My God. Probstein's scans tend to reveal flaws more than the scans of most sellers, but my God. TEN?
'Sir, I realize it's been difficult for you to sleep at night without your EX/MT 1977 Topps Tom Seaver, but I swear to you that you'll get it safe and sound.' -CDs Nuts, 1/20/14
Will be interesting to follow the hammer price on this one. By the cert no., it was originally graded by 4SC.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
<< <i>Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
Don't think that's the case.
STAY HEALTHY!
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
Time will tell what this card hammers at, but this particular card has not yet risen in value from its sale price in 2013.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree.
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree. >>
Yeah and I know many experienced collectors who will buy a 10 for registry and investment purposes and won't mind a supposed "weak 10".
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree. >>
Yeah and I know many experienced collectors who will buy a 10 for registry and investment purposes and won't mind a supposed "weak 10". >>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is.
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree. >>
Yeah and I know many experienced collectors who will buy a 10 for registry and investment purposes and won't mind a supposed "weak 10". >>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment. By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general.
<< <i> In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment. By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
Like others have said previously in this thread, eye appeal is where it's at. In my opinion, a person is not using good judgment buying soft 10's for thousands of dollars. Especially, when they look like 7's. I would much rather have a clean 9 and pocket the thousands of dollars not spent on a card that looks like a 7 in a 10 holder.
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree. >>
Yeah and I know many experienced collectors who will buy a 10 for registry and investment purposes and won't mind a supposed "weak 10". >>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment. By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
I completely agree with you. Not a day goes by that a 10 is dissed on this board yet it brings 10 money.
If someone is building a collection for their own personal enjoyment then one can debate this topic but from a pure investment standpoint it is not even close.
Just two weeks ago there was a 1975 Topps PSA 9 Nolan Ryan that looked suspect for the grade. It didn't stop bidders from pushing it over 2 grand.
There are certainly examples where the better looking 10 might go for more and it should. That said your argument is if you bought the "ugly" 10 a few years ago you still got to ride the wave higher and this is really not debatable. You are correct.
This Winfield my not be a good example since it was already a 6k card in 2013 as was pointed out but there are a ton of examples of cards that have skyrocketed in recent years and the number on the label drives the price.
In 2012 if someone had bought what others deemed a weak 10 of say a Jerry Rice rookie. Who is laughing now? We know the answer to that question.
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree. >>
Yeah and I know many experienced collectors who will buy a 10 for registry and investment purposes and won't mind a supposed "weak 10". >>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment. By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
I completely agree with you. Not a day goes by that a 10 is dissed on this board yet it brings 10 money.
If someone is building a collection for their own personal enjoyment then one can debate this topic but from a pure investment standpoint it is not even close.
Just two weeks ago there was a 1975 Topps PSA 9 Nolan Ryan that looked suspect for the grade. It didn't stop bidders from pushing it over 2 grand.
There are certainly examples where the better looking 10 might go for more and it should. That said your argument is if you bought the "ugly" 10 a few years ago you still got to ride the wave higher and this is really not debatable. You are correct.
This Winfield my not be a good example since it was already a 6k card in 2013 as was pointed out but there are a ton of examples of cards that have skyrocketed in recent years and the number on the label drives the price.
In 2012 if someone had bought what others deemed a weak 10 of say a Jerry Rice rookie. Who is laughing now? We know the answer to that question. >>
You are correct. In 2012 a weak PSA 10 Jerry Rice could be bought for $2,500 to $3,000. Now this card regularly sells for $12,000 to $15,000. We are talking about a price increase of 4 to 5 times in 3 years. So yes the owner of the "weak" Jerry Rice 10 gets the last laugh. Just weeks ago there was a Paul Molitor PSA 10 rookie that many people were dissing on this board but it still went for $8,000. Obviously the supposed "weak" 10 rode the wave of the price increase. So many more numerous examples of PSA 10 rookies increasing in price 3-5 times since 2012 such as: 1981 Montana rookie PSA 10 1976 Walter Payton rookie PSA 10 1984 John Elway rookie PSA 10 1985 Mario Lemieux Opeechee rookie PSA 10 1980 Bird Magic rookie PSA 10 1980 Rickey Henderson rookie PSA 10
Yeah if the owners had "weak" 10's of these they still made great investments.
