Ty Cobb Card Market?

[orly57]

No peter, that would be madness, and inevitably lead to anarchy. I am proposing that we use the grades as guidelines, but not get so hung up on them when applying value. And I propose that a crease on the face be treated more harshly than an innocuous invisible crease. Same with paper loss.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by orly57

No peter, that would be madness, and inevitably lead to anarchy. I am proposing that we use the grades as guidelines, but not get so hung up on them when applying value. And I propose that a crease on the face be treated more harshly than an innocuous invisible crease. Same with paper loss.

This seems a straw man point. Nobody uses grades as the sole determinant of value, or suggested that. Certainly Greg did not, as I read it.

[orly57]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This seems a straw man point. Nobody uses grades as the sole determinant of value, or suggested that. Certainly Greg did not, as I read it.

Or it is maybe THE PREMISE OF THIS ENTIRE THREAD.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by orly57

Or it is maybe THE PREMISE OF THIS ENTIRE THREAD.

I don't think so. Nobody said only the grade matters. But it matters some. It would be as foolish to think the grade is irrelevant, as to think it's the sole determinant. It's some combination of both in most cases except where it's a truly commodity card in which case the flip rules.

[barrysloate]

Hi Greg,
Thanks for your comments and I don't want to get in the middle of an argument here, but my feeling is grading is subjective and that there really aren't that many objective standards in the grading process. That's why I hate the numeric grades cards receive because it's pretending that there really is an objective and precise standard. That's why the same card can be resubmitted several times and get a different grade each time.

I think eye appeal is very important and should be part of the grading process. If a card is ugly for the grade, good chance it's overgraded. If it's "the best 3 I've ever seen", maybe it is in fact better than a 3. I'm just not a big fan of third party grading in its current form, and think it could be done a whole lot better. Not saying I have the answer to how it should be done, I'm just not a fan.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I think eye appeal is very important and should be part of the grading process.

I disagree. The problem with the single number is people paying the same for all PSA 3 Cobbs, which here our buyer obviously did not do. The purpose of TPG, particularly in the internet age -- and with Heritage's super-bright scans, which the buyer here acknowledged above -- is to show the hidden flaws. That card would've been sold as EX-MT 25-30 years ago. Not today.

As I've said before here, grading is a pyramid. At the top, you have the 10s. 10 means perfection and thus all 10s will be identical. As you go down the pyramid, grades are set for a variety of reasons -- 9s almost all look the same, but 3s, 2s and 1s have a huge number of potential flaws, including paper loss on reverse, creasing, corner wear, etc. What makes a card a PSA 2 could be a variety of factors that tell you nothing about the eye appeal of the card without looking at it.

Professional grading is not designed to reflect eye appeal. It is designed to point out flaws, often hard to see or hidden, in a piece of card board. When you see a clean-looking SGC 30, you actually know there are a lot of hard to see flaws. When you see a badgered up SGC 30, what you see is what you get. But not all SGC 30s will look alike -- in fact, at that level of the "pyramid" you will have a lot of different looking cards.

This becomes problematic when sellers try to sell a PSA 2 for what a previous PSA 2 sold for. Without comparing both cards, going by the number alone gets you nowhere because what you don't know about the previous card is whether the damage was similar or whether the eye-appeal was comparable. Sometimes you can get a pretty good deal on a nice looking 2 when a seller is willing to use a previous ugly 2 as a comparable. This is why they say, "Buy the card, not the holder." Which is exactly what our buyer did this time -- kudos to an intelligent market decision!

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

I disagree. The problem with the single number is people paying the same for all PSA 3 Cobbs, which here our buyer obviously did not do. The purpose of TPG, particularly in the internet age -- and with Heritage's super-bright scans, which the buyer here acknowledged above -- is to show the hidden flaws. That card would've been sold as EX-MT 25-30 years ago. Not today.

As I've said before here, grading is a pyramid. At the top, you have the 10s. 10 means perfection and thus all 10s will be identical. As you go down the pyramid, grades are set for a variety of reasons -- 9s almost all look the same, but 3s, 2s and 1s have a huge number of potential flaws, including paper loss on reverse, creasing, corner wear, etc. What makes a card a PSA 2 could be a variety of factors that tell you nothing about the eye appeal of the card without looking at it.

Professional grading is not designed to reflect eye appeal. It is designed to point out flaws, often hard to see or hidden, in a piece of card board. When you see a clean-looking SGC 30, you actually know there are a lot of hard to see flaws. When you see a badgered up SGC 30, what you see is what you get. But not all SGC 30s will look alike -- in fact, at that level of the "pyramid" you will have a lot of different looking cards.

