PSA 7 vs PSA 9 COMMON?

2dueces

Before I start this post, I want to state everyone should collect what they like. The old saying is if you like it buy it. With that said somethings I have been wondering about.
To the naked eye in most cases there is very little if no difference between a 7 and a 9. Now unslabbed lets say its a $1 common. Slabbed a 7 its a $12 card. but slabbed a 9 its a $200 common.
I understand having the #1 set on the registry, but is #20th so bad. After all 20th in the world is not to bad to the average guy on the street. lets say the set is small, 89 cards. 70 commons. the $70 worth of commons in 7 are $840. and in 9 they are $14,000. $13,160 diffence.
With this 13K, how many other sets could you purchase in PSA 7 quality? And this is only for a small set. I cant imagine a monster set. BTW, I'm using the Fleer 1963 Football set as an example because I have a partial set and watch the prices.
Pop reports are another question. If you have 1 of 1's today, and are bought that way, whats to say a attic full of cases isnt found tomorrow and your 1 of 1 is now a 1 of 10. It would effect that price but prolly would have very little impact on a 7.
Last but not least, is it the Regisrty that has put such a high demand on commons, or was there always a demand for high graded commons before. Has this effected the price of the 9 and 10's or would they still be in such high demand?
I like to collect quality cards, but I have found myself looking at these commons and asking myself, " Do I relly want to spend $200 for this common 9 or would I rather wait for a 7 and put the money towards a T206 HOFer?" My answer a you guessed is save the money 4 times and buy a Cobb.
Hope we can kick this around and not kick the author. In no way am I questioning anyones collecting. I just would like to see if anyone else has thought this way. Out

sagard

I like cards in the graded format. I also like 7s. The nice thing about collecting commons in "7" is that nine times out of ten they were submitted with expectations of getting an eight and are usually very nice for the grade. When dealing with stars, the sevens are often at the other end of the "7" scale and I would definately buy the eights on the stars if one can afford them. All in all it is most important to buy what you like and within a budget that you can live with.

baseballfanatic

Nothing like hitting the proverbial nail on the head. I think 90% of the high end commons are driven by the set registry. The sooner you realize that you cant compete with the Copelands and Brancas who seem to have an unlimited supply of cash, the better off you will be. Even looking at a lot of the numbers of graded commons, there are literally TONS of stuff waiting to be graded because most collectors will pick the stars out of their collection and have those graded. There are still literally tens of MILLIONS of untapped vintage stuff out there, and the longer PSA and the grading companies are in existance, the more stuff will be coming out of the woodwork, and the low pops which are going for big bucks now, will one day be 1 of only 138 graded PSA 9..............

bowdowntome

I have no problem buyin 7's, in fact most of the graded cards I've bought are 7's. Also, alot of them I paid no more for than what I would have been willing to pay ungraded. Having said that, I don't just pass up 8's or 9's. I'll buy them as well....................if I can get them for the price of an inexpensive 7. As you can probably guess though, to date I have no 9's in my collection.

I have 1 registry set, I am also the only one with a registerted set in this category, so I am #1. I know perfectly well it won't last forever, and I'm fine with that. After I complete the set, I will be happy and won't bother to try and upgrade. I'll leave the competition to others.

calleocho

the registry works because it appeals to so many.

Its a male thing as well as an American trait, to strive to be the very best.

I am very happy with my #17 registry set...if i never move from that spot it would be ok, but i do like rankings and i do get a little rush whenever i move up a spot...i call it "passive competitism"

A very important thing to remember is that the guys that build these legendary #1 sets do it with disposable income, its not like they skip a couple mortgage payments in order to buy a couple of PSA 9's.

Its all relative, Chrish Renuad paid a ton of money for some low pops 1971 topps, insane money to most of us but nothing compared to his other hobby of exotic sport cars, i dont think he cares too much about the pops going up, the same way he doesnt care about his cars dropping in value.

brianwintersfan

<< <i>To the naked eye in most cases there is very little if no difference between a 7 and a 9 >>



Sorry but I have a hard time swallowing that

iamthegreatcornholio

It all depends on the set, but in many 60's sets, people want 8 or higher. As sagard said, many of the 7's were submitted with hope of being an 8; thus, they are high-end.

Brian

jmbkb4

Brian,

Just looked at your 1965 set in the registry. VERY nice. Congrats!

P.S. Are you waiting for the perfect Mantle?

Axtell

Depends on the set as well.

For my 71 baseball set, 8s were way out of my price range, and 7s look great to me. I am collecting this set for my own means, with no intention of ever selling it. A lot of people with a lot more money than myself have the ability to go out and fork thousands and thousands in commons.

For my 85 football set, my initial goal was mainly 8s with 9s sprinked in, but with the pricing of 9s the way they are, I am more and more buying 9s.

To each their own....but as the poster above stated, I doubt anyone who's dropping $200 for a common is stretching to make ends meet.

stevek

Depends also on the year from a collector viewpoint. Some cards I buy for investment with the intentions of probably selling sooner or later, and others I buy strictly to collect - no intentions of selling. Two examples which happen to be two of my favorite Topps Baseball Card years...1965 and 1962. For me, not that much difference in a PSA 7 versus a PSA 9 to justify the cost from my collector viewpoint for 1965. But for 1962 because of the woodgrain borders, for me there is a big visual difference in a PSA 7 versus a PSA 9. I'm always looking for nicely centered 8 & 9 commons from 1962.

