Options
If you were going to sell this set, what condition rating would you describe it as?
corvette1340
Posts: 3,384 ✭✭✭
I am currently putting together a nice '69 set. Right now I have 2 PSA 9 commons, 65 PSA 8 commons, and 8 PSA 7 commons. The Mantle is a 7, the Jackson rookie is 7, Clemente 7, Fingers rookie 8, Brooks Robinson 8, Carew 8, Seaver 7, Mays 7.5, NL Batting Leaders 7. The raw cards are 15% NM/MT, 35% NM, 40% EX/MT, and 10% EX. I have around 100 left to complete and the rest of the star cards I don't have I plan to get in 7 or better. My question is what condition set is this? Right now I would say NM - NM/MT. I always put the % of each grade of the raw cards and scan all of the star cards and have gotten great feedback from all the high dollar sets I've sold. Thoughts?
0
Comments
Steve
50% of the set does not meet even the NM threshold.
Steve
<< <i>I would describe it as "two PSA 9, 68 PSA 8, one PSA 7.5, and 13 PSA 7; raw cards are 15% NM/MT, 35% NM, 40% EX/MT, and 10% EX" >>
good assessment.
<< <i>If by your own account you have 10% in EX and 40% in EX/MNT how can the set be NM/NM/MT?
50% of the set does not meet even the NM threshold.
Steve >>
so EX/MT - NM/MT?
Not sure what the question really is here, if it was mine I'd describe it exactly how you did
in your original post and how Tom did in his.
I think you are trying to find an average grade?
Steve
<< <i>so EX/MT - NM/MT? >>
No, if you're going to do that, then its EX- NM-MT.
With what you outlined so far, the fairest assessment of the ungraded portion of your partial set is 75% EX-MT to NM with 10% EX and 15% NM-MT.
<< <i>I always put the % of each grade of the raw cards and scan all of the star cards and have gotten great feedback from all the high dollar sets I've sold. Thoughts? >>
Then do the same? You have it broken down, list it as Nam said
Graded a 7.86 average
Raw a 7.04 average.
Graded/Raw combined average of: 7.45
EDIT: I based the raw numbers on there being 100 cards. Now that I re-read your OP I see that is not the case.
My daughter was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at the age of 2 (2003). My son was diagnosed with Type 1 when he was 17 on December 31, 2009. We were stunned that another child of ours had been diagnosed. Please, if you don't have a favorite charity, consider giving to the JDRF (Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation)
JDRF Donation
selling a set with 65 commons in 8 and raw cards from Ex to whatever is being claimed here
IMO is not the way to max dollars. I'd sell those 8 singly and if I was to sell a set it would be completely raw
sans the keys.
Steve
<< <i>Your cards work out to:
Graded a 7.86 average
Raw a 7.04 average.
Graded/Raw combined average of: 7.45
EDIT: I based the raw numbers on there being 100 cards. Now that I re-read your OP I see that is not the case. >>
average around NM+. If I list I will probably list it like Nam said or like I did in the op. Of course, I am 100 or so cards away from completion and I'm sure I'll upgrade most if not all of the EX cards and most of the EX/MT before I sell (if I sell). The main thing is that I get all of the star cards in the NM - NM/MT category. The only two major cards I need now are the Ryan and Bench cards.
All of that being said, if it's an average NM+ set ( NM SMR $9217 NM/MT $20,610) I will be lucky to get $6000 for it.
<< <i>Is selling a set like this even worthwhile? I could see getting the key cards graded but
selling a set with 65 commons in 8 and raw cards from Ex to whatever is being claimed here
IMO is not the way to max dollars. I'd sell those 8 singly and if I was to sell a set it would be completely raw
sans the keys.
Steve >>
I built a '64 set just like this and after repackaging cards from dozens of lots I bought and selling I ended up having just under $1800 in the set. I sold it for $3500.
Edit to say that it took me a lot of time to do this, but it's fun for me to sit at work and mess around with all of my set lists and spread sheets while I'd otherwise be doing nothing or playing online poker.
chaz
<< <i>PSA 5
chaz >>
lol, PSA should start slabbing entire sets. That would be a big ass holder, but it would keep all the guess work out of rating a set. By the way, if they get the idea for doing this, I'm gonna ask for royalties or sue.
