![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: warshawlaw
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5196256833&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: WP
Might as well as labled it a T206. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: warshawlaw
to make up all sorts of wild crap and submit it, just to see what happens. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: PASJD
I guess I better sell my CLCT stock since the death knell of PSA has been pronounced. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: dan mckee
Adam, how do you really feel about PSA? Dan. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: steve k
The poster who is a lawyer, I would be certain turns down cases which are not his area of legal expertise - basically he could not properly service that particular situation. As a businessman, I turn down orders which for various reasons I cannot properly service. Sure there are times I could make a few extra dollars by taking certain types of orders, but among other reasons, credibility can be lost. The reputation of a company is built on credibility as well as other things. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: warshawlaw
I'm not an investment advisor and I don't play one on TV but even the most ardent PSA defender, such as yourself, has to admit that the sheer volume and variety of mistakes and blunders from PSA lately has to be cause for concern. Whether it is listing commons as the rarestcards in the hobby (T206 Wagner "Whoops"), grading cards that any collector would know are trimmed (OJ and Mayo), or stuff like this, doesn't that concern you? I know it worries me. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: dennis
what with all the new borderless, slick shiny cards that they now grade, it's a simple mistake. the grader forgot to remove the sunglasses that he was wearing and mis read the acc list. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: tbob
I recently submitted a shipment of cards which included a blank back T207 Laughing Larry Doyle card. The card has a great front, nice borders all the way around and clean blank back. The seller said he had had some of the blank backs sent in and they all graded. Soooo, of course MY card comes back, "REFUND DO NOT GRADE NOHOLDER." Huh? Then I see an auction on ebay where the same seller is selling a large lot of these T207 blank backs and BINGO there are a Livingston Large C and another card both nestled in PSA holders. I checked it out because I figured they would be graded "authentic" but sure enough they actually received numerical grades. By the way my "refund" was not monetary nor did they deduct the amount from the credit card bill, they sent me a free 1 card voucher last week. That's great since my PSA membership just ran out last week, now I have to re-up and pay $89 just to use the free voucher. Sheesh. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Gene Palmer
I'm not even close to being knowledgeable on OJ's, but I'm pretty sure hips aren't this high lol... |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Paul
That's the famous "hands on cameraman's hips" pose. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Mike P.
Is anyone documenting all these blunders? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Peter Spaeth
I suspect Adam W. is keeping meticulous records. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: warshawlaw
Just throwing them up there as I see them. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Peter Spaeth
Obviously noone can dispute that PSA makes mistakes, both substantive and clerical, but so does SGC. It wasn't so long ago I read about a major blunder on a T206 Doyle, if memory serves. And I have seen my share of questionable cuts, etc. in SGC holders as well. Noone is infallible. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth
Oh my God. PSA made an error. Nothing new and it is not going to change anytime soon. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jeff Lichtman
Well, a quick check on ebay finds that PSA graded cards outnumber SGC by a ratio of about 30 to 1. While this is a rough estimate PSA's dominance in the graded card market, does anyone think PSA makes 30x more mistakes than SGC? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Julie Vognar
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Judge Dred
too much stuff to edit ... I just deleted the message... I'll just add the following... |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: brian p
Being a BB card collector myself, Adam, how is this card classified? I have the W-Unc 'Big Head' baseball cards as well as an example of one of these boxers, and discovered that, while having very similiar designs and artwork, the boxer set is actually a larger card, with the black line framework extending at least 1/8" taller than the Baseball "Big Heads". Are these cards classified as part of the baseball series? |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: jay behrens
PSA probabaly makes more errors on a per card basis, but it's not even close when it somes to the outright blunders that PSA makes that a novice should catch. The SGC Doyle flap was doctored card that got by them and SGC made good on it right away. When is that last time you ever saw PSA conduct themselves in this manner? |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Harry_Pairatesties
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Rick
The ratio is somewhere around 25 to 1 |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: david
