You are more than welcome to be annoyed by my posts, but I think I bring up valid points for discussion. In this case, you have misunderstood my point, which is that these people are wasting huge amounts of money chasing artifically scarce PSA 10 in a vain effort to achieve the meaningless distinction of being #1 on the Set Registry. If they ever try to sell their PSA 10 sets they'll get hosed because nobody else besides them cares enough about being #1 on the Set Registry to pay that kind of money (a point also made by jmbkb4).
There are huge numbers of people wasting huge amounts of money competing for bragging rights because of the Set Registry. It's a great marketing tool by PSA, but its not good for the hobby, since every dollar that is spent on getting a card graded is a dollar that is not being spent buying actual cards, something which is harming the hobby irreperably by forcing many stores & dealers out of business. I can count the number of card stores in Seattle, where I live, on one hand, and we haven't had a major show here in years.
True collectors, IMHO, shouldn't care what grade their card receives, they should just care that it has good eye appeal. The artificial distinctions that PSA has created by creating three grading levels (PSA 8, 9, & 10) for cards that look virtually identical to the naked eye has done nothing for the hobby except fool people into paying ridiculous amounts of money for PSA 9 & PSA 10 cards.
And for the record, I collect 1977 Topps Mexicans, 1971 Kellogg's, Willie McCovey & Willie Mays cards, and star cellos & racks, and can count the number of graded cards in my collection on one hand.
You have one point to make and I get it pretty clearly. In your mind graded cards are bad for the hobby. Good for you. You've made that exact points on a couple dozen threads. We get it. We disagree, generally. If someone wants to spend $2500 on a Mickey Tettleton card in a plastic slab, that's their prerogative. You can shout from the hills that you don't like it, but in the end you come off as just anothre troll here on the board. Go find a raw card site to post on. You'll probably enjoy it more. Questioning the validity of graded cards in the hobby is a moot point. It might not fit YOUR hobby, but that doesn't mean it is wrong.
Maybe there are people who just want to collect Registry Award Certificates. Good for them. Like I said before, it's not for you to judge.
You are more than welcome to be annoyed by my posts, but I think I bring up valid points for discussion. In this case, you have misunderstood my point, which is that these people are wasting huge amounts of money chasing artifically scarce PSA 10 in a vain effort to achieve the meaningless distinction of being #1 on the Set Registry. If they ever try to sell their PSA 10 sets they'll get hosed because nobody else besides them cares enough about being #1 on the Set Registry to pay that kind of money (a point also made by jmbkb4).
There are huge numbers of people wasting huge amounts of money competing for bragging rights because of the Set Registry. It's a great marketing tool by PSA, but its not good for the hobby, since every dollar that is spent on getting a card graded is a dollar that is not being spent buying actual cards, something which is harming the hobby irreperably by forcing many stores & dealers out of business. I can count the number of card stores in Seattle, where I live, on one hand, and we haven't had a major show here in years.
True collectors, IMHO, shouldn't care what grade their card receives, they should just care that it has good eye appeal. The artificial distinctions that PSA has created by creating three grading levels (PSA 8, 9, & 10) for cards that look virtually identical to the naked eye has done nothing for the hobby except fool people into paying ridiculous amounts of money for PSA 9 & PSA 10 cards.
And for the record, I collect 1977 Topps Mexicans, 1971 Kellogg's, Willie McCovey & Willie Mays cards, and star cellos & racks, and can count the number of graded cards in my collection on one hand. >>
True collectors should care what their card grades--true collectors don't like trimmed and altered cards...
Next MONTH? So he's saying that if he wins, the best-case scenario is that he'll be paying for it two weeks after the auction ends?
Forget blocking him; find out where he lives and go punch him in the nuts. --WalterSobchak 9/12/12
Looking for Al Hrabosky and any OPC Dave Campbells (the ESPN guy)
If you are buying a card to be part of your personal collection, all you should care about is eye appeal. Grades should only matter to people who are de-facto dealers and who care only about how much money they can get when they sell the card. Your point about trimmed and altered cards is certainly valid, but most knowledgable collectors can detect if a card has been trimmed simply by comparing it to another card from the same issue. It would be a very sad day for the hobby indeeed if the only way to be certain that a card was not trimmed or altered was to be forced to send it in for grading.
GumbyFan:
Everything I state is my opinion, no more and no less. If stating my opinions makes other people think I'm a troll simply because I am generally pretty skeptical of the grading industry, that's their problem, not mine. I find this board and the people on it to be very interesting and informative, so I am certainly not going to go post somewhere else just because people on this board disagree with my opinions. I don't have a problem with being unpopular...just with people who have no tolerance for dissenting opinions.
So far, I've yet to see anyone post a really strong counter-argument to anything I've said except to state "each to their own", which certainly is a valid point of view. I don't pretend to think that my opinions are any more valid than anybody else's opinions, but I do think that I make arguments that are worth seriously discussing.
Given that PSA 9 cards generally sell for 4-5x PSA 8 cards, and PSA 10 cards generally sell for 5-10x PSA 9 cards, can you or anybody else provide a cogent argument (without referring to the Set Registry) why people should spend all that extra money buying a PSA 9 or 10 card instead of a PSA 8 card when they will look the virtually identical to the naked eye?
You are right in that someone could tell the difference between a PSA 8 and a PSA 10 if they were studying a card very carefully from a couple of inches away. But most people who collect for fun do not look at cards that closely. For example I display my favorite cards in frames that hang on the wall of my home office. I'm generally looking at them from about two feet away, a distance at which such minute differences in condition are not visible to the naked eye.
You are right in that the market values PSA 10's and PSA 9's higher because of their perceived scarcity, by my point is that this scarcity has been artifically created by the grading industry. Is a PSA 9 really 4-5x nicer looking than a PSA 8? Is a PSA 10 really 5-10x nicer looking than a PSA 9? Of course not! These are artifically created distinctions in condition designed to create the appearance of scarcity.
not neccessarily....how many times do we se folks submit 9's that magically become tens after a few trys?
I say that in SOME cases you cant tell, apparently the grader cant tell. There should be a discernable difference between a 7 and a 9, but if their isnt, who is to blame?
I prefer most of my cards raw, always have and I probably always will, but I dont mind buying plastic to fill in holes in set, but I certainly wont pay a premium for it. Thats just me.
That card is DEFINITELY oc t-b. Not a legit 10. I hope the winner is happy with this flip.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
From the 1,000+ graded cards that I have seen, I think the line between 9's & 10's can be practically impossible to tell, especially after being slabbed. 8's are typically a different story becasue they almost always have a noticeable flaw... either a slightly dinged corner or OC more than 65/35. I'd be willing to say in a blind test, most of us could usually tell the diff between a slabbed 9/10 and 7/8, but not necessarily between a 9 & 10 or a 7 & 8. I think this is because not only are these differences miniscule based PSA's stated grading standards, but they of course also struggle with consistancy. As an example, I got a bunch of 72 Topps baseball that came back as 7's that look better than a lot of 8's I've both seen and had graded. On the flip side, had some come as 8's that I was expecting 7's on (not as many of course). Same thing goes for some 84 Donruss... 9 or 10 is a crap shoot (between the 2) in a lot of instances and that just doesn't seem right given the extreme premiums that a lot of 10's demand.
As far as this battle goes, I don't really have a dog in either fight. I am mostly a seller, so I can say that anything that drives up prices on cards that I have is favorable to me. However, I don't have any refractors or anything post '91 at all, so I am not biased on this particular issue. I will say that I am a big proponant of a free-market system, so in theory, if someone wants to pay $2,500-$6,000 for a card that is less than 15 years old, do I really care? Probably not. Also, I don't really see how that is hurting the hobby. It's still money being pumped into the hobby, so I can't really see why it would make a diff if that cash was spent on a card from the 60's. What you've got to understand is that there are many differnt things that drive people's personal collecting preferences. Maybe they prefer current cards because the players are more familiar to them, but yes, I'm sure a high % of this is driven by the registry. Yes, I agree that a lot of the money spent in this pursuit will probably not be able to be recouped, but that doesn't hurt anyone but the person paying those prices, right?
Also, I don't necessarily agree that the pop of low-pop vintage will just continue to rise and rise. There are a limited supply of these cards out there... I just can't imagine too many more "warehouse or attic finds" coming out of knowhere after so long. Maybe a few, but not enough to materially affect cards from the 50's through mid 70's. Now sure, cards from the 80's forward, I totally agree that the low-pops are likely to increase at a pretty crisp rate in certain circumstances. Not only are there probably a ton of commons out there yet to be graded, but there is also a lot of unopened material on the market. Look at the 86 Topps Nolan Ryan as an example of this. Granted, some cards, even recent ones, will always be tough... like the 86 Topps Football Steve Young (probably the toughest 80's-present card out there in a 10).
