What grade would SGC give this card- UPDATE! THE GRADE IS IN

[chadeast]

Hi all. I am still working on my 1933 Goudey graded set, with the hope that all of the cards will someday be in SGC holders. While I have a batch of 30+ PSA cards waiting for a special at SGC to crossover, I have one card that I can send immediately. It is the Ruth #144 that I posted in the April pickup thread. I'd like to pick your brain regarding how SGC grades cards with marks, such as the stamp on the back of this card, and hopefully get some idea of where this card could fall. I'm very hesitant to send my card and $500 to SGC only to get this card back in an A or 1 holder, or no holder at all. FYI, I already contacted SGC directly to attempt to get more information regarding how marks generally effect grading, and was told that the marks will effect grading, but that they won't know how until the card is in hand.

Any knowledge that you can share would be very appreciated!
Thanks,
Chad

[t206kid]

Probably a 1.5.

I don't think it should be $500...isn't their quick service $250 or so?

[hcv123]

This card is crease-free and pretty nice except the "3B" written on the back. A lot more of a detractor than the mark on the Ruth, but I tend to agree with the previous post - likely a 1 or 1.5.

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by hcv123

This card is crease-free and pretty nice except the "3B" written on the back. A lot more of a detractor than the mark on the Ruth, but I tend to agree with the previous post - likely a 1 or 1.5.

That might be the nicest-looking 1.5 I have ever seen.

[chadeast]

Thanks so much for the replies. You're confirming my fears. I'm not sure that I'm prepared to accept a 1.5, or at least to pay $250 for the privilege of getting a 1.5, thus my dilemma. I have/had hopes that it would be able to be graded at least a 2, based on cards like the one in this link, which has a much more prominent stamp on the back.

https://www.pwccmarketplace.com/items/1955599

[ullmandds]

sell it and buy one in an sgc tomb. you'll do well i'd imagine from an equity standpoint.

[rand1com]

It will get a 2 from SGC IMO. The MK is not that obtrusive. Overall, a very nice Goudey Ruth. Much better presentation than a typical creased 2.

[BobbyStrawberry]

I would guess a 2, though a 1.5 or a 3 would not surprise me.

[perezfan]

You won't be happy with the grade.

No matter what, that card will always appear far better than the assigned number indicates on a slab. When I acquire cards like this, I always break them out of the holder which negatively misrepresents the card. These cards just present better in raw form.

[iwantitiwinit]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

sell it and buy one in an sgc tomb. you'll do well i'd imagine from an equity standpoint.

Good idea. I'd go with this.

[Hxcmilkshake]

Would never move that out of that PSA holder. Keep it as is

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by Hxcmilkshake

Would never move that out of that PSA holder. Keep it as is

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

I agree completely. Cards with comparable grades are worth more in PSA holders. If you think there is even a chance of getting a lower grade in an SGC holder it would be crazy to cross it (and pay a lot to do it).

[chadeast]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

I agree completely. Cards with comparable grades are worth more in PSA holders. If you think there is even a chance of getting a lower grade in an SGC holder it would be crazy to cross it (and pay a lot to do it).

My experience with PSA cards is that the value falls off a cliff with qualifiers, probably due to the registry effect. So I don't think this card holds tremendously more value in a PSA 3 (MK) holder vs. an SGC 1.5 or 2 holder. Not to mention the fact that '33 Goudeys, of which I've purchase quite a few, carry little to no premium in PSA holders vs SGC holders in my experience. I find that the card itself is a much stronger indicator of price, what I see as a strong 'buy the card, not the holder' trend among many graded '33 Goudey buyers that I compete with. This probably holds true for most pre-war, I would guess.

[Eric72]

I'd recommend selling the PSA graded Ruth and using the proceeds to purchase an SGC example that would better fit your collection. However, that might be viewed upon as a taxable event.

Trading one Ruth for another is one alternative, although that would likely be easier-said-than-done.

I believe SGC has a crossover service with "minimum grade" option. Have you explored this?

[chadeast]

Originally Posted by Eric72

I'd recommend selling the PSA graded Ruth and using the proceeds to purchase an SGC example that would better fit your collection. However, that might be viewed upon as a taxable event.

Trading one Ruth for another is one alternative, although that would likely be easier-said-than-done.

I believe SGC has a crossover service with "minimum grade" option. Have you explored this?

Absolutely. In fact, I believe that they require you to enter a minimum grade. But it will cost me at least $250 to try it out, whether it makes the grade or not.

Thanks to everyone for the feedback. Selling it and/or trading are reasonable options. The problem, and it is a good problem to have, is that I particularly like THIS card, perhaps more so than anyone else would since the stamp doesn't bother me at all, and I would probably be disappointed in what it would sell for vs. what I would need to pay for an equivalent (in my eyes) in an SGC holder.

Great feedback, you've all given me a lot to consider.

EDIT: For example, here is an SGC 2 that looks decent, until the creases along the lower third of the card are noticed. I think creases present the biggest challenge on anything below a 3, especially if buying online. https://www.ebay.com/itm/22443682877...8AAOSwooJgivog

[MikeGarcia]

[QUOTE=Eric72;2104919]I'd recommend selling the PSA graded Ruth and using the proceeds to purchase an SGC example that would better fit your collection.

