Maybe The Worst Graded Card I've Seen....Recently.
 

Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere already. Came across this freshly-slabbed PSA T206. Makes you wonder how much attention is actually given to the cardboard in front of many graders. I wouldn't 4 that without the staining.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Deacon-Phil....m43663.l10137

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/DKQAA...Cy/s-l1600.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/1mkAA...C1/s-l1600.jpg

Perhaps the grade was recorded before the grader spilled his coffee.

I would guess that they just forgot to add the (st) qualifier, but I don’t think that card is a 4 even without the stains. It doesn’t even deserve a 4(st). Even assuming that the owner requested “no qualifier” then it should be like a 1.5 or 2 at best.

Yeah...not too much to defend with that assessment. I guess it is sorta close to VG-EX on a good day (stain aside) but they grader clearly missed the ST. So much for their quality control. They supposedly have people who verify grades after the card is sealed. I never believed it. I figure on most stuff it is one and done. One set of eyes assigns the grade and onto sealing and into a box.

The card is accurately graded. It has a Vg/Ex stain.

Brian

Maybe they thought it was a shadow.

Buy the card, not the holder. :D

This was my first thought. Haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not newest slab
 

Terrible card I am guessing the data entry person missed the qualifier. That said this is not freshly graded as this is not the newest holder or label. It is within the last few years but not the last year- year and a half. Could have been an old reholder when things like this were not out of the ordinary but with that serial number it is more likely a mis grade or a missed qualifier. Wouldn’t buy that and would expect it to sell at a significant discount to a normal 4.

Taking numbers from their public financial statements and loosely doing terrible math and estimating when we did not have the true number

we guessed that each grader could not spend more than 80 seconds per card

that is based on the amount they reported they earned from card grading and dividing it by the number of cards they had graded estimating they have around 17 graders

like I said its far from scientific and the +- could be 0 or it could be 100

But I don't think more than 2 minutes per card is spend assigning the grade and moving it down the assembly line to its next stop

That's funny!

How much time do you think is necessary? 2 min per card for a professional grader is practically an eternity, imo.

Perfect comment, classic Frank. :D

+1 though it's not centered.

How can a card like that ever be graded a "4" ? This is unbelievable ! And we keep sending money to these companies. Here's one I received this week, graded "1", compare that to the "4".

That card is seriously a joke. Maybe a 3, WITHOUT THE STAINING. Is it possible this was supposed to be labeled 4 with the ST quailifier??

Without seeing the back, I would give this a solid 2. Even with wrinkles that may not show up in the scan. I'm guessing PSA has a couple of uptight graders known internally as such. Maybe we're just unlucky with who gets ahold of our subs.

Yes, I thought the Gehringer would get maybe a 2.5-3. No markings, no creases, has corner wear and centering problems but I never thought that would be a "1".

There appears to be a crease across the upper left corner. It may have had a shot at a 2.5-->3 a few years back. But, I still feel a 2 is realistic even by today's interpretation of the standards.

Maybe it was cleaned, graded, and then the stain returned. If not that's pretty bad. As was mentioned someone probably forgot to add the qualifier at PSA.