Not just PSA 10's have gone way up in value. High grade hall of fame rookies have skyrocketed too. PSA 8 rookies of the following cards have increased in price 3-5 times since 2012 as well:
The list goes on and on. Yes if owners have "weak" cards of these PSA 10's or PSA 8's we all know they get the last laugh. The 10 or 8 on the PSA label drives the price at the end of the day.
<< <i> In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment. By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
Like others have said previously in this thread, eye appeal is where it's at. In my opinion, a person is not using good judgment buying soft 10's for thousands of dollars. Especially, when they look like 7's. I would much rather have a clean 9 and pocket the thousands of dollars not spent on a card that looks like a 7 in a 10 holder. >>
"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period. Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors.
<< <i> In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment. By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
Like others have said previously in this thread, eye appeal is where it's at. In my opinion, a person is not using good judgment buying soft 10's for thousands of dollars. Especially, when they look like 7's. I would much rather have a clean 9 and pocket the thousands of dollars not spent on a card that looks like a 7 in a 10 holder. >>
"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period. Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors. >>
I always have to laugh when I read the comments about my 8 looks better then that 10. Until it says 10 in the upper right hand corner it is a mute point.
There are two markets for 10s....collectors for whom money is no object, and investors. As has been discussed here numerous times, 10s are a bad buy for most collectors because they are only marginally better (if at all) than a strong 9 and cost so much more. As such, I'm not surprised that most of the action on cards like this is investors/speculators, in addition to a few rich but devoted collectors.
<< <i> In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment. By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
Like others have said previously in this thread, eye appeal is where it's at. In my opinion, a person is not using good judgment buying soft 10's for thousands of dollars. Especially, when they look like 7's. I would much rather have a clean 9 and pocket the thousands of dollars not spent on a card that looks like a 7 in a 10 holder. >>
"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period. Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors. >>
I always have to laugh when I read the comments about my 8 looks better then that 10. Until it says 10 in the upper right hand corner it is a mute point. >>
Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card.
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
So in other words, buy the holder not the card >>
Indeed, lol.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
So in other words, buy the holder not the card >>
Actually if you can afford the 10 I recommend it. If you can't then buy the card not the holder.
<< <i>"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period. Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors. >>
I am not talking about what increased more. I am talking about from a personal view point that I won't buy a soft 10, and pay 10 money, when it looks like a 7. I don't want to look at some eyesore like that and know I have a ton of money in it, when I could have a sharp 9 that looks way better, and for a fraction of the price.
Hey, if some people want to buy based solely on the label, and not the actual card in the holder, they can have at it. It's just not for me. The examples you have given above are close to topping out, in my opinion. When the next bubble pops in this economy(it's just a matter of time), there are going to be a lot of people holding the bag on these modern high grade rookie cards that have exploded in price. Better them than me.
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
So in other words, buy the holder not the card >>
Actually if you can afford the 10 I recommend it. If you can't then buy the card not the holder. >>
PSA 10's have proven time and time again to perform extremely well when a set or segment gets hot. The PSA 10 Rickey Henderson is just a prime example. A PSA 10 five years ago was a $9,000 to perhaps $12,000 card. At the same time a PSA 9 was in the mid $200's. Today you can get a PSA 9 in some cases close to $300 yet the PSA 10 recently sold for $31,000.
You can't argue with the math. I have tons of the same cards because one has better centering or corners or no print dots etc. But from a true numbers standpoint the 10's win.
The Jerry Rice might be the best example. Go back to VCP in 2012 and on a percentage basis the 10 absolutely crushes the performance of the 9.
I have one card in particular that I like one of my PSA 9's better than my PSA 10. If I put both up on EBAY there is a zero percent chance the PSA 9 will sell for even close to what the PSA 10 does.
