Thoughts on a PSA review...IT's Back from PSA
 

Originally, I purchased this card in a PSA 4 holder. Over time the case became damaged(scratches and minor digs to the edges) due to me moving several times. So it was sent for reholder. Once at PSA they contacted me and said they had found evidence of tampering(which was bs) and according to their policy had to regrade it. After thinking I had nothing to worry about since the card never left the holder I was blown away that they had dropped it to a 2. Now after waiting almost a year I just sent the card back for a review hoping they will treat me right this time. Any guesses on what it will receive?

another 2. PSA has completely reversed grading policy on CJ's in regards to caramel staining since about 2-3 years ago. They've completed destroyed any continuum or consistency for the category making it really hard to value using the grade as part of the equation. Your Birmingham is a 4 or even a 5 all day compared to those graded 5+ years ago. This creates quite the conundrum for the registry collector and an opportunity for the purist.

I always thought a little staining was a good thing, as it shows the card probably hasn't been bleached or otherwise chemically treated.

Not sure how PSA grades the stains on those cards?

I suppose they didn't make up the $$$ difference between the grades? If they claim the holder was tampered with to the point where a lesser card could have been switched in, that's pretty lame.

...
 

[/ATTACH][/ATTACH]
I'm the original submitter for this Baumgardner that was sent in almost 6 months after the Birmingham received the 2. This card has a slight tear along the upper right hand Side border along with staining and rounded corners but yet only a half point difference between the two? I think this only proves that PSA doesn't know how their own grading system works.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/152626558715

If my Birmingham is truly a "2" that's pretty sad given that there's so much room from a 2-10 on the scale.

If your luck is as poor as mine, it may come back ALT / TRIMMED. I had an Aaron RC in PSA 5. Sent it back for review and poss. bump. Came back as noted above. Good luck is all I can offer!

i wouldnt think most CJ collectors care so much about the slab...why not SGC?

That's a tough break. Did they give you the option of having the card returned to you as it was before they reviewed it?

So inconsistent. This is truly an issue where you "buy the card, not the holder."

CJ's
 

Yes and no. Not everyone lives by the philosophy of buying the card not the holder. I feel 9 times out of 10 someone is gonna pay what the market value is for the numerical grade not how the card looks. It would be different had the exact same card not been graded a 4 previously. Several hundreds of dollars difference is so called "value".

With so few 1914 CJs floating around, I would argue that people pay for the holder and numerical grade, not the card inside.

Yep. That would likely cause me to invest in a trip to the local liquor store.

Without seeing the back of the CJ I like the OP's chances it comes back at least in VG. 2 seems harsh.

So here's my take:
1) PSA forced a downgrade and should have paid off the OP with cash to cover the difference in values.
2) OP should NOT resubmit in holder for review. Either crack out or leave as is.
3) Card is awesome. "tampered" in the OP made me think the card was determined tampered (maybe an erasure, which would be a two-point drop from the four as instead of 4(MK)?
4) My weighted average if resubmitted *raw* is a 4.5

I agree with your assessment if submitted Raw. I just didn't feel like taking the chance of cracking it out and damaging it. As for the last time when it was dropped from a 4 to a 2..the card never left the holder. There was minor dings and scratches to the outside of the holder.

Update
 

Just received the update that PSA bumped it to a 2.5. Guaranteed to be the best 2.5 out there. I will post pics when it arrives.

I can't agree with this more. I had a Sport Kings Bobby Jones PSA 5, that I swear to god, looked like an '8'. It had the TINIEST wrinkle....Im sure someone could have spooned it out. Did it sell as an '8'?? HELL NO....It sold as a '5', and not even VCP average...lol

We should have group prayers for those about to send in cards.

In that case doesn't PSA have to give you the price difference?

Not if you crack it out.

Psa
 

It was never cracked out. I sent them the card still in the holder.

Then yes, they refund the difference if they determine the case has not been tampered with. Think about it....if they did, people could switch real cards with fakes, send them back to PSA and get their money back from them (in addition to having the real card).

