What's the Big Deal with OC?
scottsusor
Posts: 1,210
One of the things I've noticed in my brief time in the PSA world is the apparent shunning of anything that's graded with an Off Center qualifier -- even with PSA 8's and 9's. They are always valued WAY less than their well-centered brethren. Part of me understands that because graded cards are often seen as more "art" than "collectible." But, on the other hand, there was a time, not long ago, when "Mint" was "Mint" as long as the borders of the card were reasonably apparent, say 80/20 or even 85/15. Of course, in grading, the card will still get its 8 or 9 but that OC qualifier seems to strip the card of anything close to equal value, and many set builders may buy one but are always looking to replace it with a non-qualified version. I believe that PSA uses 65/35 as its standard for giving the OC qualifier. So, my question is -- What is so bad about a 70/30 or 75/25 card, especially one that's well known for having a vast majority of off center prints due to printing abnormalities?
Scott
Scott
0
Comments
It's the eye appeal, and it counts a lot. For most people, well-centered cards are much pleasing to look at than not so well-centered cards. Centering is just as important in stamp collecting, coin collecting and undoubtedly countless other hobbies.
Skycap
There is absolutely nothing at all wrong with nice pack fresh cards that do not meet PSA centering standards IMHO.
I have some real nice PSA 6 cards that are still very nice and attractive cards.
I do feel that PSA grades too harhly on centering and small print wrinkles.
On the flip side, I think that PSA doesn't grade down enough for the rough cut edge.
I mean think about it, PSA will absolutely murder you grading wise on a small print wrinkle
that can basically only been seen with a magnifying glass.
But a ugly frayed rough cut edge that runs down the complete side of the card, basically gets a free pass.
For the life of me, I just don't understand this.
Can anyone else explain this to me????
Mojorob
Although eye-appeal certainly counts to a considerable degree, I think that the set registry something to do with it albeit to a much lesser degree. Because qualifiers knock off two points from a cards grade within the registry and many collectors only want 8s or better, I think people shun the OCs. If there were only a 1 point hit, I think that there would be more 9oc's registered.
But there is something else in people's minds that prevent them from purchasing OCs. Many times, a 7 will sell for higher than a 9oc even when it is obvious that that 7 was submitted with "no qualifiers" on the invoice. We are definitely prejudiced against the qualifier.
(edited because Skycap is right)
<< <i>Many times, a 7 will sell for higher than a 9oc even when it is obvious that that 7 was submitted with "no qualifiers" on the invoice. We are definitely prejudiced against the qualifier. >>
And that's another thing. I simply don't comprehend PSA's willingness to do the 2 point drop when "No Qualifiers" is requested by the submitter. I can see the logic in terms of the Set Registry's points, but in terms of the rest of the world, this makes no sense at all. If, as I believe, PSA was going for a hard and fast grading system of 1 thru 10 (with no half-points), this type of variance sort of ruins its legitimacy, in my humble opinion. Or is there some other logic here that I'm missing?
Scott
I would respectfully disagree. PSA cards were around several years before the Set Registry came into existence, and during those years a vast amount of collectors were already desirous of well-centered cards, generally 8's or better with no qualifiers.
Skycap
Too bad, because I am one of them
While the two point drop is indeed arbitrary, it is reasonable and was probably based on market pricing and the like for similar cards. While the o/c is a kiss of death, it is often not a surprise to the submitter. From my perspective, the o/c is actually an upgrade of sorts. If you have a 9 o/c, then you have a very sharp card with one issue. If you have a 7, then there may be a multitude of small problems. The o/c in that case at least speaks for the rest of the attributtes.
Also there is no hard and fast really that I know of for "NQ" requests that drop the card two points. The card has two stand on it's own merit and ignore the positive features. A 9 o/c that is 95/5 asks for an "NQ" designation looks like it could technically end up in a PSA 1 holder because it does not meet the 90/10 requirement for a PSA 2. Jeez, does that really happen? So that two point idea may not be such a good thing.
Fuzz
<< <i>If PSA eliminated the OC qual (which should not happen at this time), collectors could determine for themselves if the card is not to their liking, instead of most likely shying away from it. >>
This make a tremendous amount of sense. I wonder what it would take. Is PSA listening?
