I have often argued that there are certain words and phrases that are used in the antiques and collectibles trade that ought to be stricken from the lexicon. There are also other terms like rare, mint, investment grade, and vintage that are often used incorrectly, sometimes by mistake, but other times to deceive. That said, terms such as rare, mint, investment grade, and vintage do have their necessary place in the trade and are vital when used properly. I have written about these terms in previous articles. Today, I want to discuss a condition qualifying phrase that I see quite often when scrolling through online auction sites like eBay. The phrase is collector quality condition. At first glance seeing the term may seem harmless, but I assure you it is not. I have never heard a savvy collector or dealer use the term collector quality condition to describe an item that they were either buying, selling, or otherwise collecting. This is quite simply due to the fact that the term makes absolutely no sense to anyone who is a true collector, and I can prove it quite simply with several key examples. Lets suppose you are a high-end collector of vintage comic books and are lucky enough to have a budget in the millions of dollars. You want to go after a major Golden Age key book like Action Comics #1 (first appearance of Superman) or Detective Comics #27 (first appearance of Batman). Both of these books arguably meet the definition of being rare. However, being able to locate either of these books in unrestored top tier condition is next to impossible because only a handful of what can be considered high grade copies exist, and most of these copies are sitting locked away in high-end collections. As such, even the most skilled collector with an unlimited budget would be happy to own either of these books in any grade possible, especially given the fact that there are completed auction sales showing that a copy of Action Comics #1 in CGC 0.5 (poor condition) sold for close to $500,000 in the past year! Make no mistake, there are also a few copies of Action Comics #1 that have been graded by CGC in 9.0 and higher condition, but any copy of Action Comics #1 can easily be considered to be collector quality condition. And this brings me to my point. Using the description qualifier of collector condition quality and applying it to this item is completely meaningless. Now I already know what my critics are going to say--most collectors are not buying a copy of Action Comics #1, so this is a bad example. Okay, lets use an affordable key vintage comic book to prove this point. Amazing Spider-Man #300 (first appearance of Venom) is a key issue book that is readily available due to the fact it was printed in 1988 and hoarded. Just by looking at the population reports that comic book grading company CGC regularly updates, there have been tens of thousands of copies of this book graded and readily available on the open market. Extremely high-grade copies of this book do sell for thousands of dollars, but lets assume that in this case the collector in question wants a low or mid-grade copy for his collection. Is this book not in collector quality condition simply because it is considered to be a lower grade copy? This book is still in demand from a collector just like the higher grade copy that may or may not meet the definition of investment grade. As a result, the term collector quality condition is worthless and tells the would-be buyer nothing about the item in question. Whats worse, I have seen eBay listings that show an item like this being listed without any third-party grading and the description states the item is in collector quality condition, along with the disclaimer that the the buyer should check out the pictures provided to assess the overall condition of the item. After reading this description that went viral on certain online collecting forums for all the wrong reasons, I can confirm my head is sore from banging it against the wall because I thought that was more productive than attempting to engage with the would-be seller. Even if one was to list the item in question with an accurate assessment of the items condition, the term collector quality condition still adds nothing to the description of the item. Still not convinced that the phrase collector quality condition is meaningless? Log on to any coin collecting forum or any vintage Star Wars collecting forum and youll see what I mean. Personally, as a collector who also invests in a lot of these items, I tend to go after high-grade third-party graded examples of the items I collect. That said, I fully recognize that the collectibles trade is made up of a diverse demographic. I am confident that if one lists a 1908 $5 gold coin graded by PCGS in MS64 (mint state) condition and another in AU50 (almost uncirculated), both will find a buyer. Calling either item collector quality condition does nothing to help the buyer, as both will be bought by collectors. The same is as true for a high-grade highly sought after vintage Star Wars action figure as it is for a low condition specimen of the same figure. You can apply this same concept to any antique or collectible in the trade. In conclusion, I do know that a lot of collectible resellers read this column. Please remove the term collector quality condition from your listings. Do you ever see a high-end auction company promote something as collector quality condition? I can cite no recent example of the term ever being used by Heritage Auctions, Sothebys or Christies, among others. The term should be struck from everyones lexicon and never used. Thanks for reading. Shawn Surmick has been an avid collector since the age of 12. He currently resides in his hometown of Boyertown, Pa., and is a passionate collector of antiques and collectibles. His articles focus on various topics affecting the marketplace.