I understand and believe you when you say your case wasn't tampered. Yours is a special situation.

Let's see an image.

Based on the centering and corner wear as well as the surface flaw/damage that runs through the "G" in "Kings," I would say the card is graded just right.

LMFAO...that is bad centering to you? That is bad corner wear to you? Not hardly....what you see through the 'G' is the spider wrinkle, which I am sure has been spooned out by now.

Wow - that Bobby Jones card is nice!

I thought so too Chris....I am well versed in the Sport Kings series.....If it wasn't for that spider wrinkle, that '5' had a real god shot at a much higher grade.

Although these are both post war examples here are my thoughts. I sent in a 68 topps mantle that they had kicked back years ago as too short, this go around it got a 3.

I sent in 64 mantle that had several light none color breaking creases and they gave it a 1. A freaking 1 thats a poor. I assumed i missed a pin hole or paper loss but nope. The card should be a 2 all day.

As far as cracker jacks i have never felt that psa was consistent with them and even 10 years ago i would not buy a card in a psa holder without seeing it in person.

I do tend to buy the card often as i have picked up a couple low grade cards that present really well,

James G

Mike
 

Mike is correct the Bobby jones is absolutely correctly graded. The card has excellent eye appeal which so often makes people think it should have a higher technical grade.

It got that grade because of the spider wrinkle...I get that. If auctioned now, if the wrinkle in the card is not gone, I have no doubt the card would have the PWCC-HE designation. I've seen '5's' in that set. That card doesnt look like a '5' (save for the wrinkle).

Save for the wrinkle but you can't it's there. No wrinkle I could see a 6 or 6.5 that's no 8.

Never said it was an '8', but it would not look out of place in a '7' holder. Look at the deep blue background and the registration. That card does not look average. Not at all......I've built and sold this set going on 3 times now.

.

If we are trying to compare resunes
 

I've had well over 20000 vintage cards graded. As I stated earlier eye appeal is excellent on the card that is not the same as technical grade I agree that it looks like a 7 from 1992-2000 but both psa and sgc have tightens their standards since then looks properly graded.

Touche......Random person 2, Bobby 0.

It looks to me like someone already tried to remove it and only ended up removing some of the red on the Sport Kings banner--and blue background underneath it--instead.

It's back.
 

I still can't see the justification in only a 2.5 but I used it is what it is. You guys agree or disagree?

Well, the staining is there obviously, but the main thing I'm understanding is that in the past, the staining wasn't taken into account for the grades (as I'm guessing it's hard to get Cracker Jack's WITHOUT staining), while now they ARE taking stains into account.

I would be pissed though. VCP is all over the place on the card. The last PSA 4 sold in REA for $1560. The last PSA 2.5 sold in Love of the Game for $180. Don't know if the REA was abnormal or not, but that is quite a spread.

I would say one of those prices is abnormally high and the other abnormally low.

The one that sold from LOTG was clearly cleaned of caramel stains. I think that played a role in the overall price.

As far as staining, yes it is impossible to get a 1914 CJ without staining unless it was snuck out the back door. All 14's were inserted inside the box.

1914 CJ Factory Sets are rare but they do exist.

Agreed
 

Agreed but I don't believe there is any factory sets that have rounded corners and would only receive a 2 or 3 grade. They're all 8-10's. I could be wrong and someone please correct me if I am.

That is my understanding. And I think I have seen, maybe 2?, of the factory sets before, or bits and pieces of them. Who knows what the future holds though....

.

I understand the money involved, but threads like this make me wonder why you guys torture yourselves with TGCs. Isn't finding the card and negotiating a price tough enough?

There appears to be a small spot of paper loss on Cleveland in the 9th line on the back. Tiny and barely noticeable, but that might be a factor in the grade. Definitely one hell of a 2.5!

Birmingham
 

It's actually a print defect. I can see though we're you would think it looks like paper loss. Thanks for the kinds words.

yep, good eye