SGC question...

[Timbegs]

I have no problem with the card getting this grade. However, this was my first time going through the mail and I haven't had one graded since they left NJ. I did not get any explanation of why it was stabbed 'A' like I have in the past.

Questions

Is this new - no explanation of why it's an A?

Is calling to ask being a jerk and a hassle or is it ok to call? I have had a small number graded over the years.

Still, no matter what, it looks great in their holder and I love the card and I am happy it's home and authentic.

I would call

[swarmee]

Yeah, my guess would be trimmed. But you should ask SGC.

[irv]

Originally Posted by Timbegs

I have no problem with the card getting this grade. However, this was my first time going through the mail and I haven't had one graded since they left NJ. I did not get any explanation of why it was stabbed 'A' like I have in the past.

Questions

Is this new - no explanation of why it's an A?

Is calling to ask being a jerk and a hassle or is it ok to call? I have had a small number graded over the years.

Still, no matter what, it looks great in their holder and I love the card and I am happy it's home and authentic.

How is calling being a jerk? You paid for the submission/slab so I would think they at least owe you an answer.

[Timbegs]

Originally Posted by irv

How is calling being a jerk? You paid for the submission/slab so I would think they at least owe you an answer.

I don't know - that's why I asked. I ha only ever dealt with them in person prior to this mailed submission and I am not ever going to be able to give them a ton of business.

By the way, does the flaw stand out to others?

I didn't think trimmed as it seems to measure correctly.l but another member thought it looked short...

[irv]

Originally Posted by Timbegs

I don't know - that's why I asked. I had only ever dealt with them in person prior to this mailed submission and I am not ever going to be able to give them a ton of business.

By the way, does the flaw stand out to others?

I didn't think trimmed as it seems to measure correctly.l but another member thought it looked short...

Like I mentioned, you chose them, paid them, so it's the least they can do, imo.

Sorry, I can't offer any opinions on your card. If not trimmed, it could have been recolored, or something else. Definitely call and inquire and please let us know what they tell you, even if they tell you nothing. (which I highly doubt)

[Timbegs]

I will call Monday and report back.

While it is not their fault for moving, drop off and pick up was much better for my purposes - not to mention no shipping.

[swarmee]

Was it thinner than normal cards due to being pressed inside a screwdown brick for 20 years? That would be another possibility: altered stock.

[Timbegs]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Was it thinner than normal cards due to being pressed inside a screwdown brick for 20 years? That would be another possibility: altered stock.

Outside of visible damage (creases, scuffs, scratches, dings, soft corners) I have a hard time identifying the issues cards face if they're done well.

My guess was the crease had some color added to dull it. Pressed and trimmed are also possible. I'll know tomorrow. Doesn't bother me too much. Whatever work was done was pretty goo and I am a buy the card not the holder type on the mid to low end. Resale value rarely factors in. It's a nice looking and that I would have thought a 3 or 4 at best. And now it matches my set. 😃

[Timbegs]

First and foremost, thanks to those who weighed in - I truly appreciate it...

I just ended a very pleasant conversation with Mitch at SGC. The guy couldn't have been nicer and was able to provide me with a very descriptive answer as to why it received an 'A' designation. Here goes, in paraphrase form:

In the upper left of the card is a crease - it's there, it's faint and noticeable and there's also some light scratching in the area (again, faint but noticeable) but the card still looks very attractive. In that area, right below the NY on the cap, someone added color - most likely to cover the worst point of the crease and improve eye appeal. The color match was 'excellent' but the presence of the coloring agent gives it away and therefore it was picked up under close examination 'pretty easily'. Outside of that, it would have probably fallen into the VG-VG+ (3-3.5) range, though true grading stops once an alteration is found.


As for my reaction, I'm cool with it. I love the card and since I now know what's up with it I'm just happy that it is not trimmed. I can live with a dot of color added. That's also why I stay in the lower end of the grading system.

Thanks again

[smellthegum]

Anyone else find it odd that some instances of added color only merit note as a (MK) qualifier while others reduce a card to 'A' status -- especially when, on purposely altered cards, the marks are usually less obtrusive than accidental markings? I guess it all depends on where the mark happens to be. If it's strategically placed in a matching color and is hard to see it's bad. If it's occurred randomly and easy to spot it's merely a footnote on the grade.

Not passing judgement of the legitimacy/acceptability of doctored OR marked cards, just that I find it to be sort of a double standard among TPGs that one form is OK while the other doesn't even merit a grade. They're both instances of foreign matter being applied to a card. It's as if the graders are assuming and grading the intent rather than the actual condition.

[Timbegs]

As far as I know, altered cards submitted to SGC can't receive anything better than 'A'. If it's altered in any way (see prior posted link in this thread for the full list of alterations that will get a card rejected) it cannot receive a numerical grade. So at least with SGC, it seems to me that intent is actually not a factor. Altered should mean ungradeable, I'm my opinion.

[Leon]

As you said, I think it comes down to motive. If the mark was added to in-color or make a card look better it will get an AUT. IF it is an errant/stray mark it will get an MK or a few grades (or more) lower at SGC. That is my experience. I don't really have a problem with it. Others might...

Originally Posted by smellthegum

Anyone else find it odd that some instances of added color only merit note as a (MK) qualifier while others reduce a card to 'A' status -- especially when, on purposely altered cards, the marks are usually less obtrusive than accidental markings? I guess it all depends on where the mark happens to be. If it's strategically placed in a matching color and is hard to see it's bad. If it's occurred randomly and easy to spot it's merely a footnote on the grade.

