Mid-Grade Collectors

jchcollins · #1 05-24-2018, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MCoxon

Also, if you look at old Beckett guides, it would have "percent discount from mint" for various grades, and my recollection that Ex-Mt might have been at 75% of value of mint, whereas now, I notice almost a doubling at every PSA number grade for 1950s cards, so that a PSA 9 price (mint) would dwarf a PSA 6 in price.l

Beckett ranges (& don't get me started on how some people always thought the left column was for NM and the right was VG...) were stated to be for NM cards for pre-1980. If you had 1950's cards that were truly better than NM (again, as subjective as this is today, it was even crazier what people thought back in the 80's) then that was some range 100% or more of "book" value based on what the card was. Clearly the percentage for Mickey Mantle was higher using this line of thinking than Mickey Vernon.

I remember one case where a dealer actually pulled this on me - wanting more $ for a card because it was in "better than" NM condition. The term NM-MT was not yet en vogue, and it certainly was not associated with the number 8. But the point I believe was the same. The card in question was a 1958 Topps Yogi Berra, which I bought because it was so nice, but paid wayyyyy too much for by today's standards. It was nice, but may have been a PSA 6 today because of the centering. I'm not a centering freak. I don't generally like worse than 80/20 up to miscut cards (there are some rare exceptions), but have a tolerance for it beyond that. Today as back then, if my first impression of a card is that the centering is acceptable, I move on and then generally don't consider it again - I just admire the card. Then sometime later someone will be all like "Well that's nice except for the 65/35..." and I'll be dumbfounded. I digress - another large point to be made is that before professional grading - many, many EX-MT or so vintage cards were routinely described as NM to Gem Mint by dealers who sold through the mail - and in the 1980's and earlier, this was often done sans any pictures. I imagine that many, many off-centered "mint" cards were sold at mint prices back in the day.

thatkidfromjerrymaguire · #2 05-24-2018, 05:19 PM

For me, mid-grade cards provide the best bang for the buck. Would I prefer to have Mint condition vintage cards? Sure! They are beautiful and investment quality. However, my budget doesn't allow that.

I do not want cards with creases, marks, or paper loss...but other than that, mid grade cards will still have great visual appeal and are fun to handle. So VG to EX is the sweet spot for my collection. I typically don't need them graded, unless it's a higher dollar card, and then the only reason I want them graded is to confirm they are authentic and unaltered.

toppcat · #3 05-24-2018, 05:39 PM

Ex or Ex-Mt is fine for me for 60's and 70's cards, VG-EX even for earlier 50's cards even. I've been dabbling in newer stuff (90's and up) but for those I am only collecting 10's.

CobbSpikedMe · #4 05-24-2018, 07:10 PM

It's really nice to see so many of you like the mid-grade stuff. I even like the low-grade cards too. Sometimes I get discouraged when the pick up threads turn into a show and tell of super expensive cards. Don't get me wrong, I love the pick up threads and seeing when folks pick up nice cards, but I can't compete with those. I should also say that even when I do rarely post one of my lower grade pick ups I still get good feedback from the board which is encouraging.

Here's one of my lower grade gems...

Nick55 · #5 05-24-2018, 09:17 PM

Congrats on picking up the '54 Jackie Robinson!

geosluggo · #6 05-25-2018, 06:12 PM

I admit some envy when I see really nice professionally graded cards from the 1950s and '60s. But I like building sets and don't have a ton of money. Here are a few cards from the 1956 set I completed a couple years ago. The Mantle was actually a graded card that I liberated from its slab. Don't remember the grade but I know I paid more than $100 but less than $150 for it -- the most I spent on any card in that set. The Ted Williams is a card I acquired as a kid in the late 1970s. Most of my commons are in nicer shape than these stars.

Nick55 · #7 05-26-2018, 06:59 AM

The Koufax and '56's look great. I love the stories behind them.

irv · #8 05-25-2018, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe

It's really nice to see so many of you like the mid-grade stuff. I even like the low-grade cards too. Sometimes I get discouraged when the pick up threads turn into a show and tell of super expensive cards. Don't get me wrong, I love the pick up threads and seeing when folks pick up nice cards, but I can't compete with those. I should also say that even when I do rarely post one of my lower grade pick ups I still get good feedback from the board which is encouraging.

Here's one of my lower grade gems...

Same here, and I also appreciate it.

Nice Jackie, BTW.

CobbSpikedMe · #9 05-25-2018, 05:24 PM

Thanks for the kind words regarding the Jackie guys!! 1954 Topps is my favorite vintage Topps set and that was my first big card for the set. I only need some commons and the Banks and Aaron now.

You've made me feel like sharing another low grade gem from my collection. This Koufax was bought for $10 when I was a kid and that was a lot of money for me back then when packs were $0.25 each.

It's one of my favorite cards in my collection and always will be.

JunkyJoe · #10 03-08-2019, 04:42 PM

Glad to have found this conversation hub on the interwebs. I started collecting when I was a kid, so, about 30+ years ago. Managed to thin out the pile of junk wax over the years .... gave most of it away to thrift stores, and kept a couple for nostalgia (a couple shoe boxes full, that is). Among the junky stuff, of course, I made sure to save my short stack of Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr. cards that my nutty card collector uncle had given me (he had 2 closets overflowing with wax packs and sets back then). The late 80's/early 90's was a fun era ... lots of hype, cheap packs all over the place, lots of card shops with old worn down vintage cards to stare at and drool over. Off centered cards were the norm ... keeping those corners and edges razor sharp and keeping the surfaces clean and glossy, that was the name of the game back then.

Did some searches on ebay a few years ago and discovered that vast new wonderland of collecting. Back in the days of the card shops, I never could have imaged the future would be so bright. So these days, I enjoy being able to browse thousands of vintage cards from the 50's through the 70's from the leisure of my home. The way I see it, I would have to have $$ millions $$ to burn before I ever buy high grade vintage cards that are NM or nicer. The handled worn down cards have just so much more character, in my opinion. I actually think a crease-free VG or VG-EX 50's card with decent Left/Right centering is prettier to look at than a NM or Mint example of the same card. I don't spend big bucks ... $80 or $100 is a major card purchase for me. I don't mind even a small crease or two on a 50's or 60's card. I pretty much draw the line at badly miscut cards, cards that have been butchered, ugly print lines/wax stains, and ones that are badly out of focus. I love the cards with rounded corners, chipped edges, a light crease or two or three, and moderately faded colors (as long as it's not over the player's face). I feel like a kid in a candy store when I can score a couple of nice VG/VG-EX cards for $20 or $30.

71buc · #11 03-08-2019, 06:45 PM

Fun thread...I dont buy more than a handfull of cards each year. When I do I try to focus n HOFers between 1952 through 1973. I prefer to stay in the 350 to 500 range for the best PSA 6 I can find. It seems that with the current standards a PSA 6 is a very pretty card. Centering as long as it doesn't carry an OC qualifier bother me. On regional cards like the Wilson Frank's I will settle for a PSA 4 or 5 in my price range.

jchcollins · #12 03-14-2019, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 71buc

Fun thread...I dont buy more than a handfull of cards each year. When I do I try to focus n HOFers between 1952 through 1973. I prefer to stay in the 350 to 500 range for the best PSA 6 I can find. It seems that with the current standards a PSA 6 is a very pretty card. Centering as long as it doesn't carry an OC qualifier bother me. On regional cards like the Wilson Frank's I will settle for a PSA 4 or 5 in my price range.

I would agree that 6 is a pretty nice place to play in 1960�s cards and earlier. Unless just dramatically O/C, they usually have nice corners and surface features. Most of the newer 6�s (where PSA is being tough) and some cards present like 7�s or 8�s. If you don�t mind a bit more corner wear, I also think that PSA 4�s and 4.5�s are great value for the money. It takes awhile, but you can find centered 4�s of HOFer�s from the 50�s and 60�s for a fraction of the price that some truly high or investment grade cards sell for.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

GasHouseGang · #13 03-14-2019, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 71buc

Fun thread...I dont buy more than a handfull of cards each year. When I do I try to focus n HOFers between 1952 through 1973. I prefer to stay in the 350 to 500 range for the best PSA 6 I can find. It seems that with the current standards a PSA 6 is a very pretty card. Centering as long as it doesn't carry an OC qualifier bother me. On regional cards like the Wilson Frank's I will settle for a PSA 4 or 5 in my price range.

I'm pretty much the same as you Mike. I start getting nervous if I get much higher than $500. This card was on ebay and it looked nicer than most of the PSA6's I saw. When the 15% off day came I picked it up for a price I was more comfortable paying. The picture they had was taken with a phone and made it difficult to tell condition, but it turned out to be really nice for the grade. This is a scan I made.

ruth_rookie · #14 06-10-2019, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thatkidfromjerrymaguire

I do not want cards with creases, marks, or paper loss...but other than that, mid grade cards will still have great visual appeal and are fun to handle.

Agreed. Which made me wonder who�s buying the cards with those scarlet letters. Then I quickly realized that, to some extent, it�s me. I simply will not buy a card with a nasty crease, stain, or paper loss. Unless it�s been on my wish list for many years and the violations aren�t too obtrusive. For example, I recently bought a rookie Aaron in a PSA 2 slab. While viewing the front, you scratch your head because you swear you�re looking at a 6 and wonder why in the world it�s only a 2. Then closer examination of the back reveals paper loss the size of a pinhead. So I bought it � paid a grand for an otherwise EX-MT card. I�ll buy those all day long, but they have to be highly desirable cards impossible to find in high grade without getting into a bidding war and, ultimately, paying exponentially more for the same card without the flaw.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Buying collectors grade (F-G) of these 4 1959 Topps	Ed_Hutchinson	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	0	07-06-2017 03:50 PM
FS: Several Collectors Grade 1950s Mantles	j_bodensteiner	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	0	04-09-2016 02:55 PM
Plank, Collins and Evers - Collectors Grade *reduced	Tao_Moko	Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T	0	03-08-2015 10:01 PM
1971 T goldmine for off-grade collectors ~ 60% of the set!	JElwell	Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T	0	03-07-2014 09:43 AM
Collectors Forensic Register = Grade Tech Services Inc.?	Peter_Spaeth	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	23	11-13-2010 11:10 AM