IN PERSON AUTOGRAPHS ON CARDS

BLUEJAYWAY

Have always pondered this as to its effect on the value of a card. I know most of the time an in person autograph is done on a lesser valued card . But for the sake of discussion how would the cards value be affected if for instance you had a 1952 TOPPS Mantle in a high grade,PSA8/9, and it was autographed by him. Would it increase/decrease its worth. If it was 1 of 10 pop. in that grade, but the only one autographed. Diminished value due to its auto. and increase the remaining 9 in high grade that are unautographed? Or the reverse,lower the non-auto. value increase value for the autograph. What if it was the only 9 and it was autographed, less or more value? After all he is a collecting icon, so would that play into it and the card would still retain its value as if it was not autographed. Thoughts?

Ilovecards

good question.

I am not sure for high high value cards. But I do know that some cards in high grade prices increases drastically if autographed. I guess if you are going to have an autograph card you would want the best. So someone is always willing to pay a premium for that.

What would you rather have an auto card in a grade 5 or one in 10 ?

cardsnbeads

I wouldn't get a vintage card that is higher than an 8 signed.

thenavarro

Id say generally, buy the best quality you can afford within reason to get signed and in the long range you'll be happy. Exception being, I would NOT personally pay a premium for modern (1975 and up) low pop (meaning pop 1 or 2 in PSA 10) unisgned cards to pop out to get signed, as that premium will eventually be lost as those pops inevitably rise. However, for those that have deep enough pockets that the price really doesn't matter, then always buy the best quality you can afford and be happy.

Oh, and to answer your question, I think you'd get a LARGE premium for a Mantle like you mentioned in high grade compared to an unsigned one

otwcards

I think it really depends upon how the autographed card market morphs...

I would think that high grade vintage cards would be better served unsigned for maximum price realization. Personally, I prefer the great eye-appeal, mid-grade cards for autographs. I have not really noticed anyone paying a premium for higher grade examples versus clean, mid-grade cards. I may be in the minority, but I also prefer ball-point signatures on vintage cards versus Sharpie signatures.

vintageinvestments

I see collectors getting smarter and paying premiums for vintage era autos on period cards. They do not make them anymore and to get vintage or HOF players on vintage cards and even more if the signature was received in the playing days will only continue to move up in the future. It is easy to get the old timers in sharpie now as well as stickers (certifieds)but premiums will continue to rise on vintage sigs IMO.

Jason

jmmiller777

IMHO I would say the example of the Mantle is not representative of 99% of the cards out there. Mantle autos on a 52 would go for crazy money, even at a 4 or 5. I have bid more than I should of on McCovey auto'd rookie cards without winning them so maybe HOFer auto'd rookie cards are a good thing, I can't seem to find Mays or McCovey at reasonable prices.

magikbilly

Speaking as an autograph collector, vintage is always preferable of course. If not, ballpoint over Sharpie for me. "Old time" autograph collectors preferred something that "scratches" the photo like fountain pen (as do I, when possible) - Sharpie bleeds into itself too. Ideally, old timers can sign vintage material in the sepia fine point ink pen Sharpie makes which gives a very pleasing appearance indeed - the signatures do not look so out of place. I have used it.

Hope this is helpful,
Eric