Not passing judgement of the legitimacy/acceptability of doctored OR marked cards, just that I find it to be sort of a double standard among TPGs that one form is OK while the other doesn't even merit a grade. They're both instances of foreign matter being applied to a card. It's as if the graders are assuming and grading the intent rather than the actual condition.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Timbegs

As far as I know, altered cards submitted to SGC can't receive anything better than 'A'. If it's altered in any way (see prior posted link in this thread for the full list of alterations that will get a card rejected) it cannot receive a numerical grade. So at least with SGC, it seems to me that intent is actually not a factor. Altered should mean ungradeable, I'm my opinion.

I'd have to research to find an example but I believe I have seen a prewar card with a stamp on the back in an SGC holder with a numerical grade. I don't have a problem with this, or in the case of a pen or pencil mark. As Leon mentioned I do see a distinction between a stray mark or stamp and recoloring or trimming to enhance a cards appearance.

[Timbegs]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

I'd have to research to find an example but I believe I have seen a prewar card with a stamp on the back in an SGC holder with a numerical grade. I don't have a problem with this, or in the case of a pen or pencil mark. As Leon mentioned I do see a distinction between a stray mark or stamp and recoloring or trimming to enhance a cards appearance.

I'd love to see it produced. As far as I know, that's not how SGC works.

Sometimes, a card can have a stray mark sneak through - anywhere. In addition, some sets with sloppy production value produce 'marked' cards that often have stray printing marks. Good luck finding a 1969 Topps Super Mays without the print spot. It does happen in other sets too. The printing of the Red Hearts resulted in many speckled cards. Around the name, team and position.

As for the stamp, I know some 'sets' were created by collectors, in a way. There's a guy on here who is pursuing a T206 set that has been hit with a personalized stamp on the back by their original owner (pretty darn good thread). He's got a bunch and wants them all. A set within the set, in a way. As such, perhaps PSA or SGC would be willing to work with a collector in that way. I'm not entirely sure.

[smellthegum]

Originally Posted by Timbegs

I'd love to see it produced. As far as I know, that's not how SGC works.

Here are a few examples, but maybe they've changed their policies. I don't know how old these are:
T212 Obak with stamp
36 Diamond Stars (this is alleged to be printer's ink, but could be anything)
59 Topps with pen
71 OPC with pen

[nat]

How would the guy on the phone know why your card got an A? Do they keep records of all the cards that they grade? (And if so, why not send it along with the card when they return it?) I mean, there's no way this guy remembers grading this card. He must grade a thousand cards a day. Or maybe when you spend your day peering through the glare off of Kris Bryant and Mike Trout cards you actually do remember grading a 1953 Mantle?

[Timbegs]

Originally Posted by nat

How would the guy on the phone know why your card got an A? Do they keep records of all the cards that they grade? (And if so, why not send it along with the card when they return it?) I mean, there's no way this guy remembers grading this card. He must grade a thousand cards a day. Or maybe when you spend your day peering through the glare off of Kris Bryant and Mike Trout cards you actually do remember grading a 1953 Mantle?

I'm going to assume an electronic record of some kind is kept. He described the damage like he had the card in front of him. I was also briefly placed on hold while he 'retrieved his records.'

I can also say that when I went in person the first, they had 2 of the ten I had submitted not slabbed and had a printed flip with the reason for defect (I had a 69 Topps Mantle that was trimmed and a 62 Topps that had color added. They told me it would only take a minute to slab them. Which I had them do since I like the look, though I have since upgraded.

[Timbegs]

Originally Posted by smellthegum

Here are a few examples, but maybe they've changed their policies. I don't know how old these are:
T212 Obak with stamp
36 Diamond Stars (this is alleged to be printer's ink, but could be anything)
59 Topps with pen
71 OPC with pen

You learn something new every day. Perhaps they just slipped thru? None of them seem high grade to begin with so perhaps it was done quickly and overlooked? I have always wondered exactly how much time is spent on a card. I'd imagine more on a high value card than a post 1970s card. Tobacco cards seem to have the craziest variations (stamps, ghost images, crazy miscuts, color fade; to name a few) so maybe the stamp is explainable, just not by me. The Robinson has me stumped - that's a bad slip. That Mantle couldn't grade better than Poor so maybe the grader just casually flipped it and holstered it. The blurry picture and unattractive nature makes it hard to see but somethings up. Interesting and makes me wonder how the process al works. In my head it's like NASA but it could be a guy in a dark room with a flashlight for all I know. I wanted to ask if I could have a tour when they were in NJ but felt like that probably crossed a line...

That said, I appreciate the info and the work you did. Information is king. I'll be more careful when looking fat graded cards for sure.

This turned into a decent little thread, huh?

[mickey7mantle7]

Originally Posted by nat

How would the guy on the phone know why your card got an A? Do they keep records of all the cards that they grade? (And if so, why not send it along with the card when they return it?) I mean, there's no way this guy remembers grading this card. He must grade a thousand cards a day. Or maybe when you spend your day peering through the glare off of Kris Bryant and Mike Trout cards you actually do remember grading a 1953 Mantle?

Card grades and notes are documented and kept on record via the serial number on the flip.

Some companies like CGC (comic grading) charges extra for the grading notes like said example ^ if you want them.