Home PSA Set Registry Forum

Premium value of the No. 1 set?

Just wondering what everyone thought might be a reasonable value to place on the value of the top set on the Registry.

For example: if a vintage regular issue set grades out at 8.5 and the SMR is $20,000. What kind of premium if any, do you think the set would warrant as being the highest graded set?

Disclaimer....I understand the relevance of the SMR is minimal for many vintage cards. However, the auction houses usually reference them in the listings. I also, understand the variability presented by low pop cards. Just looking for a little insight. Break vs. sell is another consideration.



  • Anybody???

    Just makes one wonder if putting together the number 1 set is worth anything more than just a pat on the back?????
  • ABellPharmDABellPharmD Posts: 181 ✭✭✭
    I would think that there isn't much of a premium for a PSA ranking when selling a set. Typically, if it's a set like you described, you would probably do better breaking it rather than selling it whole. I like how some auction houses are now offering the ability to bid on the set as a whole AND for the cards individually and based on the highest bid (set, total of individual cards) determines how the cards are sold. This maximizes both options, in my opinion.
    I collect Cal Ripken cards, T206, E95, E210, R319.
  • cards651cards651 Posts: 665 ✭✭
    cuse - I was giving others a shot at it. A couple of general thoughts in no particular order:
    1. Always depends on the year and set (perhaps obvious)
    2. I do believe there is a tremendous premium for the No. 1 Set. (eBay prices for 1 of 1s and 4SC asking prices seem to support this.)
    3. At the same time, achieving that premium in a sale is always difficult.
    4. Buyers always seem to balk at big items (I know I end up falling into this trap anyways). Buyers end up buying 1,000 items at $1 instead of 1 item at $1,000 even when the one item is probably worth more ($1,200 to $1,500 for example). In the aggregate, buyers can be dumb.
    5. Smart buyers will buy the one item at $1,000 but then you (seller) loses the premium we are assuming is there.
    6. Assuming you have the top set - my advice is be patient, price it accordingly (determine break-up value but build in a discount for time savings, shipping savings etc.) and it should eventually sell with a decent premium.
    7. I still think eBay is reasonable way to go.

    Anyway, hope this gets the conversation moving along. I've thought about this issue a lot and know there are many schools of thought out there.
    Good luck. - Kevin M.

  • MCMLVToppsMCMLVTopps Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭✭✭

    SMR, like the POP report are next to worthless. Either may be touted by an auction house as appealing to a low information buyer. I won't spend time validating my comments...although I could cite NUMEROUS examples.

    If you want to sell your set, do yourself (and your wallet) an enormous favor and contact Steve Novella @ 239-336-9491.
    You will not find a better seller on this planet!!

  • cards651cards651 Posts: 665 ✭✭
    Yes, SMR is one that really stumps me. Why would a company (PSA) that has an apparently well-regarded reputation in the hobby, produce such drivel? I see those spread-sheet produced prices every month and I really start to wonder. They even price some cards that don't exist in the indicated grade. How do you price something that doesn't exist? And yes, once an auction house starts quoting SMR, particularly if it's an item I'm not sure about, I run.

    I disagree on POP reports. Those are amazingly informative. I understand that they are a 'turnstile' count that reflects the number of grades given out. The POP report has no way of 'subtracting' the various 'crackouts', destroyed cards, cards lost in tornadoes etc. Nevertheless, I've found it very useful. - Kevin M.
  • GriffinsGriffins Posts: 6,076 ✭✭✭

    << <i>Cuse,

    SMR, like the POP report are next to worthless. Either may be touted by an auction house as appealing to a low information buyer. I won't spend time validating my comments...although I could cite NUMEROUS examples.

    Al >>

    Agreed 1000%. SMR exists to sell ads, it's not an accurate price guide.
    Be careful when using it too- I was working on one set very closely when suddenly the price on 1 card in one particular grade spiked up in SMR- and as it turned out an auction house was offering that card the next month.

    Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's

  • pop 1 10s add to the confusion....

    I previously sold a number 2 set and the price was remarkable.

    Glad to receive everyone's input. I hope the chatter continues... Thanks!!!
  • MCMLVToppsMCMLVTopps Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I disagree on POP reports. Those are amazingly informative. I understand that they are a 'turnstile' count that reflects the number of grades given out. The POP report has no way of 'subtracting' the various 'crackouts', destroyed cards, cards lost in tornadoes etc. Nevertheless, I've found it very useful. - Kevin M.

    Really Kevin? Surely you are not this naive as to put so much faith into the POP reports !!. "Amazingly informative" ? You could not be more WRONG!!

