Email from Cosetta Robbins about Registry

bighurt2000

Received this today and want to know what you guys think. I am a little confused about what they are saying about
currently allow for multiple combinations of stickers/stamps/panels to be added as separate line items. Let me know
if you understand what they are saying and break it down for me.

Thanks James


Cosetta Robbins
show details 9:30 AM (2 hours ago) Reply



Dear Set Registry Member,

I am contacting you because you have a master player set registered in the PSA Set Registry. Currently, the master player sets will allow for multiple combinations of stickers/stamps/panels to be added as separate line items. We are polling to see if the majority would prefer that these items become one line item as either/or. In other words, the sticker/stamp/panel for a specific company & date would be listed in one slot and a member could add any combination to fill that slot, provided the player of the set you are participating in, is listed on the item.

We would like to get your opinion on this matter. Please vote for one of the following options:

1) Continue to allow and require multiple combinations and keep the master sets as they are
2) Remove duplicate stickers/stamps/panels for each company/year and make these items either/or in one slot for that company/year
3) No opinion

Your vote is important. I look forward to hearing from you.


Thank you,
Cosetta Robbins
Assistant Set Registry Manager
Collectors Universe Inc.
(800) 325-1121 ext #148
(949) 833-7660 fax

mike1297

I know because my self and another Pete Rose master set collector were just talking about this. There are cards, mostly stickers that came out originally attached as 2 or 4 or 6 or 8 but for the most part they were separated and only the Pete Rose card was part of the master set. If you look now you will see the Pete Rose card still there, but now you have to also collect the Rose card and the sticker that was originally next to it still attached, or to the right, or the two stickers still attached to the rose card above it, and as you can see it could go on and on. It's getting a bit ridiculous.
Here’s an example:
1983 ALL-STAR GM.PROG. PETE ROSE INSERTS-HAND CUT
1983 ALL-STAR GAME PROGRAM INSERT-HAND CUT CHRIS CHAMBLISS/DAN DRIESSEN PETE ROSE/JASON
THOMPSON
1983 ALL-STAR GAME PROGRAM INSERT-HAND CUT J.THOMPSON/P.ROSE
1983 ALL-STAR GAME PROGRAM INSERT-HAND CUT JASON THOMPSON/PETE ROSE JOE MORGAN/RON OESTER

mikeschmidt

I voted for #2, and this very issue has made the Registry profoundly unfun for me.

[Former winner of Player Set of the Year award]

halosfan

I voted for option 2 as well. I wish they would have gone a step further and put it to a vote to do away with the other variation that bugs me: Cards with and without the protective coating. It is silly to have to get 2 cards -- one with the peel off coating removed and one with it still on.

mariotown

The fact that they grade all these variations is just a pathetic money grab in my opinion. I say grade the individual and the sheet if possible but not every stinkin' variation you could possibly cut the thing into.

Kevin

SDSportsFan

I also voted for #2. That's one of the things that's bugged me. In my Kellen Winslow master set for instance, I currently need three different examples of his 1988 Topps sticker...one where he's paired with Richard Dent, one with Michael Downs and one more with Anthony Carter. I have the one with Richard Dent and to me, that should be enough.


Steve

johnny1976

Voted 2 as well. I think this really got out of hand with all the different ways you can cut up an all star program,stamps,panels for a master set. I just want a single picture of the player I am collecting.

HAMMERFAN44

I voted #2 with authority...agreed the proliferation of stamp/panel combos is getting out of hand.

pjray55

I am not a fan of all the stamp panels but I do like the Hostess panels; is that an entirely different matter or if you had a hand cut single from hostess and a full panel would they then combine into a single line item?

SDSportsFan

<< <i>I am not a fan of all the stamp panels but I do like the Hostess panels; is that an entirely different matter or if you had a hand cut single from hostess and a full panel would they then combine into a single line item? >>




To me, the Hostess cards/panels should be the same way; either/or.

The Registry also has this problem with the 1969 Topps Football stamps. Some master sets require both the single stamp and the full 4-stamp-panel. Again, it should be either/or.

As long as you have the card of the player represented in the Registry set you're collecting, that should be what counts.


Steve

NickM

I'd probably go with #2 because of the problem with cutting a sheet into different groupings, but in the cases where stamps or stickers came 2 to a panel and a player could appear with a few other players as the choice next to him, requiring all the different panels makes sense for a master set. Now if a player could appear with any other player next to him, then it makes more sense to have just one such panel required.