Scott
<< <i>From my perspective, the o/c is actually an upgrade of sorts. If you have a 9 o/c, then you have a very sharp card with one issue. If you have a 7, then there may be a multitude of small problems. >>
Well said. I, like many collectors, shun the OC cards for the most part, but I would rather have a 9OC than a 7 any day (in most cases) for the reason above. The card grades a 9, but it's off center (and maybe only a little bit). A 7 may have other issues that are not quite so apparent.
What would the response be to the '72 Clemente auction from that other thread if PSA did not use qualifiers? If forced to just downgrade a card for bad centering, how far would that card have plummeted? A 4? Just curious.
Todd
ebay id: nolemmings
I think you asked this question because you deal quite a bit in 1969 baseball where centering is a big problem. Not being familiar with other years, I don't how bad the centering is on them. Your question makes a lot of sense when asked specific to 1969 where finding well centered examples of some cards is next to impossible. If OC cards are more rare in other years, then it would make less sense to buy them if well centered cards are more readily available. For 1969 you would think there would be less of a stigma on the OC qualifier.
As I've said before, I like my cards as I like my women: Give me an otherwise sharp, off-centered one any time over one that is worn and abused, showing signs of handling.
Come on, guys. You gotta agree with that!
One of my issues with SGC is that a PSA 8 OC card, often receives an SGC 80. That is, an SGC 80 (EXMT) is not the same as a PSA 6, but is often advertised as such. It's interesting that those who don't have an issue with PSA 8 OC often won't touch an SGC 80. (I know, this is not the SGC Great Grading Debate forum.)
Moreover, we're so conditioned that it has to be PSA 7 or better, that anything less simply doesn't move. For example, there have been some key card Venezuelans in the PSA 2-5 range offered during the last year, but they have received minimal interest. Had they been 8+, then your high grade "collectors" would have jumped all over it. But reality is that high grade for such issues doesn't exist.
In the raw card days "EXMT" was good thing, now a PSA 6/SGC 80 will immediately cause some frowns. Although it's a free market there's something just not right about sending $100-$500 raw card to one human grader, receiving a 10, Gem, Pristine, whatever - because the card either earned it or the grader was in a good mood - then listing that card for a gagillion dollars. I realize this turned from a reply to a vent, so I somewhat apologize.
Todd -- Great comment about the virtues of a 9 OC with one known deficiency vs. a 7 NQ that should have been a 9 OC.
Scott
Send me all of your PSA 9 o/c's from this set - I'll take them all if they are like the ones I have...
I guess it's just a personal preference. I sense that OC's have not much more than a niche interest in the hobby. That explains why jaybyrd was able to get the 1960 Spahn PSA 9 OC for only $50 as the sole bidder, while the SMR for an unqualified PSA 9 is $475 and would likely draw many bidders unless the minimum was set unreasonably high. Generally, very, very few people want an OC card as compared to an unqualified one, but if a person is happy with an OC card, that's fine.
Skycap
Maybe I should take some of those 1967 9 oc's that have been sitting here in limbo and put them
in the trading section, with a reference to them here.
But would you trade 8's that I need for 9 oc's that I don't (categorically)?
1967and 1973 Topps baseball wantlists (any condition) welcome. Once had the #14 ATF 1967 set. Yet another collector like skylaneflyer, gimel1 who made it to the completion of 1967 only to need the money more than the company of 609 close friends.
Looking for oddball Norm Cash and Cleon Jones stuff, and 1956 team cards
I think PSA should Upgrade grades for dead centering 52/48 or better, however!
If you have card with psa 7 corners but perfectly centered with sharp focus, it should be instantly upgraded to an 8!
When cards are displayed in a case, minor corner wear is the least apparent card problem except for a wax stain on the back! What I am saying is that I am unable to discriminate a PSA 7 or 8 vintage card on display in a case on the wall based on the corners! They look equal as long as the centering, gloss, and focus are about equal!
<< <i>...I think PSA should Upgrade grades for dead centering 52/48 or better, however!
If you have card with psa 7 corners but perfectly centered with sharp focus, it should be instantly upgraded to an 8!