The one thing that I think we can all agree on is that PSA has a very bad rep for consistancy... and there is certainly at least the appearance that they give certain dealers preferential treatment, despite their claims to the contrary. Personally, my next goal is to try and score some 10's from low/no-pop 80's commons. However, I'm scared to death that I will experience poor results based on what I've seen out of PSA lately on modern stuff. To me, if you put in a solid, thorough effort to identify possible 10's, you should have at least a decent shot at some, and I'm just not sure that is true right now. I think that's why so many of these 80's sets still have tons of 0-pop 10 commons. Who wants to take the risk of getting a 9, which would basically be unprofitable in most cases? Sure, you could make $20-$100+ for some key 10's, but you need a moderate success rate to make the fiscally feasible.
Jim G All-time favorite athletes: Steve Sax, Steve Garvey, Larry Bird, Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Andre Agassi, Karch Kiraly, Wayne Gretzky, Ichiro Suzuki, Andres Galarraga, Greg Maddux. "Make the world a better place... punch both A-Rods in the face (Alex Rodriguez and Andy Roddick)!"
a PSA 8, psa 9 and psa 10 are not even close when you look at them....is your naked eye half blind?
a psa 10 is virtually perfect, you can see no flaws..
a psa 9 has one corner that is not perfect, or a touch of white showing on the front edge...
a psa 8 is a nice card that has more than 1 corner that is imperfect....
a psa 7 has an obvious flaw, and dinged corner that is very obvious....
but no way can an advanced collector mistake a psa 8 for a 10 like you suggest....
there are far fewer psa 10's then psa 8's, thus the huge price different....
finally, its not artifcial prices, those are REALIZED PRICES that a free market bore out! >>
are you sure about your 9 comment? I've always been told/under the impression that the least little corner imperfection could yield nothing higher than an 8. Personally, I've seen a lot of 9/10's and 7/8's that are very difficult to tell the diff between. Of course, I have only been at this for about 9 month
Jim G All-time favorite athletes: Steve Sax, Steve Garvey, Larry Bird, Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Andre Agassi, Karch Kiraly, Wayne Gretzky, Ichiro Suzuki, Andres Galarraga, Greg Maddux. "Make the world a better place... punch both A-Rods in the face (Alex Rodriguez and Andy Roddick)!"
The thing about it being OC t/b...it is if you are considering the "shaddow" embossing, but it's dead center if you run the edge of the image in the foreground. It will be up to personal preference on this one. While the card would look better with the image shifted north, the front image would actually become OC. Kind of a weird quirk with these kinds of cards I guess.
<< <i>The thing about it being OC t/b...it is if you are considering the "shaddow" embossing, but it's dead center if you run the edge of the image in the foreground. It will be up to personal preference on this one. While the card would look better with the image shifted north, the front image would actually become OC. Kind of a weird quirk with these kinds of cards I guess. >>
good point. But.......with the way PSA 'usually' grades these cards -- this card is OC and an 8 if I send it in.
"The one thing that I think we can all agree on is that PSA has a very bad rep for consistancy... and there is certainly at least the appearance that they give certain dealers preferential treatment, despite their claims to the contrary. Personally, my next goal is to try and score some 10's from low/no-pop 80's commons. However, I'm scared to death that I will experience poor results based on what I've seen out of PSA lately on modern stuff. To me, if you put in a solid, thorough effort to identify possible 10's, you should have at least a decent shot at some, and I'm just not sure that is true right now. I think that's why so many of these 80's sets still have tons of 0-pop 10 commons. Who wants to take the risk of getting a 9, which would basically be unprofitable in most cases? Sure, you could make $20-$100+ for some key 10's, but you need a moderate success rate to make the fiscally feasible."
As they say buyer beware. Take a look at these two subs. Keep in mind all straight form wax packs. The first is the 83 Topps Baseball, a totally just BS sub result, the second the 85 Football arguably one of the hardest of all Modern sets to get 10's, and I can get 7. Talk about inconsistency with Ace's. Does anybody really think that I am that good on one sub to be able to pick out some 10's and on another I can't find the garde with a blindfold on. Gimme a break, this is Inconsistent Grading A++++++. So the bottom line is if you don't get the right Grader you are hosed. I am going to stay away from most 80's stuff from now on beacuse of the inconsistency. Both subs were in the last month. Neil
1 04796291 1983 TOPPS 4 LANCE PARRISH N/A 9 2 04796292 1983 TOPPS 61 JOHNNY BENCH N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements 3 04796293 1983 TOPPS 101 PETE ROSE N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements 4 04796294 1983 TOPPS 146 DON SUTTON N/A 9 5 04796295 1983 TOPPS 163 CAL RIPKEN JR. N/A 9 6 04796296 1983 TOPPS 201 ROD CAREW N/A 8 7 04796297 1983 TOPPS 201 ROD CAREW N/A 9 8 04796298 1983 TOPPS 221 JOE NIEKRO N/A 9 9 04796299 1983 TOPPS 245 STEVE SAX N/A 8 10 04796300 1983 TOPPS 300 MIKE SCHMIDT N/A 8 11 04796301 1983 TOPPS 360 NOLAN RYAN N/A 5 12 04796302 1983 TOPPS 361 NOLAN RYAN N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements 13 04796303 1983 TOPPS 386 ROD CAREW N/A 8 14 04796304 1983 TOPPS 388 GEORGE BRETT N/A 9 15 04796305 1983 TOPPS 390 REGGIE JACKSON N/A 8 16 04796306 1983 TOPPS 397 PETE ROSE N/A 7 17 04796307 1983 TOPPS 399 MIKE SCHMIDT N/A 9 18 04796308 1983 TOPPS 430 KIRK GIBSON N/A 9 19 04796309 1983 TOPPS 463 GAYLORD PERRY N/A 9 20 04796310 1983 TOPPS 464 GAYLORD PERRY N/A 9 21 04796311 1983 TOPPS 501 REGGIE JACKSON N/A 9 22 04796312 1983 TOPPS 550 CARL YASTRZEMSKI N/A 5 23 04796313 1983 TOPPS 551 CARL YASTRZEMSKI N/A 8 24 04796314 1983 TOPPS 580 TOM SEAVER N/A 8 25 04796315 1983 TOPPS 580 TOM SEAVER N/A 8 26 04796316 1983 TOPPS 600 GEORGE BRETT N/A 9 27 04796317 1983 TOPPS 705 VICTORY LEADERS L.HOYT/S.CARLTON 8 28 04796318 1983 TOPPS 715 TONY PEREZ N/A 9 29 04796319 1983 TOPPS 732 DAVE HENDERSON N/A 9 30 04796320 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 118 CHECKLIST 133-264 N/A 9 30 04796321 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 118 CHECKLIST 133-264 N/A 8 31 04796322 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 132 KIRBY PUCKETT N/A 9 32 04796323 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 132 KIRBY PUCKETT N/A 9 33 04796324 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 148 EDDIE MURRAY N/A 8 34 04796325 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 209 JOSE GUZMAN N/A 9 35 04796326 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 225 WILLIE McGEE N/A 8 36 04796327 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 250 CAL RIPKEN N/A 8 37 04796328 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 250 CAL RIPKEN N/A 8 38 04796329 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 300 DARRYL STRAWBERRY N/A 8 38 04796330 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 300 DARRYL STRAWBERRY N/A 8 39 04796331 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 389 JOSE CANSECO N/A 9 40 04796332 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 389 JOSE CANSECO N/A 8 41 04796333 1980 TOPPS 554 ART HOWE N/A 8 42 04796334 1980 TOPPS 644 CHARLIE HOUGH N/A 8 43 04796335 1983 TOPPS 515 GENE TENACE N/A 8 44 04796336 1987 TOPPS ALL-STAR 6 TONY GWYNN GLOSSY SET OF 22 9 45 04796337 1987 TOPPS 375 RON GUIDRY N/A 9 46 04796338 1981 TOPPS 450 DAVE KINGMAN N/A 8 47 04796339 1984 TOPPS 65 KIRK GIBSON N/A 8 48 04796340 1984 TOPPS 408 LOU PINIELLA N/A 9