For the 4-in-1s, I would either not include the separated parts at all or make that an either-or combination for a Master Set - otherwise people would have to take apart cards in order to complete the set - imagine making the separated Bird and Magic cards from their '80-'81 Topps rookie card requirements for their sets!

Nick

55in88

While I tend to agree with option #2, are we also talking about making one line for 58 Hires with or without tabs, 60 Armour coins with space between or condensed, and variations in color (coins)? 68 Bazooka with period after or without ? These are all from my Drysdale Master set, and the aforementioned 61 and 62 stamp panels have two
varieties each year as well as a single stamp. I think some clarification is necessary, and I am sure my examples are not the only others.

Doug

mcadams

I was about to start a new thread on this issue, so thanks guys. #2 is clearly the way to go here. I am so glad Cosetta and PSA are finally addressing this. I emailed custy service about a year ago when someone started registering different stamp variations from early 80's all star game programs into the Murphy master set list. It is completely retarded to think that master set collectors should have to find not only their player's stamp, but them "attached" to various other players around them. With an all-star game program, there are literally hundreds of different ways to cut the stamps on a page with all the squares and rectangles (God, this gives me a headache even typing it) and I'm sure some a-hole would keep submitting different combinations just to ensure that the #1 set never got to 100%. If you don't vote for #2, that potential madness is exactly where we're headed...

Some panels (like 86 Dorman's Cheese) are often seen together or apart. In fact, its clear from the design of the panel that its intended use can be either together or apart. Cosetta's email clearly states that in master player sets, you can choose whether you want your player alone or your player in some other variation, but you wouldn't be required to get both. This works fine for me.

Boopotts

I'm the 'inventor' of the All Star program quad panel, and even I would lean towards option two.

calaban7

I replied back with #2.

cougar701

There has been a lot of crazy stuff out there for literaly over a century, think about that...more then 100 years of cards and images of players on an some item or another. With respect to all types of collectors and for what flips one person or another's lid can be quite different.

Point is, PSA is a relatively new concept to collecting in itself and they have done well for only being around a fraction of that time.

They are locked in a long long journey to get things categorized to what makes the most sense and what we saw from them 10 years ago is different then what we see today and will obviously be different then 10 years from now.

I'm glad they have the energy and direction to be making the effort to put things in better perceptive across this huge endeavor of all sports/non-sports cards and collecting in general.

Here's to progress!

mcholke

I voted #2 as well. Sure seems that is direction of the group. Good to see.

Trevmo

#2 all the way. I'm with the group with the decision on getting rid of all those slots for one persons card. All star game program, scratch offs, etc... As long as you have the card one way or another, it should fill the slot.

---------------------------------------------------

Collecting Ozzie Smith PSA 10's and 1949 Bowman PSA 5's

jackstraw

I may be in the minority but I voted #1. It doesn't bother me one bit what somebody else collects.
It doesn't bother me one bit that I will never complete the player sets I work on. I would never
in my life send in or buy a Sportsflic or a Star card so count me out of completion but if you
want to more power of you. I would never look at a team card and say there is Griffey
so I have to have it but if you want to more power to you.

mariotown

Basically what has happened here is that the size and variety of the PSA holders has dictated a whole new way of collecting certain cards. That seems crazy to me. Just because PSA has created a holder that fits a 4-panel, 6-panel, or whatever version of something I already have as a single card shouldn't make it something required to complete the Master set. People would not be collecting these things if PSA didn't have the holders to fit them. I think PSA should have full panels and single cards in the Master set and stop at that. I guess that is sort of a hybrid #2.

Kevin

Robby

Voted for #2 as well ! In regards to Hostess Panels and Topps Stamps ( and Kellogg's Panels , which no one has mentioned yet ) , I'm undecided on weather we should be making some exceptions for one and not the other ?
Robbie

P.S. ........ Other examples ....... Post Cereal hand-cut and perforated .......................Kraft Cheese two Card Panels........1971 and 1981 Topps Scratch offs ..... etc.

tunahead08

I voted 2, but this was the email I sent back:

"With the choices given, I would vote 2.



