![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: kirk
I know at this point, and especially with the fiasco of them closing (or not closing) etc... Thats GAI's "stock" is low right now within the hobby, and maybe some of their trust & rep has been tarnished.... But I've been seeing some crazy crazy well below book deals on GAI cards on ebay lately. I just saw a PSA going for just above beckett book value, and a GAI graded the same, going for almost HALF of that. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jason L
when their rep comes under fire, people start to assume the worst regarding all of the product, and fears of authenticity and alteration are skyrocketing. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: leon
Their recent fiasco has hurt them as well as their over grading of cards since inception (at least in public perception). It seems they didn't capitalize on Mike Baker's status in the hobby when they needed too. Most collectors look at their graded cards with a skeptical eye and therefore the prices are low....I recently crossed a GAI 6 E91 Caramel and got an SGC 60...I was still happy....best regards |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Kirk
Well, I figured that their recent reputation issues were coming into play, but what I don't understand is why that would affect values so much. They didnt close the doors because the market was scoffing at their grading. Has there been any known cases of trimmed cards being slabbed by GAI? There certainly has with PSA.... Even fakes. Yet the cards in PSA holders are selling for well over book... I'm about to bid on a card tat I could not afford in a PSA holder. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: leon
No one and no grading company is perfect. I am going to go out on a limb here and say that there are trimmed cards in all of the grading companies holders. My guess is they would agree with me. Now, that being said, who is doing the best job and what will have the best long term value? My vote still goes to SGC. Others think PSA. That is fine too. The problem with GAI is a compound one. First off they have a poor reputation for grading a little too loosely. It's not just me, but most vintage collectors, have thought that was the case for a long time. Then their latest fiasco and excuses about what happened have left a vote of "no confidence" in a lot of collectors eyes. I have nothing personally against them and have met several of their employees. They all seem like nice folks. Their PR (public relations) has not been very good, imho. They could have easily come on community chatboards and explained what was going on. Instead they went into some silent periods and that hurt them a lot....Who knows if they will be able to come back or not? Regardless of the company always buy the card and not the holder. Most of this board feels comfortable with SGC's and PSA's services.....best regards |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Eric Brehm
I have submitted two high grade cards in GAI holders to PSA for cross-over, both within the past year and a half, and in both cases the cards were returned to me in the original holders with the designation EVID TRIM. Two cards is a small sample, but this does make me wonder what is going on. It seems to me that there are three possibilities to explain this: |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Andrew S.
I would never purchase a GAI graded card. With regard to crossover, it is a mistake to send slabbed cards for crossover. I've much better luck breaking them out and submitting. Giving graders a point of reference right off the bat by sending a competitor's slab can sometimes work out fine, but most often is a recipe for disaster. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Marc S.
killed my interest in 1955 Bowmans. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Kirk
I'm glad I started this topic. I see GAI listed everywhere as one of the top 4. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Rich Klein
1955 Bowman's are a very unique case. I opened about one box worth of cards from the Rosen find in the late 1980's and the variance of size in those cards were very large. I don't have the same problem with 55 Bowman's being slabbed even if too big or too small than I do with most other issues. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jon Canfield
I personally believe that all of the 3 major companies (PSA, SGC and GAI) have those that will support them and those that dislike them. I've had good and bad experiences with all three and I would not personally hesitate to buy a GAI graded card albeit as Leon says - buy the card, not the holder. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Marc S.
<<1955 Bowman's are a very unique case. I opened about one box worth of cards from the Rosen find in the late 1980's and the variance of size in those cards were very large. I don't have the same problem with 55 Bowman's being slabbed even if too big or too small than I do with most other issues. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: leon
I absolutely agree with you on the borders issue....If you want legit cards always try to buy BIG BORDERS...regardless of the holder. Every time I see an E101 or E102 (sorry for the OT over here) that is graded and has little borders, I kind of laugh.....Generally speaking they didn't start out that way. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cards with qualifiers...deals or not deals? | Archive | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 8 | 07-24-2010 03:35 AM |
Some damn good deals on authentic Babe Ruth cards | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 12-29-2007 06:50 PM |
signed t206 cards, whats the value?? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 25 | 04-10-2007 08:32 PM |
whats the difference between these 2 cards? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 18 | 02-11-2005 07:59 AM |
POSTING BAD DEALS OR SCAMMING THIEFS THROUGH CARD DEALS OR EBAY | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 01-14-2004 09:31 AM |