When cards are displayed in a case, minor corner wear is the least apparent card problem except for a wax stain on the back! What I am saying is that I am unable to discriminate a PSA 7 or 8 vintage card on display in a case on the wall based on the corners! They look equal as long as the centering, gloss, and focus are about equal! >>
RG58,
That's an interesting point, and I think that I agree with you. But, don't you think that most of the "perfectly centered" PSA 7s might have already been "bumped up" ? I'm not saying that this is always the case, but in my experience, most PSA 7s with great centering have some other issues that would not allow them to be PSA 8s. I do agree that centering is the most important aspect of grading (visually) when you are talking PSA 6-7 and higher. Just a thought.
JEB.
I can't help but wonder if a big part of the visual appeal of an off-center graded card/slab has to do with the ominous "(OC)" as opposed to the card itself. No, actually I don't wonder. I think its a fact.
For example, if you were to put two almost identical cards next to each other -- Let's say one is a PSA 8 with 65/35 centering and the other is a PSA 8 OC with 75/25 centering -- If it wasn't for the "(OC)" in the description, would one really have a whole lot better visual appeal than the other?
And, if you want to get truly anal, the PSA 8 OC might actually be a BETTER raw card physically than the PSA 8. Personally, I think the idea presented earlier in this thread about doing away with OC and letting the appearance of the slabbed card speak for itself, is a tremendous one. But, if PSA really wants to retain the OC part of the grade, suppose they were to put that "(OC)" designation on the BACK of the slab. Obviously this would not work for "(ST)" and "(PD)" designations because they truly affect the physical condition of the card, but "(OC)" clearly does not.
How about it, PSA? Thoughts?
Scott
I wasn't aware that PSA has a grading rule that states that a card can be upgraded based on "great eye-appeal/perfect centering". I have some PSA 7's with great centering that look a lot nicer in the display than some PSA 8's with 70/30 centering or worse. I have to assume the psa 7's are "7s" because of the corners. It would be nice if PSA would up the grade based on eye-appeal/centering alone. I know we all have seen this situation and it is what leads many to crack/resubmit.
Rob
<< <i>JEB,
I wasn't aware that PSA has a grading rule that states that a card can be upgraded based on "great eye-appeal/perfect centering". I have some PSA 7's with great centering that look a lot nicer in the display than some PSA 8's with 70/30 centering or worse. I have to assume the psa 7's are "7s" because of the corners. It would be nice if PSA would up the grade based on eye-appeal/centering alone. I know we all have seen this situation and it is what leads many to crack/resubmit.
Rob >>
From PSA's Card Grading Standards:
EX-MT 6: Excellent-Mint.
A PSA EX-MT 6 card may have visible surface wear or a printing defect which does not detract from its overall appeal. A very light scratch may be detected only upon close inspection. Corners may have slightly graduated fraying. Picture focus may be slightly out-of-register. Card may show some loss of original gloss, may have minor wax stain on reverse, may exhibit very slight notching on edges and may also show some off-whiteness on borders. Centering must be 80/20 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the reverse.
Now isn't it possible that a card that meets these requirements, but has better centering, might be given the benefit of the doubt, and slabbed as a PSA 7?
There is a fine line between any two consecutive grades and to rely only on centering, although it may be the most eye appealing characteristic of a card, does not take into account all of the other factors that may raise or lower the grade - like a minor surface wrinkle on the back of the card.
For the record, I am playing Devil's advocate here. I do disagree with PSA's grading every once in a while, but, looking at this issue from an outsider's point of view (i.e. PSA), the standards are established for a reason.
If you feel your card has been undergraded, feel free to crack it out and resubmit. I'm sure that PSA has no problem with this!
JEB.
loth
I find that the biggest question people ask about cards is regarding the centering. While it is true that centering can be seen for what it is, so can corners, print defects, etc. The purpose of 3rd party grading in my opinion is to give an independent authoritative grade to a card, while ruling out tampering, etc. You should be able to buy it sight unseen, and have a good idea of what youy are getting.
If people feel that OC cards are penalized too harshly, and it doesn't bother them, then you can buy all you want for a fraction of the non OC card price in the same grade. That should make you happy with the OC qualifier, rather than upset with it, because others will shun it.
It is the market that determines how much an OC qualifier affects the value, and the market certainly has spoken loud and clear.