Date Received: 11/10/2007 Date of Grades Posted: 11/19/2007 Date Shipped: 11/19/2007
1 08257450 1985 TOPPS 2 ERIC DICKERSON RECORD BREAKER 8 2 08257451 1985 TOPPS 6 WALTER PAYTON RECORD BREAKER 8 3 08257452 1985 TOPPS 19 GERALD RIGGS N/A 8 4 08257453 1985 TOPPS 22 BEARS TEAM LEADERS WALTER PAYTON 9 5 08257454 1985 TOPPS 29 WILLIE GAULT N/A 8 6 08257455 1985 TOPPS 30 DAN HAMPTON ALL PRO 10 7 08257456 1985 TOPPS 30 DAN HAMPTON ALL PRO 9 8 08257457 1985 TOPPS 31 JIM McMAHON N/A 8 9 08257458 1985 TOPPS 33 WALTER PAYTON ALL PRO 8 10 08257459 1985 TOPPS 37 COWBOYS TEAM LDRS. TONY DORSETT 9 11 08257460 1985 TOPPS 40 TONY DORSETT N/A 9 12 08257461 1985 TOPPS 41 MICHAEL DOWNS N/A 8 13 08257462 1985 TOPPS 43 TONY HILL N/A 8 14 08257463 1985 TOPPS 46 ED "TOO TALL" JONES N/A 8 15 08257464 1985 TOPPS 46 ED "TOO TALL" JONES N/A 9 16 08257465 1985 TOPPS 54 JEFF CHADWICK N/A 8 17 08257466 1985 TOPPS 61 JAMES JONES N/A 9 18 08257467 1985 TOPPS 63 BILLY SIMS N/A 8 19 08257468 1985 TOPPS 65 BOBBY WATKINS N/A 10 20 08257469 1985 TOPPS 75 JAMES LOFTON N/A 9 21 08257470 1985 TOPPS 75 JAMES LOFTON N/A 9 22 08257471 1985 TOPPS 79 ERIC DICKERSON ALL PRO 9 23 08257472 1985 TOPPS 80 HENRY ELLARD N/A 8 24 08257473 1985 TOPPS 110 GIANTS TEAM LEADERS GIANTS' DEFENSE 9 25 08257474 1985 TOPPS 114 HARRY CARSON N/A 9 26 08257475 1985 TOPPS 130 MIKE HORAN N/A 8 27 08257476 1985 TOPPS 132 RON JAWORSKI N/A 8 28 08257477 1985 TOPPS 146 PAT TILLEY N/A 8 29 08257478 1985 TOPPS 150 DWIGHT CLARK N/A 9 30 08257479 1985 TOPPS 150 DWIGHT CLARK N/A 8 31 08257480 1985 TOPPS 151 ROGER CRAIG N/A 10 32 08257481 1985 TOPPS 153 FRED DEAN N/A 9 33 08257482 1985 TOPPS 156 RONNIE LOTT N/A 9 34 08257483 1985 TOPPS 157 JOE MONTANA N/A 9 35 08257484 1985 TOPPS 157 JOE MONTANA N/A 8 36 08257485 1985 TOPPS 161 FREDDIE SOLOMON N/A 9 37 08257486 1985 TOPPS 181 DARRELL GREEN N/A 9 38 08257487 1985 TOPPS 184 DEXTER MANLEY N/A 8 39 08257488 1985 TOPPS 185 ART MONK ALL PRO 9 40 08257489 1985 TOPPS 190 JOE THEISMANN N/A 9 41 08257490 1985 TOPPS 192 PASSING LEADERS D.MARINO/J.MONTANA 9 42 08257491 1985 TOPPS 213 JAMES BROOKS N/A 8 43 08257492 1985 TOPPS 214 ROSS BROWNER N/A 8 44 08257493 1985 TOPPS 235 BRONCOS TEAM LDRS. J.ELWAY/S.WINDER 8 45 08257494 1985 TOPPS 240 MIKE HARDEN N/A 8 46 08257495 1985 TOPPS 244 RICK KARLIS N/A 10 47 08257496 1985 TOPPS 251 WARREN MOON N/A 9 48 08257497 1985 TOPPS 258 COLTS TEAM LEADERS ART SCHLICHTER 9 49 08257498 1985 TOPPS 280 ART STILL N/A 8 50 08257499 1985 TOPPS 280 ART STILL N/A 9 51 08257500 1985 TOPPS 281 RAIDERS TEAM LDRS. MARCUS ALLEN 8 52 08257501 1985 TOPPS 282 MARCUS ALLEN N/A 8 53 08257502 1985 TOPPS 282 MARCUS ALLEN N/A 9 54 08257503 1985 TOPPS 283 LYLE ALZADO N/A 10 55 08257504 1985 TOPPS 287 TODD CHRISTENSEN N/A 8 56 08257505 1985 TOPPS 288 RAY GUY N/A 8 57 08257506 1985 TOPPS 289 LESTER HAYES N/A 8 58 08257507 1985 TOPPS 293 ROD MARTIN ALL-PRO 9 59 08257508 1985 TOPPS 302 DOUG BETTERS N/A 8 60 08257509 1985 TOPPS 317 REGGIE ROBY ALL PRO 8 61 08257510 1985 TOPPS 319 UWE VON SCHAMANN N/A 8 62 08257511 1985 TOPPS 322 TONY COLLINS N/A 8 63 08257512 1985 TOPPS 327 BRIAN HOLLOWAY N/A 9 64 08257513 1985 TOPPS 329 STANLEY MORGAN N/A 8 65 08257514 1985 TOPPS 330 STEVE NELSON ALL PRO 8 66 08257515 1985 TOPPS 333 MOSI TATUPU N/A 8 67 08257516 1985 TOPPS 334 ANDRE TIPPETT N/A 8 68 08257517 1985 TOPPS 337 MARK GASTINEAU ALL PRO 8 69 08257518 1985 TOPPS 337 MARK GASTINEAU ALL PRO 9 70 08257519 1985 TOPPS 341 JOE KLECKO N/A 9 71 08257520 1985 TOPPS 353 GARY ANDERSON N/A 9 72 08257521 1985 TOPPS 362 DONNIE SHELL N/A 9 73 08257522 1985 TOPPS 366 DWAYNE WOODRUFF N/A 10 74 08257523 1985 TOPPS 366 DWAYNE WOODRUFF N/A 9 75 08257524 1985 TOPPS 389 STEVE LARGENT N/A 10 76 08257525 1985 TOPPS 389 STEVE LARGENT N/A 9 77 08257526 1985 TOPPS 391 DARYL TURNER N/A 8 78 08257527 1985 TOPPS 392 CURT WARNER N/A 8 79 08257528 1985 TOPPS 393 FREDD YOUNG N/A 8 80 08257529 1984 TOPPS STICKERS 222 DAN MARINO N/A 8 81 08257530 1984 TOPPS STICKERS 66 NOLAN RYAN N/A 9 82 08257531 1972 O-PEE-CHEE 343 WILLIE STARGELL N/A 8 83 08257532 1972 O-PEE-CHEE 341 JOE TORRE BOYHOOD PHOTOS 7 84 08257533 1972 O-PEE-CHEE 463 BERNIE CARBO N/A 9 85 08257534 1972 O-PEE-CHEE 411 BOB MONTGOMERY N/A 9 86 08257535 1973 KUNG FU 26 CAINE WITH MOUTH OPEN 8 87 08257536 1973 KUNG FU 39 TWO HANDS N/A
Actually Collect Non Sport, but am just so full of myself I post all over the place !!!!!!!
<< <i>Ending tonight, Tettleton at $2,600 with reserve still not met. >>
They could honestly set the reserve at about $5,000 and it will still sell due to the top few power players in this Set Registry...(you too, Josh, right?!?!)
Interesting read. As a player, I always liked Tettleton. Good power and good on base percentage; great attributes for any hitter especially a catcher. Of course, defensively, he was far from any Johnny Bench.
Any hooo, as fate would have it, I have potentially stumbled upon a small handful of raw 93 refractors. I did not collect these when they came out and this was one of my "dark and dormant" years of collecting (I did not do much collecting from about 1992 through 2000; girls, college, girls, marriage and kids made things busy). Can someone kindly give me a primer course on what to look for on these for grading? That would be a big help should I score this find that I hope can turn into some lucrative profits given the prices on many graded examples.
<< <i>Ending tonight, Tettleton at $2,600 with reserve still not met. >>
They could honestly set the reserve at about $5,000 and it will still sell due to the top few power players in this Set Registry...(you too, Josh, right?!?!) >>
haha!! I had my snipe placed at $2,500. Guess I'm out of the running!!
actually, mark -- I am very interested in this auction for two reasons -- 1) How greedy is the seller (how high is the reserve set) and 2) How badly does JMK or pinhead want the #1 spot?
I actually thought the reserve was set at $2,500 (all her other 1 of 1s has been for that amount), but I was obviously wrong. Probably $3,000 or so.
