Fake 1915 Cracker Jack in PSA holder...wow!

[swarmee]

PSA's definition of the MC qualifier includes ones where the image falls off the edge or image from another card is visible on this one. I think the slight red at the top left border is why it got the MC. I think based on the blatant registration issues that it should have gotten the OF (out of focus) qualifier instead. But all qualifiers count the same.

[perezfan]

Some excellent examples of total failure there...

Posts 135, 136 and 137 are all blatantly altered and none should have received a numerical grade. Anyone who thinks that is normal corner wear is dreaming.

If a normal person submitted those cards, they could expect to receive nothing other than an "A".

Pathetic.

[Kidnapped18]

This was my very first Cracker Jack...I had to learn real fast the differences between a 1914 CJ and a 1915 CJ
(Mislabeled 1914 CJ...back clearly shows it is a 1915 CJ)

[steve B]

My prediction on the "offer" is a voucher for another grading.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by steve B

My prediction on the "offer" is a voucher for another grading.

That was my prediction also. If he sends it in first before having it in a email/writing exactly what he will get. He will be lucky to get the voucher.

[Kidnapped18]

I have seen PSA 1s and 2s look better visually. This is a very bad PSA 5!
Does anyone really think this is a legit 5? Card is way off center, one side is very jagged and the other side looks trimmed. (I do not own this card, it is in someone else's collection)

[oldeboo]

Needle sharp corners on one side, dull and rounded on the other side. Major red flag when grading. Wonder why they didn't just trim off the ragged left side too.