SGC Delays

[UKCardGuy]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Show us the results in this thread when they arrive. Would be interested to see them... Thanks!

I have them in hand today.

Received 7/28, Graded 8/18, Delivered 8/25

The cards look great in the SGC holders. Some of the grades seem a little harsh but reasonable.

I'm a little surprised by the grade on the 1932 Sanella Ruth though. The corners are sharp, the back is clean and there's no creases or surface damage that I can see. I was hoping for at least a 6.

[gonefishin]

Nice cards - congrats. They look great.

[NATCARD]

Order of 151 cards received on 8/17. Graded on 8/23. Shipped back to me today 8/25. Not sure if they could do this any faster! Jeff W

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by UKCardGuy

I have them in hand today.



Received 7/28, Graded 8/18, Delivered 8/25



The cards look great in the SGC holders. Some of the grades seem a little harsh but reasonable.



I'm a little surprised by the grade on the 1932 Sanella Ruth though. The corners are sharp, the back is clean and there's no creases or surface damage that I can see. I was hoping for at least a 6.

They all look great, especially those 55s!

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Jay Wolt]

Gary the Babe Ruth & Nolan Ryan look much better then a "4"
How are the card backs?
Nice batch of cards

[Vintagedeputy]

Originally Posted by UKCardGuy

I'm a little surprised by the grade on the 1932 Sanella Ruth though. The corners are sharp, the back is clean and there's no creases or surface damage that I can see. I was hoping for at least a 6.

Maybe its just my computer, but I feel like I see the slightest hint of a diamond cut. I may be wrong though.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by UKCardGuy

I have them in hand today.

Received 7/28, Graded 8/18, Delivered 8/25

The cards look great in the SGC holders. Some of the grades seem a little harsh but reasonable.

I'm a little surprised by the grade on the 1932 Sanella Ruth though. The corners are sharp, the back is clean and there's no creases or surface damage that I can see. I was hoping for at least a 6.

No creases on Jackie or Ryan either? If not, those two and the Sanella Ruth make little sense.

[UKCardGuy]

Originally Posted by perezfan

No creases on Jackie or Ryan either? If not, those two and the Sanella Ruth make little sense.

The Jackie has some staining on the back lower corner and there's a small wrinkle in the border of the Ryan. I missed that wrinkle on the Ryan before I submitted (Doh!). So those both seem fair.

The grade on the Sanella seems low. I can see now that the back isn't 100% perfect but a 4 still seems harsh.

[perezfan]

That makes more sense. Still perplexed about the Sanella Ruth though. There must be a tiny wrinkle on it somewhere.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by perezfan

That makes more sense. Still perplexed about the Sanella Ruth though. There must be a tiny wrinkle on it somewhere.

Or the grader had no clue, see my Senna above.

[1880nonsports]

for many of you - maybe buying cards and then sending them out for someone else to grade them might not be for you....... Some silly claims and downright whining. People looking at a SCAN in a holder in an online chat room and questioning grades. Same people calling balls and strikes from the nose bleed section.

[theshowandme]

Have a 22 card order that should arrive there today.

All of it is vintage non-sports. Excited for when it returns