This becomes problematic when sellers try to sell a PSA 2 for what a previous PSA 2 sold for. Without comparing both cards, going by the number alone gets you nowhere because what you don't know about the previous card is whether the damage was similar or whether the eye-appeal was comparable. Sometimes you can get a pretty good deal on a nice looking 2 when a seller is willing to use a previous ugly 2 as a comparable. This is why they say, "Buy the card, not the holder." Which is exactly what our buyer did this time -- kudos to an intelligent market decision!

right when you get down to cards with flaws.....i call it the 'authentic' principle...

not all authentics are alike..some can go for 2x and 3x mroe than the next..same with PSA 1s......and now people are starting to see it on the less flawed but still flawed cards in the psa 2-3 range....... huge spectrums on that range that can overlap the next or even next 2 grade ranges..... plus centered cards almost have their own range and not limited to the VCP range....needs to be a 'centered VCP" site..

[rats60]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

I disagree. The problem with the single number is people paying the same for all PSA 3 Cobbs, which here our buyer obviously did not do. The purpose of TPG, particularly in the internet age -- and with Heritage's super-bright scans, which the buyer here acknowledged above -- is to show the hidden flaws. That card would've been sold as EX-MT 25-30 years ago. Not today.

As I've said before here, grading is a pyramid. At the top, you have the 10s. 10 means perfection and thus all 10s will be identical. As you go down the pyramid, grades are set for a variety of reasons -- 9s almost all look the same, but 3s, 2s and 1s have a huge number of potential flaws, including paper loss on reverse, creasing, corner wear, etc. What makes a card a PSA 2 could be a variety of factors that tell you nothing about the eye appeal of the card without looking at it.

Professional grading is not designed to reflect eye appeal. It is designed to point out flaws, often hard to see or hidden, in a piece of card board. When you see a clean-looking SGC 30, you actually know there are a lot of hard to see flaws. When you see a badgered up SGC 30, what you see is what you get. But not all SGC 30s will look alike -- in fact, at that level of the "pyramid" you will have a lot of different looking cards.

This becomes problematic when sellers try to sell a PSA 2 for what a previous PSA 2 sold for. Without comparing both cards, going by the number alone gets you nowhere because what you don't know about the previous card is whether the damage was similar or whether the eye-appeal was comparable. Sometimes you can get a pretty good deal on a nice looking 2 when a seller is willing to use a previous ugly 2 as a comparable. This is why they say, "Buy the card, not the holder." Which is exactly what our buyer did this time -- kudos to an intelligent market decision!

But isn't eye appeal a big part of being exceptional for the grade and worthy of the half point bump? At a minimum, this card should have been a 3.5. It is better than any 3 Green Cobb that I have seen. It is better than the last 2 4s that sold and why it sold for more than those cards. I think the buyer has a 4.5 in a 3 holder and someone with pull will get it in a 4.5 holder one day.

[botn]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Hi Greg,
Thanks for your comments and I don't want to get in the middle of an argument here, but my feeling is grading is subjective and that there really aren't that many objective standards in the grading process. That's why I hate the numeric grades cards receive because it's pretending that there really is an objective and precise standard. That's why the same card can be resubmitted several times and get a different grade each time.

I think eye appeal is very important and should be part of the grading process. If a card is ugly for the grade, good chance it's overgraded. If it's "the best 3 I've ever seen", maybe it is in fact better than a 3. I'm just not a big fan of third party grading in its current form, and think it could be done a whole lot better. Not saying I have the answer to how it should be done, I'm just not a fan.

Hi Barry,

I am not sure why the op decided to start an argument with me. I was not giving my opinion on whether the grading standards were right or wrong. Only trying to suggest that most times a card has a technical flaw that renders a grade much lower than the card would appear and upon examination in hand based on current grading standards, the grade would be justifiable.

Eye appeal should play apart in a grade but beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the grading process is supposed to be an objective process following certain guidelines but at the end of the day we have people making these calls. The market has always been sophisticated and compensates where the grading process has "failed". A nice 4 might sell for more than an average 6. I see it all the time and support that market as both a buyer and a seller.

Greg

[aaroncc]

Copied from PSA website.



The Importance of Eye Appeal and Subjectivity in Grading


Over the years, more and more collectors have come to understand the basic guidelines behind PSA grading. After grading for well over a decade, PSA grading standards have truly become the official standard for the most valuable cards in the hobby. That being said, there are a host of grading questions that arise and the one basic question that comes up the most has to do with eye appeal and centering.

While it's true that a large part of grading is objective (locating print defects, staining, surface wrinkles, measuring centering, etc.), the other component of grading is somewhat subjective. The best way to define the subjective element is to do so by posing a question: What will the market accept for this particular issue?

