Quote:
Originally Posted by bnorth
What actually happened was the grading companies used to label some cards missing ink. Turns out they just labeled a lot of faded cards as missing color. So now they just ignore the fading. I don't remember the grade. I sold a SGC graded 1958 "Blue" Hank Aaron card on here with full disclosure. The label did not mention anything. That was after I believe each of the big 3 had previously labeled some of them "Blue Front" before they figured out they all are faded.
I also had a real missing yellow ink card graded at the same time. It is graded a SGC 5.5 and is an amazing card. Sadly they won't even label real mmissing ink cards correctly now because of all their mistakes. Once you have owned a few real missing color cards and a few faded it is very easy to tell them apart.
Here are 2 examples of faded blue Aaron cards being listed at beyond silly prices for actually being altered faded cards.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/12501287182...sAAOSwhedhmagm
https://www.ebay.com/itm/37379913003...sAAOSwxIxhmak- |
Exactly what I'm getting at. Because of all the potential errors they may have been making, makes sense for TPGs to just disregard and ignore missing or faded colors so they can't be hit with liability for a grading mistake. Also raises the question if it is really that hard or impossible to determine if a certain ink(s) on a card is truly missing, or if it is just faded. You would think it should be fairly easy to tell as in the case of a missing ink the other colors on a card should look normal, at least somewhat bright, and consistent. Whereas, if color loss is due to age, fading, or sun exposure, you would expect the entire card and all the ink/colors on it to have suffered similar fading or loss, right? Wonder why TPGs apparently couldn't consistently tell the difference?