<< <i>.........I will be lucky to get $6000 for it. >>
If you got over $2,000 for it, cartwheels would be in order, and you would owe the buyer dinner every Saturday evening for a month at the restaurant of his choice.
<< <i>
<< <i>.........I will be lucky to get $6000 for it. >>
If you got over $2,000 for it, cartwheels would be in order, and you would owe the buyer dinner every Saturday evening for a month at the restaurant of his choice. >>
I'll bet you the $2000 right now that it brings at least $3000 and I won't buy any more graded cards for it.
Steve
<< <i>I'll bet you the $2000 right now that it brings at least $3000 and I won't buy any more graded cards for it. >>
And he's back.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'll bet you the $2000 right now that it brings at least $3000 and I won't buy any more graded cards for it. >>
And he's back. >>
lol, so you can state your opinion on what you think the set will get and I can't state that I think you are wrong? A friendly wager isn't out of line.
<< <i>I've got a C-note on LSU tonight. >>
probably a good bet, although Texas is scrappy and definitely won't roll over.
LSU is a -140 lay right now, so if you got them even then it's definitely a good bet.
Steve
<< <i>2k is not a friendly wager.......fanning flames.
Steve >>
Steve, to some it is.
I was just emphasizing that I think I could finish the set out raw and still list the raw condition as 15%NM/MT, 35% NM, 40%EX/MT, and 10% EX and still get at least $3000 for it. I would buy the Bench, Ryan, and other star cards I'm missing raw in NM condition.
Edit to say that Nam might be right and it might not bring $2000, but I'd be willing to gamble on it.
2k is way out of line.
Steve
<< <i>Well since we were once chastised by Carol for gambling here
2k is way out of line.
Steve >>
who is Carol? I've never been chastised for gambling.
<< <i>who is Carol? >>
My future ex-wife
<< <i>
<< <i>who is Carol? >>
My future ex-wife >>
Kiss me twice.....let's party.
<< <i>How is the Mike Shannon and the Lou Brock. Are we talking PSA 8 candidates? I agree with a previous poster, you'll maximize your $$$ selling the hi-grade cards individually. >>
I haven't got the Shannon yet. The Brock is EX/MT - possibly NM on a good day. I'm just using the same formula that almost doubled my profit on the '64 set. I've been buying the star cards at well below VCP average. I got the Mantle PSA 7 for $220 minus my 8% ebay coupon last night for a total of $209 after shipping and insurance. The VCP average on that card was $280 with the low being $230 before my buy. I also got the Seaver, Jackson Rookie, and other star cards at great buys imo. This set might not do as well as the '64 set did but like I said, it is fun for me to build over a few months while sitting at work.
"Common sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it"
<< <i>I've compiled a large database of sales history for complete sets over the past few years, and if history chooses to repeat itself, I predict it sells for $2600-$3000, maybe even a little higher with the large quantity of graded cards. Good luck with it! >>
thanks.
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
Steve
VCP shows that the price you paid for the Mantle (excluding the discount) was close to normal when you take into account that it was off-center both ways. The lowest price before that was $202 with several 7's selling in the $230 range.
If you can find nicely centered key cards that *don't* sell for a premium (occasionally, that happens), those pay off the most imo even if you're paying close to the VCP average.
As for your wager offer, I do not accept, but it is not out of cowardice. Win or lose I like to look my opponent in the eyes. So, if you're ever in NY come look me in the eye and shake my hand so I can size up what kind of man you are. Then and only then would you be able to gamble with me. You can have the 8 and 9 wild, and 2 on the wire to 9.
<< <i>Sorry I was away for a few hours and could not respond. Has corvette wiped his ass with all of our paychecks yet?
As for your wager offer, I do not accept, but it is not out of cowardice. Win or lose I like to look my opponent in the eyes. So, if you're ever in NY come look me in the eye and shake my hand so I can size up what kind of man you are. Then and only then would you be able to gamble with me. You can have the 8 and 9 wild, and 2 on the wire to 9. >>
Nam, I'll take that spot for $5000 and then we can go to the golf course and you can have 2 a side for the same bet.