Steve

stevek

Da*n I hate that when someone beats me to the idea and posts a minute or two before my post while I'm still typing on the keyboard. - LOL

Stingray

Though I do agree on older sets on having some 7s for visual and cost purpopses, I am doing the 75 set and since that set is not that old and 8s and 9s are plentiful and not to cost prohibitive, I am buying those grades. I know I will not have the #1 set, but I do not want anything below 8s.

Stingray

lostdart58

Most of us will never be #1 in our particular set registry. The thrill to me is mostly just COMPLETING the set. (in an acceptable , to me, grade average)

I have somewhat satisfied the MALE EGO thingy by filling in the various TEAM sets from my particular set (72 Topps). In most cases there are only a handfull of these Team sets registered and I have a chance in some cases of actually having the #1 set. (albeit a small insignificant set!).....
............there is no chance they will be displaying any of these sets at the next National!!

DaBigHurt

The sad fact is, most COLLECTORS cannot tell the difference between 7's and 9's. That's just a reality today. Most collectors today are spoiled and pampered collectors with no sense of history of the hobby. Old time collectors collected for the love of the hobby and paid their dues. Today, the collectors have to rely on the TRAINED and CERTIFIED professional graders at PSA to do the grading for them because they lack the fundamentals of an earlier generation of collectors. The collector of today is more concerned with getting tattoos, getting as much bling bling and being a thug than being a collector.

VintageJeff

<< <i>The sad fact is, most COLLECTORS cannot tell the difference between 7's and 9's. That's just a reality today. Most collectors today are spoiled and pampered collectors with no sense of history of the hobby. Old time collectors collected for the love of the hobby and paid their dues. Today, the collectors have to rely on the TRAINED and CERTIFIED professional graders at PSA to do the grading for them because they lack the fundamentals of an earlier generation of collectors. The collector of today is more concerned with getting tattoos, getting as much bling bling and being a thug than being a collector. >>



You got something against tattoos?





Disclaimer this pic is about 6 years old so there is now one more tattoo across my shoulder blades (cracked stone tribal with a 2 headed snake weaving through it) guess I'll be on my way to misgrade my cards now.

SDavid

What I really don't understand is the added premium that psa 10 commons often get for pre-1970 sets. Even though I would never try to complete a graded set, I can at least understand the concept behind building a psa 8 or 9 set. But why shell out big bucks just to have a few joe schmo psa 10's thrown in with it? I assume nobody is actually trying to complete these sets in psa 10.

CleveFanCarpFisher

In other areas of business differentiation creates value....I assume a few 10's will do the trick for most collections.

Also, IMO, in 20 years the 9 and 10 cards will increase in value exponentially relative to the lower grades since the grading company wars have scorched the 6/7/8 battlefield.

RipublicaninMass

I am going for a 55 topps set, and I will never beat out Fogel's set. I would love to be in the top 20 but I don't think that is feasible either. I will just hit 100% and be content. The commons in 8 are way too high, some going for hundreds of dollars, and forget about the stars, they are astromical. I think a nice mix of 6,7,8 will be fine, with eventual upgrade, in many years, to 7 and 8's. I am in NO RUSH!! Eventually, the 7's will be just as tough as some of the 8's, NM vintage raw is disappearing.

Stingray

<< <i>Also, IMO, in 20 years the 9 and 10 cards will increase in value exponentially relative to the lower grades since the grading company wars have scorched the 6/7/8 battlefield. >>



That could be relative though to the year of the set. There might not be that many cards say from the 30s, 40s or 50s that could be graded 9 or 10s, so yes they might go up in value exponentially, but say cards from the 60s, 70s and 80s (especially late 70s and 80s), there is still unopened material and there could be a hoard of 9s and maybe some 10s as more and more gets graded. So there value might not increase as much. That is fine with me, in that I can get higher grades at a cheaper price, I really do not care if there are enough 1975 PSA 9s to go around so everyone can make their set, as long as I can get mine done.

Stingray

2dueces

<< <i>

<< <i>To the naked eye in most cases there is very little if no difference between a 7 and a 9 >>



Sorry but I have a hard time swallowing that >>




Ok, to most nakes eyes. I'm sure the best of the best graders here have submitted cards hoping for 9's and they have come back 8's even 7's. Not everyone can spot 9's everytime, so there must be a very slight difference that is sometimes undetectable. So are these miniscule differences worth the figures paid for them? Or are 5 nice sets in 7's commons, with stars graded 8's and 9' just as nice as 1 set with all 9 commons and the stars graded 8's and 9'?
Let me ask this question. What came first, the chicken or the egg? Did the registry come because it was requested by collectors or did the registry come to collect collectors? Was this an idea to generate hugh, I mean hugh new doors of income for the grading companys, or did collectors request it to see where thier set rates? After all there are only so many star cards to be graded. Who would be sending 10000 commons a month for grading without the registry? Just kicking it around. Out