Submission Question: What's a "Common"?

Love of the Game

Hi all:

Quick question - I'm getting ready a submission of 53 Topps for my registry set. It's a 56-card submission, so I'm trying to do it as inexpensively as possible.

My question: what exactly is PSA's definition of a "common"? Is it any card that's not listed in SMR? So I can assume that people like Alvin Dark and Bob Cerv are considered to be "stars" for that set, and not eligible for the vintage common price?

Thanks,
-Al

gregm13

I'd submit them as commons. This new pricing policy is ridiculous....because it is incredibly vague. To be honest, I'm not going to submit a "star" under the $15 service that books for $50 in PSA 8 just because it's listed in SMR. Unless it's one of the key cards in the set or a rookie, I'll submit under the commons service. If they have a problem, they can kick back the order.

JMHO.

Greg M.

ctsoxfan

Was there ever a clear cut definition of "common" given? I always thought it was any card not listed specifically in the SMR, but that really doesn't work on many vintage sets. As I prepare a submission for the current '60s commons Registry special, I would like to make sure my defintion of common and PSA's are the same.

gregm13

I always based my determination on price. If a card in PSA 8 was below $500, I sent it in as part of the common specials.

Regards,

Greg M.

ctsoxfan

Makes sense to me.

Love of the Game

Hey ctsoxfan - what happened to your old icon? I didn't recognize you.

I put together the submissions last night, but I hesitate to throw cards that appear in SMR in a commons submission and have the order kicked back to me. I freak out every time I send in an order, thinking my cards are going to be lost. You can insure the package, but what good does that do when you have to replace the cards you worked hard to find? So I send in an order, they realize that I've got "stars" in a "commons" order, and then what happens?

-Al

Mefer

I would just use common sense. Obviously, throwing in a Mantle and Mays are out of the question but "above average players" who do not have significant value attached to their cards, when compared to the rest of the set, should be ok. I think the worst thing that would happen is that the order would be sent back or you would receive a phone call. However, I doubt this to be likely.

Probably another vague answer but there is not, in my mind, a clear answer.

Love of the Game

Well, as I said before, I will always heed the wisdom of Ace Frehley.

Thanks, guys.

-Al

Mefer

Space Ace is glad he could help out. ACK!

Love of the Game

Drive safe.

-Al

MorrellMan

Good question Al, because, I think there is no cut'n'dried answer. I have some cards to send in for my '48 Swell set - most of the cards are stars, because that's the nature of the set, but I'm figuring only the Ruth and Robinson cards as stars and the rest as commons. I think somebody put it best when he said use "common" sense. Obviously, every card in the '59 thru '61 Fleer sets are stars, but there are only handful in each set that someone might have a hard time calling a common.

SportsModerator2

From the Lingo section on the PSA website.

common
A term used to describe a card that is not a rookie, semi-star, or star card. These are usually the least expensive cards in a set. “Singles” has also become a widely acceptable term for commons.



star card
A card featuring a star player. In vintage material, a star card is usually a Hall of Fame member, while in modern material it is the players who dominate sports media and national advertising campaigns

I would like to add this to the description as well.

These defintions are somewhat general because there are exceptions. For example, a star card from late in a player’s career might be OK to submit at a lower priced service but it needs to be pre-approved by us first.



Carol

WinPitcher

“Singles” has also become a widely acceptable term for commons.


?

A761506

I have a problem understanding it also... as an example using the 1967 Topps set... Luis Aparicio is in the HOF. His 67 Topps card in a PSA 8 is worth $27 according to SMR. Later in that set, Mike Shannon and Mickey Stanley (unquestionable commons) have a PSA 8 of $125. According to the PSA rules that say no stars in with common submissions... you could submit the Shannon and Stanley under the common service ($6/card), but the Aparicio would need to be submitted under regular service ($15/card). Completely ridiculous. I'd like to know if they are going to try to enforce this and kick out cards that aren't obvious commons, or if they are going to let it slide as they have done in the past.

Has anyone submitted a bulk commons order in January that included questionable stars?

SportsModerator2

This separation of stars and commons is not new. Many people seem to be under the impression that the Vintage bulk rates and rules changed when the other levels changed, that is not the case.

