideplate> I'm over 80% complete with my 72T set and the most expensive card in my set is #178 - Paul Schaal IA in PSA8. In fact, what paid for it is more than double the next most expensive card in the set.

    Most of the set builders will tell you that the hardest cards in their set aren't the HOFers - they're the common card that always managed to get placed at the edge of a sheet and get cut improperly. Or a common card that you never see without printing problems. To me, this is what makes building a set so much fun - you gain an intimate knowledge of ALL the cards in the set.

    Mike
    So full of action, my name should be a verb.
  • No real ruckus, I just keep hearing the same thing every so often. The thing that jogged my memory on the subject was an attack on JEB in a recent post. I'm sure not many collectors will disagree with what I said, but hey, maybe there are some points I have not thought of. I would welcome an opposite point of view.
  • FBFB Posts: 1,684 ✭✭
    Sideplate,

    Plenty of people have said it before and I'll say it again... If we were in this for the money then we should all have our heads examined!!! But you're right - many of us are SET collectors and you can't build sets without the commons. I've been a set collector all of my life and to me - its the only way to go.

    So, if it isn't cost efficient to slab a few $.75 commons - then so be it - anybody who doesn't like it doesn't have to do it!

    Nice job on completing the 74!!!!
    Frank Bakka
    Sets - 1970, 1971 and 1972
    Always looking for 1972 O-PEE-CHEE Baseball in PSA 9 or 10!

    lynnfrank@earthlink.net
    outerbankyank on eBay!
  • Sideplate

    No opposite here. I agree. I came to Jeb's defense and will defend my stance on this with vigor when the name calling begins. Other than that your points are well stated. I also have paid the high dollar for that common and without them there is no set. They help make up the teams that make up the history and culture od baseball cards. The people who ridicule are usally the ones that strugle with the hobby and most likely feel the hobby owes them something instead of trying to make it a better place for all.

    Daveimage
    Visit my site @ www.djjscards.com
  • packCollectorpackCollector Posts: 2,786 ✭✭✭
    sideplate, no disagreement here. when people realize we collect what we like not what everyone else like the world will be a happier place. If I want to put all my "commons" in holders so be it, you dont have to agree but thats what makes ita great hobby. everyone buys what they want. I have not embarked on the bohemouth task of putting together a 400 card set all in holders. I will eventually becasue it looks like fun, for now I spend my money by buying 5c and 10c packs for $100's of dollars. most people think I need my head examined to but thats what I like and its FUN!! Happy collecting to all no matter what you like!
  • Ken,

    I'm sure most everyone here will agree with you. I think that what happens is that a few people will visit this forum under various user id's just to stir things up and then they disappear. That may or may not be the case this time but I wouldn't worry about their comments.

    The Theodore card was the last card Scott Wetzel needed to go psa 8 or better - it is very tough to find. I still need it in a 9 - I believe it is pop 1 now so at least it exists. I'm glad to see you posting here!

    Wayne
    1955 Bowman Football
  • I think some of the discussion on commons and grading centers on whether dealers are going to submit inexpensive cards, pay $7.00 for grading and then not have the card realize the grading fees (or at least a nominal profit) when it is retailed or auctioned. The issue isn't really focused on the value of the card (either it's dollar value or significance in the set compared to the star players) or it's degree of difficulty in completing one's set but whether the economics of the grading of any relatively inexpensive card cn be justified at a particular time.

    I've premised my whole business pretty much on commons and minor stars, both raw and graded, so bashing commons would be pretty senseless. The economics of the grading of commons from certain years at certain periods of time, however, I think (as a seller, not a collector) is open to discussion (and likely to bashing if your stuck with a bunch of commons from a year that's not selling).
    Joe Tauriello
    Setbuilders Sports Cards
    Ebay: set-builders & set-builders2
  • jaxxrjaxxr Posts: 1,258 ✭✭
    Graded commons ??

    I am a supporter of set collecting via graded cards and desire to nearly complete some larger sets. I simply can't afford to submit or buy every single in the sets at this time, and will have to settle for perhaps something like one-third raw in nice "probable" 8 or better shape.

    I do wonder what others feel about the future for graded commons from about post 1975. I realize there are some big collections from 1976 to 1990, and a few later years also, but what about those sets not yet heavily pursued ?? Might they be possible decent investments ?? Grading fees will most likely go up from inflation alone, in say ten years. The adult status and corresponding finances for those younger collectors should make those eras more popular in ten years. Some established collectors might enjoy a few newer sets. Because there is some quality unopened product from 1983 Topps, 1986 Donruss, 1989 Fleer, and such, would it be fun and reasonably speculative to grade some top-quality commons for the future ?? Perhaps foolish, but about five years ago grading 71 Topps commons was economic insanity. None of us can know for sure, but I think it would be interesting to hear others views on these more recent but not current commons.
    image
    This aint no party,... this aint no disco,.. this aint no fooling around.
  • Sideplate,

    Whoever bashed commons collectors surely weren't Set Registry guys. We all grade low dollar cards for our sets whenever necessary. But I will say, I do think of the "value" of a high grade common before I decide to collect a set. That's why I stay with vintage sets so that I limit the extent to which I spen big $ on commons that may be tough to re-coup.

    Just my 2 cents.