    I'll spend a few minutes trying to educate you as to the total fallacy of the POP report. Just a bit of history to validate who I am...I once had the 16th best 1955 Topss set, just a few cards short of a straight PSA 8 collection...I don't have to tell you how much this thing cost to put together...well over $50k. I've put together 3 other 1955 Topps sets in lower grades...my last was a straight PSA 7 set, which you will see retired in the Regsitry under Teddy Ballgame. I have other sets as well, which I plan to sell in the near future, also #1 sets. in the Registry.

    ok...pls follow the logic as I try to save you from yourself...

    First, just for grins, take a moment to google "PSA half point". You will then see the entire history of why PSA decided to go half-point and how wonderful it'll be for the world of collector's. The write up is a glowing analysis of how you just cannot live without sending in your already slabbed cards for review and getting that very elusive ".5" upgrade. The half-point system was enacted exactly 6 years ago this Saturday.

    So collectors, now wanting to enhance their cards or collections were sending in slabbed by the zillions to get the half point bump. Surely you can see the ENORMOUS cash cow that suddenly enters the coffers of PSA's world. Undoubtedly IMO, the "powers to be" forced this as an infusion of monies and thus improving their cash position and value of their stock. These cards had NO impact on the POP report because PSA graders had the slabbed card in their hands. They could pop out the flip, subtract it from the grade it arrived in and add one to the half-point side. No problem.

    The real rub is the MASSIVE crackouts that flooded into Newport Beach. I would venture to say that the crackout craze falls somewhere between PSA 5s and PSA 7s. Thinking of getting a PSA 6 to bump to a PSA 6.5 or even a PSA 7 drove the masses to crackout craziness.

    If a PSA 7 is cracked out (and the flip not sent along), that card remains in the POP report, but really no longer exists...the slab is gone, along with the flip. Now, that same card comes back as a PSA 6.5, you lost while playing PSA roulette. Result...a PSA 7 still exists in the POP report and a PSA 6.5 has been created. Two cards in the POP report, but only ONE exists.

    Now, because you are unhappy with the new 6.5, you use your free gradings you got from renewing your subscription to PSA and recrack the 6.5 and send it in. Now we have a "ghost" 7 and a "ghost" 6.5. The card comes back as a 6.5...result...a fictional 7, a fictional 6.5 and a real 6.5. One card has morphed into 3 cards. Still disappointed, you use another submission form,hey, they're free, why not?...shipping image . The card comes back as a 7. Presto, you're back where you started from...result...one fictional 7, two fictional 6.5s, one real 7. One card has become four cards in the POP report. I hope you can see this example clearly enough to appreciate what has happened to the POP report. I know a couple of "collectors" who crack and recrack the same card over and over and over again till they get the grade they either began with or higher. If you crack a PSA 7 and send it in 10 times, what happens. There are 9 phony cards in the POP report and one real one. See the mess? Multiply this times who knows how many tens of thousands !!!

    Surely you follow this, don't you? People have sent in untold thousands upon thousands of crackouts. I would venture to say that most tossed the flip in the trash (not all) and, at that moment, the POP report became more and more invalid. I could use a much stronger term than "invalid", but it wouldn't get past the board patrol...you can imagine my exact thought.

    So, crackouts have been cracking for SIX YEARS. There are almost 100 thousand registered sets, who knows the total number of PSA graded cards...it is impossible to know how many cards within these sets were cracked and sent in. This is most likely a function of how valuable the set, or specific cards within the set are (were). Like getting a 55 Topps Koufax to go from a PSA 6 to PSA 7, is real money.

    To be fair, I have cracked and not sent in the flip. I've done well most of the time. Incredibly I once had an SGC46 that came back a PSA 8...it almost took my breath, it was such a leap as to be unbelievable. The value of that card alone went up in the $100s. It was and SGC, so the POP report wasn't really impacted at all in this case.

    Again, to be fair...before I sold my high end 55 Topps set, I was convinced to send in all 206 (slabbed) for possible half-point bumps...I got 15 bumps, and a few were serious high number cards. One became a 1 of 1, which really helped the bottom line.

    Aside from this, the crackout craze has killed the POP report. After 6 years, the POP report has become totally useless in terms of making a valued judgment as to how rare the card is or isn't. I'd bet the POP report is off by some 30% or more in some cases. I am most familiar with the 55 Topps set. There was a day when Art Fowler (#3) in a PSA 7 was hard to come by, as was Jim Rivera (#57)...to see the POPs on these cards now, you'd think they were a dime a dozen.

