![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
So here's my card that was rejected as miscut. Decent but not perfect corners, within spec for size.
But the top and bottom cut look like this from the back. The result of a dull blade or worn backing strip in the papercutter. Bounced only because I checked off the don't slab as A option. And a great example of why I don't like the straight up "A". The card is factory, and not altered. As it is, someone could make their own decision about the rough cut and if they'd be ok having it in their collection. With a straight "A" it would be assumed to be altered and probably trimmed. And there's currently a large price difference between the two. So why just "A" if it gets slabbed, but a flip with a nice explanation if it's not? That doesn't make much sense to me. This one is pretty near AB narrow, and is only a 40 because of a paper inclusion that allowed a tiny wear spot in the ink on the front. Technically it makes sense, except for the size thing. I don't have a scan of the one rejected for min size, and actually misplaced it a couple years ago and haven't found it yet ![]() Steve B |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1933 Delong - PSA vs SGC | jg8422 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 08-22-2014 10:23 PM |
Wanted: 1933 Uncle Jacks HOF Type & 1933 DeLong's | Orioles1954 | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 03-04-2010 09:51 AM |
1933 Tattoo Orbit vs. 1933 Delong: Which Do You Like More? | Orioles1954 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 20 | 06-24-2009 09:17 AM |
WTB: 1933 Tattoo Orbit and 1933 DeLong (List Inside) | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 05-22-2008 06:04 AM |
WTB/WTTF: 1933 Tattoo Orbit or 1933 DeLong | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 2 | 02-21-2008 09:34 AM |