 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2
12-07-2019, 01:08 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Definitely a notch or two below pin holes and paper loss.
Gum stains, when they are on the back, don't bother me near as much as off-centered or diamond cut cards. In general, I'd put a 10 - 20% penalty on cards with gum stains on the back.
__________________
Working Sets: Baseball- T206 SLers - Virginia League (-1) 1952 Topps - low numbers (-1) 1953 Topps (-91) 1954 Bowman (-3) 1964 Topps Giants auto'd (-2) 
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Who had a positive impact on your collection ? | Baseballcrazy62 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 151 | 05-15-2025 07:21 PM |
| Impact of the MC and/or MK designation | TheBigRedOne | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 02-27-2017 05:43 AM |
| Where do you all stand on gumstains? | Brianruns10 | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 13 | 10-30-2013 01:32 AM |
| Impact of Net 54 on SCP/Sothebys | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 18 | 09-15-2007 05:44 PM |
| Impact of the Card | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 45 | 07-17-2007 02:17 PM |
Threaded Mode