    DO NOT be fooled by the POP report! It is forever hosed and cannot ever...E V E R be fixed.

    I have said it before and I'll say it again. The half-point decision by PSA was nothing more than a money grab. I challenge anyone on this board or any board to hold a PSA 8 and a PSA 8.5 at arms length and discern the difference between the two.

    Don't let the fluff cloud your judgment. Clicking ruby red slippers in those tornadoes won't help your buying decision, nor the POP report.

    Chance Favors The Prepared Mind Louis Pasteur


  • Some good points MCMLV. let me start by saying I have cracked out many cards, long before the 1/2 point craze started.

    I disagree with you on the relevance of pops on PSA 9s and 10s of 50s high end cards. IMO, the pops are hardly skewed by breakouts. Most are pop <5 and many are 1s.

    I agree with you 100% on newer stuff and breakouts. I had no problem breaking out $1-50 cards. Breaking our $300+ cards is another story. And , this is where this thread was started and is about. The values used in my starting example post are waay under what the set is worth and the grade stated.

    I too have sold a bunch of 8+ sets. I'm just trying to gauge the risk/reward of relatively recent vintage number 1 set sales.

    I appreciate the debate and discussions.
  • MCMLVToppsMCMLVTopps Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Point made.

    I was perhaps over interpreting cards651 being so enamored with the POP report as a whole. Clearly, since inception of the half-point, the middle spectrum of PSA graded cards is seriously bloated and not a viable tool with which to make a buying decision. I believe there is a fair number of 8s being cracked, but a risky move at best. Surely no 9s are being cracked...therefore, to your point, the PSA 9-10 arena is pretty solid.

    One thing I used to do when making a purchase decision was to search the Registry to attempt to determine the "rarity" of the card I was interested in. As an example, if the card in a PSA 9 was shown in the POP report as 1 of 5, and research of the Registry showed 3 were already "taken", that card was a "real pop" of 2. No way was I gonna get one of the other 3 already in the Registry.

    GL with your sets/sales.

  • Thanks Al

    It's all good, give and take discussions.

    I was just trying to stir a little conversation.

    Best of luck to you and all that provided me input in this thread !!
  • Al - I think I struck a chord. I have been away. Will try to get through your comments. - Kevin
  • macboubemacboube Posts: 336 ✭✭
    Disagree - I have c/o'd several 8's, 8.5's and 9's in search of the elusive GEM MINT 10 grading. The '55 AA pop report is definitely inaccur. IMO on even high end cards. Also, it is inaccur. in both directions.

    Without a doubt, c/o's are re-subbed by the hundreds if not thousands on a daily basis. Therefore, the Pop Report can never EVER be accur. - duh!

    I have been monitoring several high end 100% graded sets being sold as one lot sets by Bussineau. They seem to sell unbroken sets far more often than most other auction houses. IMO, and very generally speaking, I feel you can achieve more $$$ in your pocket at the end of day by NOT selling as a one lot complete set, but rather a as a SET BREAK. Most of the sets I have monitored are 50's, 60's, and 70's stuff.

    I recently broke up one of my '55 AA sets (#5 current-finest) and utilized REA (no fees) and realized what I would guess to be at least 10-15% more than what I would have guessed to net as selling as one lot-set.

  • I think everyone can agree that pop reports can not be 100% accurate. My point in defence of an earlier post my another member was they are MUCH more accurate for 9s than 5,6, 7s in vintage sets. Especially for very low pop cards. I'd say 100% ACCURATE for pop 1 none higher cards. Same for pop 2 or 3 cards where you own all of the highest graded. This is not theoretical-fact.

    I guess I'd also have to respond to MacB that you may be shooting yourself in the foot. For the sake of this discussion...............and the thread was started to discuss selling...........

    If your cracking out and sending in your pop1 PSA 9 3x in search of a 10 and don't get the bump, you now own (according to the uncorrected reports) a pop 4 card. That is of course if you didn't send the flips back in.

    I understand that only you might know the real pop of that card. When selling your pop 4 PSA 9, theoretically it would be worth less to an unknowing buyer than a pop 1 PSA 9. Yes, the other couple guys chasing your 9 might pay a premium. However, the other potential buyer/bidders might not lay out the looong dollar or bid up the price attempting to buy the card as a pop 4 vs. a pop 1. Again, I acknowledge there are a lot of assumptions on my part and you probably are not considering selling at this time.