When using the Modern bulk service level, there is no distinction between stars and commons. The main rule is that cards must be valued under $500.

The staff will enforce it but we're human and a few will always sneak by.

If you have a star card in your vintage bulk order, your order will be set aside and a call will be made to you explaining the problem. You will be required to move the card to the appropriate service level and pay separate shipping. The same will apply to cards that are valued to low for the service level picked.

Carol

Buccaneer

bumb

I am still wrestling with this as I get ready to submit (both the 10 freebies and then a bulk submission). What have the experiences been the past 2 months regarding minor- and semi-stars in a bulk commons order? As I look at my 1957s, I see the likes of Sal Maglie, Red Schoendienst, Whitey Herzog, team cards like Phillies, Braves, etc. I would not consider any of such cards stars and certainly would not pay $15 to have them graded (esp. since they are 6 or 7). Thanks.

IJustLoveCards

called to get some sort of explination:

I was told line for line what carol indicated earlier in the thread.

However, you can save 3.00 by submitting a star under the regisrty 5 day special at 12.00 a card vs. the 15.00 they usuallly charge, however, who wants to pay 12.00 + shipping for a card that slabbed in a 7 is worth 18.00 after the card cost you 5.00 to buy.. it makes no sense.

PSA needs to have a special whereas a star player can be submitted for 10.00 or less as long as the "value" doesnt exceed some declared value figure i.e. 2500.00..PSA will capture a large number of cards.

just my 2 cents worth.

Buccaneer

Then it makes no sense for me to submit star cards for grading unless they are exceptional star cards or would grade out high. It is marginal enough as it is to submit non-star cards ($2.50 to buy the card + $7.00 to grade for a common that can't be sold for more than $6). Even at $12, would you want to grade a 1957 Maglie or Schoendienst???

1967topps

I'm going by Hall of Fame, which PSA listings indicate.
That means stars of the day like Billy Williams Ron Santo and Norm Cash are submitted as commons.

Buccaneer

<< <i>I'm going by Hall of Fame, which PSA listings indicate.
That means stars of the day like Billy Williams Ron Santo and Norm Cash are submitted as commons. >>



That certainly makes sense and would help monetarily. Doesn't help that players like Schoendienst are in the Hall because of his cronies on the Vet Committee but we can save with all of those minor and semi stars would shouldn't have the word "star" next to their names.

RTB

The way I see it, "star" cards from a 50s or 60s set would be the expensive key cards in the set, not minor stars unless maybe their rookie cards. It's a value thing...

bowdowntome

I agree with the Hall of Fame point. You can't really go by just the value, because many sets are not listed in the SMR.

carew4me

For some reason PSA seems to allow this confusion. I have no idea why they continue to be so vague on this issue.


a star card is usually a Hall of Fame member ***OK, when is it not, maybe that applies to my batch...who knows

while in modern material it is the players who dominate sports media and national advertising campaigns ***That is so subjective as to be laughable

These defintions are somewhat general because there are exceptions. ***Thankyou for being honest, now you understand your customers confusion

For example, a star card from late in a player’s career might be OK to submit at a lower priced service but it needs to be pre-approved by us first *** Any other exceptions you care to list - Why in the world would you not be clear about this, why generate CS calls???

This doesn't have to be subjective. With a small effort by PSA they could publish a list of non-common eligible cards within the master registry listing.
This way if I had 53's like the original poster I could pull up the listing an cross reference my batch against the list. This would take me a few minutes and I would have no need to generate a CS call.

This is an example where the easiest solution is the best for both PSA and their customers but they refused to act!

Buccaneer

I would surmise the purpose of being vague is to get more people to submit cards for $12/$15 each. It does not take any more time or any special conditions to grade "star" cards but they certainly love the revenues from such.

Cubfan

Ive always gone by the Hall of Fame standard as well.

What makes it more confusing is that there is a picture of a card Hall of Famer Duke Snider with the add for the "60's commons".

I think that happened before on a 50's common special where PSA showed a card of Phil Rizzuto in the ad.

I guess its just common sense and low value. I dont know.