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
So in other words, buy the holder not the card >>
Actually if you can afford the 10 I recommend it. If you can't then buy the card not the holder. >>
PSA 10's have proven time and time again to perform extremely well when a set or segment gets hot. The PSA 10 Rickey Henderson is just a prime example. A PSA 10 five years ago was a $9,000 to perhaps $12,000 card. At the same time a PSA 9 was in the mid $200's. Today you can get a PSA 9 in some cases close to $300 yet the PSA 10 recently sold for $31,000.
You can't argue with the math. I have tons of the same cards because one has better centering or corners or no print dots etc. But from a true numbers standpoint the 10's win.
The Jerry Rice might be the best example. Go back to VCP in 2012 and on a percentage basis the 10 absolutely crushes the performance of the 9.
I have one card in particular that I like one of my PSA 9's better than my PSA 10. If I put both up on EBAY there is a zero percent chance the PSA 9 will sell for even close to what the PSA 10 does. >>
Totally agree with your math. Many people don't have the money or too scared to pay out money for a PSA 10 card. They then console themselves saying they paid a fraction of the price for a 9 and it has more "eye appeal" than a 10. Truth is the 10 is generally the better investment.
<< <i>Totally agree with your math. Many people don't have the money or too scared to pay out money for a PSA 10 card. They then console themselves saying they paid a fraction of the price for a 9 and it has more "eye appeal" than a 10. Truth is the 10 is generally the better investment. >>
Honestly, I find this to be a snarky comment, thumbing your nose at others so to speak, and not true for many collectors.
That Winfield is a prime example as to where you are wrong. And that's not the only example. All 10's are not created equal.
Of course the 10 is the better investment, because most of the time it has the lowest pop. Although, when I go to sell, I sure as heck don't want to try and peddle a soft 10 in hopes of recovering my money.
<< <i>"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period. Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors. >>
I am not talking about what increased more. I am talking about from a personal view point that I won't buy a soft 10, and pay 10 money, when it looks like a 7. I don't want to look at some eyesore like that and know I have a ton of money in it, when I could have a sharp 9 that looks way better, and for a fraction of the price.
Hey, if some people want to buy based solely on the label, and not the actual card in the holder, they can have at it. It's just not for me. The examples you have given above are close to topping out, in my opinion. When the next bubble pops in this economy(it's just a matter of time), there are going to be a lot of people holding the bag on these modern high grade rookie cards that have exploded in price. Better them than me. >>
So you are predicting these PSA 10's will go down and have topped? So you know the future? Good luck with your 9's, I assure you they will most likely be a worst investment than a 10. But at least your 9's have more "eye appeal" and are more affordable.
<< <i>Totally agree with your math. Many people don't have the money or too scared to pay out money for a PSA 10 card. They then console themselves saying they paid a fraction of the price for a 9 and it has more "eye appeal" than a 10. Truth is the 10 is generally the better investment. >>
Honestly, I find this to be a snarky comment, thumbing your nose at others so to speak, and not true for many collectors.
That Winfield is a prime example as to where you are wrong. And that's not the only example. All 10's are not created equal.
Of course the 10 is the better investment, because most of the time it has the lowest pop. Although, when I go to sell, I sure as heck don't want to try and peddle a soft 10 in hopes of recovering my money. >>
That's my point the 10 is the better investment regardless of eye appeal.
<< <i>"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period. Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors. >>
I am not talking about what increased more. I am talking about from a personal view point that I won't buy a soft 10, and pay 10 money, when it looks like a 7. I don't want to look at some eyesore like that and know I have a ton of money in it, when I could have a sharp 9 that looks way better, and for a fraction of the price.
Hey, if some people want to buy based solely on the label, and not the actual card in the holder, they can have at it. It's just not for me. The examples you have given above are close to topping out, in my opinion. When the next bubble pops in this economy(it's just a matter of time), there are going to be a lot of people holding the bag on these modern high grade rookie cards that have exploded in price. Better them than me. >>
So you are predicting these PSA 10's will go down and have topped? So you know the future? Good luck with your 9's, I assure you they will most likely be a worst investment than a 10. But at least your 9's have more "eye appeal" and are more affordable. >>
Why be snarky and snobbish about things?
