View Full Version : Date Stamped on the back of T206?
Archive
08-31-2006, 12:20 PM
Posted By: <b>Lloyd W. Taylor</b><p>How does having a date stamped on the back of a T206 effect the SGC grading of the card. For example 4-15-1911 stamped on back.<br><br>Lloyd W. Taylor<br />www.lloydsbaseballcards.com<br />www-lloydsbaseballcards-com on ebay
Archive
08-31-2006, 12:33 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve M.</b><p>of those over the years but never submitted one for grading. Based on my experience with SGC with paste residue and very light reverse paper loss I don't think you would get better than an SGC 10. PSA may grade it MK and lower it a grade or two from where it would otherwise be.<br /><br />Found this one...October 2, 1911...only one left, I think.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1156974441.JPG">
Archive
08-31-2006, 12:55 PM
Posted By: <b>Keith O'Leary</b><p><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Lloyd, I'm curious as to what your stamp looks like. Mines Feb 26 1912.</FONT><BR><IMG src="http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f92/vwtdi55/For%20Sale/t205_mclean_b.jpg"><BR>
Archive
08-31-2006, 03:02 PM
Posted By: <b>joe</b><p>Those are cool, I would like one. As far as grade, Sgc probably would grade 10. <br />They are tough on backs.<br /><br /><br />Joe<br /><br />Joe
Archive
08-31-2006, 04:06 PM
Posted By: <b>jackgoodman</b><p>Altho SGC did mention at the National that they were no longer downgrading for the factory stamp on the back of Obaks, just disclosing them on the flip. Maybe they will take a more lenient stand on period stamps as well. I don't think those are stamps put on there by some child. Probably a factory or retailer stamp - I would humbly opine.
Archive
09-02-2006, 01:25 PM
Posted By: <b>Lloyd W. Taylor</b><p>The card in question is at SGC right now. I will post a scan when it returns. Thanks for all the thoughts<br><br>Lloyd W. Taylor<br />www.lloydsbaseballcards.com<br />www-lloydsbaseballcards-com on ebay
Archive
09-02-2006, 04:21 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>My Thorpe has the name Leslie O'neil stamped on the back and it grade SGC20, otherwise, I am sure it would have gotten a 30.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.
Archive
09-07-2006, 02:02 PM
Posted By: <b>Dave Rey</b><p>The Rockenfield Obak card I got back from SGC and sold on eBay last month wasn't penalized gradewise by the factory stamp on the back, they just added "stamped" to the flip and still graded it a 40, which was pretty much dead-on with the card's flaws.
Archive
09-07-2006, 02:17 PM
Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>date stamps and other non-recognized stamps will generally not receive anything higher than a 30 from sgc. some stamps, such as 'toy town' for example, are apparently no longer being penalized.
Archive
09-07-2006, 05:26 PM
Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>I definately think foriegn ink stamps should lower the grade like it already does. Anybody can replicate a stamped date on the back of card so I find it hard to believe you can authenticate it somehow as factory made or "special". I like the current (MK) designation of PSA. I have a card with a mark on the back that came from the factory and not noted as a mark. This is correct because it is composed of the regular printing ink.<br />I will show a picture when I can.
Archive
09-07-2006, 05:42 PM
Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Yah I personally don't like foriegn inks such as stamps and pens. However if you look above the t in piedmont you see a mark. This is what I call a factory mark because it is factory ink. PSA also didn't label this card with the (MK).<br /><img src="http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c1/dank28/factorymark.jpg">
Archive
09-07-2006, 06:16 PM
Posted By: <b>scott brockelman</b><p>Why would they MK this card? it is exactly as produced. So are the cards like Obak with the blue factory stamps or T209 colors with factory stamps, these are 100% original, not the result of some stamp happy kid. <br /><br />Scott
Archive
09-07-2006, 06:18 PM
Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Yah I'm showing an example of a factory produced mark. I'm not saying this card should get the mark designation. Just showing a "marked" card that does not deserve it, as was agreed by PSA. Any card with foreign ink marks should be noted as marked. Even if the factory used an ink stamp in factory with a date it's still a mark. However if the Ink is from the actual manufacture process as shown in my example, then it is not a mark designation IMO. This also seems to be the popular consensus though I can't confirm.