Snap...Crack(le)...and Pops

HoofHearted

Reading these boards has got me to wondering about the accuracy of the Population Reports. It sounds like cracking graded cards, especially higher graded ones, and resubbing them is a common occurrence. I'm not sure I'd put much faith in the pop rpts as time passes.

Any other thoughts on this?

Thanks,

hh

RipublicaninMass

I was thinking of cracking the mcnall/gretzky wagner, in hopes of a 9.
But I am not sure the average vintage collector would risk cracking some 8's and 9's to achieve higher.

DirtyHarry

Don't think so much. The impact is minor. Enjoy.

jrdolan

I think there are really only 25,000 UD Griffey Jr. rookies, but it seems like a million because they keep changing from PSA 9 to BGS 9.5 to GAI 10 and back again.

Boopotts

"Don't think so much. The impact is minor."

I don't want to start a flame war, Harry, but with all due respect--- how do you know?


My best guess is that the impact is indeed minor when dealing with real high-dollar cards ('54 Aarons, etc.), and with real low dollar cards. But it wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn that the pop reports are totally skewed when you're looking at cards in the $50-$200 range.

DirtyHarry

Boopy - think your comments put it in perspective. Crack/resubmit goes on all the time, regardless of the grading company. It's a given and "built in" to the equation. There is no way to analyze it accurately ...ergo...forget it and enjoy. That's all I'm saying.

HoofHearted

Thanks for the input. I guess I'm not sure, being the initiate I am, just how much weight to attach to the Pop Rpts, and how they could/should be used. I would venture a guess that they're maybe more important to the investment crowd.

hh

calleocho

I think that when it comes to stars the POP might be a little off...the diffrence in price for PSA 7 vs PSA 8 for say a Mantle is substancial enough that it makes it a big target.

But for commons and lower grade stuff...its probably pretty accurate.

the POP report its an incredible tool..just not perfect.

gmoneystyles

I will pay you triple SMR my pic below. Does that answer your query?

phreakydancin

With the success of the PSA Set Registry, it wouldn't surprise me if the pop numbers are more off for the other grading companies, as collectors crack and submit their cards to PSA for their sets. I did it recently to both BVG and PGC holders to add to my PSA set.

TWINRON

Do what I do re resubmitting. At Nationals each year I return the flips of the holders that I cracked out (be they 4,5, 6, or 7,s) to PSA , and they adjust their POP report accordingly. I have never had the courage to resubmit a PSA8!!

HoofHearted

Returning the cracked folders sounds like a smart thing to do. Paying the postage may be discouraging to some. I wonder if this is something PSA would consider as a reasonable business expense??

hh

Rangerman

<< <i>With the success of the PSA Set Registry, it wouldn't surprise me if the pop numbers are more off for the other grading companies, as collectors crack and submit their cards to PSA for their sets. I did it recently to both BVG and PGC holders to add to my PSA set. >>



I cracked non-PSA holders, sent cards to PSA and the results were favorable--- point--- population of other companies are 'off' if anything. IMO

CollectorChris

The population report must be used as a fairly accurate guide -- not perfection. For example, I have three vintage PSA 9 cards which show a population of 1 yet I have seen others appear in auctions.