Do I know the future? No, but I can tell you that the economic experts say a correction is coming in the markets. Plus, these modern high grade rookies have exploded so much, that a ceiling can only go so high. It's not like they are a 52' Mantle.
I never said what I personally have one way or the other. I said I would take a high end 9 over a 10 that didn't fit what I think a 10 should look like.
Some of us don't view or use cards as an investment. Some of us just enjoy looking at them. Apparently, that is where you and I differ.
thunderdan
Posts: 3,036 ✭✭✭
Comments
Good luck to the seller.
<< <i>If any of you are looking for a PSA 7 Winfield RC, this one probably won't come cheap. >>
I see what you did there.
As much as I want an ever so slight upgrade from my 6.5, I'm not sure this one fits that bill.
-CDs Nuts, 1/20/14
*1956 Topps baseball- 97.4% complete, 7.24 GPA
*Clemente basic set: 85.0% complete, 7.89 GPA
<< <i>Looks like a much older flip, I wonder if it would "10" nowadays? Or maybe it was a mistake? >>
Is it tougher now to get PSA 10 than before?
<< <i>
<< <i>Looks like a much older flip, I wonder if it would "10" nowadays? Or maybe it was a mistake? >>
Is it tougher now to get PSA 10 than before? >>
Generally yes. Centering wasn't as stringent as it is these days.
https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/pdub1819/othersets/6204
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
<< <i>Last one went for $6,405.00 on 2/10/15 via PWCC.
Good luck to the seller. >>
This is the same card, in fact this will be the fourth sale of this card in the last two years:
2/10/15 eBay PWCC $6,405.00
5/14/14 Heritage $5,078.75
8/30/13 Memory Lane $6,164.20
Previous scans:
Memory Lane-
Heritage -
PWCC -
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal.
<< <i>Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
Don't think that's the case.
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
<< <i>
<< <i>Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
Don't think that's the case. >>
Agreed. Paying a PSA 10 price for a card that should be in a PSA 7 holder is not a wise investment.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
Don't think that's the case. >>
Agreed. Paying a PSA 10 price for a card that should be in a PSA 7 holder is not a wise investment. >>
It's not a wise investment when many of these PSA 10 cards have doubled and tripled in value?
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree. >>
Yeah and I know many experienced collectors who will buy a 10 for registry and investment purposes and won't mind a supposed "weak 10".
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree. >>
Yeah and I know many experienced collectors who will buy a 10 for registry and investment purposes and won't mind a supposed "weak 10". >>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree. >>
Yeah and I know many experienced collectors who will buy a 10 for registry and investment purposes and won't mind a supposed "weak 10". >>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment.
By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general.
<< <i>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment.
By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
Like others have said previously in this thread, eye appeal is where it's at. In my opinion, a person is not using good judgment buying soft 10's for thousands of dollars. Especially, when they look like 7's. I would much rather have a clean 9 and pocket the thousands of dollars not spent on a card that looks like a 7 in a 10 holder.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree. >>
Yeah and I know many experienced collectors who will buy a 10 for registry and investment purposes and won't mind a supposed "weak 10". >>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment.
By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
I completely agree with you. Not a day goes by that a 10 is dissed on this board yet it brings 10 money.
If someone is building a collection for their own personal enjoyment then one can debate this topic but from a pure investment standpoint it is not even close.
Just two weeks ago there was a 1975 Topps PSA 9 Nolan Ryan that looked suspect for the grade. It didn't stop bidders from pushing it over 2 grand.
There are certainly examples where the better looking 10 might go for more and it should. That said your argument is if you bought the "ugly" 10 a few years ago you still got to ride the wave higher and this is really not debatable. You are correct.
This Winfield my not be a good example since it was already a 6k card in 2013 as was pointed out but there are a ton of examples of cards that have skyrocketed in recent years and the number on the label drives the price.
