T206 PSA 6.5 Collins common back PWCC

[CMIZ5290]

Just ended, $1700...Big money

[Touch'EmAll]

The PSA 5 Cobb green just went little over $15.k, and bat off PSA 5 Cobb well over $6.k - whew!

[Sean]

And a T215 Tinker PSA 4 went for over $5K. I don't know the set well. Is that a shock to anyone else?

[DeanH3]

Stop the presses....... An SGC 3 Young portrait outsold a PSA 3 Young portrait! Thought that didn't happen even if the SGC example was better. ;)

[Jobu]

A PSA 5 with two chunks of paper loss on the back no less.


The PSA 5 Cobb green just went little over $15.k, and bat off PSA 5 Cobb well over $6.k - whew!

[frohme]

Even some T207 love - Sullivan PSA 5 went for > $400. One of the tough Recruit cards in most any grade, especially at or above PSA 3. Even 3 different bidders above $275

[ronniehatesjazz]

Even some T207 love - Sullivan PSA 5 went for > $400. One of the tough Recruit cards in most any grade, especially at or above PSA 3. Even 3 different bidders above $275

Yeah I was impressed with the prices on almost all of the T207's. Lost out on a few commons where I bidded much higher than I normally would. Was shocked I got outbid. Maybe it was for the best.

[Rhotchkiss]

I was the underbidder on the tinker Red Cross and I was sure $5l would get it done; guess I was wrong. Healthy t206 prices indeed. Someone, however, got a good price on a real pretty tinker portrait IMO

[Touch'EmAll]

The green Cobb 5, how it got into a PSA 5 holder w/2 parts paper loss??? And it also looks to be candidate for staining on back. Head scratcher for sure. The registry folks will pay for the flip I guess.

[3-2-count]

The green Cobb 5, how it got into a PSA 5 holder w/2 parts paper loss??? And it also looks to be candidate for staining on back. Head scratcher for sure. The registry folks will pay for the flip I guess.

This card is a good example of a flaw that Psa has in their service when collectors send in older flips for re-holder into newer slabs.

If this were just a slider 4 that made it's way into a 5 slab no big deal, but this card which was graded long ago was simply re-slabbed into the same numerical holder when sent back in not taking into consideration their miss first time around.

There are many others in the market as well, but this one sticks out like a sore thumb since it's a marquee card worth big bucks.

Psa's inefficiency to address this just compounds the problem in my opinion. Beautiful card though even though it should reside in a 2 slab!

[swarmee]

True Tony, but that's outside the scope of PSA's purview on a reholder. It's up to the owner of the card (in 99% of cases where PSA doesn't detect alteration or compromised slab during the reholder) to ask for a review with no minimum grade. At that point, the PSA guarantee would come into play, and PSA should/will regrade the card properly and pay the difference between the purchase price and the new value.
However, there's really no way for PSA to have all their cards "recalled" in order to standardize the grading at this point in time. Very few owners would approve of sending in their GPA 6.5 sets and having them returned with 5.3 instead even with a big check coming with it. Too much pride in the set registry. Plus, I wonder if such a recall would invalidate the price guarantee? Are they self-insured? Or would the policy owner balk at maybe cutting a check of a billion dollars during a recall? Who would pay for all the cards (pre-war only?) to be regraded and reholdered? How long would that take in months? Man hours?
A recall would be good in order to get the population report back on track. They could zeroize it on January 1 of a year and then re-add cards that they grade that year and all the reviews/reholders in the same time frame. It's basically a non-starter.

Now there are cards that are egregious (2 grades or more out of whack, over $500 difference?) that PSA should recall when they are pointed out to them. But they'd have to put together a task force for no gain in their opinion. They are already bursting at the seams with new submissions.

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

At that point, the PSA guarantee would come into play, and PSA should/will regrade the card properly and pay the difference between the purchase price and the new value.

Maybe that's what happened here. If you're going to get reimbursed, might as well create a artificial market high to be measured against. Jack the most recent sale up to some bananas dollar figure then send it in to PSA and turn a profit. Nothing would surprise me these days.

[calvindog]

Maybe that's what happened here. If you're going to get reimbursed, might as well create a artificial market high to be measured against. Jack the most recent sale up to some bananas dollar figure then send it in to PSA and turn a profit. Nothing would surprise me these days.

PSA would rather fight you to the death than give that money back to you. There will always be an excuse why PSA is not responsible for the misgraded card in the holder.

[GasHouseGang]

I had to go look for that green Cobb. I thought I'd post pictures, because before you know it they will be gone from ebay.

[bobbyw8469]

Front looks good....back...not so much.

[steve B]

True Tony, but that's outside the scope of PSA's purview on a reholder. It's up to the owner of the card (in 99% of cases where PSA doesn't detect alteration or compromised slab during the reholder) to ask for a review with no minimum grade. At that point, the PSA guarantee would come into play, and PSA should/will regrade the card properly and pay the difference between the purchase price and the new value.
However, there's really no way for PSA to have all their cards "recalled" in order to standardize the grading at this point in time. Very few owners would approve of sending in their GPA 6.5 sets and having them returned with 5.3 instead even with a big check coming with it. Too much pride in the set registry. Plus, I wonder if such a recall would invalidate the price guarantee? Are they self-insured? Or would the policy owner balk at maybe cutting a check of a billion dollars during a recall? Who would pay for all the cards (pre-war only?) to be regraded and reholdered? How long would that take in months? Man hours?
A recall would be good in order to get the population report back on track. They could zeroize it on January 1 of a year and then re-add cards that they grade that year and all the reviews/reholders in the same time frame. It's basically a non-starter.

Now there are cards that are egregious (2 grades or more out of whack, over $500 difference?) that PSA should recall when they are pointed out to them. But they'd have to put together a task force for no gain in their opinion. They are already bursting at the seams with new submissions.

Maybe they would just "fix" them like they do sometimes with modern stuff?