But another option would be to allow only 2 copies of the panels/stickers. 1 would be just the single player cut out, and 2 would be the entire panel as it was offered, if the panel is too large to be holdered, than just the single card is allowed. What I mean by this, is the Drake's panels that were 2-3 cards depending on year would be added as the single player, and then the whole panel, but thinks like the 80's All-Star Program inserts that are around 30 players, would only be allowed as single players, as the full sheet is too large. This would eliminate all the different cut variations that people are trying to add lately."

jeffcbay

I like when they allow one or the other for that particular slot, for example:

1983 TOPPS STICKERS CAL RIPKEN JR. #26 or #315
1984 FLEER STICKERS CAL RIPKEN JR. #15 or #29
1984 TOPPS STICKERS CAL RIPKEN JR. #197 or #204
1991 STAR DIAMOND SER. CAL RIPKEN JR. #28 - #36
1993-00 BLEACHERS 23KT G. CAL RIPKEN JR. #37 - #44
1994 U.S. PLAYING CARD CAL RIPKEN JR. BALT.ORIOLES 1H or 9C
1999 TOPPS TEK CAL RIPKEN JR. #25A or 25B
2001 FLEER RIPKEN COMMEMORATIVE CAL RIPKEN JR. #1 - #60

I realize my example shows two or more DIFFERENT cards for the same slot, but I think PSA could use this rule of thumb for the SAME cards that are simply cut in different combinations.

mikeschmidt

I'm much in favour of a simplistic approach, which is why I voted for #2. To Guy's point, I applaud his bravery for stepping up and saying he invented the All-Star Quad Panels and thinks they are silly [and all the permutations of such].

In an ideal world, I think there should be some premium for the harder version, if applicable. e.g. a Drake's single is worth a certain weighting, but a Drake's panel in the same grade provides a bonus or increased weighting, since it encourages the original form and is more difficult to find in top grade.

M

mariotown

<< <i>I like when they allow one or the other for that particular slot, for example:

1983 TOPPS STICKERS CAL RIPKEN JR. #26 or #315
1984 FLEER STICKERS CAL RIPKEN JR. #15 or #29
1984 TOPPS STICKERS CAL RIPKEN JR. #197 or #204
1991 STAR DIAMOND SER. CAL RIPKEN JR. #28 - #36
1993-00 BLEACHERS 23KT G. CAL RIPKEN JR. #37 - #44
1994 U.S. PLAYING CARD CAL RIPKEN JR. BALT.ORIOLES 1H or 9C
1999 TOPPS TEK CAL RIPKEN JR. #25A or 25B
2001 FLEER RIPKEN COMMEMORATIVE CAL RIPKEN JR. #1 - #60

I realize my example shows two or more DIFFERENT cards for the same slot, but I think PSA could use this rule of thumb for the SAME cards that are simply cut in different combinations. >>



In my opinion, this approach seems okay for Basic sets but not the Master set. Everything that was manufactured should be in the Master set. The weird variations created by collectors do not count. Only the cards as singles or as they were originally issued in panels should be allowed. I even think PSA should go a step further and allow all Topps Tek variations to be included since they are all technically different cards (i.e. 25-1, 25-2, 25-3, etc.). But PSA doesn't even recognize them as different, which I think is wrong.

Kevin

baseballfan

i voted for #2 it getting to hard to keep up with a player set when your not even collecting cards anymore, you have to go get stickers and other stuff because someone got one graded and added it to the set.

just my .02

K

I also voted #2. Another aspect other than the 83 Fleer Stamps and 82-84 All Star Program cards would be the 88 (or was it 89?) Topps / OPC stickers that seem to have a never ending list of variations.

mikeschmidt

<< <i>I also voted #2. Another aspect other than the 83 Fleer Stamps and 82-84 All Star Program cards would be the 88 (or was it 89?) Topps / OPC stickers that seem to have a never ending list of variations. >>



Having busted boxes and boxes of the product, and knowing friends/dealers that have busted cases of such -- I can confirm, authoritatively, that there are a defined number of variations. That said, it is a ridiculous number of such.

1988 Topps Stickercards - Mike Schmidt [two different stickers, one stickercard]: Twenty-four total variations
1988 OPC Stickercards - Mike Schmidt [two different stickers, one stickercard]: Twelve total variations

Trevmo

I agree with the option for bonuses if you have the full or complete panel or varieties. I think it shouldn't be part of the set but it could be worth one bonus point or something along those lines. For example, collector #1 could have the entire player set complete with a GPA of 8.5 and none of the bonus cards. On the other hand, collector #2 could have the set complete with a GPA of 8.40 but with the bonus points he would be over the 8.5 mark for top spot. I think this would be somewhat fair because collector #2 has more cards from that player, especially the hard to find ones. Just my opinion, and that's what this poll is all about, opinions. Everyone has pretty good points and I'm waiting to see where this ends up.

Frozencaribou

From a vintage hockey collecting perspective, I would be very happy if option #2 were chosen.