In 2012 if someone had bought what others deemed a weak 10 of say a Jerry Rice rookie. Who is laughing now? We know the answer to that question.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I will never understand people who blindly buy based on the number on the flip, instead of the actual card. >>
Because PSA 10 rookies of hall of famers have proven to be a good investment. Regardless of eye appeal. >>
There are many of us that will pass on borderline or weak 10's. Eye appeal if everything to me, and I know I'm not alone. As collectors get more educated over time, they tend to agree. >>
Yeah and I know many experienced collectors who will buy a 10 for registry and investment purposes and won't mind a supposed "weak 10". >>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment.
By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
I completely agree with you. Not a day goes by that a 10 is dissed on this board yet it brings 10 money.
If someone is building a collection for their own personal enjoyment then one can debate this topic but from a pure investment standpoint it is not even close.
Just two weeks ago there was a 1975 Topps PSA 9 Nolan Ryan that looked suspect for the grade. It didn't stop bidders from pushing it over 2 grand.
There are certainly examples where the better looking 10 might go for more and it should. That said your argument is if you bought the "ugly" 10 a few years ago you still got to ride the wave higher and this is really not debatable. You are correct.
This Winfield my not be a good example since it was already a 6k card in 2013 as was pointed out but there are a ton of examples of cards that have skyrocketed in recent years and the number on the label drives the price.
In 2012 if someone had bought what others deemed a weak 10 of say a Jerry Rice rookie. Who is laughing now? We know the answer to that question. >>
You are correct. In 2012 a weak PSA 10 Jerry Rice could be bought for $2,500 to $3,000. Now this card regularly sells for $12,000 to $15,000. We are talking about a price increase of 4 to 5 times in 3 years. So yes the owner of the "weak" Jerry Rice 10 gets the last laugh.
Just weeks ago there was a Paul Molitor PSA 10 rookie that many people were dissing on this board but it still went for $8,000. Obviously the supposed "weak" 10 rode the wave of the price increase.
So many more numerous examples of PSA 10 rookies increasing in price 3-5 times since 2012 such as:
1981 Montana rookie PSA 10
1976 Walter Payton rookie PSA 10
1984 John Elway rookie PSA 10
1985 Mario Lemieux Opeechee rookie PSA 10
1980 Bird Magic rookie PSA 10
1980 Rickey Henderson rookie PSA 10
Yeah if the owners had "weak" 10's of these they still made great investments.
Not just PSA 10's have gone way up in value. High grade hall of fame rookies have skyrocketed too. PSA 8 rookies of the following cards have increased in price 3-5 times since 2012 as well:
1952 Topps Mantle PSA 8
1951 Bowman Mantle PSA 8
1955 Clemente PSA 8
1954 Aaron PSA 8
1951 Bowman Mays PSA 8
The list goes on and on.
Yes if owners have "weak" cards of these PSA 10's or PSA 8's we all know they get the last laugh. The 10 or 8 on the PSA label drives the price at the end of the day.
<< <i>
<< <i>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment.
By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
Like others have said previously in this thread, eye appeal is where it's at. In my opinion, a person is not using good judgment buying soft 10's for thousands of dollars. Especially, when they look like 7's. I would much rather have a clean 9 and pocket the thousands of dollars not spent on a card that looks like a 7 in a 10 holder. >>
"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period.
Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment.
By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
Like others have said previously in this thread, eye appeal is where it's at. In my opinion, a person is not using good judgment buying soft 10's for thousands of dollars. Especially, when they look like 7's. I would much rather have a clean 9 and pocket the thousands of dollars not spent on a card that looks like a 7 in a 10 holder. >>
"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period.
Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors. >>
I always have to laugh when I read the comments about my 8 looks better then that 10. Until it says 10 in the upper right hand corner it is a mute point.
Shocking to see touched corners, print dot on a 10.
Buy the card, not the holder... Tulips anyone?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
In my opinion, those are not very smart collectors or investors, because great eye appeal that matches the gem grade on the holder is where the best investment is. >>
If the PSA 10 Winfield rookie value triples in price the "weak PSA 10" will do the same. I would conclude the owner of the "weak PSA 10" was smart then and made a great investment.
