Odd Packaging -- anyone ever seen this in an SGC Flip

[Rhotchkiss]

I have never seen an SGC card wrapped like this. Anyone have a card like this? When did SGC start doing this? Also, looks undergraded, no? I am interested in this card, but find the wrapping odd. Thanks in advance

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1914-Cracke...19.m1438.l2649

[3-2-count]

Hi Ryan. Sgc has been inserting a baggie for some time now on various issues although mainly on larger cabinets such as T3's and T4's.

Since 1914 Cracker Jacks are paper thin they've inserted the baggie here so it doesn't slip under the gasket which we've all seen happen before with many Sgc graded cards.

The black gasket design that Sgc uses is actually quite horrible in my opinion which should have been corrected long ago since the slippage that I mention above happens far to often and cards are not secured properly in their holder.

[Rookiemonster]

While I have never seen this before I don’t own many sgc graded cards.

But that pwcc sticker reminds of the movie Tommy boy with Chris farly. If you want me to take a Dimp in a box and mark it guaranteed I will I have a few minutes.

[Rhotchkiss]

Thanks Tony, that is good to know. I look at CJs often and will buy SGC cards all day long, and I had never seen this (admittedly, I dont look at cabinets much). Personally, I dont like the plastic -- makes the card look cheap and harder to see. But, good to know that this has become standard practice with them and there is not something odd or unique about this one that caused them to put this extra cover over it.

[rainier2004]

Beautiful card...whats the big deal though, not even a HOFer?

[3-2-count]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Thanks Tony, that is good to know. I look at CJs often and will buy SGC cards all day long, and I had never seen this (admittedly, I dont look at cabinets much). Personally, I dont like the plastic -- makes the card look cheap and harder to see. But, good to know that this has become standard practice with them and there is not something odd or unique about this one that caused them to put this extra cover over it.

Just to clarify, Sgc does not insert the baggie into all encapsulations as standard practice. And that goes for all Cracker Jacks submitted as well.

It's very possible that whoever submitted the CJ Jax to Sgc requested that the baggie be used for the exact reasons mentioned. Just a guess.

[griffon512]

as far as the grading goes, it certainly presents much better than a typical 1.5 but on a technical basis the assigned grade could be accurate if what looks like a typical crease extending from the left border of the card is something greater, like a heavy crease or surface tear of the cardboard stock. it's difficult to tell given the scan from pwcc. regardless, given the eye appeal it will probably sell for around what an average looking sgc 3 would sell for.

[rainier2004]

Originally Posted by griffon512

as far as the grading goes, it certainly presents much better than a typical 1.5 but on a technical basis the assigned grade could be accurate if what looks like a typical crease extending from the left border of the card is something greater, like a heavy crease or surface tear of the cardboard stock. it's difficult to tell given the scan from pwcc. regardless, given the eye appeal it will probably sell for around what an average looking sgc 3 would sell for.

It was removed from an album and still has residue on the back.

[iowadoc77]

All other logic is appropriately discarded once it is designated PWCC high end.

[Throttlesteer]

Looks like a fair amount of paper loss on the back, unless I'm getting glare off of the baggie. Certainly presents nicely for the grade. But, what else would you expect for "high end".

Not sure why, but I always picture a cat holding its butt in the air when someone pets it..high end. Now if it were pack fresh?????

[griffon512]

Originally Posted by rainier2004

It was removed from an album and still has residue on the back.

i don't see any signs of album removal and residue, but maybe you have a better eye than me. looks like some remnant caramel staining that may have been partially removed in the past.

i just read the pwcc description and it reinforced what i originally wrote: that what looks like a typical crease in the scan is an actual tear. any tear should not get higher than a sgc 1.5. true of paper loss as well. it will still get the final price of a higher grade card given eye appeal.

[rainier2004]

Originally Posted by griffon512

i don't see any signs of album removal and residue, but maybe you have a better eye than me. looks like some remnant caramel staining that may have been partially removed in the past.

i just read the pwcc description and it reinforced what i originally wrote: that what looks like a typical crease in the scan is an actual tear. any tear should not get higher than a sgc 1.5. true of paper loss as well. it will still get the final price of a higher grade card given eye appeal.

If you look close at the top of the back there is a light "shadow" or area. The tear seems to starts where the residue ends and I am guessing happened during removal. That area I am referring to does not look like typical caramel to due to its geometry and based on the presence of the darker staining.

