What's happened to PSA?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>tbob</b><p>How can this card grade at all? Will they grade anything unless it is submitted from me? Getting paranoid...<br /><br /><img src="http://members.aol.com/trophybob/what.jpg">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>That sure is a close cut Close Candy.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>I dont see that card being a 6, but it doesnt necessarily look trimmed to me either. Then again, neither did the e95 plank I bought.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>cmoking</b><p>can you tell me what is wrong with it that makes it an obvious screw up? I don't know anything about that issue at all.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>(And, for those who might not know - T206's are shorter than E94's). That top border has a lot of waves as well!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>the better to cheat you with my dear <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>Two references to compare with the PSA version above. One pulled from a recent ebay completed auction, the other from the Old Cardboard website. The top boarder on the PSA version above is very different from the two below. Where was the PSA image obtained? <br /><br />Brian Engelhard<br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1118861055.JPG"> <br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1118861043.GIF">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>its hard to pick up the waves in the top border, that could be just the scan. Is it not possible for e94s to be miscut?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>that ain't a miscut. Miscut would have an abnormally large lower border to correspond to the ridiculously short top.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>dan mckee</b><p>I can't see the original posted oicture TBOB

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mark</b><p>Whoever bought that card made a smart investment.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>For sure the Wagner isn't trimmed, but certainly its a reprint doctored to look old! j/k Congrads on the Wagner, hopefully you didn't mind me using it as a reference.<br /><br />Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>common Brian - you should have let that gag go last for awhile and let mark sweat a little.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>It seems there has been a little contraversy on the board lately, I should've added to it huh? I was actually protecting my insecurity after looking at the PSA scan. I just sent a good bit of money off for a PSA card I haven't seen!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred</b><p>If you look really close it almost appears as if the bottom tab of the card holder has "scrunched" the bottom border of the card. If this were to have happened then PSA would be completely negligent in the capsulation of the card. I could be wrong but it sure looks funny...

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>I saw that too. If you look at a psa holder under magnification, those tabs are like little ledges with a lip and the card can actually sit on them and appear to be below the lip. I dont think any damage is caused as a result.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>With that top border there should be a huge bottom border...maybe it's hiding under that lip? regards

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>tbob</b><p>Even Seth, whose auction it is in, recognized immediately that this a trimmed card. It's in a T206 holder for frigging sakes. If you have ever owned an E94 you KNOW how much bigger they are supposed to be, that's why they come in the PSA condom holders.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dave H</b><p>Someone must have thought that was a strip card

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>robert a</b><p>Mark.<br />Nice pick up on the wagner. Great card!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>WP</b><p>Does the seller include the missing slivers in the auction?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anson</b><p>Maybe they just folded it over?<br /><br />I'm sure stuff like this gets by all the graders. PSA does seem to have more than their fair share. However, they have also graded more cards than all the others combined.<br /><br />Nice Wagner indeed

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Julie</b><p><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/jphotos/110103_diving_prv.gif">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>BCDaniels</b><p>ELKIDS! YOU PUNK! NO SOUP FOR YOU<br /><br /><br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1118642268.JPG">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Damian</b><p>How about a VBC grading service? I hope I'm not ripped for the right field suggestion.<br /><br />Damian

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anson</b><p>Might be more legit in many cases.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>will watson</b><p>i actually think that's an excellent idea. no one knows prewar better than the VBC guys.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Damian</b><p>I am pretty darn new here, but what would this entail? I am not speaking to profits but to service. Ideas?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anson</b><p>It might be hard to set up a slabbing-type operation. However, offering an "advisory" service to prospective Ebay bidders would be a nice source of support to keep the board up and running.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Isn't that what we do daily? Good idea.....

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Leon you are right, it is what is done here everyday. I tell anyone I can about this forum. What else can we do beyond that in providing "official VBC opinions"? I hope this isn't off topic and maybe this should be a different thread but, here's a card I need an opinion on. I do think the card looks a little "squatty" with top and bottom borders being too small. Seller is colorado-mountain-sports on ebay but the picture is bad. They sent me this image (if you can see it). I have no idea if I posted the picture here correctly. Sorry I am so green, it took me 20 minutes to figure out how to screw this up.<br /><br /><br /><br />[URL=<img src="http://img67.echo.cx/my.php?image=628oj.jpg]<a href="http://img67.echo.cx/img67/8136/628oj.th.jpg">[/URL" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://img67.echo.cx/img67/8136/628oj.th.jpg">[/IMG][/URL</a>]

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mike P.</b><p>No need to make all the tags, the board does it automatically.<br /><img src="http://img67.echo.cx/img67/8136/628oj.th.jpg">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Damian</b><p>Looks like the image can't be seen. I have tried to figure this out through the FAQ. Any help out there in what am doing wrong? Thanks.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>If the image is online, all you have to do to make the image appear in a post here is to cut and paste the address of the image. The image address should start with an "http://" and usually end with a ".jpg" (sometimes will end with a ".gif") If you look in the gobbldygook (merely speculating on the spelling of that word) text in your above post you will see the image address (starting with an http and ending with a jpg). That's the only text you need for the image to appear. <br /><br /><img src="http://www.cycleback.com/fashion/one_files/image002.jpg"><br /><br /><img src="http://cycleback.com/photoguide/nine_files/image003.jpg"><br /><br /><img src="http://www.cycleback.com/baseballphotos/lll_files/image002.jpg">&lt;br /&gt;

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Damian</b><p>Thanks Julie.