|
Makes me want to go raw
Posted By: <b>bigfish</b><p>David,<br /><br />I paid the 5 price and should have looked at the scan better. Live and learn. Quality control is a concern!!!!!!!!! Makes me want to go raw!!!
|
Makes me want to go raw
Posted By: <b>Pennsylvania Ted</b><p>Those "hairlines" are not on the card. They must have been on my scanner.
|
Makes me want to go raw
Posted By: <b>Anthony S.</b><p>Looks like an SGC 70 (possibly 80), but I get the sense based on the theme of this thread that it inexplicably graded much lower.
|
Makes me want to go raw
Posted By: <b>David R</b><p>Ted,<br /><br />I'll guess. SGC 50 although I'm sure it's probably a 30, thus your post. <br /><br />David R.
|
Makes me want to go raw
Posted By: <b>Pennsylvania Ted</b><p>My Johnson (in above scan) was graded SGC 40. When I questioned SGC as to "why such a low<br /> grade ?"<br />They pointed out that there was "a faint tiny spot of some residue on the back of this card".<br /><br />Well, that was the BAD news......<br /><br />Here is the GOOD news......I sold it on ebay for a 4-digit price. I identified the "flaw" in my ebay<br /> lot description and I provided a scan of the card's back. But, that did not seem to bother most,<br />as the bidding was quite brisk.
|
Makes me want to go raw
Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Ted - my guess is that it sold for 4 digits because the buyer is planning on cracking it, soaking it to remove the residue, resubmitting it for a 5, and making a nice profit.
|
Makes me want to go raw
Posted By: <b>Pennsylvania Ted</b><p>There wasn't much more margin for profit over what it sold for.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:17 AM. |