I would spend up for the pack issued one. I don't think the market tends to value regular old signed cards not issued by the company and that's what this one would be, essentially.

I agree on this one. I think the market for vintage signed cards has really taken off the last few years though. Aside from the scandal with the t206s.

But I still wouldn't mind with this card for my collection. Especially if I got Griffey to sign it personally at a show or something.

9 times out of 10 I really don't care about grading; I will buy graded online if all other things equal the price is in line with raw - but this stuff really makes my head spin. I have a Nolan Ryan rookie that is maybe a nice 5 that I was considering sending in to SGC just to get it in a slab - but now not sure I can even stomach doing that. I really wonder if the entire world of TPG's are getting ready to get stood on their collective ear...

great card, but always thought the drawings were hideous. Too bad as I've debated adding one for a while, but cant find one for a good price

Completely agree. It's their site and they make the rules. The post was in good taste and I was surprised in the unprofessional response by calling me so late at night, giving me a good chewing. Orlando saw it and, if memory serves me right, it was about the time he was getting his promotion. I can only speculate as to why they acted the way that they did. Maybe it should've, but it didn't keep me from continuing to do business with them. The current level of negligence that is being uncovered has me wanting to throw the towel in on my PSA cards and sets, though.

Technically a (not issued as signed) signed card is altered, but it's really just in its own genre

Some game used collectors like and get their items signed, while others don't and some will go as far as to have authentic autographs removed.

You don’t think it’s possible (or even likely) that there are more altered than non-altered vintage cards in graded slabs right now? The older the card, the more generations of trimmers had an opportunity at it. Even if the profit motivation for trimming ramped up only in the 80s, when investing and formalized numerical grading became part and parcel of baseball card collecting, there was still plenty of reason to trim beforehand, if only to make one’s own card more appealing to the eye.

And in the era of greed, 80s and after, how many generations of trimmers had a shot at these cards before the motivation to trim went supernova with the rise of PSA, SGC, and BGS?

Sadly... +1

It's a very high number but no way is it 50 percent. Not even close in my opinion. Look at ebay, look at 707's store for a good sense of the distribution of graded vintage cards, most cards are still worth relatively little.

After studying this card more, I believe it was taken from a pack signed by mantle (think black sharpie) and the griffey was added later. The holograms on the back, as far as I know cannot be used to verify the signatures. This card never existed unsigned. It came from the 94 packs three ways. Signed by only mantle. Signed by only griffey and signed by both players.

This one IMO is not a pack pulled piece. Real, but UDA gave some of these out as autograph redemption replacements from their vault if memory holds. Came with UDA coa.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1994-Upper-...ss!29654!US!-1

Pack pulled piece IMO

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1994-Upper-...QAAOSwglJc-rjT

The pack pulled pieces did not come with COA’s

Agree...

That is definitely a more recent (and authentic) Griffey Jr. signature.

That's how I remember it now. The cards were issued signed by one, or both. If it's signed by one, it's necessarily authentic. If it's signed by both, forgeries most often are of the Mantle.

How to tell your business is a homerun.^^^^

Treat your customers badly and they keep coming back.

None of this will touch PSA.

I might be wrong, but I'm guessing that the people who had faith in PSA might start to question that faith sometime soon.

It depends on how adept they are at giving their customers a false sense of security that the problem has been contained and ameliorated. Now there are doubtless a lot of people who WANT to hear that message, so they may well believe it.

There is also the question of how far word of this travels. I did speak today with a guy who most would classify as an investor who does not read the message boards but did see the NYT article.