    GoSoxBoSox
    There is a fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness"

  • Here are a couple of reasons big dealers submitt truck loads of cards!

    Text

    Text

    I bought a lot of 100 graded 1981-82 topps basketball from Joe Tuttle for .81 a card $81.00 + shipping. under $1.00 a card. All psa 8's. McHale rook. and many stars in 8. Bird/Magic/Alcindor er that was his name when we played against him in high school.

    I'm sure JT will make the difference up on something else.

    mx'er
    image

    ______________
    1961 topps 100%
  • Motocrosser,

    That second link is unbelievable.

    Why would he auction a group of 314 psa 10's all at once???????



    I wouldn't grade them out to sell as a single lot - it seems he will take a beating. I could understand it if they were 9's or less.



    Wayne
    1955 Bowman Football
  • mikeschmidtmikeschmidt Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭
    My guess:

    major dealers are able to submit mass quantities to PSA at super-duper discounts -- and only having the 9s or 10s ultimately slabbed. I guarantee you that Tuttle will be selling at a profit -- even if it is simply a marginal one.

    Tuttle has been selling hoardes of 89 UD lately -- and I think he may have realized that the Ebay market is saturated -- and he is now just selling multiples of cards he already sold a few weeks back.

    I love dealers like this as it gives me an opportunity to pick up modern 10s on the cheap.
    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.
  • BasiloneBasilone Posts: 2,492 ✭✭


    << <i>major dealers are able to submit mass quantities to PSA at super-duper discounts -- and only having the 9s or 10s ultimately slabbed >>



    He currently has 327 PSA 8 1982 Topps ending tonight...so it looks like the 8's get slabbed as well.

  • Wayne...Marc has the answer!

    I also love delers like Tuttle...I follow his auctions religiously. I pick up 10's for my MVP & Cy young sets all the time.

    After I bought the 100 basketball cards cheap, he put up the 9's in groups of 50-75 at a time. 3 weeks in a row. Many were dups. of the cards I got. He was getting over $12.00 for many 9's. I bet in the end he made money.

    Marc, I see you on many of his auctions.

    mx'er
    ________________
    1961 topps 100%
    image

    ______________
    1961 topps 100%
  • Thanks to everyone for backing me up about collecting "unpopular sets ... just so you can get a registry award."

    To all of those not ashamed "if 95% of it consisted of $0.50 - $2.00 commons inside of $6.00 - $8.00 holders.", keep collecting your sets and congratulations, in advance, for completing a very difficult task, no matter which idiot on a message board thinks less of you for it. image

    And if you really want one of those "Best of the Registry" certificates, take my previous advice and start a new set. It can be done and I will do it again with a few next year, hopefully. But that is not the reason I collect. I'm trying to complete sets that are interesting to me (and quite possibly, not as interesting to the majority of other collectors). If this gets me a certificate next year, great, if not, oh well. It's all in fun.

    JEB.
  • I agree with sideplate. I love graded commons simply because I know I'm going to get a good card and not some crap listed at nrmt/mt+++ that is actually ex/mt in reality. I look at the psa holder as insurance that my set will be high quality when I'm done. One day I might unload my 1966 set and I know the buyer will be happy to see a ton of PSA cards in the set simply because they don't have to worry about those cards being misrepresented. Of course, this is the whole reason PSA exists, in my opinon.

    Graded commons are uncommonly good. Oh man, I've said the word "commons" in my head so many times now it is losing its meaning. commons commons commons commons

    Scott
    1966T, 1971T, 1972T raw and in 8s
    1963T Dodgers in 8s
    Pre-war Brooklyn 5s or higher
  • We 61 guys know the value of a common! Thsi is why dealers will submit a lot of cards hoping for the big one.

    61 PSA 8 common over $500
    Ole Doctor Buck of the Popes of Hell

  • Without the insane bidding war, that '61 Repulski is just your ordinary, everyday $225 common.

    Without the second level bidding war, that '61 Repulski runs you a cheap $60.

    Buckwheat, where were you on that one? I thought you needed it. I recall something about a first born child in trade...

  • Very common for a low pop 61 common...about 10 cards will sell like the Repulski. Buck and I know (we've paid it) for sure.

    mx'er
    ______________
    1961 topps 100%
    1951-present MVP 100%
    1956-present Cy Young 100%

    BTW..........I just received my first 10. Small submission just under the wire for the Oct. cc special. A 1984 topps#97 Lamarr Hoyt for my Cy Young set. I also got a few 9's if you 84 guys are interested.
    image

    ______________
    1961 topps 100%

  • TG...I think you're correct about the 2nd leval bidding war. When does that war end? It's been going for about 3+ years now!

    mx'er
    image

    ______________
    1961 topps 100%
  • WabittwaxWabittwax Posts: 1,984 ✭✭✭
    This topic reminds me a lot of the beatings that modern card collector's take from some vintage guys. I am putting together a set of 1997 Totally Certified Football Gold in which every card is serial numbered to 30. I have about 1/3 of the set on the Set Registry right now. I have about 70 different cards total out of the 150 card set and I have been working on it for 2 years. People have told me it's a waste of time because vintage cards are the only thing that will hold their value. I don't agree but to each his own. My set technically is rarer than T206's and I have bought commons for as low as $2. I don't think I can go wrong with that.
Sign In or Register to comment.