Edit to say, that all internet wagers I make for more than $1000 the money is always escrowed. So, in saying you need to see me, I would always make someone I don't know post up as well.
<< <i>Nam, I'll take that spot for $5000 and then we can go to the golf course and you can have 2 a side for the same bet. >>
The spot I offered you in pool without ever seeing you hold a stick is enormously more than the tiny spot you've offered in golf. Unfortunately I dont golf, but you've just shown me something about you that I've long suspected. You're not a gambler at all, you're a locksmith.
<< <i>You may be too far into this now, but I think your set would do better at auction if most of the key cards are well centered. Even a well centered Mantle psa 6 would generate more interest for the set imo than an off-center 7. Most buyers know that off centered cards sell for below average prices, and just their presentation can be a turnoff.
VCP shows that the price you paid for the Mantle (excluding the discount) was close to normal when you take into account that it was off-center both ways. The lowest price before that was $202 with several 7's selling in the $230 range.
If you can find nicely centered key cards that *don't* sell for a premium (occasionally, that happens), those pay off the most imo even if you're paying close to the VCP average. >>
VCP average for the PSA 7 Mantle is $280 and the low is $230. And yes, I agree that the one I bought is relatively low end and off center more than most, but I've found that buyers of the sets I sold pay more attention to grades than appearance of individual cards, even Mantles. So in that regard, it was better for me to buy a low end 7 with no qualifier than to buy a high end 6 for the same price.
<< <i>
<< <i>Nam, I'll take that spot for $5000 and then we can go to the golf course and you can have 2 a side for the same bet. >>
The spot I offered you in pool without ever seeing you hold a stick is enormously more than the tiny spot you've offered in golf. Unfortunately I dont golf, but you've just shown me something about you that I've long suspected. You're not a gambler at all, you're a locksmith. >>
locksmith, nit, whatever you want to call me. I generally get the cheese when I gamble. I've never understood why people, usually around the billiards industry like to woof at people for being smart about gambling. The only person I've ever staked for more than $10,000 was Stevie Moore and it was straight stealing. That's why most pool players stay broke, because they "gamble" too much. The smarter ones gamble but usually have the best of it.
I saw the Mantle, I hope the 8's look better.
Fanning away.............
Steve
<< <i>Can we please see some scans?
I saw the Mantle, I hope the 8's look better.
Fanning away.............
Steve >>
The only ones I have on hand are the Clemente 7, B. Robinson 8, and Jackson rookie 7(which has good centering), along with all of the PSA 8 commons. I'll wait until I get the other graded stars in hand and then I'll scan them all. I assume that whomever sent the Mantle in to be graded asked for no qualifiers or it would have been a 9 (OC).
Now producing a PSA 7 Brock on top of that just legitimizes the whole set IMO.
It seems to me this is an example of an off grade set piggybacking on some graded stars. At least, that's how I would approach it as a bidder.
Kiss me twice.....let's party.
I thought that too...about the Mantle.
You can scan some of the raw? Scan some that you feel are representative of the set.
If you really want to make a nice set go for the white letters too.
Steve
<< <i>Tommy
I thought that too...about the Mantle.
You can scan some of the raw? Scan some that you feel are representative of the set.
If you really want to make a nice set go for the white letters too.
Steve >>
If I decide to keep it then I will just sell the Mantle and get a nice 7 or 8 and probably do the white letter too. I'll scan some of the raw cards tomorrow.
Steve
<< <i>Wow, $200 for a PSA 7 Mantle, that's sweet. I picked up a PSA 7 Ryan for $110 dlvd on ebay, and I have to say its a 7.5 candidate no sweat. You can get away with a lot set condition wise if you produce the big three Mantle, Ryan and Jackson in PSA 7 or better.
Now producing a PSA 7 Brock on top of that just legitimizes the whole set IMO.
It seems to me this is an example of an off grade set piggybacking on some graded stars. At least, that's how I would approach it as a bidder. >>
Most bidders will look at it that way until they see the entire listing.
The reason my sets have done well in the past is because I list them with about 50 or more pictures and scans. They are always up close, high res. scans and show the condition of the cards to be dead on my description. Here is the last '64 set I sold. I've deleted the photos from photobucket but you can see the description.
'64 set
Steve