By the way I am not the owner of this winfield PSA 10 and have no interest in obtaining it. Just speaking of PSA 10"s in general. >>
Like others have said previously in this thread, eye appeal is where it's at. In my opinion, a person is not using good judgment buying soft 10's for thousands of dollars. Especially, when they look like 7's. I would much rather have a clean 9 and pocket the thousands of dollars not spent on a card that looks like a 7 in a 10 holder. >>
"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period.
Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors. >>
I always have to laugh when I read the comments about my 8 looks better then that 10. Until it says 10 in the upper right hand corner it is a mute point. >>
Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card.
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
So in other words, buy the holder not the card
<< <i>
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
So in other words, buy the holder not the card >>
Indeed, lol.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
So in other words, buy the holder not the card >>
Actually if you can afford the 10 I recommend it.
If you can't then buy the card not the holder.
<< <i>"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period.
Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors. >>
I am not talking about what increased more. I am talking about from a personal view point that I won't buy a soft 10, and pay 10 money, when it looks like a 7. I don't want to look at some eyesore like that and know I have a ton of money in it, when I could have a sharp 9 that looks way better, and for a fraction of the price.
Hey, if some people want to buy based solely on the label, and not the actual card in the holder, they can have at it. It's just not for me. The examples you have given above are close to topping out, in my opinion. When the next bubble pops in this economy(it's just a matter of time), there are going to be a lot of people holding the bag on these modern high grade rookie cards that have exploded in price. Better them than me.
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
It looks like you are a new member.
Hi, welcome to the forum!
So what do you collect? Or do you only invest?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
So in other words, buy the holder not the card >>
Actually if you can afford the 10 I recommend it.
If you can't then buy the card not the holder. >>
PSA 10's have proven time and time again to perform extremely well when a set or segment gets hot. The PSA 10 Rickey Henderson is just a prime example. A PSA 10 five years ago was a $9,000 to perhaps $12,000 card. At the same time a PSA 9 was in the mid $200's. Today you can get a PSA 9 in some cases close to $300 yet the PSA 10 recently sold for $31,000.
You can't argue with the math. I have tons of the same cards because one has better centering or corners or no print dots etc. But from a true numbers standpoint the 10's win.
The Jerry Rice might be the best example. Go back to VCP in 2012 and on a percentage basis the 10 absolutely crushes the performance of the 9.
I have one card in particular that I like one of my PSA 9's better than my PSA 10. If I put both up on EBAY there is a zero percent chance the PSA 9 will sell for even close to what the PSA 10 does.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Haha I agree. The grade on the label tells the story at the end of the day. I keep on reading over the years how people post that their lower grade card is more eye appealing and thus better than the higher graded card. Just wishful thinking that they had the higher graded and more valuable card. >>
So in other words, buy the holder not the card >>
Actually if you can afford the 10 I recommend it.
If you can't then buy the card not the holder. >>
PSA 10's have proven time and time again to perform extremely well when a set or segment gets hot. The PSA 10 Rickey Henderson is just a prime example. A PSA 10 five years ago was a $9,000 to perhaps $12,000 card. At the same time a PSA 9 was in the mid $200's. Today you can get a PSA 9 in some cases close to $300 yet the PSA 10 recently sold for $31,000.
You can't argue with the math. I have tons of the same cards because one has better centering or corners or no print dots etc. But from a true numbers standpoint the 10's win.
The Jerry Rice might be the best example. Go back to VCP in 2012 and on a percentage basis the 10 absolutely crushes the performance of the 9.
I have one card in particular that I like one of my PSA 9's better than my PSA 10. If I put both up on EBAY there is a zero percent chance the PSA 9 will sell for even close to what the PSA 10 does. >>
Totally agree with your math. Many people don't have the money or too scared to pay out money for a PSA 10 card. They then console themselves saying they paid a fraction of the price for a 9 and it has more "eye appeal" than a 10.
Truth is the 10 is generally the better investment.
