![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: petecld
Look at: |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Hankron
I have no fondness for the graded card fashion, but I don't see an ethical problem here. If the card is dated and labelled correctly, the card is dated and labelled correctly ... The card itself is probably worth less than the grading fee. However, getting a 10 cent card graded isn't an issue of ethics, but of silliness. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: leon
This is the same as SGC grading the Wagner reprints. It is pitiful but I understand business is business...regards all |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: RC_McKenzie
From the scan, it looks like the top right corner is a little fuzzy. The sad thing is, as these grading companies go BK, their opinion becomes moot. Is an SGC 100 Walter Payton rookie still going to be worth $15,000.00 in 50 years? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
I am the individual running these clearly identified T-206 reprints. The holder is accordingly marked, the cards all have REPRINT on the reverse, my description certainly cannot be considered to be deceptive, and so what if GAI chose to encapsulate and accept the appropriate fee? SGC certainly has a large number of reproductions in their holders. They are curiousity items, nothing more nothing less. To compare the encapsulation of these by GAI and SGC to the "quality" operations of AAA is virtually obscene. Quite a difference between the snip, snip, snip, of a Spaulding catalog and the encapsulation of these "snippets" to be sold to unsophisticated collectors, with the slabbing of clearly identified reprints ALREADY extant in the marketplace. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jay Miller
I see no problem with this. The seller identifies the items as being reprints. If someone wants to purchase these good luck to them. I wouldn't, but that is my choice. Why try to make choices for others and inflict your views on them? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: warshawlaw
Not with the seller, who seems entirely legit, but with GAI. If they want to grade reprints, that's their business, I guess. I'm just going to make their business not a part of my business. SGC was bad enough with the Wagner, but at least their justification was that it was a family-licensed issue and carried some legitimacy (I don't agree, BTW), not a straight broder. What's the justification here, other than needing the dough? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: runscott
It's certainly silly for SGC, GAI or anyone else to slab reprints that are worth pennies, but ethically there's nothing wrong with it, and it doesn't fall into the same category as Roy Huff's AAA items that are intended to deceive (but only idiots)and which give novices a bad taste for our hobby and encourage destruction of irreplaceable historical items. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: zardoz51
Sorry about that, still figuring out the hows of posting here. The danger of being a lurker and non-contributor for the past year and a half |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jay Miller
Scott--It's not silly for the grading companies to slab the reprints. They get paid their fee regardless of the items worth. What is silly is the people who pay to have these items slabbed. The only thing collectors need to look out for is grading companies who don't make it perfectly clear on the holder that the card is a reprint. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Marc S.
He is one of the few truly good guys of the hobby. Whatever your opinions on grading reprint cards are --the cards are clearly marked, seem to warrant their grade, and there is no deceptive practices going on there. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: runscott
some collectors have lost a little respect for grading companies who slab reprints, but I realize that it doesn't bother everyone. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Brian C Daniels
Paul, everyone likes you! Your the bestess. I hope your buddy in southern Cal sends you the funny e-mails I get from him every night. He is too funny! Buy some cards from him so he has some money to buy some from me.Lord knows he needs the coin. And how come you didn't put your famous quote on the bottom of your original post here that you do on everyone on the PSA message board? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jay Miller
Scott---I agree with you. I think that it just wakes people up to the reality that these are businesses whose means of making money is entombing little pieces of paper in plastic. Rightly or wrongly, their decision parameter is probably--what maximizes revenue (not what hobby purists might think they should or shouldn't slab). |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Annymous
I was recently offered in trade for a real card a group of '50s commemorative Cobbs, every one of them graded, andthe group by at least 3 different companies (the big ones). I suppose there's some difference between commemoratives and reprints (commemoratives can often have original pictures on them), but still, I asked why the guy was getting commemoritives graded. Haven't heard from him since. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: runscott
If they can make money they'll do it. But they also need to consider the fact that they may lose potential customers if they stray too far for hobby purists. I've had long conversations with "pro-GAI" collectors who almost had me convinced until I saw this auction - definitely puts me off. I don't like the SGC-slabbed Wagner reprints either, but the idea of a set-registry containing a slabbed version of "the Monster" reprints makes me cringe. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Hankron
I wish to add two points. Within reasonable parameters (i.e. excluding counterfeits, copyright infringements, non-cards), I don't think it's fair to expect a big grading card company to exclude cards that are submitted to them, especially if the objection is one of aesthetics (which I think is the essential basis of the complaint of this grading. Some think its distasteful or 'beneath' the grader to grade this reprint). I'm not into Britney Spears swatch cards, but that doesn't mean I think they should be banned from grading. Just because one collects old baseball cards, doesn't make a 1914 Cracker Jack Zach Wheat essentially any less silly than a Britney Spears card. It's really hard to argue to someone who doesn't collect that a little piece of cardboard sold in a box of Cracker Jacks with candy stains still on it is inherently noble and should belong to an exclusive club that excludes the inferior. Likely, you will get a roll of the eyes or, at best, "Isn't that cute. You collect kids toys." ... So, in the scheme of things, I don't think GAI or others should act as arbiters of taste. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jay Miller
Scott---Don't get me wrong. I don't like slabbed anything. I only slab cards if I am going to resell them and only then if I think it will significantly add to the ultimate realization. The cards in my collection are not slabbed unless they came that way and even some of those have been liberated. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jay Miller
David--Please correct the typo on the Britney Spears card--you inadvertently typed a W instead of an N. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: petecld
I guess I didn't explain myself very well in my original post. I believe I mentioned in my post that it had nothing to do with the seller. I NEVER said anything was deceptive or desciptions were questionable - where did that come from? |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: MW
Zardoz is a great guy but I really question what a slabbed T206 reprint says about GAI. In my opinion, it means that they're desperate or they'll grade just about anything. In either case, that can't be good. Also, take a look at the label -- it's kind of reminiscent of the way that some of the T206 packs are graded by GAI -- it's somewhat deceptive ("T206 Repr"). Would a beginning collector even know what this means? In my opinion, if GAI is going to put crap like this in a holder, they should be ABUNDANTLY CLEAR with their labeling methodology. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: Mostly low-grade, low-cost cards | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 4 | 03-31-2009 05:22 AM |
FS: Mostly low-grade, low-cost cards | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 03-29-2009 04:55 PM |
T206 Cobb bat on off anyone??? LOW LOW GRADE? | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 01-03-2008 10:08 AM |
Looking for Toleteros Hilton Smith low low low grade | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 07-30-2005 06:29 PM |
How low can this hobby get? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 01-24-2002 01:09 PM |