I find it extremely stupid that I'm expected not only to have the 1969-70 OPC 4 in 1 card panel intact, but also the individual 4 in 1 sticker. It looks so silly to see a 4 in 1 individual card in a psa holder, and I will not buy it out of principle. I am sure some of you out there who collect 4 in 1 Topps baseball cards can appreciate this.

The other silly thing is that PSA won't grade punched out 1972-73 OPC team crests or player crests, but somehow it's okay to submit punched out 69 opc 4 in 1's.

-Nathanael

Aaronman

I voted for number 2 as well but sent a note in looking for 2 registry entries per issue.

1.) The individual card
2.) The entire original panel

As a Hank Aaron collector this would work well for the 61, 62, 69 & 74 Topps stamps, 61-63 Post Cereal, 69 Nabisco, 69 & 72 Milton Bradley, Bazooka, Hostess ....

I'm not sure if my suggestion works well with the more modern players/sets. As a collector, I like having a 76 Hostess Aaron single and the 3 card panel in the master.

There have been several weird Aaron cards added lately (in the last year). Many are the different permutations of the above panels but they also added a folded and unfolded version of the 62 Baseball bucks. That seems very odd to me.

Doug

buildingcal

i voted for 2 , seems to me a lot of people did

mariotown

Hey I discovered a new variation!



Notice the missing bottom corner. Should PSA allow that?

I think this pretty much says it all about how stupid this is. And the crazy thing is, I bet PSA would grade it!

TheVon

I haven't voted yet, but my inclination was to vote #2. My only hesitation is that I think it would be a shame to lose out on some of the common sense panels that others have mentioned. In particular, I think the panels that were part of boxes like the Hostess and Drake's panels should still be part of Master Sets. To me, that's part of the fun of collecting a Master Set. I also like the box bottom panels and I think those should still be included in Master sets. I am intrigued by the idea of having bonus points for these panels instead though.

InsaneBain

I think PSA should allow only complete panels and the single player from the panel for the registry. These panel variations are getting out of hand. Next someone will start cutting variations out of those 100 card sheets topps used to put out. ENOUGH OF THE PANEL VARIATIONS! You guessed it I VOTED OPTION #2

Publius

I voted #1, but Im beginning to regret my choice.

My reasoning was, the master set should be just that, every stamp, sticker, cut panel, coin, bubble gum wrapper, phone card, magnet and card you can come up with that has to do with that player. I think its kind of cool to see the weirdo variations of collectibles for players that exist. That being said, I only collect a few more modern players, so you dont run into weird variations, just weird cards. Jerry Rice master set is up to almost 1000 cards, it was just that period where every one who was anyone was cranking out a card, a coin or a bubble gum wrapper of him. I got an At&T card from Lawnmowerman with Rice, had it graded and added.

I could see how it would be frustrating to get weird variations of some things, but if you dont like the way the master set is going, stop collecting it and only collect the basic set.

Hankfan44

I am new to the message board, but have been in the registry for a couple of years. I am working on a Hank Aaron master set myself, and I have been conflicted on this very issue since joining the registry. While I feel that any/all items (documented of course) of a particular player should be included in the master set, I don't like where the current format is going. For this reason, I too, voted for option #2, but also included a note about keeping a slot for original panels. Don't get me wrong, I am one who thinks collecting is a very individual endeaver, and to each his own, but in this situation we need to keep some kind of limits. If someone wants to collect every possible variation of a stamp or panel, go for it. Just don't expect the majority to do the same. I agree with some of the earlier posts, PSA has done a great job with the registry, and is keeping up the good work by bringing this issue to a vote.


Doug,

I don't agree with everything about the Aaron master set, but I understand the reasoning behind most of the slots. However, I too am very perplexed over the '62 Bucks unfolded slot. I have been scratching my head ever since it was added. Most, if not all, of the Topps Bucks were folded, and you can either see the fold or not. I have had 3 different examples, and couldn't see the fold on any of the three, but none were graded as unfolded???? Guess I need to add that to my submission form next time I get one.

Anyway, that's enough for now. I am interested to see what becomes of the poll.

