Home› Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

How does PSA base their weight for each card?

Carew29Carew29 Posts: 4,025 ✭✭
in Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

I am pretty sure this has been brought up before. But i wanted to throw out this example for myself and "opcyaz".

1968 TOPPS #80 Rod Carew-----POP TOTAL---645
1968 OPC # 80 " " ------POP TOTAL---16
1968 Venezuela # 80 ------POP TOTAL----2

PSA has been around now for several years. Yet the percentage of OPC that have been graded to the amount of Topps is less than 3%.
Venezuela POP speaks for itself. At one time i owned both of them. Common sense says that if there is a low POP in a PSA 9 it should sell for alot more money. This should also apply to the weight given to each card which should reflect what has been graded over how many years. How many more Venezuelan Carews can there really be out there. I only know of 3 #80's that are not graded with David Levin. And believe me, i got the best one out of that group!!
Any new opinions ? And how do we get this point across to PSA to change the weighting?

Comments

  • wolfbearwolfbear Posts: 2,759 ✭✭✭

    Rarity is only a part of the equation.
    Demand in relation to rarity determines value.

    For example, I have some cards that are rarer than a Mantle rookie card,
    but they're only worth a fraction of what a Mantle is worth because
    a lot more people want a Mantle rookie than want my obscure cards.


    Pix of 'My Kids'

    "How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
  • 67standup67standup Posts: 833 ✭
    1968 Venezuelan Ryan - 10
    1968 Topps Ryan - 10

    1960 Venezuelan Yaz - 1
    1960 Topps Yaz - 10

    Recommended they change the Yaz Ven. They did; new weighting:

    1960 Venezuelan Yaz - 9
    1960 Topps Yaz - 10

    Conclusion: an intricate detailed computer program sprinkled with logic is used to derive the weights.
    “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” - George Carlin
  • A761506A761506 Posts: 1,309 ✭✭✭
    I've had the weights changed on a couple sets, one I paired with the leader and we agreed and determined the weights, PSA then updated it for us. I also created the weighting for the Norm Cash sets, as I was the one who wanted the set to begin with, and I actually put it together for PSA using their spreadsheets.

    Many of the weights they have now are artibrary numbers, especially on cards they don't list prices on in SMR. They will tell you the general rule of thumb is that the weights are based on the price of the card in PSA 8. There are many instances where this will create a very unbalanced weighting for a particular set, especially a set of a lesser player. For instance, in the Rocky Colavito set, there's a leader card of his from 1961 that also has Mantle and Maris on it, making it's value $200 in PSA 8. That's more than his rookie card, which is valued at $175 in pSA 8... No way the leader card is nearly as significant as the rookie card of the player the set is named for. Therefore, we weighted it according to the significance of the card to the player set, it's rarity as well as it's value. Weighting these things can be quite tricky actually... trying to find a good balance.

    If you propose new weights and your set is among the top in the rankings, and you talk to a couple other people at the top to see if they'll go along with it, getting their input as to weighting... once you all agree, PSA will change them for you.

Sign In or Register to comment.