P.S. After this sells, every PSA 9 Tettleton is going to be cracked out across the country and resubmitted!
<< <i>Interesting read. As a player, I always liked Tettleton. Good power and good on base percentage; great attributes for any hitter especially a catcher. Of course, defensively, he was far from any Johnny Bench.
Any hooo, as fate would have it, I have potentially stumbled upon a small handful of raw 93 refractors. I did not collect these when they came out and this was one of my "dark and dormant" years of collecting (I did not do much collecting from about 1992 through 2000; girls, college, girls, marriage and kids made things busy). Can someone kindly give me a primer course on what to look for on these for grading? That would be a big help should I score this find that I hope can turn into some lucrative profits given the prices on many graded examples.
Thanks all! >>
You probably found a handful of PSA 10s! Anyway, surface scratches and refractor lines (unless really bad) won't detract too much for your overall grade. Centering, as you can see with the Tettleton, is very overrated with the '93 Refractors. Finally, a corner ding or two will net you a PSA 9...
<< <i>Ending tonight, Tettleton at $2,600 with reserve still not met. >>
They could honestly set the reserve at about $5,000 and it will still sell due to the top few power players in this Set Registry...(you too, Josh, right?!?!) >>
haha!! I had my snipe placed at $2,500. Guess I'm out of the running!!
actually, mark -- I am very interested in this auction for two reasons -- 1) How greedy is the seller (how high is the reserve set) and 2) How badly does JMK or pinhead want the #1 spot?
I actually thought the reserve was set at $2,500 (all her other 1 of 1s has been for that amount), but I was obviously wrong. Probably $3,000 or so.
P.S. After this sells, every PSA 9 Tettleton is going to be cracked out across the country and resubmitted! >>
This is like the perfect storm for the seller. Two deep pocketbooks chasing the same card for first place on the Registry. I have a separate question. How come all of the Palmeiros now go for a fortune?
Yes -- definitely the perfect storm on a card worth $100 in PSA 9 holder (which is where it should be based on centering). If you're going to pay big bucks for a PSA 10 card, shouldn't it at least present like a very strong 9 or 10? This looks like a weak 9 or strong 8 to me.
Regarding Palmeiro -- I don't know. I think that one $4,500+ sale made the "perceived value" of the card go up. Or people are now looking to resubmit a nice 9? Little to they know that JMK already has a Palmeiro 10 and the next 10 will sell for less than $1,000.
Nice buys tonight, I guess I got a couple also.....
Mark,
The problem with the Palmeiro's in the 23 month's I have been following this set there has only probably been the one PSA 10 and 2 maybe 3 PSA 9's on Ebay, which is driving up the prices. When noone is selling, then one shows up you have a pretty good demand for it. I got mine in a trade otherwise I still wouldn't own one.
This Tettleton auction is crazy, I'm half tempted to crack both of mine out and take the $5.00 gamble because I think both of mine look better than this one.
-John
-John Stevens Ebay ID: jrconcessi
Collecting 1993 Finest Refractors & All Refractors 1993 - 2001, 1964 Topps Psa 8.5 or Better Soon to be Collecting 1966 Batman Color and all Hall of Famers in all Sports in as High a Grade as I can Afford.
Thanks for the link. I'll stick with my guess of 5600.
I've been putting a set together since January and have 5 cards to get. I have not seen a Jay Bell of any sort come to auction on EBay during that time. 1 Hershiser but the auction ended early. This is the first Tettleton auction I have seen (but in all fairness the one I got was in an Ebay store - graded a 9) - so I think the Tettleton is somewhere in the Top 15 of this set as far as scarcity.
Prices are all over the place. Cut off your right arm for Destrades or Hayes but a card with similar pop #'s like Brady Anderson can be had raw for cheap. Go figure. I think that patience will pay off in the long run - some of these prices on commons will definetly have a steep downward curb once a few appetites have been satisfied.
I think that the 93 Finest Refractors represent the pinnacle set from what had to be the time period where the greatest number of people were involved with collecting baseball cards. Like when you had to get to the card store fast before they ran out of Becketts kind of days. This was definetly the period I was from. I'd imagine there will be more people like me that return to the hobby after they are a little older - making more money and feeling nostalgic. Just how many will determine the value of these cards going forward. I think they are a decent investment as far as cards are concerned but surely this is a hobby pursuit for me. The top dollar for cards like Tettleton in 10 are mainly a product of being top of the heap in the registry, which is a valid pursuit, though may not really reflect the value of the card per se more the value of being tops in this set.
John & Josh-
BTW- On the subject of Palmeiro - the 9 I traded to John was purchased raw for less then $30. The seller had described it as having some sort of defect. I didn't see anything wrong with it and was pretty happy to have it slabbed 9. Same scenario for my Puckett that graded 9 - described in auction as having some sort of defect that wasn't there in my eye or PSA's. But I don't think there is any good reason why Palmeiro should have a premium. My thoughts were that like a lot of the prices in Beckett they have never got around to purging the fallen stars like Palmeiro who once represented a premium as a 3000/500 guy. On that topic why is Beckett so off on their valuation of this set? They are really doing a disservice to the uniformed who would happily sell there Bell, Hershiser or Hayes for $30 according to "book" value.
Always looking for 1993-1999 Baseball Finest Refractors and1994 Football Finest Refractors. saucywombat@hotmail.com
<< <i> Does anybody really think that I am that good on one sub to be able to pick out some 10's and on another I can't find the garde with a blindfold on. >>
Isn't that exactly what your accusing them of?
Looking to have some custom cuts or plain custom cards built? PM me.
First, I agree that this Tettleton is not a 10 due to the centering. If most of us submitted this card, it would almost certainly come back a 9 imo. It's currently at $2,800 and has not met reserve. 8 hours to go so we'll see what happens. To be sure, this is a ton of money for a modern card, but as bad as it seems to most of us, I really don't think whether or not it is a legitimate 10 has any bearing on the auction at this point. Why? Because the set registry is a mathematical calculation and does not factor in eye appeal or the like. Since it's obvious this is a set reg battle, why would either of those guys care whether or not this is a legit 10? As long as they are #1, who is ever even going to remember down the road that this key card is a joke of a 10? And even if a few do remember, I doubt either of these guys would care.
Jim G All-time favorite athletes: Steve Sax, Steve Garvey, Larry Bird, Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Andre Agassi, Karch Kiraly, Wayne Gretzky, Ichiro Suzuki, Andres Galarraga, Greg Maddux. "Make the world a better place... punch both A-Rods in the face (Alex Rodriguez and Andy Roddick)!"
What if the print run of refractors was really 5,000 per player?
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>Is guy serious about selling this card or is he just trying to see how high it would go with some impossible reserve set on this auction?? >>
They know exactly what they're doing. It's going to sell for somewhere in the 3-4k range to one of the top two registry guys. I'm convinced that a 5k reserve would have been met on this auction, but we'll see...
<< <i>What do the top guys have in their sets- 50K? 75K? That's just insane money any way you cut it. >>
I would bet that "pinhead" has probably $100K in his set -- seriously. JMK has less due to trades. #3 vintage corvette has probably $75,000. I have many magnitudes less in my set. All but a few of mine were raw subs, purchased insanely cheap.
<< <i>Is guy serious about selling this card or is he just trying to see how high it would go with some impossible reserve set on this auction?? >>
They know exactly what they're doing. It's going to sell for somewhere in the 3-4k range to one of the top two registry guys. I'm convinced that a 5k reserve would have been met on this auction, but we'll see... >>
Pinhead, I believe, will win the auction. He is a very insecure person and has always paid the most outragoues prices for the cards. JMK is much more sensible.
<< <i>Pinhead, I believe, will win the auction. He is a very insecure person and has always paid the most outragoues prices for the cards. JMK is much more sensible. >>
Weird... so the reserve had to be between $2,800.01 & $2,999.95... a really strange amount to be sure! Geeze, I wonder if "pinhead" thought after that auction... "Cool! I saved over $1,000 on this cuz I would have bid over $4k!"? Anyway, let the crack and resubmit of all the 9's out there begin. Gonna be really interesting to watch the pop reports on this one over the next few months
Jim G All-time favorite athletes: Steve Sax, Steve Garvey, Larry Bird, Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Andre Agassi, Karch Kiraly, Wayne Gretzky, Ichiro Suzuki, Andres Galarraga, Greg Maddux. "Make the world a better place... punch both A-Rods in the face (Alex Rodriguez and Andy Roddick)!"
<< <i>Weird... so the reserve had to be between $2,800.01 & $2,999.95... a really strange amount to be sure! Geeze, I wonder if "pinhead" thought after that auction... "Cool! I saved over $1,000 on this cuz I would have bid over $4k!"? Anyway, let the crack and resubmit of all the 9's out there begin. Gonna be really interesting to watch the pop reports on this one over the next few months >>
Reserve was set at $2,999.95. pinhead would have had to bid that amount or over to win it for that amount.
Comments
<< <i>Almost 900 and reserve still not met. 2500 seems feasible for the reserve at this point. >>
Whether or not the reserve is $2,500 is not up for debate (trust me).
My only question is if it's Higher than $2,500.
You are more than welcome to be annoyed by my posts, but I think I bring up valid points for discussion. In this case, you have misunderstood my point, which is that these people are wasting huge amounts of money chasing artifically scarce PSA 10 in a vain effort to achieve the meaningless distinction of being #1 on the Set Registry. If they ever try to sell their PSA 10 sets they'll get hosed because nobody else besides them cares enough about being #1 on the Set Registry to pay that kind of money (a point also made by jmbkb4).
There are huge numbers of people wasting huge amounts of money competing for bragging rights because of the Set Registry. It's a great marketing tool by PSA, but its not good for the hobby, since every dollar that is spent on getting a card graded is a dollar that is not being spent buying actual cards, something which is harming the hobby irreperably by forcing many stores & dealers out of business. I can count the number of card stores in Seattle, where I live, on one hand, and we haven't had a major show here in years.
True collectors, IMHO, shouldn't care what grade their card receives, they should just care that it has good eye appeal. The artificial distinctions that PSA has created by creating three grading levels (PSA 8, 9, & 10) for cards that look virtually identical to the naked eye has done nothing for the hobby except fool people into paying ridiculous amounts of money for PSA 9 & PSA 10 cards.
And for the record, I collect 1977 Topps Mexicans, 1971 Kellogg's, Willie McCovey & Willie Mays cards, and star cellos & racks, and can count the number of graded cards in my collection on one hand.
You have one point to make and I get it pretty clearly. In your mind graded cards are bad for the hobby. Good for you. You've made that exact points on a couple dozen threads. We get it. We disagree, generally. If someone wants to spend $2500 on a Mickey Tettleton card in a plastic slab, that's their prerogative. You can shout from the hills that you don't like it, but in the end you come off as just anothre troll here on the board. Go find a raw card site to post on. You'll probably enjoy it more. Questioning the validity of graded cards in the hobby is a moot point. It might not fit YOUR hobby, but that doesn't mean it is wrong.
Maybe there are people who just want to collect Registry Award Certificates. Good for them. Like I said before, it's not for you to judge.
11235813, 0
<< <i>GumbyFan,
You are more than welcome to be annoyed by my posts, but I think I bring up valid points for discussion. In this case, you have misunderstood my point, which is that these people are wasting huge amounts of money chasing artifically scarce PSA 10 in a vain effort to achieve the meaningless distinction of being #1 on the Set Registry. If they ever try to sell their PSA 10 sets they'll get hosed because nobody else besides them cares enough about being #1 on the Set Registry to pay that kind of money (a point also made by jmbkb4).
There are huge numbers of people wasting huge amounts of money competing for bragging rights because of the Set Registry. It's a great marketing tool by PSA, but its not good for the hobby, since every dollar that is spent on getting a card graded is a dollar that is not being spent buying actual cards, something which is harming the hobby irreperably by forcing many stores & dealers out of business. I can count the number of card stores in Seattle, where I live, on one hand, and we haven't had a major show here in years.
True collectors, IMHO, shouldn't care what grade their card receives, they should just care that it has good eye appeal. The artificial distinctions that PSA has created by creating three grading levels (PSA 8, 9, & 10) for cards that look virtually identical to the naked eye has done nothing for the hobby except fool people into paying ridiculous amounts of money for PSA 9 & PSA 10 cards.
And for the record, I collect 1977 Topps Mexicans, 1971 Kellogg's, Willie McCovey & Willie Mays cards, and star cellos & racks, and can count the number of graded cards in my collection on one hand. >>
True collectors should care what their card grades--true collectors don't like trimmed and altered cards...
Forget blocking him; find out where he lives and go punch him in the nuts. --WalterSobchak 9/12/12
Looking for Al Hrabosky and any OPC Dave Campbells (the ESPN guy)
If you are buying a card to be part of your personal collection, all you should care about is eye appeal. Grades should only matter to people who are de-facto dealers and who care only about how much money they can get when they sell the card. Your point about trimmed and altered cards is certainly valid, but most knowledgable collectors can detect if a card has been trimmed simply by comparing it to another card from the same issue. It would be a very sad day for the hobby indeeed if the only way to be certain that a card was not trimmed or altered was to be forced to send it in for grading.
GumbyFan:
Everything I state is my opinion, no more and no less. If stating my opinions makes other people think I'm a troll simply because I am generally pretty skeptical of the grading industry, that's their problem, not mine. I find this board and the people on it to be very interesting and informative, so I am certainly not going to go post somewhere else just because people on this board disagree with my opinions. I don't have a problem with being unpopular...just with people who have no tolerance for dissenting opinions.
So far, I've yet to see anyone post a really strong counter-argument to anything I've said except to state "each to their own", which certainly is a valid point of view. I don't pretend to think that my opinions are any more valid than anybody else's opinions, but I do think that I make arguments that are worth seriously discussing.
Given that PSA 9 cards generally sell for 4-5x PSA 8 cards, and PSA 10 cards generally sell for 5-10x PSA 9 cards, can you or anybody else provide a cogent argument (without referring to the Set Registry) why people should spend all that extra money buying a PSA 9 or 10 card instead of a PSA 8 card when they will look the virtually identical to the naked eye?
you have 1 major flaw in your argument.....
a PSA 8, psa 9 and psa 10 are not even close when you look at them....is your naked eye half blind?
a psa 10 is virtually perfect, you can see no flaws..
a psa 9 has one corner that is not perfect, or a touch of white showing on the front edge...
a psa 8 is a nice card that has more than 1 corner that is imperfect....
a psa 7 has an obvious flaw, and dinged corner that is very obvious....
but no way can an advanced collector mistake a psa 8 for a 10 like you suggest....
there are far fewer psa 10's then psa 8's, thus the huge price different....
finally, its not artifcial prices, those are REALIZED PRICES that a free market bore out!
You are right in that someone could tell the difference between a PSA 8 and a PSA 10 if they were studying a card very carefully from a couple of inches away. But most people who collect for fun do not look at cards that closely. For example I display my favorite cards in frames that hang on the wall of my home office. I'm generally looking at them from about two feet away, a distance at which such minute differences in condition are not visible to the naked eye.
You are right in that the market values PSA 10's and PSA 9's higher because of their perceived scarcity, by my point is that this scarcity has been artifically created by the grading industry. Is a PSA 9 really 4-5x nicer looking than a PSA 8? Is a PSA 10 really 5-10x nicer looking than a PSA 9? Of course not! These are artifically created distinctions in condition designed to create the appearance of scarcity.
not neccessarily....how many times do we se folks submit 9's that magically become tens after a few trys?
I say that in SOME cases you cant tell, apparently the grader cant tell. There should be a discernable difference between a 7 and a 9, but if their isnt, who is to blame?
I prefer most of my cards raw, always have and I probably always will, but I dont mind buying plastic to fill in holes in set, but I certainly wont pay a premium for it. Thats just me.
<< <i>That card is DEFINITELY oc t-b. Not a legit 10. I hope the winner is happy with this flip. >>
You're right, but I've seen MUCH worse looking PSA 10 '93 Refractors. Pretty sad.
As far as this battle goes, I don't really have a dog in either fight. I am mostly a seller, so I can say that anything that drives up prices on cards that I have is favorable to me. However, I don't have any refractors or anything post '91 at all, so I am not biased on this particular issue. I will say that I am a big proponant of a free-market system, so in theory, if someone wants to pay $2,500-$6,000 for a card that is less than 15 years old, do I really care? Probably not. Also, I don't really see how that is hurting the hobby. It's still money being pumped into the hobby, so I can't really see why it would make a diff if that cash was spent on a card from the 60's. What you've got to understand is that there are many differnt things that drive people's personal collecting preferences. Maybe they prefer current cards because the players are more familiar to them, but yes, I'm sure a high % of this is driven by the registry. Yes, I agree that a lot of the money spent in this pursuit will probably not be able to be recouped, but that doesn't hurt anyone but the person paying those prices, right?
Also, I don't necessarily agree that the pop of low-pop vintage will just continue to rise and rise. There are a limited supply of these cards out there... I just can't imagine too many more "warehouse or attic finds" coming out of knowhere after so long. Maybe a few, but not enough to materially affect cards from the 50's through mid 70's. Now sure, cards from the 80's forward, I totally agree that the low-pops are likely to increase at a pretty crisp rate in certain circumstances. Not only are there probably a ton of commons out there yet to be graded, but there is also a lot of unopened material on the market. Look at the 86 Topps Nolan Ryan as an example of this. Granted, some cards, even recent ones, will always be tough... like the 86 Topps Football Steve Young (probably the toughest 80's-present card out there in a 10).
The one thing that I think we can all agree on is that PSA has a very bad rep for consistancy... and there is certainly at least the appearance that they give certain dealers preferential treatment, despite their claims to the contrary. Personally, my next goal is to try and score some 10's from low/no-pop 80's commons. However, I'm scared to death that I will experience poor results based on what I've seen out of PSA lately on modern stuff. To me, if you put in a solid, thorough effort to identify possible 10's, you should have at least a decent shot at some, and I'm just not sure that is true right now. I think that's why so many of these 80's sets still have tons of 0-pop 10 commons. Who wants to take the risk of getting a 9, which would basically be unprofitable in most cases? Sure, you could make $20-$100+ for some key 10's, but you need a moderate success rate to make the fiscally feasible.
All-time favorite athletes:
Steve Sax, Steve Garvey, Larry Bird, Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Andre Agassi, Karch Kiraly, Wayne Gretzky, Ichiro Suzuki, Andres Galarraga, Greg Maddux.
"Make the world a better place... punch both A-Rods in the face (Alex Rodriguez and Andy Roddick)!"
<< <i>123456789,
you have 1 major flaw in your argument.....
a PSA 8, psa 9 and psa 10 are not even close when you look at them....is your naked eye half blind?
a psa 10 is virtually perfect, you can see no flaws..
a psa 9 has one corner that is not perfect, or a touch of white showing on the front edge...
a psa 8 is a nice card that has more than 1 corner that is imperfect....
a psa 7 has an obvious flaw, and dinged corner that is very obvious....
but no way can an advanced collector mistake a psa 8 for a 10 like you suggest....
there are far fewer psa 10's then psa 8's, thus the huge price different....
finally, its not artifcial prices, those are REALIZED PRICES that a free market bore out! >>
are you sure about your 9 comment? I've always been told/under the impression that the least little corner imperfection could yield nothing higher than an 8. Personally, I've seen a lot of 9/10's and 7/8's that are very difficult to tell the diff between. Of course, I have only been at this for about 9 month
All-time favorite athletes:
Steve Sax, Steve Garvey, Larry Bird, Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Andre Agassi, Karch Kiraly, Wayne Gretzky, Ichiro Suzuki, Andres Galarraga, Greg Maddux.
"Make the world a better place... punch both A-Rods in the face (Alex Rodriguez and Andy Roddick)!"
THAT"S MR. nameshimselfwithnumbers to you, i got a boggs refractor with a shot at a ten?
<< <i>The thing about it being OC t/b...it is if you are considering the "shaddow" embossing, but it's dead center if you run the edge of the image in the foreground. It will be up to personal preference on this one. While the card would look better with the image shifted north, the front image would actually become OC. Kind of a weird quirk with these kinds of cards I guess. >>
good point. But.......with the way PSA 'usually' grades these cards -- this card is OC and an 8 if I send it in.
"The one thing that I think we can all agree on is that PSA has a very bad rep for consistancy... and there is certainly at least the appearance that they give certain dealers preferential treatment, despite their claims to the contrary. Personally, my next goal is to try and score some 10's from low/no-pop 80's commons. However, I'm scared to death that I will experience poor results based on what I've seen out of PSA lately on modern stuff. To me, if you put in a solid, thorough effort to identify possible 10's, you should have at least a decent shot at some, and I'm just not sure that is true right now. I think that's why so many of these 80's sets still have tons of 0-pop 10 commons. Who wants to take the risk of getting a 9, which would basically be unprofitable in most cases? Sure, you could make $20-$100+ for some key 10's, but you need a moderate success rate to make the fiscally feasible."
As they say buyer beware. Take a look at these two subs. Keep in mind all straight form wax packs. The first is the 83 Topps Baseball, a totally just BS sub result, the second the 85 Football arguably one of the hardest of all Modern sets to get 10's, and I can get 7. Talk about inconsistency with Ace's. Does anybody really think that I am that good on one sub to be able to pick out some 10's and on another I can't find the garde with a blindfold on. Gimme a break, this is Inconsistent Grading A++++++. So the bottom line is if you don't get the right Grader you are hosed. I am going to stay away from most 80's stuff from now on beacuse of the inconsistency. Both subs were in the last month.
Neil
1 04796291 1983 TOPPS 4 LANCE PARRISH N/A 9
2 04796292 1983 TOPPS 61 JOHNNY BENCH N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements
3 04796293 1983 TOPPS 101 PETE ROSE N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements
4 04796294 1983 TOPPS 146 DON SUTTON N/A 9
5 04796295 1983 TOPPS 163 CAL RIPKEN JR. N/A 9
6 04796296 1983 TOPPS 201 ROD CAREW N/A 8
7 04796297 1983 TOPPS 201 ROD CAREW N/A 9
8 04796298 1983 TOPPS 221 JOE NIEKRO N/A 9
9 04796299 1983 TOPPS 245 STEVE SAX N/A 8
10 04796300 1983 TOPPS 300 MIKE SCHMIDT N/A 8
11 04796301 1983 TOPPS 360 NOLAN RYAN N/A 5
12 04796302 1983 TOPPS 361 NOLAN RYAN N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements
13 04796303 1983 TOPPS 386 ROD CAREW N/A 8
14 04796304 1983 TOPPS 388 GEORGE BRETT N/A 9
15 04796305 1983 TOPPS 390 REGGIE JACKSON N/A 8
16 04796306 1983 TOPPS 397 PETE ROSE N/A 7
17 04796307 1983 TOPPS 399 MIKE SCHMIDT N/A 9
18 04796308 1983 TOPPS 430 KIRK GIBSON N/A 9
19 04796309 1983 TOPPS 463 GAYLORD PERRY N/A 9
20 04796310 1983 TOPPS 464 GAYLORD PERRY N/A 9
21 04796311 1983 TOPPS 501 REGGIE JACKSON N/A 9
22 04796312 1983 TOPPS 550 CARL YASTRZEMSKI N/A 5
23 04796313 1983 TOPPS 551 CARL YASTRZEMSKI N/A 8
24 04796314 1983 TOPPS 580 TOM SEAVER N/A 8
25 04796315 1983 TOPPS 580 TOM SEAVER N/A 8
26 04796316 1983 TOPPS 600 GEORGE BRETT N/A 9
27 04796317 1983 TOPPS 705 VICTORY LEADERS L.HOYT/S.CARLTON 8
28 04796318 1983 TOPPS 715 TONY PEREZ N/A 9
29 04796319 1983 TOPPS 732 DAVE HENDERSON N/A 9
30 04796320 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 118 CHECKLIST 133-264 N/A 9
