How does this happen?

clayshooter22

I'm #2 in a set and the #1 guy and I both have cards in the master set that don't show as empty slots on the other person's set? Once an item is added to the set composite...shouldn't it start as an empty slot in all sets?

One of my examples:

Puckett Master

#1 guy has, spec 1614000070, 1986 Topps Tattoos - single player tattoo.

I have spec 1614860071 which is the same issue but a panel of two tattoos.

In neither case is the other issue an empty slot in our sets. For instance, I do not have an empty slot for the single player tattoo.

Now, I'd be happy if this is some global change to account the single player vs. panel issue but I still have other issues where there are multiple items in the registry of the same issue such as the 87 M&M single and panel or the 8 versions of the 89 Topps Stickercards, lol.

Any ideas?

Mike

MeteoriteGuy

This looks like the newer policy discussed in this forum a couple months ago.

I don't see the need of 5-6 of the same issue in various collector created forms.

Edit to add: The Topps Yearbook stickers I see completely different. These are not collector created versons.

clayshooter22

Mark,

Agreed. I think any time a hand cut can be reduced to a single player issue that the single player piece should be the selection for the registry....but there are far too many examples where the multiplier for panel is/should be higher than the single...so how is the set composite calculated when you can choose one for your set?

MeteoriteGuy

<< <i>Mark,

Agreed. I think any time a hand cut can be reduced to a single player issue that the single player piece should be the selection for the registry....but there are far too many examples where the multiplier for panel is/should be higher than the single...so how is the set composite calculated when you can choose one for your set? >>



I have no problem with an and/or, although I do see logic in only allowing single player...in these cases.

I think since so many are graded in panel or like form, it is likely best to accept either. Removing them would likely just upset a 100 or so people...so no need.

Personally, it would not matter to me as a collector which they used, and as a PC collector, I would prefer having both a complete panel and a single, but I understand we are talking about the exact same card, and not a variation.


As far as composite value, I guess it might depend on the issue, but I think in most cases they should be the same. It is hard however to come up with some general rule...when cards themselves don't want to follow said rule, and I would prefer answering on a case by case situation. Of course, PSA can not really do that.

For example, there are some Hostess or Wiffle Ball panels that much harder to find then others. Should they have the same composite?...I don't know. Going by the PSA 8 rule...I guess they should have different set values.

clayshooter22

Mark,

I see your point and I'll conceed in most cases it prob doesn't matter a whole lot. I guess in my head I'm just looking for some consistancy.

btw, I did vote and I voted to keep both because like you I don't consider a master set complete without both. If joe somebody can't complete his registry set without both; well, that didn't bother me.

Many panels are tougher than the singles but a few singles are tougher to hand cut, such as 87 Drakes where the cards share a boarder and PSA needs the full boarder for the best grade - essentially ruining the rest of the panel. As panels get scarce I would think panels would draw a premium but it could take years to realize this. MAybe we'll get PSA to flip-flop on this one down the road.

Miek