![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: peter ullman
With all the talks lately about the psa 8 honus and such...I couldn't help but be kinda pissed off when I just saw this e106 doyle that I sold on the bst thread in the past year. I sent this card to scg and it came back trimmed...I sold it under full disclosure and now it's in a psa holder as the highest graded so far. WTF???? Me thinks the hobby is in trouble. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
And you have every right to be upset. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave
With all due respect...why is it about bashing PSA again? What makes everyone on here so certain (everytime) that PSA got it wrong, but SGC got it right? SGC deemed the card trimmed....for all anyone knows...maybe THEY got it wrong... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe D.
It is quite possible that PSA got it right, and maybe SGC was being cautious. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: peter ullman
dave...the card is pretty obviously trimmed...to me. I've compared it to other...unaltered e106's I have and it's dramatically smaller...lengthwise and widthwise...as was the donovan I sold which probably now resides in a psa 5 holder and is the finest graded to date. I'm not a fighter...I don't argue with people for fun...PSA has quality control issues...more issues than some other grading co's...and it is and will continue to be a thorn in the side of this wonderful hobby ...that's all. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave
Let me ask this...if it was pretty obviously trimmed to you, why did you send it to SGC in the first place?? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: mark
I sold this card yesterday on B/S/T. Peter says that SGC deemed it trimmed. PSA has 2 people look at cards before it is slabbed. Both say it is NOT trimmed. If you did sell this card to an undisclosed person then that person knowingly sold me a trimmed card without telling me. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: T206Collector
I'm the biggest SGC supporter going, but you can't just measure a pre-war card to tell if it's trimmed. You should pick up a copy of SGC Collector Magazine this month -- it has a number of tricks to determine if a pre-war card is trimmed. Just because SGC says it is trimmed, obviously, does not mean it is. At some point, you must have had your doubts because you submitted it to SGC for grading. Cards too close to call are best sold, if at all, on ebay, with a full disclosure of SGC's evaluation, but your own opinion that you can't tell and that it might be worth a regrade. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Frank Wakefield
That Doyle card, 2nd row, 2nd from right, is trimmed. All around. No need in sending it to a grading company to ascertain that. Of course there are some folks who would think that card is fine if it were in a graded holder... Some folks buy the slab, some the card, some try to do both. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: peter ullman
I'm not looking to cause big trouble here. I sold the card on the bst thread months ago...I can't remember to whom...but I can probably find a record of the sale somewhere...and when I sold it I included the rejection label from scg. If you have any other e106's...that aren't altered...compare it to the card you just sold and I think the variance in size will prove to be outside of accepted tolerances. Doesn't the rt side of the card look trimmed to anyone? Dave...I didn't think/know they were trimmed when I sent them off...they were the only 2 e106's I had at the time and they were purchased from a major catalog co 10-15 years ago so I assumed they were ok. After receiving the rejection...I compared them to other e106's...and it became apparent they were trimmed. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: mark
the guy who bought it from me and offered money back and he said no, he is happy with the card and will keep it. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: peter ullman
mark...I didn't mean to cause you any trouble...that was a noble gesture and you're definitely one of the good guys. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: mark
i have bought many cards from you (not this one ) and you are a great seller. I will continue to buy from you. This debate has gone on for many years and i think it will continue. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: peter ullman
I am 90% lurker here...10% vocal...I read this board dozens of times/day...I have a problem like a lot of you. If some of you want to live in denial regarding PSA's competencies...to each their own. I live in denial of some things too. All of PSA's mistakes are learning exercises for some of us who choose to have an open mind and want to learn. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: James Feagin
Since so many E106 are hand-cut, SGC and PSA probably just have different policies. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: steve
OK, I have various reasons both PSA and SGC upset me. PSA crossover is a joke (especiaslly toward GAI). And get this - just bought a Mordecai Brown portrait in SGC 60. Me and PSA would have only given it a "4". Too much corner wear with a corner wrinkle on back bottom corner. If it is a EX, very very low end - not happy with SGC's grading on this one. Oh, well. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: peter ullman
james...if that's true...I'll feel a little better. I have an e106 collins...my last one and it...the cut...looks machine cut...like most caramels...w/rounded corners. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jeff Prillaman
I recently submitted a 63T Koufax to PSA that was returned as trimmed. Since I picked it up in a childhood collection I felt very confident it was not and submitted it to SGC where it was graded. I know a local collector who submitted some T206's to PSA that were returned short and subsequently graded by SGC. Because of the history of both of these items I am literally 99.99% confident that SGC got them right. But at the same time it just shows this kind of thing goes both ways. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: mark
You could have 100 experts grade a card and get 100 opinions. PSA graded my card and gave it a 4. I am sure that they measured it and if they had a problem with the size then looking at the edges is the next step. When they looked at the edges they must have felt confident to say it was NOT trimmed. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: peter ullman
I agree with you guys...ask 100 opinions...you'll get 100 diff ones...but...when so much $$$$ is at stake with some cards...there needs to be more continuity w/grading. I'm done beating a dead horse. I hope y'll enjoy the snow...I am! |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Glyn Parson
"With all due respect...why is it about bashing PSA again? What makes everyone on here so certain (everytime) that PSA got it wrong, but SGC got it right? SGC deemed the card trimmed....for all anyone knows...maybe THEY got it wrong..." |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Kyle
Yeah, but Joe doesn't grade the cards and I'm sure he doesn't hire the graders. Both companies have their issues, both companies have their benefits. I've used both and have no problems with either of them. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Zach Rice
