Buying the holder: T222 Alexander

[bcornell]

[REMOVED] This forum is done.

[fkw]

The T222 and T200 cards are real photos, not printed.

I always thought the image would be completely ruined if water was applied to it, just like most any real photograph.

That said the back does look washed out.

[Ease]

I see what you're talking about, but that's a heckuva nice card too either way.

[Matthew H]

You've got to admit... It is a beautiful holder.

[jimivintage]

Bill,

As you know I once had a nice sized collection of these beauties, and you certainly helped me along the way. During that span of time, I refused to touch a PSA graded T222.....just something fishy about the grading. It is certainly "washed out" or liquidated somehow. In my opinion, if we were to take the card out of the holder we'd certainly be able to determine it fairly quickly.

[jimivintage]

Forgot to mention in the last post. The "baggy" look is terrible in the holder, too. I'd be fearing these photographs would have have the corners "flaking off" as they are sort of just floating around in the holder. I wonder how many times the owner had to tap the edge to make it look perfectly centered in the holder! :)

[brianp-beme]

Not a PSA defender but couldn't the washed out look be the result of how the icky 'bag' that encases this card reflected the light when it was scanned?

Brian

[FrankWakefield]

More times than not, when I've broken a card out of a PSA holder where there's a sleeve or baggy involved, the card was laying atop the bag, and was not in it. Would they do that so the card image was clearer, only having to be seen through one layer of plastic, the slab? Or out of laziness or carelessness? Why?

I agree, that card looks slightly odd. I've not seen PSA getting bunches of these wrong, but I don't doubt what you say. I have seen SGC graded Fatima cards and they all seemed fine.

[philliesphan]

Bill-

What do you suggest the card be graded? Your start your post with "buying the holder", and I understand your concerns with this particular example. But I do not know what you are suggesting it should be graded instead.

For a T222, it does not appear to have significant cracking, fading, or fold lines which mar so many examples from the set. The image on the front is clear, with strong contrast, unlike the vast majority of examples that I typically see available in auctions / for sale.

From a pricing perspective, it seems like there was a steep decline in the price of this card since its last sale.

Are you suggesting that this should be in an Authentic holder? Something else?

[Leon]

IF I were grading the card I would not grade it above vg.....on a good day maybe vg-ex, but most likely vg. That back does look all washed out. I still remember, a year or so ago, I called a major auction house that had around 25-40 of the Frederick Foto cards in auction, all in PSA 2 holders.....except the cards didn't have borders. The guy at the auction house told me he thought they were all trimmed, as I did too.
That doesn't look like regular ole wear on the back, to me. If it was then there would be some creasing or wrinkles.

[bcornell]

Marc -

I was wondering that same thing after I posted. To my eyes, this card should be in an "Auth" holder because I think it has significant damage. But I suppose someone else might say PSA 2 or some other grade.

For the sake of comparison, here are the back of 3 PSA 5 T222's. The Alexander card is sandwiched between Saier and Tyler.

http://t207.com/images/other/t222_saier_psa5_back.jpg http://t207.com/images/other/t222_alexander_psa5_back_bad.jpg http://t207.com/images/other/t222_tyler_psa5_back.jpg

[sb1]

I would venture a guess that the card was chemically removed from an album, water by itself would not wash out the back. As I recall there were a number of these on the market a couple of years ago, with the backs each faded such as this one.