New T206 Wagner?
 

Anyone have the history on this newly graded example?

https://i.imgur.com/06stkNh.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/XR8fray.jpg

Hi Chris. I don't, but it sure is PERTY!!

Could it be the 3rd row, 3rd column Wagner?

Gotta be - pretty unique mark on the top left quadrant of the card

Looks like it. Maybe the scanner contrast turned up on the graded version to flatten out a lot of the edge wear you can see in that collage shot.

I wonder if that's a reholder, because no way that's a 2.5 with the way SGC has been grading things lately.

Where are those scans from?

It looks to me like the OP's card might be the one David suggests but that card doesn't seem to be listed on the T206 Resource:

https://t206resource.com/Wagner-Gallery.html

I blew up the collage photo and trimmed out the 3rd row/3rd column card. It looks like the same card, but the edges don't look as rough in the graded copy.

Don't think it's any funny business, I think that's just the function of the scanner setting turning the contrast up on the graded copy and flattening out the whitish edges.

Also, makes that scuff mark look more pronounced in the process.

@Bryan, the grid of Wagners seems to be from here.

Hauls of Shame

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/wp-cont...1-40-Final.jpg

From the collage, it is interesting to note the wide awake Honus versus the sleepy Honus. Here are examples next to each other in the third row.

Brian

+1 Agree and I am sure it will also sell for a perty amount

How many T206 Wagner's are now known ? I think I heard around 70, from somewhere. That could be way off, though.

I'm in the "those-corners-have-been-touched-up" camp. They definitely look different from scan to scan.



.

Oy Vey

looks like one of the "doctors" got to the top edge...and then got it through SGC with the ultimate grading bump from A to 2.5.

Beautiful example btw!

Is this one up for auction?

Even a card doctor would be courageous to treat a Wags regardless of his compensation.:eek::eek::eek:

If even the same card, the SGC 2.5 vsn's bottom left corner to about 50% in toward the center has been trimmed. The 2.5 vsn is much less equidistant (and even more angled) to the card's inner border than 3rd row 3rd card vsn.

I wonder if 2.5 vsn is altered throughout. Something's off on it...seems much too bright and crisp...also, Wag's jersey on left side is bleeding/crosses over the card's inner boarder into the border.

Need high res scan to better assess, but very suspicious. Does anyone know if SGC and PSA have authentic vsns on site to compare against new submissions or reholders, vs using one from a database?

I wish SGC would do that to my cards, usually I send in a crossover and they take it from a 2.5 down to an A...

Maybe a scan/image issue but the new version is much mire vivid so it seems?

So in this climate is this a 6-8 million dollar card?

Yes, this will be the 1st deca-million dollar card. Unless one of the three PSA 10 '52 Topps Mick's comes to auction, which will go to $20M in our lifetime.

Scanner
Contrast
Settings
Turned
Up


Sorry, I know everybody loves a scandal, but I feel like I've been put on ignore by most of the people in this thread.

:confused:

You guys are funny, comparing a super duper low resolution scan, to a scan on steroids, and seeing Neil Armstrong on a Stanley Kubrick sound stage for some reason.

Sure, every Honus Wagner has a possibility of being altered in some way and this one might very well be... but you can't possibly tell that by using these two scans as comparison.

Dave, I don't think you're being ignored. I just think the corners look touched up to a lot of us.

Agreed someone will make this card a record setter if it ever comes to auction.

I think we should start a crowd fund so we as a forum can purchase it

In my opinion trimmed or not, it’s a gorgeous Wagner!

Looking forward to following this one.

Just to make sure we’re all on the same. We’re talking about the card in the OP with 2 frayed corners, a splitting corner, and a clipped corner?

Hi Steven,

I'm commenting on how the two cards (the SGC 2.5 and the raw one from the collage third row down third card over) look like the corners have been improved from the raw one to the SGC one.




.

Can someone call up Mastro to check whether that was his work?

Lol, let's actually start a hedge fund and raise the $10M for this investment (single portfolio item), then we can exit in the future at 5-6X EBITDA!

Very interesting.... I always thought the Wagner on the bottom left corner of the collage photo is a reprint.

I fixed it for you :) If you space things way out again, screwing up this thread (or any thread,) you will be suspended.
.

Sorry Leon. I didn’t realize I was screwing up the thread.

Your post used about about 1/2 of my 27 inch screen with those 4-5 words spaced the way they were. No worries, just be careful. I am not ignoring you LOL...

Back to topic, the card does look a little brighter for sure.
.

That card has to be a reprint right?:confused:

fo sho

The collage photo appears to be made up of many individual photos. Maybe someone has that original photo that was used. That would help indicate if it is even the same card as shown in the original post.

I am sure SGC cupped the owners sack while he graded it himself just like PSA does. We don't have enough money to get preferential treatment like that.

IMO I agree that the borders look like they have been pressed. Also why use SGC when you know a PSA holder brings more? Probably ten of thousands more easily.

First thought...what a beautiful card. You couldn't get deeper color or better registry if you tried.

Second thought...how the hell is that a 2.5 with that top edge alone?

Bill

A: It is the same card, just a difference in scans.

B: It hasn't been trimmed. Recently. It does look trimmed before.

I've posted this elsewhere but still worth noting. The Honus in lower left corner is a Dover reprint which was based off of the Honus directly above it.

For the same reason there will never be a 4th PSA 10 1952 Topps Mick...protect the integrity of what's already been graded and those investors/owners.

It's "borders"; NOT "boarders"

"Boarders" are people (non-family members) who are living in someone else's house (such as a boarding house).

;)
Steve

Thanks! How the hell did I ever earn an MBA from Babson when I can't spell?! Thank goodness finance is my core competency and not grammer :)

*Grammar

the spell check police are out in droves this morning :)

Hahahahahaha

Dang, I haven't been busted in a while:( Thank goodness it was just a warning and not a fine:D

LOL, that one was intentional, I don't asipre to be a habitual offender officer ;)

No one ever answered this question. Is it currently in an auction?