Again, the vast majority of grading is applied with a basic, objective standard but no one can ignore the small (yet sometimes significant) subjective element. This issue will usually arise when centering and/or eye appeal are in question. For example, while most cards fall clearly within the centering guidelines for a particular grade, some cards fall either just within or just outside the printed centering standards. The key point to remember is that the graders reserve the right, based on the strength or weakness of the eye appeal, to make a judgment call on the grade of a particular card.

What does this mean exactly?

Well, take this example. Let's say you have a 1955 Topps Sandy Koufax rookie card that is right on the edge of the acceptable guidelines for centering in a particular grade. The 1955 Koufax card has a yellow background that tends to blend with the border of the card. In other words, the contrast isn't great, so poor centering may not be much of an eyesore – the borders are not clearly defined. In this case, if the card exhibits extremely strong characteristics in other areas (color, corners, etc.), an exception may be made to allow an otherwise slightly off-center card to fall within an unqualified grade (no OC qualifier). This is a rare occurrence but it does happen.

On the other hand, there are cards that technically fall within the printed PSA Grading Standards that may be prevented from reaching a particular unqualified grade because the eye appeal becomes an issue. For example, a 1957 Topps Sandy Koufax card has great contrast between the white borders and the picture because the background is very dark. It is possible that a 1957 Topps Sandy Koufax, one that technically measures for a particular grade – let's say 70/30, may be prevented from reaching that unqualified grade because the market would view that card as off-center – based on eye appeal issues. Again, this is a rare occurrence but it does happen from time to time when a judgment call has to be made on a card that pushes the limits for centering.

In conclusion, the issues discussed do not apply to the vast majority of cards that filter through the PSA grading process each day but this is an issue that needed some clarification in the marketplace. The bottom line is that there are times when a PSA grader must make a call on a card that falls on the line between two grades and that final determination is made based on experience, eye appeal and market acceptability.

[BeanTown]

What does it take to become a grader at either SGC or PSA? I think I've read on a previous thread that PSA graders are allowed like 15 seconds to look at a card, to determine the grade. Maybe that applies in what kind of service the customer paid for or value of the card?

Grading changed the hobby, which has allowed for subjective opinions to be traded like commodities.

I would have loved to see a grading company back in the early 2000s, just grade the card saying it's either fake, altered, or genuine and un tampered with. In other words KIS (Keep It Simple).

[Tim Kindler]

Sam,
Congratulations on landing a beautiful Cobb! I've always thought that whether you can easily afford a card like this, or you have scratched and scraped to earn extra spending money for a long time to purchase a card like this; as long as you are happy with it, then its a good buy no matter what happens in the market place.
Happy Collecting Everyone!
Tim Kindler

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by Tim Kindler

Sam,
Congratulations on landing a beautiful Cobb! I've always thought that whether you can easily afford a card like this, or you have scratched and scraped to earn extra spending money for a long time to purchase a card like this; as long as you are happy with it, then its a good buy no matter what happens in the market place.
Happy Collecting Everyone!
Tim Kindler

+1. Congrats on the very pretty Cobb, Sam. Part of a great collection you have. We buy our cards for our enjoyment with our own money, not so some stranger on the internet can tell us if they think we made a wise investment, or not.

[Westside]

Originally Posted by Tim Kindler

Sam,
Congratulations on landing a beautiful Cobb! I've always thought that whether you can easily afford a card like this, or you have scratched and scraped to earn extra spending money for a long time to purchase a card like this; as long as you are happy with it, then its a good buy no matter what happens in the market place.
Happy Collecting Everyone!
Tim Kindler

+2

[Westside]

I bought a heavily creased red background T206 Ty Cobb back in 2002 or there abouts for $350 off Ebay and sold it a year later for $325. I didnt really buy many cards or really keep up with the hobby for a few years. During that time, I regretted selling the card and decided a couple years ago to buy another. I was surprised when I started looking around how much the prices had gone up. I found one a couple months ago with a small chuck missing and a little paper loss on the back for $400 which I bought. I actually like it better than my first Cobb. Could I have gotten one similar cheaper? In other words, did I over pay? I have no idea, and I don't care. I am really happy with it. That's is what is most important to me.

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This seems a straw man point. Nobody uses grades as the sole determinant of value, or suggested that. Certainly Greg did not, as I read it.

I think SOME people do, cuz we've seen examples of the SAME card magically reholdered in a slab with a higher grade and it sells at an AH for many multiples of the original sale price. The registry sometimes drives blind love for the grade on the flip regardless of what is inside the plastic.

[Touch'EmAll]

The market recognized that not all 3's are the same. The market took into account all facets of the card - the great centering, color, focus...and a minor technical flaw that makes the flip read "3". All things considered, the market priced the card high and possibly very correct when compared to an average "3".