[uyu906]

Beautiful card - horrible looking baggy in the holder. I am not sure I could deal with it staying in that holder for very long.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by griffon512

as far as the grading goes, it certainly presents much better than a typical 1.5 but on a technical basis the assigned grade could be accurate if what looks like a typical crease extending from the left border of the card is something greater, like a heavy crease or surface tear of the cardboard stock. it's difficult to tell given the scan from pwcc. regardless, given the eye appeal it will probably sell for around what an average looking sgc 3 would sell for.

In their description PWCC clearly mentions that it is a tear on the left side near the top about 1/2" in length

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Rookiemonster

While I have never seen this before I don’t own many sgc graded cards.

But that pwcc sticker reminds of the movie Tommy boy with Chris farly. If you want me to take a Dimp in a box and mark it guaranteed I will I have a few minutes.

what's a "Dimp"?

[DeanH3]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

what's a "Dimp"?

I think it's similar to a shat.

[Rhotchkiss]

Anyway, it's at $15.6k right now with 9 days left. it's got a rip in it and it's wrapped in an ugly card condom- but pwcc slaps "certified high end" on it and they come running.

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

It's a pretty nice rip upper left. Here's same card sold at LOTG back in 3/29/15 for $15,600

[midmo]

I don't care for the baggies either. I've broken a few out, but still have some. I've only submitted cards to SGC for grading once and these Piedmont Art Stamps were in that group. I didn't ask for them to get baggied. I assume they did it because they are so thin.

[frankbmd]

1. People don’t like when thin items slide under the gasket and complain that SGC should fix the problem.

2. People like the way the SGC “gasket” frames the card and makes the colors “pop”.

3. SGC then puts thinner items in a transparent sleeve to prevent the cards from sliding under he gasket.

4. People don’t like the transparent sleeve, that keeps the card from sliding under the “gasket”.

5. SGC removes the sleeve and thin cards are then framed and their colors pop
Until the card slides under the gasket again.

6. Return to #1 and repeat as needed.

[Jay Wolt]

[Stampsfan]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Anyway, it's at $15.6k right now with 9 days left. it's got a rip in it and it's wrapped in an ugly card condom- but pwcc slaps "certified high end" on it and they come running.

Good one.

Seems like a stretch to label it a "High End 1". Kinda like a beautiful toad. Opposite of an ugly bikini model.

[Rookiemonster]

Originally Posted by DeanH3

I think it's similar to a shat.

You are correct in your assement a dimp is a spelling error of Dump and is also known as a shat! Lol

[T206Collector]

Read the back of the Certified High End certificate. It’s nice to have someone willing to tell me whether a card has visual appeal beyond the technical grade.

[BeanTown]

Originally Posted by 3-2-count

Hi Ryan. Sgc has been inserting a baggie for some time now on various issues although mainly on larger cabinets such as T3's and T4's.

Since 1914 Cracker Jacks are paper thin they've inserted the baggie here so it doesn't slip under the gasket which we've all seen happen before with many Sgc graded cards.

The black gasket design that Sgc uses is actually quite horrible in my opinion which should have been corrected long ago since the slippage that I mention above happens far to often and cards are not secured properly in their holder.

Its safe to say that SGC practices safe grading

[3-2-count]

Originally Posted by BeanTown

Its safe to say that SGC practices safe grading

Unless you take into consideration of course one can open their slabs with nothing more than a couple strong finger nails.

[Batpig]

The sticker actually lists PSA as the grader. Oops.

[yanksfan09]

Almost 20k now with 8 days left

[iowadoc77]

Originally Posted by yanksfan09

Almost 20k now with 8 days left

And if auctioned anywhere else, would not be nearly where it is. Like them or don’t like them, truth is they get good hammer prices on cards like this!

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by iowadoc77

And if auctioned anywhere else, would not be nearly where it is. Like them or don’t like them, truth is they get good hammer prices on cards like this!

The picture is terrible - it's real tough to see the rip, which is large when you look at scans from previous auction. And, as someone pointed out, their certification refers to a PSA graded card; obviously they put the wrong certification pic, but it highlights the absurdity of their whole certification. But I must agree, with many cards they bring out the bids and get great prices, and whoever wins this card has certifiably overpaid!

[iowadoc77]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

The picture is terrible - it's real tough to see the rip, which is large when you look at scans from previous auction. And, as someone pointed out, their certification refers to a PSA graded card; obviously they put the wrong certification pic, but it highlights the absurdity of their whole certification. But I must agree, with many cards they bring out the bids and get great prices, and whoever wins this card has certifiably overpaid!

Don’t take my post wrong. I was not supporting or condemning the card or PWCC and yes it is remarkable how much different the two scans make the card appear. Wow. For that kind of money the tear is a really really big deal. And some issues with the listing for sure.