 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6
12-03-2013, 11:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
I've had three rejected, all T206s
Miscut top and bottom -rough factory cut that I guess was just a bit too rough. Min size- yeah, small top to bottom but factory. The vertical dimension I think gets looked at harder than side to side. EOT- Got it back and checked it and wondered why I'd sent it in the first place. Definitely trimmed, but nice and even so also a deceptive trim. I won't be resending unless it's to get it slabbed as "A" before selling. Modern cards would be a bit tougher to tell, since the edges are typically cleaner all around. Steve B 
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Evidence of E90-1 being printed before E102 | CaramelMan | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 08-24-2013 05:40 PM |
| Evidence of trimming | kylebicking | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 02-04-2010 04:03 PM |
| Leon, I will post evidence this evening | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 05-01-2008 10:47 PM |
| The Evidence as Promised | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 05-01-2008 07:02 PM |
| evidence of trimming vs. cut short | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 04-08-2005 04:18 PM |
Threaded Mode