1989 Fleer Randy Johnson #381 Marlboro Errors - 30 Years Later

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by steve5838

I'm sorry to hear it but understand too. I swear it seems like PSA is trying to kill this card. I've never seen their labeling convention so out of whack. I'm currently battling to get this one relabeled as Ad on Scoreboard but they are holding firm on the Partially Obscured label. I just don't get it...

It is not just that card they don't discriminate. They will screw up any card at any time for any reason.

Did you ever get the somewhat similar card I sent you graded? Been meaning to ask for a while.

[steve5838]

Originally Posted by bnorth

It is not just that card they don't discriminate. They will screw up any card at any time for any reason.

Did you ever get the somewhat similar card I sent you graded? Been meaning to ask for a while.

Ben, this is actually a different card than the one you sent me. I cropped the above pic from this one (see the uncropped card below). I bought this already graded card on eBay last month. I just sent you a PM about the similar one you sent me.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by steve5838

Ben, this is actually a different card than the one you sent me. I cropped the above pic from this one (see the uncropped card below). I bought this already graded card on eBay last month. I just sent you a PM about the similar one you sent me.

That is why I said somewhat similar. The one in the post is a very nice card. Sadly as I age and my eyesight gets worse I have less and less interest in the Johnson cards. With the many versions a person needs great eyes to appreciate them fully.

[Statfreak101]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/16587205026...Bk9SR9rX-v6wYQ

Pardon my language, but is this a fucking joke?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Statfreak101

https://www.ebay.com/itm/16587205026...Bk9SR9rX-v6wYQ

Pardon my language, but is this a fucking joke?

Yes and no. That is just the normal quality of grading by PSA. On the other hand I love screw ups so I will be bidding on it.

[Statfreak101]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Yes and no. That is just the normal quality of grading by PSA. On the other hand I love screw ups so I will be bidding on it.

It just ticks me off when I am sitting on a mountain of clearer Marlboro ads that were labeled as "partial" and then I see this nonsense.

What a joke.

[steve5838]

Originally Posted by Statfreak101

It just ticks me off when I am sitting on a mountain of clearer Marlboro ads that were labeled as "partial" and then I see this nonsense.

What a joke.

Agreed. It doesn't make sense to me either. Obviously they just don't care. In my opinion I would rather they ditched their labeling convention on the card entirely if they can't apply it consistently (and communicate the convention to collectors). At least then people wouldn't be confused by inconsistencies in labeling the exact same variation multiple ways.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Statfreak101

https://www.ebay.com/itm/16587205026...Bk9SR9rX-v6wYQ

Pardon my language, but is this a fucking joke?

This card just sold and went for more than I would pay. Any guesses on what version it actually is? It is obviously not a corrected version.

[Statfreak101]

Originally Posted by bnorth

This card just sold and went for more than I would pay. Any guesses on what version it actually is? It is obviously not a corrected version.

How can you say it is not a corrected version based on the pictures in the listing?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Statfreak101

How can you say it is not a corrected version based on the pictures in the listing?

Look above his left ear and tell me that is a corrected version.