My SGC Submission - The Die Is Cast...

[71buc]

I recently had a submission return from SGC. You are correct they have great turnaround times. You most certainly will receive your disappointment and inconsistent grades much quicker with SGC than PSA. On the plus side they do communicate and return emails 100X better than PSA who doesn’t seem to make any effort to offer quality customer service. Nonetheless I wish you luck!

[jimmer77]

Jolly, thanks for posting this video...I found it to be utterly 'epic"
I can't wait for reveal day

[jchcollins]

Great stuff. I did not realize you were a YouTube celebrity!

[Harliduck]

Jolly...great video...I totally enjoyed it. Your very entertaining... I can't say I disagree with any of your grades, be fun to see how they turn out. I've had very mixed results lately...some have graded lower, a couple graded way higher than I though to be honest. The biggest bummer was a 54 Bowman Mantle I popped from a PSA 2.5 came back A, evidence of trimming. It's OC and sharp, no way it was trimmed. Anyway, is what it is...

BTW...I was cracking up about the fingernails at the end. I have some pretty harsh OCD issues myself and that is a huge pet peeve of mine. About half way through I actually thought...hey, thanks Jolly, your nails look great! hahaha...not kidding. Some folks just don't get it!

[JollyElm]

I mailed out the package on Wednesday and they received it in Boca (NY speak for "Boca Raton, FL") on Friday, so it should be under the loupe soon.

Some further full disclosure stuff...here are the notes I included with a trio of cards. The most important is the Bench RC note, because I also included a clipped-normative (is that how pathetic dipshi*ts say "NOT miscut" these days??) one to get a number grade, and wanted to avoid any confusion. The Kaline 'request' was obviously done a bit tongue-in-cheek, but it would be nice to see the variation on the slab...


Notesoncardholders.jpg

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Some further full disclosure stuff...here are the notes I included with a trio of cards. The most important is the Bench RC note, because I also included a clipped-normative (is that how pathetic dipshi*ts say "NOT miscut" these days??) one to get a number grade, and wanted to avoid any confusion. The Kaline 'request' was obviously done a bit tongue-in-cheek, but it would be nice to see the variation on the slab...


Attachment 590736

Please Note: Enclosed in this card saver is a crisp $100 bill. Please return (this card) to me designated an SGC 7. Thanks for your cooperation in this matter.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JollyElm]

The plot, it does thicken...

Cards were graded today, 9/28/23, BUT they sent me a message stating, "You have been refunded $15.00 for 1 card that SGC cannot grade."
No explanation as to why they cannot grade it was included, and they did not say which card is being sent straight to bed without plastic. Argh.

On the submission form, every card had the 'slab if authentic' box checked, so this is even more confusing.

Since this is a blind reveal thingy, I'm not going to investigate and discover which card it is, so it'll be a surprise to me (right up until the moment I see the back of it still in the semi-rigid holder I put it in, and begin shouting obscenities).

Whichever one I guess is the culprit, I assume will be wrong. The obvious choice is the miscut Bench rookie card, because it's the only one that isn't 'normal,' but that's too easy. The 1967 Laughlins are tricky, but I have plenty of them graded by SGC, so they are low on the suspect list. Perhaps the very problematic 1954 Bowman Mantle?
Could it be a 'minimum size not met' thing, maybe with the 1971 Ryan? But I thought they give it an 'A' and note it on the flip when that's the case. This is going to be an anxious few days waiting for Mr. Postman to (now) darken my doorway.

ETA: I did mention the 1971 Rose is a tad bit wider than normal, could there be something afoul there?