30 04796321 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 118 CHECKLIST 133-264 N/A 8
31 04796322 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 132 KIRBY PUCKETT N/A 9
32 04796323 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 132 KIRBY PUCKETT N/A 9
33 04796324 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 148 EDDIE MURRAY N/A 8
34 04796325 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 209 JOSE GUZMAN N/A 9
35 04796326 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 225 WILLIE McGEE N/A 8
36 04796327 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 250 CAL RIPKEN N/A 8
37 04796328 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 250 CAL RIPKEN N/A 8
38 04796329 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 300 DARRYL STRAWBERRY N/A 8
38 04796330 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 300 DARRYL STRAWBERRY N/A 8
39 04796331 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 389 JOSE CANSECO N/A 9
40 04796332 1989 O-PEE-CHEE 389 JOSE CANSECO N/A 8
41 04796333 1980 TOPPS 554 ART HOWE N/A 8
42 04796334 1980 TOPPS 644 CHARLIE HOUGH N/A 8
43 04796335 1983 TOPPS 515 GENE TENACE N/A 8
44 04796336 1987 TOPPS ALL-STAR 6 TONY GWYNN GLOSSY SET OF 22 9
45 04796337 1987 TOPPS 375 RON GUIDRY N/A 9
46 04796338 1981 TOPPS 450 DAVE KINGMAN N/A 8
47 04796339 1984 TOPPS 65 KIRK GIBSON N/A 8
48 04796340 1984 TOPPS 408 LOU PINIELLA N/A 9
Date Received: 11/10/2007
Date of Grades Posted: 11/19/2007
Date Shipped: 11/19/2007
1 08257450 1985 TOPPS 2 ERIC DICKERSON RECORD BREAKER 8
2 08257451 1985 TOPPS 6 WALTER PAYTON RECORD BREAKER 8
3 08257452 1985 TOPPS 19 GERALD RIGGS N/A 8
4 08257453 1985 TOPPS 22 BEARS TEAM LEADERS WALTER PAYTON 9
5 08257454 1985 TOPPS 29 WILLIE GAULT N/A 8
6 08257455 1985 TOPPS 30 DAN HAMPTON ALL PRO 10
7 08257456 1985 TOPPS 30 DAN HAMPTON ALL PRO 9
8 08257457 1985 TOPPS 31 JIM McMAHON N/A 8
9 08257458 1985 TOPPS 33 WALTER PAYTON ALL PRO 8
10 08257459 1985 TOPPS 37 COWBOYS TEAM LDRS. TONY DORSETT 9
11 08257460 1985 TOPPS 40 TONY DORSETT N/A 9
12 08257461 1985 TOPPS 41 MICHAEL DOWNS N/A 8
13 08257462 1985 TOPPS 43 TONY HILL N/A 8
14 08257463 1985 TOPPS 46 ED "TOO TALL" JONES N/A 8
15 08257464 1985 TOPPS 46 ED "TOO TALL" JONES N/A 9
16 08257465 1985 TOPPS 54 JEFF CHADWICK N/A 8
17 08257466 1985 TOPPS 61 JAMES JONES N/A 9
18 08257467 1985 TOPPS 63 BILLY SIMS N/A 8
19 08257468 1985 TOPPS 65 BOBBY WATKINS N/A 10
20 08257469 1985 TOPPS 75 JAMES LOFTON N/A 9
21 08257470 1985 TOPPS 75 JAMES LOFTON N/A 9
22 08257471 1985 TOPPS 79 ERIC DICKERSON ALL PRO 9
23 08257472 1985 TOPPS 80 HENRY ELLARD N/A 8
24 08257473 1985 TOPPS 110 GIANTS TEAM LEADERS GIANTS' DEFENSE 9
25 08257474 1985 TOPPS 114 HARRY CARSON N/A 9
26 08257475 1985 TOPPS 130 MIKE HORAN N/A 8
27 08257476 1985 TOPPS 132 RON JAWORSKI N/A 8
28 08257477 1985 TOPPS 146 PAT TILLEY N/A 8
29 08257478 1985 TOPPS 150 DWIGHT CLARK N/A 9
30 08257479 1985 TOPPS 150 DWIGHT CLARK N/A 8
31 08257480 1985 TOPPS 151 ROGER CRAIG N/A 10
32 08257481 1985 TOPPS 153 FRED DEAN N/A 9
33 08257482 1985 TOPPS 156 RONNIE LOTT N/A 9
34 08257483 1985 TOPPS 157 JOE MONTANA N/A 9
35 08257484 1985 TOPPS 157 JOE MONTANA N/A 8
36 08257485 1985 TOPPS 161 FREDDIE SOLOMON N/A 9
37 08257486 1985 TOPPS 181 DARRELL GREEN N/A 9
38 08257487 1985 TOPPS 184 DEXTER MANLEY N/A 8
39 08257488 1985 TOPPS 185 ART MONK ALL PRO 9
40 08257489 1985 TOPPS 190 JOE THEISMANN N/A 9
41 08257490 1985 TOPPS 192 PASSING LEADERS D.MARINO/J.MONTANA 9
42 08257491 1985 TOPPS 213 JAMES BROOKS N/A 8
43 08257492 1985 TOPPS 214 ROSS BROWNER N/A 8
44 08257493 1985 TOPPS 235 BRONCOS TEAM LDRS. J.ELWAY/S.WINDER 8
45 08257494 1985 TOPPS 240 MIKE HARDEN N/A 8
46 08257495 1985 TOPPS 244 RICK KARLIS N/A 10
47 08257496 1985 TOPPS 251 WARREN MOON N/A 9
48 08257497 1985 TOPPS 258 COLTS TEAM LEADERS ART SCHLICHTER 9
49 08257498 1985 TOPPS 280 ART STILL N/A 8
50 08257499 1985 TOPPS 280 ART STILL N/A 9
51 08257500 1985 TOPPS 281 RAIDERS TEAM LDRS. MARCUS ALLEN 8
52 08257501 1985 TOPPS 282 MARCUS ALLEN N/A 8
53 08257502 1985 TOPPS 282 MARCUS ALLEN N/A 9
54 08257503 1985 TOPPS 283 LYLE ALZADO N/A 10
55 08257504 1985 TOPPS 287 TODD CHRISTENSEN N/A 8
56 08257505 1985 TOPPS 288 RAY GUY N/A 8
57 08257506 1985 TOPPS 289 LESTER HAYES N/A 8
58 08257507 1985 TOPPS 293 ROD MARTIN ALL-PRO 9
59 08257508 1985 TOPPS 302 DOUG BETTERS N/A 8
60 08257509 1985 TOPPS 317 REGGIE ROBY ALL PRO 8
61 08257510 1985 TOPPS 319 UWE VON SCHAMANN N/A 8
62 08257511 1985 TOPPS 322 TONY COLLINS N/A 8
63 08257512 1985 TOPPS 327 BRIAN HOLLOWAY N/A 9
64 08257513 1985 TOPPS 329 STANLEY MORGAN N/A 8
65 08257514 1985 TOPPS 330 STEVE NELSON ALL PRO 8
66 08257515 1985 TOPPS 333 MOSI TATUPU N/A 8
67 08257516 1985 TOPPS 334 ANDRE TIPPETT N/A 8
68 08257517 1985 TOPPS 337 MARK GASTINEAU ALL PRO 8
69 08257518 1985 TOPPS 337 MARK GASTINEAU ALL PRO 9
70 08257519 1985 TOPPS 341 JOE KLECKO N/A 9
71 08257520 1985 TOPPS 353 GARY ANDERSON N/A 9
72 08257521 1985 TOPPS 362 DONNIE SHELL N/A 9
73 08257522 1985 TOPPS 366 DWAYNE WOODRUFF N/A 10
74 08257523 1985 TOPPS 366 DWAYNE WOODRUFF N/A 9
75 08257524 1985 TOPPS 389 STEVE LARGENT N/A 10
76 08257525 1985 TOPPS 389 STEVE LARGENT N/A 9
77 08257526 1985 TOPPS 391 DARYL TURNER N/A 8
78 08257527 1985 TOPPS 392 CURT WARNER N/A 8
79 08257528 1985 TOPPS 393 FREDD YOUNG N/A 8
80 08257529 1984 TOPPS STICKERS 222 DAN MARINO N/A 8
81 08257530 1984 TOPPS STICKERS 66 NOLAN RYAN N/A 9
82 08257531 1972 O-PEE-CHEE 343 WILLIE STARGELL N/A 8
83 08257532 1972 O-PEE-CHEE 341 JOE TORRE BOYHOOD PHOTOS 7
84 08257533 1972 O-PEE-CHEE 463 BERNIE CARBO N/A 9
85 08257534 1972 O-PEE-CHEE 411 BOB MONTGOMERY N/A 9
86 08257535 1973 KUNG FU 26 CAINE WITH MOUTH OPEN 8
87 08257536 1973 KUNG FU 39 TWO HANDS N/A
<< <i>How many boxes of Froot Loops can you buy with $2600? >>
Which size box?
<< <i>Ending tonight, Tettleton at $2,600 with reserve still not met. >>
They could honestly set the reserve at about $5,000 and it will still sell due to the top few power players in this Set Registry...(you too, Josh, right?!?!)
Any hooo, as fate would have it, I have potentially stumbled upon a small handful of raw 93 refractors. I did not collect these when they came out and this was one of my "dark and dormant" years of collecting (I did not do much collecting from about 1992 through 2000; girls, college, girls, marriage and kids made things busy). Can someone kindly give me a primer course on what to look for on these for grading? That would be a big help should I score this find that I hope can turn into some lucrative profits given the prices on many graded examples.
Thanks all!
<< <i>
<< <i>Ending tonight, Tettleton at $2,600 with reserve still not met. >>
They could honestly set the reserve at about $5,000 and it will still sell due to the top few power players in this Set Registry...(you too, Josh, right?!?!) >>
haha!! I had my snipe placed at $2,500. Guess I'm out of the running!!
actually, mark -- I am very interested in this auction for two reasons -- 1) How greedy is the seller (how high is the reserve set) and 2) How badly does JMK or pinhead want the #1 spot?