BlackberryHill

I voted for #2. I have been lobbying PSA for this change for some time. In my opinion, the only people that panels and strips benefit are the ones cutting, grading and selling them at ridiculous prices. They currently have the edge on collectors who don't want to miss out on having the next item that will be added to their set. That will soon change
if # 2 becomes the new policy. My guess is that the only people not voting for #2 are the collectors who paid to high a price on EBAY for panels and strips that simply were overpriced in the "frenzy" to be the first to have the next set addition

firstbase23

I voted #1 because that is the reason for a master set, to get all of the variations not allowed in the basic set. I don't always agree with what is being added( especially the all-star programs) but I believe that is the nature of the beast. That is just my opinion.

qualitycards

I voted #2, it seemed the most sense of the 3 choices

InsaneBain

Right on Blackberry Hill. It is simply the people who make the panel variations and the people who have paid crazy prices for them that want to keep them on the registry. i collect Pete Rose and did alot of trading with the owner of the #2 set and now he wont talk to me because I called and e-mailed psa over this issue several times. What a baby, is this junior high or something? It seems from the thread that 95% agrees with me. The guy with the number set has spent alot on the panel variations. i have noticed him buying them off ebay at one point for a bill each. i emailed him about it and he says he uses his welfare checks to buy these! At the rate he is going he will be on welfare for blowing his money on stupid panels!

HITKING

I get a charge out of people who are worried more about what the other PSA Registry Set guys are doing rather than focusing on their own issues! For the record I happen to own the #1 Pete Rose Master Set and I am indifferent as to what PSA does with these panels. Let the democratic voting process determine the outcome for the good of the PSA Registry. I will continue to collect the panels even if they are no longer included on the registry. My objective is to have the finest possible collection of Pete Rose cards independent of the registry.

So Tim and Guy....Keep cutting up those All-Star programs and opening those sticker & stamp boxes. I will buy the Pete Rose PSA 10 panels from you. That is as long as my welfare checks continue to arrive as reported by InsainBain. But I do not think I will have any problem with this as long as the Obama remains in the White House.

Insainbain...Do you think I can get a government subsidy since I am putting at least two people to work cutting up these All-Star programs and stamps & sticker panels? They may be the only two jobs that have been added to the economy in some time. Food for thought!

InsaneBain

You make a good point ole boy! I would try to find out what obama thinks about you but he is to busy tryn to screw up my legitimate insurance. Hey if these panels are removed from the registry you could go to Washington and try and get a "bail out"! Theres you some food for thought!

BlackberryHill

I am new to the Message Board. In fact yesterday was the first time I posted a message. But, I am personally "passionate" about this issue, notwithstanding what others may think or what opinions other may have. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, if PSA is true to their word they will go by the MAJORITY VOTE. I hope that for no other reason panels are eliminated because it simply doesn't make sense to expect collectors to purchase multiple variations of the same card, sticker or panel that has been "cut" just to create a new unique version of the same.

MJH

I am a CARD COLLECTOR and a COIN COLLECTOR,

In the PCGS sets they have coin SETS WITH MAJOR VARIETIES
and a COMPLETE SET WITH ALL VARIETIES.
Why can't PSA make sets similar to the PCGS sets.

For the PSA SETS you would have MASTER SET WITH MAJOR VARIETIES
which would include one of the stamps/insert panels of your choice.

And a COMPLETE MASTER SET WITH ALL VARIETIES,
which would include all the stamp/insert panels.

JUST AN IDEA !!!
THIS MIGHT MAKE BOTH SIDES HAPPY !!!


mark

smtjoy

I voted #2 . I do think they need to use some comon sense. I collect Clementes and I think things like he has two different 1962 topps stamp panels and both should be on the registry as they were issued that way. What I take big issues to and why I voted #2 is the 1969 Topps stamp panels have a total of 19 different configurations that could be graded, no way am i buying the same stamp 19 times just because a person tore it different. I think they should only include the card/stamp/etc in its orginal state or totaly seperate ie the clemente stamp only.

jradke4

if you think this is insane...how about the finest issues from about 1995-1997. they are listed twice either with protector or with out. ones with out were peeled by the owner. so that would be a modified card. or just a regular card.

TheVon

Based on the posts in this thread I'm really surprised that Option #1 (to include all variations) won the poll. For those that haven't received it yet, here's the e-mail from Cosetta:

Hello everyone,

The results of the Master Player Sets poll are in. The members have spoken and the majority has voted for Option 1; continue to allow and require multiple combinations of stamps, stickers, etc. and keep the master sets as they are.

For those interested in sets that require just one stamp, sticker, etc. per date, may I suggest the Basic & Collector Issues sets. If there is not a B&C set for your player, please send your request in. It will receive priority.

I would like to thank everyone for their participation and continued support of the Set Registry program.

Thank you,

Cosetta Robbins
Assistant Set Registry Manager