Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman
I've been collecting data in an attempt to quantify this. It'll take a while for me to finish it (as I have little spare time), but what I've noticed is that it's really more the serial number than it is the holder itself (though they are highly correlated). The early serial numbers are almost all overgraded. There are exceptions obviously, as variance existed back then just as it does today, but the variance today is quite a bit wider than it was in the early days (which makes sense as they have a lot more graders today than they did back then). But the grade deltas aren't just 0.5 or 1 point off, they are often 2 full grades higher with early serials, and even sometimes upwards of 2.5 or 3 grades off (though that's rare). Putting a card like that into a new lighthouse slab might fool a few newer buyers, but it isn't going to fool the majority of collectors who are going to look at the card itself and make their own judgment.
I'm also working on a PSA serial number decoder algorithm to estimate when the card was graded. But cliff notes are that yes, early slabs/serials are absolutely worth less on average, and often times much, much less. This is more true for high-end cards than it is with set building commons since the set builders often care more about the grade than they do the card. But for guys like Ruth, Mantle, Mays, Jackie, Cobb, etc. it matters A LOT.
|
I think this just correlated generally - with definite exceptions - that an earlier cert number was a looser grading system than later cert numbers, particularly ones that start with a 6. Essentially people still pay for the card and not the holder but the more recent cert numbers tend to have nicer cards at the same
grade. Again, plenty of exceptions to the rule.