Altered high grade E93s in Mile High?

[x2drich2000]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Look at the sub, well one of them anyhow. Not the type to get kicked down to the basement. I would not think. These aren't 80s commons.
PSA Certficiation Check




Cert Year Brand Player Variety Grade

15132902 1910 E93 STANDARD CARAMEL NAP LAJOIE NM-MT 8
15132903 1910 E93 STANDARD CARAMEL FRED CLARKE NM-MT+ 8.5
15132904 1910 E93 STANDARD CARAMEL FRANK CHANCE EX 5
15132905 1910 E93 STANDARD CARAMEL CLARK GRIFFITH NM-MT 8
15132906
15132907
15132908
15132909 1910 E93 STANDARD CARAMEL HONUS WAGNER NM+ 7.5
15132910 1910 E93 STANDARD CARAMEL TY COBB MINT 9
15132911 1910 E93 STANDARD CARAMEL CHRISTY MATHEWSON MINT 9
15132912 1911 M116 SPORTING LIFE JIMMY WALSH GOOD 2
15132913 1948 BOWMAN HERMAN WEHMEIER MINT 9
15132914 1948 BOWMAN JOE PAGE NM-MT+ 8.5
15132915 1948 BOWMAN FRANK SHEA GEM MT 10
15132916 1948 BOWMAN WARREN SPAHN NM 7
15132917
15132918 1948 BOWMAN RALPH KINER NM-MT 8
15132919 1948 BOWMAN NM-MT+ 8.5
15132920

Out of curiosity, what is up with the randomly skipped Certs? Cards that got rejected for some reason?

DJ

[glchen]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Out of curiosity, what is up with the randomly skipped Certs? Cards that got rejected for some reason?

DJ

The randomly skipped cert #'s would either be cards that were rejected for some reason or cards that were graded, but later cracked out and the cert's sent back to PSA (e.g. to try for re-submission).

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by glchen

The randomly skipped cert #'s would either be cards that were rejected for some reason or cards that were graded, but later cracked out and the cert's sent back to PSA (e.g. to try for re-submission).

Why would someone trying to get a better grade send in the old cert.? In that case why not just submit for a bump?

[swarmee]

Either reason: sending to SGC and want an "unbiased" grade, or sending back to PSA but would rather crack out and try again then send back in for review.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Either reason: sending to SGC and want an "unbiased" grade, or sending back to PSA but would rather crack out and try again then send back in for review.

So why return the certs, especially in the second case where it just telegraphs that the card already has been graded whatever it was graded?

[4815162342]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So why return the certs, especially in the second case where it just telegraphs that the card already has been graded whatever it was graded?

To keep the population low. They could wait until after the cards are re-graded to return the certs.

[ergoism]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So why return the certs, especially in the second case where it just telegraphs that the card already has been graded whatever it was graded?

I think that a lot of people view it as proper etiquette to return the certs so that the population report remains closer to accurate. And for lower pop cards, as was stated above, it's important to not add unnecessary tallies to the pop report.

Edited to add: I don't think anyone is sending in the flip with the card to get regraded. You can send the flips back at any time and they'll know to adjust the pop report accordingly.

[sporteq]

When were the lower grades offered and what was the final hammer price on them? if anyone has that info, thanks.