part of the blame for many labling errors lies with the person who submits the cards. i have had several cards come back from sgc with a wrong lable and i immediately asked for them to be corrected and they were in a matter of minutes without a problem or hassle. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: jay behrens
David, what sort of errors did they make? Is it on the order of the "hands on hips" or Hermanski misID, or is it simple typos? I've had to send one card back to SGC becuase of a typo and that's it. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: david
they were typos and incorrect labelings of the pose. ie browns champ, spotted tie, things of that nature. sgc was great about fixing them and collectors should be more aware of these sorts of mistakes and it would eliminate most of the problems |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: warshawlaw
The card in question is a variation of W529. W529 consists of ten cards the images of which were taken from IFC-licensed photographs (W516-520-521 are analogous baseball issues). Burdick in his typically terse description created only one W529 category. Subsequent catalog editors subdivided the W529 group into 3 subclassifications. It has since become apparent to me that the ten images used in W529 were the basis for at least six distinct sets (plus color variations), some or all of which may be the work of the same company. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Peter Spaeth
"incorrect labelings of the pose" |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: will watson
wow. they made a mistake. funny how the only time someone mentions PSA is to point out a labelling or grading error. why not mention the thousands of cards on ebay that are labelled correctly? |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: jay behrens
As with anything in life, the bad things are always pointed out. And with a business, especially something that has the impact on the value of item, incorrectly labeling an item tends to be a serious issue. And mistakes like "hands on hips" shouldn't be made, period. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Brian Weisner
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Peter_Spaeth
Well said Brian, I agree with you 100 percent. But nothing anyone can say is going to change the minds of those who think SGC is god and PSA is scum, and certainly not reality or common sense. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: jay behrens
The reason for many people thinking PSA scum and thus prefering GAI or SGC is the manner in which PSA handles their mistakes. They are not a customer friendly company, especially when it comes to their average customer. They ahve repeatedly shown that they will deny any wrong doing and will do nothing about their mistakes problems until they are hauled into court. This is not a good way to run a company and is the reason they ahve alienated many on this board. If SGC or GAI acted the way PSA does, they would suffer the same slings and arrows. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JimCrandell
Jay, |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Hal Lewis
Glad that earnings season is over and Jim (Dav) can spend more time with us!! |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: T206Collector
...has been that when I buy graded T206 cards on ebay, the SGC and GAI cards are more consistently graded than the PSA cards. I have come across way too many examples of PSA 5 T206 cards with creases getting slabbed. That has never happened to me with SGC or GAI. I prefer SGC to GAI, however, because of the sturdiness of the SGC holder and the insert, which does not leave room for GAI slippage. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Josh K.
I agree - the cards that I have had graded by SGC tend to be much more consistent than those graded by PSA. I collect, among other things, T206 HOFers - the only two that I have ever bought that were misgraded were by psa (a psa 4 Young and a psa 4 Jennings - both had creasing and were downgraded to 40's by SGC). To add fuel to the fire how many of you saw this Lemon (no pun intended) on ebay a few days ago: |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JimCrandell
Hal, |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: warshawlaw
happen. I have a few SGC cards that they switched during the encapsulation process (I know they are switched because I have both cards from the switch; I am going to have them fix them at the National). The Lemon is likely a switched label during encapsulation. I don't get all torqued over that sort of stuff and that's not why I started this post. I started it because the nature of the mistakes coming out of PSA recently are not quality control processing mistakes, they are core identification and authentication mistakes that undermine the reason why people send in cards in the first place, which is authentication. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: steve k
<<< To add fuel to the fire how many of you saw this Lemon (no pun intended) on ebay a few days ago: >>> |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
PSA 7 T205 Lost in the mail, need help | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 12-02-2005 09:10 PM |
lost cards | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 05-10-2005 11:03 PM |
PSA LOSES Law Suit of lost/stolen Magie T206 card!!! | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 36 | 06-23-2004 03:26 PM |
Lost site | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 03-18-2004 06:05 PM |
OK PSA has finally lost it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 12 | 10-28-2003 06:35 AM |