    I remember counting my extra flips a while back. I had hundreds of cracked out flips (PSA, SGC, etc). Some were just taken out to make raw sets. Plenty of others went the resubmit route.

    I never sent in a PSA 9 searching for a 10. I have broken out other company's 9s, with mostly bad......mixed results.....never a bump to a 10. You re-subbed several 8, 8.5 and 9s. I'm not sure how many other collectors would risk breaking out a pop 1 none higher card $500+++++ trying to get a 10. That risk/reward ratio would raise my blood pressure. My heart couldn't take the suspense or disappointment. lol

    Thanks again for everyone's input. I pull and digest tidbits from each post. Varying points of view sometimes lead you down paths that were never considered.
    Wow, that sounded deep.. or is it just getting deep????lol

    thanks let's move on....!!

  • macboubemacboube Posts: 336 ✭✭
    Cuse - you would be shocked at my success rate of c/o's to 10's...........what you likely are not considering, is that most every sub that was once an 8, 8.5, 9 was perfectly pack fresh and from unopened cellos. (And I have had 7's come back as 9's at times). On another note, I once c/o'd a '67 Topps baseball common that was a PSA 6 and pressed a corner. It came back a 10, and at the time it was 1 of 1 (now 1 of 2). If you have enough experience and know how with cards, and you realize understand how subjective this grading system is, cracking out is no brainer............The system basically compels you to do this.

    and good luck Sat. vs. Duke!!!!!
  • cards651cards651 Posts: 665 ✭✭
  • cards651cards651 Posts: 665 ✭✭
    Al - I hear you somewhat and I follow the logic but a couple of points.
    1. Most of my comments are geared towards mid-70s sets so will not always apply to mid-50s sets.
    2. I guess I assumed no one would ever blindly follow the pop reports. They should always be used in conjunction with an understanding of the set, the number of raw cards available and how often graded versions are available.
    3. I hear you on some of the PSA issues - half point in particular but that's somewhat off topic. Yes, there may only be 5 PSA 9's for a particular card when the POP report claims 8. But this still gives you a guide relative to other cards. Imagine if collectors didn't have this info.
    4. I really rely on it when purchasing mid-70s cards as noted. If the POP report indicates a pop of 12 or less and the price is fair, I buy the card. If the POP report indicates 30 cards, I often wait to pick it up since it will probably come along at a lower price. Again, if I didn't have the POP report, I really could not take this approach.
    5. It's simply impractical to remove POP counts. Think about all the possibilities - crackouts, damaged cards, floods.

    Anyway, a good topic for sure.

    P.S. I love to tell the POP report story of the guy selling a'71 OPC Hockey common for some absurd price. He claimed it was 'rarer' than the 1st Series checklist (the well-known rare card of the set) because it had fewer cards at the given grade (8 or 9 or something). Anyway, don't know if anyone ever fell for it but the moral is - collectors need to understand the POP report and then it can be helpful, Not perfect, helpful.

    Kevin M.
  • MCMLVToppsMCMLVTopps Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Quickly...I merely referred to 55 topps as I am very familiar with the set. My feelings are such that ANY years of ANY manufacturer have severely bloated POP numbers. These fallacies are found primarily in the PSA 5, 6, 7 range and to some degree 8s as well. Some crack 9s, but, there is no 9.5, so those "crackers" are really pretty gutsy IMO.

    Keep in mind, that every and I do mean EVERY, slabbed PSA card that is cracked and the flip not included...which, IMO, is in the90% ++ range, leaves a ghost card behind when it passes through Newport Beach.

    I'd say the 1975 (your focus) has had a bazillion cracks. I feel the 1975 set is one of the nicest sets Topps has ever produced. Have been tempted many times to put it together, but the 55s always kept pulling me back. For that matter the whole 10 years of the 70s have beau coup crackouts. You need only look at the Registry and see how many sets and players of that era are in the Registry. Separate threads abound...translation...crackouts and bogus POP reports.

    Sadly, not anyone can fix what has happened nor what will continue to happen. If I were still collecting, I'd subtract 20-30% off the # you see for star cards...commons not so much.

  • cards651cards651 Posts: 665 ✭✭
    Thanks, Al. Perhaps it's a glass half-full/half-empty thing. I think we agree on a lot of issues here. There's just no easy solution. I am truly a pessimist at heart (just ask my wife) but the PSA grading has helped more than hurt IMO. - Kevin M.
    P.S. I actually stay away from '75 Topps as I never collected it. I know nothing about that set. I collect a good amount of all four sports, '69 Baseball and various '70s sets.
Sign In or Register to comment.