How much emphasis do you place on registry weightings when buying?

bosoxphan

Registry weightings are based on PSA 8 prices, correct? If you're putting a set together in PSA 6-7, have you ever let the registry weightings decide which cards you buy in 6 and which ones you buy in 7 to maximize your overall grade. For instance, in the 53 Bowman Color set, in PSA 7 the Mantle card is $2000 and the Feller card is $485. Both are given a weighting of 10. Makes sense to buy the Feller in PSA 7 and the Mantle in PSA 6. Or is that giving the registry to much thought?

mcastaldi

Bosoxphan> While I won't claim to know what the registry weightings are based on exactly, I don't believe they're based on PSA8 pricing.

For me, the registry weightings have absolutely no influence on my purchasing. Because my goal is ultimately a complete set, I plan to get each card anyway. So to me, if I'm getting each card anyway the weighting is pretty arbitrary.

Now, the pop report definitely does influence my buying a great deal. . .but not the registry weightings.

Mike

Vargha

None whatsoever.

Scoop

Bosoxfan, I have made similar decisions in building my 1956 Topps baseball set. There are 6 or so rare commons (with a 1 weighted rating) in PSA 8 which have been going for $400 and up. I have decided to keep those in a 7 and use the dollars saved to purchase 9's (commons in 3rd series have a 2 rating and in 9's usually go for $200-300. Makes sense to me.

mikeschmidt

Frankly, I would rather complete my set -- and upgrade where, when, and if possible. As for the weightings -- I don't think that they are generally true with the 1955 Bowman set. The recent Superior Sports Auction is to some degree a testament of that.

(PSA 10 commons with a grade weight of 1 sold for $600 - $750
a PSA 10 common with a grade weight of 3 sold for $600
a PSA 10 Yankee with a grade weight of 4 sold for $1,100)

acowa

I honestly don't know the weights before purchasing a card...I have a minimum grade for each of my sets...and I fill them in as I find the cards at a reasonable price.

Regards,


Alan

dalew

I agree with Mike Schmidt. I'm trying to complete a set. I buy no less than 7 and upgrade when I can. Some say, why not just buy 8's, well I'm completing two sets. One of 8's and then the lower grade cards in a second set, which is registered on the Set Registry. You guess which one.

As an aside, Santa told the reindeer to head to Mike's house for gifts. But alas, the reindeer got confused. When they ended up on top of an "out house," Santa turned to the reindeer and said, "No, I said the Schmidt house."

Dale

helionaut

Kind of a chicken/egg question. Do prices drive weights or do weights, as an indicator of demand, drive prices? I think it's more that weightings are largely derived from the same forces that drive pricing, i.e. supply and demand, but only in the overall comparison of player reputation and any problems widely known to be associated with a card. The problem with slabbed cards is that prices can be widely distorted given population. If weightings and SMR prices were recalculated daily based on sales, they would swing widely every day. But if cards of every player were slabbed in an equally large quantity as, say, Mantle cards are, it would all even out again based on the magnitude of the player.

I don't subscribe to the pop report, so I've been able to pretty much avoid the low pop bidding frenzy on my 75T set, because I know the populations will only increase. But in my 71T Greatest Moments set, I use weights as a rough guide on what to bid on. Without investigating, I wouldn't have guessed that the Reggie Jackson is the 10 in that set, over an early Thurman Munson #1 card (weighted 9). And from the collectors I've talked to, the Reggie should be weighted about a 14, it's that tough.

Buckwheat

I agree that it is a chicken and egg thing, but I do believe that weightings drive prices to some degree. While the common market has been hot, the star market has been very soft. I believe that the Set Registry is helping to drive demand for commons. But I don't think that it is only a switchover from stars. I believe that stars are significantly underwieghted in teh registry, and thus demand drops.

For example, a common 8 that goes for $20 vs a Mantle 8 that goes for upwards of $1000. The Mantle has a weight factor of 10, but the value is 50 times greater. When people look to upgrade their rating, it is much more cost effective to buy commons than stars. The descrepancy is even greater in PSa 9's. I emailed BJ suggesting that their be no cap on the weighting, which presently is set at 10. She responded very quickly that it is not an exact science but that the idea had merit. They are very busy working on adding sets and weightings at present. Perhaps at some point in time it will be considered.

The problem with dropping Star prices is significant, and effects dealers much more than others. This is where they make their money, and where they have all of their inventory. While as a buyer, I like to see prices drop, I also don't want dealers to have to give up their business. In answer to the original question, I do look at weighting in determining what I pay, and I believe that the underweighting of stars is hurting the demand and prices for them.

mcbride