Agreed that identification is the most valuable information provided by catalogs
Quote:
Scott or Gibbons could replace prices with ratings of R (for rarity) and give a range of values from common as mud (R) to only one known (RRRRRR add Rs until you create the highest category level you wish).
True, but that doesn't necessarily correlate to value, since it only addresses the supply side of the supply/demand relationship, and would likely lead to some seriously un-informed decisions on the part of buyers and sellers. It would have the advantage to the publisher of not having to reevaluate pricing on a regular basis. Providing a price
range would probably be helpful to new collectors and in many ways would be more accurate, but in the end that would probably just end up causing more confusion than the current system. The current Scott valuing system, for all its faults, is probably the least-bad option. It's not perfect, but for most people in the hobby, it works.
Posted 03/14/2016 1:27 pm
