1965 Topps PSA 10 Perez Rookie back on Ebay
mcholke
Posts: 1,000 ✭✭
Auction link
Seller purchased card a few months ago for $15,099. Listed at $39,999 accepting offers. Will be curious to see if he is able to up purchase price and how fast it might take to get offer in excess of what he paid.
Seller purchased card a few months ago for $15,099. Listed at $39,999 accepting offers. Will be curious to see if he is able to up purchase price and how fast it might take to get offer in excess of what he paid.
Collecting Tony Perez PSA and Rookie Baseball PSA
0
Comments
Steve
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Ditto.
/s/ JackWESQ
///////////////////////////////////////////////
Sure.
Based on the scan, it fails the well-stated "eye-appeal test" that ALL TPGs claim to employ.
"Market Grading" is the single biggest threat to the value of PSA 9s and 10s.
TPGs cannot help themselves; they will follow the acceptance levels set by the collecting/reselling
market. Gradeflation will be the result.
It is not popular to express this sentiment, BUT most of the time when I see folks complaining
about "low grades," I say, "Good for PSA and good for the value of my cards."
Mike
As for what Stevek said ,yes, anything is possible.
Steve
It is very easy to overpay for a one-of-a-kind item since there is no established market.
<< <i>It is not popular to express this sentiment, BUT most of the time when I see folks complaining
about "low grades," I say, "Good for PSA and good for the value of my cards." >>
That's very rational of you, lol. I agree. I generally don't even complain about the grades that I get (unless there is some super obvious reason why it should have graded higher, which hasn't really happened to me yet). The cards should be scrutinized and I'm happy and rational when I receive a card back and I agree with the grade 99% of the time. Obviously there are some overgraded cards that get through (and hopefully this was a specific time period thing and won't happen as much), but you'd see these cards up for sale more than you would undergraded cards, which gives sort of a false impression of the grading standards. Or I'm just tired and want to go home.
ebay i.d. clydecoolidge - Lots of vintage stars and HOFers, raw, condition fully disclosed.
<< <i>Agree that the card does not meet the "eye-appeal" test for being a PSA 10. There was a 1956 Topps PSA 10 Yogi Berra in the most recent Mile High auction that had the same problem....was off-center probably 65/35 or 60/40 R/L.
It is very easy to overpay for a one-of-a-kind item since there is no established market. >>
60-40 centering is allowed under the grading criteria for a PSA 10
True, but if I'm paying 10 money for something it better be all there.
Steve
Excerpt:On the other hand, there are cards that technically fall within the printed PSA Grading Standards that may be prevented from reaching a particular, unqualified grade because the eye-appeal becomes an issue.
The Importance of Eye-Appeal and Subjectivity in Grading
Over the years, more and more collectors have come to understand the basic guidelines behind PSA grading. After grading for well over a decade, PSA grading standards have truly become the official standard for the most valuable cards in the hobby. That being said, there are a host of grading questions that arise and the one basic question that comes up the most has to do with eye-appeal and centering.
While it's true that a large part of grading is objective (locating print defects, staining, surface wrinkles, measuring centering, etc.), the other component of grading is somewhat subjective. The best way to define the subjective element is to do so by posing a question: What will the market accept for this particular issue?
Again, the vast majority of grading is applied with a basic, objective standard but no one can ignore the small (yet sometimes significant) subjective element. This issue will usually arise when centering and/or eye-appeal are in question. For example, while most cards fall clearly within the centering guidelines for a particular grade, some cards fall either just within or just outside the printed centering standards. The key point to remember is that the graders reserve the right, based on the strength or weakness of the eye-appeal, to make a judgment call on the grade of a particular card.
What does this mean exactly?
Well, take this example. Let's say you have a 1955 Topps Sandy Koufax rookie card that is right on the edge of the acceptable guidelines for centering in a particular grade. The 1955 Koufax card has a yellow background that tends to blend with the border of the card. In other words, the contrast isn't great so poor centering may not be much of an eyesore - the borders are not clearly defined. In this case, if the card exhibits extremely strong characteristics in other areas (color, corners, etc.), an exception may be made to allow an otherwise slightly off-center card to fall within an unqualified grade (no OC qualifier). This is a rare occurrence but it does happen.
On the other hand, there are cards that technically fall within the printed PSA Grading Standards that may be prevented from reaching a particular, unqualified grade because the eye-appeal becomes an issue. For example, a 1957 Topps Sandy Koufax card has great contrast between the white borders and the picture because the background is very dark. It is possible that a 1957 Topps Sandy Koufax, one that technically measures for a particular grade - let's say 70/30, may be prevented from reaching that unqualified grade because the market would view that card as off-center - based on eye-appeal issues. Again, this is a rare occurrence but it does happen from time to time when a judgment call has to be made on a card that pushes the limits for centering.
In conclusion, the issues discussed do not apply to the vast majority of cards that filter through the PSA grading process each day but this is an issue that needed some clarification in the marketplace. The bottom line is that there are times when a PSA grader must make a call on a card that falls on the line between two grades and that final determination is made based on experience, eye-appeal and market acceptability.
///////////////////////////////////////
GEM-MT 10: Gem Mint.
A PSA Gem Mint 10 card is a virtually perfect card. Attributes include four perfectly sharp corners, sharp focus and full original gloss. A PSA Gem Mint 10 card must be free of staining of any kind, but an allowance may be made for a slight printing imperfection, if it doesn't impair the overall appeal of the card. The image must be centered on the card within a tolerance not to exceed approximately 55/45 to 60/40 percent on the front, and 75/25 percent on the reverse.
"The best way to define the subjective element is to do so by posing a question: What will the market accept for this particular issue?
The slope is slick. Once the market gains too much influence over the experts,
TPGs will quickly devalue their product/service. Profit will always try to get in the
way of the market being able to "just say no." The card-market needs to stand
firm - which the coin market failed to do - and make it clear that 10s "are special."
Resellers must NOT be allowed to dictate PSA grades. If they need help with wealth
creation, they shoud go to another grader. I want my cards in PSA-slabs BECAUSE
they are "tough graders;" NOT because resellers get rich peddling them.
<< <i>60-40 centering is allowed under the grading criteria for a PSA 10
True, but if I'm paying 10 money for something it better be all there.
Steve >>
I agree 100%
<< <i>I agree, the centering is not even 50-50.
Mike >>
It doesn't have to be. Have you read the PSA specs?
I guess I should have read rest of the thread. Anyway, I agree that if I were to pay big bucks, it has to be a great looking card for the grade. This card is graded accurate as a PSA 10 but not worth $15k.