I have also been told that E106s were cut from strips. This is coming for someone who has been in the hobby for ages and has in fact seen a strip of them. This would mean that all E106s were, at one time, hand-cut. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: mark
That would mean that SGC does grade trimmed cards (<: |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: mark
I think the light blue background going off the black line at the left fools the eye in my PSA 4. The sides of SGC card look just like the PSA 4... |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: BcD
made a mint in my red cross Chase with trophy alleged to be "trimmed" by psa |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe Pelaez
I Luv this thread. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: George Dreher
I do a lot of business with PSA, so I was shocked when reading a recent auction description on eBay that said The Better Business Bureau just gave them the lowest possible rating of "F" |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave
you know that rumor was told to me back in the 1997 by one of the biggest coin and stamp dealers in Ohio. there was a group of us at a show talking about price guides and grading, and he mentioned that he knew of several collectors that thought they had received different cards back than the ones they submitted. he then went on to tell elaborate that the grading company was keeping the choicest cards they could find for themselves as investment material. I also remeber a card shop owner telling pretty much the same story in 2000. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)
The nice part about a tell all book is that we can all become tabloid worthy train wreck collectors... |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Cy
Dave, |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe Pelaez
But It's only fair to admit that Slab Inc does a great job with corners and sides, ... most of the times. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Frank Evanov
I have sent in several thousand cards to PSA over the last 6 years. Each one is scanned prior to sending. It's not that I fear a switch, it's just that I am concerned about PSA accidentally damaging my cards. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Scot Reader
I think the BBB rating has to be taken with a grain of salt. Few people feel sufficiently upset to report bad service at the local IHOP. But when your '33 Goudey Ruth that you thought was worth $10,000 comes back with evidence of trimming from PSA, or with a wrinkle that you thought wasn't there when you sent the card in--woooooooooooooooooooooooooah, look out! Of course PSA makes mistakes and of course they occasionally damage cards inadvertently, but the reason they have an "F" from BBB is that there are big $$$ at stake. They are bound to ruffle more than a few feathers given the nature of their business. I can say that I have submitted over 250 vintage cards to PSA and while there has been an occasional mistake, overall I think they have done a pretty good job. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
Judge, |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)
Without a doubt, you are correct about high grade cards being the fastest appreciating portion of the hobby. I wouldn't disagree with that statement at all. In fact, I wholeheartedly agree with that statement. The unfortunate part is that it has also (not proportionally) led to the increase in the price of vintage cards. Some people will say it was inevitable but I firmly believe that the valuation on lower grade material also followed the high grade material (and it really shouldn't have). Then again, there aren't many high grade examples of a lot of different cards so it led to the "I have the highest known graded example of such and such a card..." |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jim Crandell
Good points Judge--I agree. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Lee Behrens
Let's see the Wagner was bought by Gretzky in the late 80's for over $500,000 in 2007 the same card is sold for just over 2 million about 5 times. You mean to tell me that the rest of the rest levels did not preform to this same level if not higher, I bet you could buy a lowgrade Pr/Fr for around $5 in the late 80's and know you can get $25 for one. I believe it is all proportional it all comes down to the supply and demand and what people can afford and the level of card they are ssatisfied with. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe Pelaez
I always appreciate someone that's straightforward and honest to themselves first. ... I applaud you. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JimCrandell
Joe, |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
No offense to Scot, but PSA got a horrible rating not because of $$$, but because a certain number of customers complained about the company. I find it hard to swallow that a majority of the complaints came from people who were financially disappointed in the results PSA gave them on a card grade. Believe it or not, I utalize PSA more for the encapsualtion of the cards than I do for the actual grade the card is given. Matter of fact I suggested to them years ago that they should clearly offer that service alone and apart from grading for people like me who don't care what number a card is given (authentication). I had an interesting discussion yesterday with some senior collectors who have been in the hobby since the 40's and 50's. They agrred to a man that card grading has ruined the hobbyist aspect of card collecting for many people old and young. It also has contributed in the false perception that baseball cards are like gold bullion, and they aren't. they have intrinsic value, which basically means that PSA 8 gem you may want to sell for thousands is really only worth what someone is willing to pay for it at that time. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: boxingcardman
but even a broken clock is right twice a day. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe Pelaez
I was about to go to bed. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: boxingcardman
Thanks for the interesting historical/experiential perspective. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JimCrandell
Joe, |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: George Dreher
I am a graded card collector and also a coin collector. Been collecting coins for 40 years. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe Pelaez
Thank God you stepped up and stated that you were also a coin collector. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Paul Moss
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh, let us all harken back to the good old days when we'd see full page ads of Al Rosen with his "Just Say NO To Graded Cards" T-shirts. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe Pelaez
That's Alan alright. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JimCrandell
Sorry Joe--have collected cards since the late 1950s and last 20 years quite actively. I don't know the gentleman who collected coins but there must be a few. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1953 Howell RC PSA 7 1961 DeJordy RC PSA 7 1965 Cheevers RC PSA 7.5 For Sale | Archive | Everything Else, Football, Non-Sports etc.. B/S/T | 0 | 01-15-2009 10:30 AM |
FS-T207's Mullin No D PSA 6 (highest graded),McDonald PSA 6 (1 higher), Henry PSA 3 | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 2 | 12-03-2007 05:30 AM |