I actually thought the reserve was set at $2,500 (all her other 1 of 1s has been for that amount), but I was obviously wrong. Probably $3,000 or so.
P.S. After this sells, every PSA 9 Tettleton is going to be cracked out across the country and resubmitted!
P.P.S. mefer, PM sent
<< <i>Interesting read. As a player, I always liked Tettleton. Good power and good on base percentage; great attributes for any hitter especially a catcher. Of course, defensively, he was far from any Johnny Bench.
Any hooo, as fate would have it, I have potentially stumbled upon a small handful of raw 93 refractors. I did not collect these when they came out and this was one of my "dark and dormant" years of collecting (I did not do much collecting from about 1992 through 2000; girls, college, girls, marriage and kids made things busy). Can someone kindly give me a primer course on what to look for on these for grading? That would be a big help should I score this find that I hope can turn into some lucrative profits given the prices on many graded examples.
Thanks all! >>
You probably found a handful of PSA 10s! Anyway, surface scratches and refractor lines (unless really bad) won't detract too much for your overall grade. Centering, as you can see with the Tettleton, is very overrated with the '93 Refractors. Finally, a corner ding or two will net you a PSA 9...
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Ending tonight, Tettleton at $2,600 with reserve still not met. >>
They could honestly set the reserve at about $5,000 and it will still sell due to the top few power players in this Set Registry...(you too, Josh, right?!?!) >>
haha!! I had my snipe placed at $2,500. Guess I'm out of the running!!
actually, mark -- I am very interested in this auction for two reasons -- 1) How greedy is the seller (how high is the reserve set) and 2) How badly does JMK or pinhead want the #1 spot?
I actually thought the reserve was set at $2,500 (all her other 1 of 1s has been for that amount), but I was obviously wrong. Probably $3,000 or so.
P.S. After this sells, every PSA 9 Tettleton is going to be cracked out across the country and resubmitted! >>
This is like the perfect storm for the seller. Two deep pocketbooks chasing the same card for first place on the Registry. I have a separate question. How come all of the Palmeiros now go for a fortune?
<< <i>How many boxes of Froot Loops can you buy with $2600? >>
about 650 or so... possibly more if they are on sale!
Yes -- definitely the perfect storm on a card worth $100 in PSA 9 holder (which is where it should be based on centering). If you're going to pay big bucks for a PSA 10 card, shouldn't it at least present like a very strong 9 or 10? This looks like a weak 9 or strong 8 to me.
Regarding Palmeiro -- I don't know. I think that one $4,500+ sale made the "perceived value" of the card go up. Or people are now looking to resubmit a nice 9? Little to they know that JMK already has a Palmeiro 10 and the next 10 will sell for less than $1,000.
Nice buys tonight, I guess I got a couple also.....
Mark,
The problem with the Palmeiro's in the 23 month's I have been following this set there has only probably been the one PSA 10 and 2 maybe 3 PSA 9's on Ebay, which is driving up the prices. When noone is selling, then one shows up you have a pretty good demand for it. I got mine in a trade otherwise I still wouldn't own one.
This Tettleton auction is crazy, I'm half tempted to crack both of mine out and take the $5.00 gamble because I think both of mine look better than this one.
-John
Ebay ID: jrconcessi
Collecting 1993 Finest Refractors & All Refractors 1993 - 2001, 1964 Topps Psa 8.5 or Better
Soon to be Collecting 1966 Batman Color and all Hall of Famers in all Sports in as High a Grade as I can Afford.
Thanks for the link. I'll stick with my guess of 5600.
I've been putting a set together since January and have 5 cards to get. I have not seen a Jay Bell of any sort come to auction on EBay during that time. 1 Hershiser but the auction ended early. This is the first Tettleton auction I have seen (but in all fairness the one I got was in an Ebay store - graded a 9) - so I think the Tettleton is somewhere in the Top 15 of this set as far as scarcity.
Prices are all over the place. Cut off your right arm for Destrades or Hayes but a card with similar pop #'s like Brady Anderson can be had raw for cheap. Go figure. I think that patience will pay off in the long run - some of these prices on commons will definetly have a steep downward curb once a few appetites have been satisfied.
I think that the 93 Finest Refractors represent the pinnacle set from what had to be the time period where the greatest number of people were involved with collecting baseball cards. Like when you had to get to the card store fast before they ran out of Becketts kind of days. This was definetly the period I was from. I'd imagine there will be more people like me that return to the hobby after they are a little older - making more money and feeling nostalgic. Just how many will determine the value of these cards going forward. I think they are a decent investment as far as cards are concerned but surely this is a hobby pursuit for me. The top dollar for cards like Tettleton in 10 are mainly a product of being top of the heap in the registry, which is a valid pursuit, though may not really reflect the value of the card per se more the value of being tops in this set.
John & Josh-
BTW- On the subject of Palmeiro - the 9 I traded to John was purchased raw for less then $30. The seller had described it as having some sort of defect. I didn't see anything wrong with it and was pretty happy to have it slabbed 9. Same scenario for my Puckett that graded 9 - described in auction as having some sort of defect that wasn't there in my eye or PSA's. But I don't think there is any good reason why Palmeiro should have a premium. My thoughts were that like a lot of the prices in Beckett they have never got around to purging the fallen stars like Palmeiro who once represented a premium as a 3000/500 guy. On that topic why is Beckett so off on their valuation of this set? They are really doing a disservice to the uniformed who would happily sell there Bell, Hershiser or Hayes for $30 according to "book" value.
saucywombat@hotmail.com
1996 Select Certified Mirror Gold Ozzie Smith
2006 Bowman Chrome Orange Refractor Chris Carpenter
<< <i> Does anybody really think that I am that good on one sub to be able to pick out some 10's and on another I can't find the garde with a blindfold on.
>>
Isn't that exactly what your accusing them of?
Commissions
Check out my Facebook page
All-time favorite athletes:
Steve Sax, Steve Garvey, Larry Bird, Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Andre Agassi, Karch Kiraly, Wayne Gretzky, Ichiro Suzuki, Andres Galarraga, Greg Maddux.
"Make the world a better place... punch both A-Rods in the face (Alex Rodriguez and Andy Roddick)!"
<< <i>Is guy serious about selling this card or is he just trying to see how high it would go with some impossible reserve set on this auction?? >>
They know exactly what they're doing. It's going to sell for somewhere in the 3-4k range to one of the top two registry guys. I'm convinced that a 5k reserve would have been met on this auction, but we'll see...
<< <i>What if the print run of refractors was really 5,000 per player? >>
The world might explode
Ripken in the Minors * Ripken in the Minors Facebook Page
<< <i>What do the top guys have in their sets- 50K? 75K? That's just insane money any way you cut it. >>
I would bet that "pinhead" has probably $100K in his set -- seriously. JMK has less due to trades. #3 vintage corvette has probably $75,000. I have many magnitudes less in my set. All but a few of mine were raw subs, purchased insanely cheap.
<< <i>
<< <i>Is guy serious about selling this card or is he just trying to see how high it would go with some impossible reserve set on this auction?? >>
They know exactly what they're doing. It's going to sell for somewhere in the 3-4k range to one of the top two registry guys. I'm convinced that a 5k reserve would have been met on this auction, but we'll see... >>
Pinhead, I believe, will win the auction. He is a very insecure person and has always paid the most outragoues prices for the cards. JMK is much more sensible.
We'll see if I'm right.
Steve
<< <i>The maris/cepeda card is looking a lil better imo after seeing this.
Steve >>
haha!!
but not much better, huh?
Something to tell the grandkids about...
<< <i>Pinhead, I believe, will win the auction. He is a very insecure person and has always paid the most outragoues prices for the cards. JMK is much more sensible. >>
You were right.
Sweet Morsels Toffee and Chocolates
All-time favorite athletes:
Steve Sax, Steve Garvey, Larry Bird, Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Andre Agassi, Karch Kiraly, Wayne Gretzky, Ichiro Suzuki, Andres Galarraga, Greg Maddux.
"Make the world a better place... punch both A-Rods in the face (Alex Rodriguez and Andy Roddick)!"
<< <i>Weird... so the reserve had to be between $2,800.01 & $2,999.95... a really strange amount to be sure! Geeze, I wonder if "pinhead" thought after that auction... "Cool! I saved over $1,000 on this cuz I would have bid over $4k!"? Anyway, let the crack and resubmit of all the 9's out there begin. Gonna be really interesting to watch the pop reports on this one over the next few months
Reserve was set at $2,999.95. pinhead would have had to bid that amount or over to win it for that amount.
Not a bad profit for the seller, eh?