*******However, that might be viewed upon as a taxable event. "

....I imagine 80 t0 90 % of the members on here have sold a particular card or two in order to purchase that same card but in an upgraded condition......almost always it's money out of our pocket to accomplish this .....in what universe is this "viewed as a taxable event" ?????.....because an awful lot of us are soon going to be mowing the grass alongside the highway leading into Leavenworth....

..

[Frankish]

[QUOTE=MikeGarcia;2104947]

Originally Posted by Eric72

....I imagine 80 t0 90 % of the members on here have sold a particular card or two in order to purchase that same card but in an upgraded condition......almost always it's money out of our pocket to accomplish this .....in what universe is this "viewed as a taxable event" ?????.....because an awful lot of us are soon going to be mowing the grass alongside the highway leading into Leavenworth....
..

Quite possibly. If you sell a card, my understanding is that the difference between your cost and the sales price is taxable. It doesn't matter if you use that money to purchase another card. If you have a legitimate business dealing in cards, then you can aggregate and balance gains with losses. But, as far as I know, that doesn't apply to hobbies....

[Frankish]

Regarding the original card (which looks terrific for that grade), I'd guess a 1.5 or 2. I tend to be too optimistic, so 1.5 is probably more likely.

Good luck whichever way you play it!

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Frankish

Quite possibly. If you sell a card, my understanding is that the difference between your cost and the sales price is taxable. It doesn't matter if you use that money to purchase another card...

I agree with this assessment.

I do not agree with your citation, though. You attributed someone else's comment ("...in what universe...") to me. Almost makes it seem I was arguing with myself. lol

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by MikeGarcia

"...in what universe is this 'viewed as a taxable event'..."

It does seem rather absurd, I'll grant you that. However, the IRS will view profits from the sale as taxable.

[BobC]

YyYy

Originally Posted by Eric72

It does seem rather absurd, I'll grant you that. However, the IRS will view profits from the sale as taxable.

Just to set the record straight regarding the sale of any cards, as far as the IRS is concerned, technically if you sell any card you have just incurred a taxable event. Especially if the proceeds from the sale exceed the cost or basis you have in the card being sold. And it really doesn't matter if you are a hobbyist, investor, or dealer, it is still technically a taxable sale and the only difference is in how that sale is reported and taxed between those three potential types of owners.

Also for the record, if you merely trade one card for another, and even if no money changes hands, that is also technically a taxable sale to the IRS. In that instance the current fair market value of the card you receive is considered the sales price you got for the card you are trading, and you compare that to the cost/basis of the card you just traded to determine if you have a taxable gain or loss. And the same goes for the person you traded with. So if you thought by only doing trades that you were not potentially breaking any tax laws when not reporting that activity on your tax returns, please note that you are technically wrong.

Whether you report any of these sales/trades as taxable sales on your income tax return if there is no one else actually reporting them to the IRS (like with the 1099-K forms received by some sellers on Ebay) is totally a decision of each seller. Just know those sales/trades are all considered taxable events by the IRS and are technically to be included on every seller's tax returns. There is no de minimus sales amount under which you technically don't have to report such sales/trades.

And also keep in mind that the government has already made a change to the reporting threshold where sites like Etsy and Ebay are required to send the seller a 1099-K form reporting their total gross sales for the year, which also gets sent to the IRS. In case you have not heard already, effective as of 1/1/2022, the sum of all taxable sales totaling $600 or more for any calendar year on sites like Ebay and Etsy are to be reported to the seller, and the IRS, on a 1099-K form going forward. Used to be, and still currently through the end of 2021, you had to have total sales of at least $20,000 AND at least 200 separate sales transactions before those sites were required to report someone's total sales to the IRS.

[aconte]

B 2.0


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[stlcardsfan]

2.5

[bobbyw8469]

2.5

[Bridwell]

2.5

[bozzio37]

1.5


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Casey2296]

"C"

[butchie_t]

It’s the Babe, it goes to 11.

[Eric72]

C) sgc 2.5

[Gorditadogg]

B. 2.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[slightlyrounded]

D. 3

[brianp-beme]

B - 2.0

Brian (no matter what, a great card)

[hcv123]

1.5

[tiger8mush]

E

[SD]

Hoping for a 3 but leaning towards C 2.5.

[Frankish]

2

[VintageBen]

A

[bobbyw8469]

When will the reveal happen?

[Directly]

Compare with a known Ruth SGG 2.5 (left) it appears comparing yours is at least a 2.5, but grading can be subjective - I think your card has better eye appeal. 3.5==?

[RL]

C

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Directly

Compare with a known Ruth SGG 2.5 (left) it appears comparing yours is at least a 2.5, but grading can be subjective - I think your card has better eye appeal. 3.5==?

Did you see the mark on the back, lower right hand area?

.

[chadeast]

I changed the reveal to tonight at 10 PM EST so get your guesses in if you haven't yet done so, and thanks for responding!

[John1941]

C-2.5

[Alexcards]

B. 2

[jcarroll84]

B

[pbspelly]

Don't take this the wrong way, and please recognize that I am not very well versed in the whole grading thing (I just collect cards of two family members and don't care much about the grading), but why would you pay to have a PSA 3 crossed over to an SGC 2? Isn't a PSA 3 worth more than an SGC 2? Was it just that you wanted all your Goudey cards in the same SGC holders?

It does look very nice

[Jay Wolt]

The PSA 3 had a MK qualifier

[Jcosta19]

I'll go E 3.5 to be different. I'll assume they somehow missed or ignored the mark.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk