![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I thought this might be an interesting question. What would you rather have both for collecting and for resale purposes? Since PSA essentially says that qualifier cards rank the same as an unqualified card two grades beneath it, I then have to ask...what would you RATHER have? A card with excellent corners or surface or edging with some grading imperfection leading to a MC, ST, MK or OC qualifier, or a card two grades below with no qualifiers?
9ST or a 7? 8MC or a 6? 4OC or a 2? etc. I'm interested in knowing your thoughts both for pure collection purposes, and for reselling. (I know the anti-graders are going to spit at this question, but I thought it interesting, as I know I have my opinions). |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
PSA 5. I hate those OC, MC, MK crap that PSA does. I don't want to get a grade then have to do math by subtracting 2 grades or 1.5 grades. I just want a flat grade.
Last edited by zljones; 03-27-2012 at 11:19 AM. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
PSA sucks! I would rather have an SGC 60.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I'd rather have a PSA 10.
But seriously, I would pick based on the appearance and appeal of the card - I have seen 2 and 3s present better than 5s, 6s.... |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I think the majority of collectors would prefer the "5" over one with a qualifier. However, if the price is right I will take a look at one with a qualifier as I think many grading "snobs" turn their nose away immediately...Example, while the centering is bad on this Clemente all the qualities of this card are pack-fresh ...I'm assuming this cards was submitted requesting NQ and got a 6 instead of an 8oc. Point is I would've bought this labeled 8oc or a "6", either way it's the same card.
![]() Last edited by mintacular; 03-27-2012 at 11:32 AM. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Would much rather have a t206 7oc with sharp corners than a well centered 5 with corner wear all day long....
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Also, pertaining your other examples on qualifiers, oc is a more forgiving qualifier than mk for example when it is an ink mark. Oc and mc are qualifiers that are factory and not man made....
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I would prefer the description to say 7OC over a 5 because I feel it is full disclosure. I personally Do Not buy MC/ST/MK graded cards as I feel they are far more than 2 grades below. If I were putting together a low grade set I have no problem with MK but a 9MK in my opinion is not the equivalent to a 7, it would have to be in the 1-3 range. Just my opinion.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Patrick, that Clemente is really "pack fresh". I would have no problem if all my cards looked that good! I think OC is so much in the eye of the grader. Here is a 54 Topps Ford I purchased from a board member, and here is a PSA8 from ebay. Which is more OC?
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
F/S T206-220 cards,Cobb & all 48 SL'ers | Julian Wells | Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T | 0 | 08-17-2010 02:55 PM |
T206 For Sale: 220 cards, Almost 50% of set | Julian Wells | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 08-01-2010 04:34 PM |
Vintage FOOTBALL for sale - Raw and/or Graded - Singles and Sets - 1930's & up | Shouldabeena10 | Everything Else, Football, Non-Sports etc.. B/S/T | 7 | 06-14-2010 06:09 AM |
Ozzie Smith Collection For Sale - All PSA 9 & 10 | ledsters | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 2 | 10-23-2009 09:13 PM |
Closed eBay store. All FSH. All sports - Raw, PSA, SGC, Lots, GU'd, 1949-2008 w/ FREE | lsutigers1973 | Everything Else, Football, Non-Sports etc.. B/S/T | 0 | 09-23-2009 11:32 AM |