<< <i>Totally agree with your math. Many people don't have the money or too scared to pay out money for a PSA 10 card. They then console themselves saying they paid a fraction of the price for a 9 and it has more "eye appeal" than a 10.
Truth is the 10 is generally the better investment. >>
Honestly, I find this to be a snarky comment, thumbing your nose at others so to speak, and not true for many collectors.
That Winfield is a prime example as to where you are wrong. And that's not the only example. All 10's are not created equal.
Of course the 10 is the better investment, because most of the time it has the lowest pop. Although, when I go to sell, I sure as heck don't want to try and peddle a soft 10 in hopes of recovering my money.
<< <i>
<< <i>"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period.
Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors. >>
I am not talking about what increased more. I am talking about from a personal view point that I won't buy a soft 10, and pay 10 money, when it looks like a 7. I don't want to look at some eyesore like that and know I have a ton of money in it, when I could have a sharp 9 that looks way better, and for a fraction of the price.
Hey, if some people want to buy based solely on the label, and not the actual card in the holder, they can have at it. It's just not for me. The examples you have given above are close to topping out, in my opinion. When the next bubble pops in this economy(it's just a matter of time), there are going to be a lot of people holding the bag on these modern high grade rookie cards that have exploded in price. Better them than me. >>
So you are predicting these PSA 10's will go down and have topped?
So you know the future?
Good luck with your 9's, I assure you they will most likely be a worst investment than a 10. But at least your 9's have more "eye appeal" and are more affordable.
<< <i>
<< <i>Totally agree with your math. Many people don't have the money or too scared to pay out money for a PSA 10 card. They then console themselves saying they paid a fraction of the price for a 9 and it has more "eye appeal" than a 10.
Truth is the 10 is generally the better investment. >>
Honestly, I find this to be a snarky comment, thumbing your nose at others so to speak, and not true for many collectors.
That Winfield is a prime example as to where you are wrong. And that's not the only example. All 10's are not created equal.
Of course the 10 is the better investment, because most of the time it has the lowest pop. Although, when I go to sell, I sure as heck don't want to try and peddle a soft 10 in hopes of recovering my money. >>
That's my point the 10 is the better investment regardless of eye appeal.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>"Soft 10's" of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Walter Payton, John Elway rookies for example have increased in value 3-5 times, many thousands of dollars, over the past 3 years. "Clean" 9's have increased in value at most a few hundred dollars over the same time period.
Like it or not but the eye appeal of the 10 on the PSA label is the most eye appealing quality to many collectors and investors. >>
I am not talking about what increased more. I am talking about from a personal view point that I won't buy a soft 10, and pay 10 money, when it looks like a 7. I don't want to look at some eyesore like that and know I have a ton of money in it, when I could have a sharp 9 that looks way better, and for a fraction of the price.
Hey, if some people want to buy based solely on the label, and not the actual card in the holder, they can have at it. It's just not for me. The examples you have given above are close to topping out, in my opinion. When the next bubble pops in this economy(it's just a matter of time), there are going to be a lot of people holding the bag on these modern high grade rookie cards that have exploded in price. Better them than me. >>
So you are predicting these PSA 10's will go down and have topped?
So you know the future?
Good luck with your 9's, I assure you they will most likely be a worst investment than a 10. But at least your 9's have more "eye appeal" and are more affordable. >>
Why be snarky and snobbish about things?
Do I know the future? No, but I can tell you that the economic experts say a correction is coming in the markets. Plus, these modern high grade rookies have exploded so much, that a ceiling can only go so high. It's not like they are a 52' Mantle.
I never said what I personally have one way or the other. I said I would take a high end 9 over a 10 that didn't fit what I think a 10 should look like.
Some of us don't view or use cards as an investment. Some of us just enjoy looking at them. Apparently, that is where you and I differ.
This sold for $698
The current bid on this one is $4,800
Collectors, which one would you take?
<< <i>Ok, after some researching, I think I have finally figured out how to post pics, so here I go.
This sold for $698
The current bid on this one is $4,800
Collectors, which one would you take? >>
To be honest with you as a collector, I would take pride in owning a 10.