 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#51
05-09-2010, 10:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Peter_Spaeth
I absolutely agree that the price of a pop 1 card is often artificially driven, rather than market driven. Most of the time, this type of card falls into the hand of collectors (rather than investors) and may never appear in the market again. Just think, when the last time that you saw a 1952 Mickey Mantle PSA 10, since Tom Candiatti sold the card in private transaction few years ago. I have to disagree with you on your other notion. I think that if you put this card in the mix among other 9's, most of the professionals would still be able to pick it out as a sgc 98 or psa 10). I agree that the label is for those who are not trained to grade cards and help the industry to standardize grading. They may not be right 100% of the time, but based on my experience, they are correct most of the time. 
|
|
#52
05-09-2010, 10:52 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
MJ maybe but on the other hand I know a guy who used to deal in large quantities of Jordan rookies and it was essentially a game for him cracking out 9s to resubmit and getting a certain percentage into 10s -- or just asking for bumps at the Parsippany show. I dare you to crack yours out and resubmit it if you are so confident.
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/
|
|
#53
05-09-2010, 10:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't think the professionals could distinguish a 9 from a 10 with any great level of consistency. That's my take.
|
|
#54
05-09-2010, 10:55 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I agree with Barry. I think for the most part it's essentially arbitrary.
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/
|
|
#55
05-09-2010, 11:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
barrysloate
if what you were saying was true, then the industry is in big trouble. A friend of mine used to work for a small grading company similar to CSA, PRO etc. He told me the way they grade cards (by the way, my friend receive no formal training in grading, and he only has a high school diploma) they would scan the card and then enlarge it on a computer, then measure the centering, pick up any print marks, etc. They have a point system, and certain points were given for each category and the sum would then translate into a grading scale of 1-10. Not sure how SGC or PSA people grade the cards, and would like to find out.
|
|
#56
05-09-2010, 11:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
if you look at the photos on the other sgc 96 rose cards on ebay (two of them available), you can clearly see that the centering from left to right are not 50/50, more like 65/45. Then compare the centering on the SGC 98, it's dead on center 50/50. I don't claim myself to be an expert in grading, and even i can see that difference.
|
|
#57
05-09-2010, 11:17 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
It's all relative, many cards are undergraded by a couple grades and many are over graded by a couple grades. You could crack your Rose out and send it to psa and it could come back an 8, 9, 10, or even worse evidence of trimming you just never know. Your best bet is to go to a show and try to get it crossed in person, if they say no dice try to bribe the grader a couple grand and see what happens.
|
|
#59
05-09-2010, 11:31 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#61
05-09-2010, 11:41 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Good luck, whatever happens it's a great card !!
|
|
#62
05-09-2010, 12:37 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The fact that it's not already in a PSA 10 holder leads me to believe that
it might have a flaw preventing it from crossing to PSA 10. I'd have to imagine that PSA has already looked at this card at least 1 or 2 times. It does seem to have a minor amount of tilt. Regardless, it's still a beautiful card.
|
|
#64
05-09-2010, 12:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nice looking card but I would have to agree with Chuck's comment. I would assume the card has been presented to PSA either before grading at SGC or sometime after. Far too important a card for the PSA Set Registry to not be in their holder.
|
|
#65
05-09-2010, 12:51 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
No doubt this is a beautiful card.I know he charges for his auto's,but it would be pretty cool to have Mr.Rose put his auto on the slab,wouldn't it?
Clayton
|
|
#68
05-09-2010, 01:42 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
i am pretty sure i know original submitter
he would have definetly submitted to psa multiple times for review. I am confident he would not have sold as sgc 98 unless he was told there was no way this would ever be a 10 and was probably given a reason.
Last edited by glynparson; 05-11-2010 at 10:57 AM.
|
|
#69
05-09-2010, 02:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you assumption is true, does it mean that PSA is a stricter grader than SGC? Why would SGC put the card in a SGC 98 holder, but PSA would not? I am sure this has been debated many times before, but is it true the general perception is that PSA is more reputable than SGC, even in prewar or post war cards?
|
|
#70
05-09-2010, 02:41 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/
|
|
#72
05-09-2010, 03:31 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
PSA has been around longer and they've captured a large part of the post-war and modern card market.
Did you happen to look at the SGC96 graded 1963T Rose card that BMW has for sale ($20K)? It looks every bit as awesome as the card graded a 98. Is there really a an $80K difference in value. Perceived, maybe. Seriously, is it really worth the $80K? I don't get this... Someone could have picked up the almost 400 OJs that was sold in the REA auction for $80K. Now THAT, to me would have been money better spent. There were some pretty neat cards in that OJ lot but then again, I'm an OJ nut so a 1963T card just doesn't do it for me. I do however appreciate looking at a nice 1963T because that year is a very condition sensitive. Please don't take that as my possible endorsement of the value of the SGC98 Rose rookie (it isn't).
__________________
fr3d c0wl3s - always looking for OJs and other 19th century stuff. PM or email me if you have something cool you're looking to find a new home for.
|
|
#73
05-09-2010, 03:35 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Fred, I find it best to not do the math in your head over such trivialities as the monetary and aesthetic differences between a 9 and a 9.5. It is simply insanity when you really focus on these issues.
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/sets
|
|
#74
05-09-2010, 04:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
BMW paid 8-10k or less for his card, here is the SGC96 just sold in REA-
http://bid.robertedwardauctions.com/...x?itemid=13826 The sgc98 has sold for 19k-27k. You might need to up the bribe to 5-10k.
|
|
#75
05-09-2010, 04:02 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I am not the grader, but I do see some differences between these two cards. The SGC 96 has a small printing fisheye in the upper right part of the blue. It also has a tiny white dot in the red to the right of Pedro Gonzalez's face. The SGC 96 also seems centered a bit lower than the SGC 98. Obviously these are incredibly minor "flaws", but for those interested in the difference between a 10 and 9, I am guessing those are the types of differences.
 
|
|
#76
05-09-2010, 04:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
A few years ago I got a close look at a T206 Pastorius that was graded PSA 10. While the front was an absolute gem, with perfectly sharp corners and a beautiful "finish" that a pristine T206 will have, the back was noticeably off-center. None of us who saw it that night (it was at one of our Net54 dinners) understood how a card with so obvious a visual flaw received a grade of 10. It's still a mystery to me how some of these grades are assigned.
|
|
#77
05-09-2010, 06:20 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Very interesting story Barry,,,sometimes I wonder if it's who you know.........
Clayton
|
|
#78
05-09-2010, 06:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Clayton- no question there is some lobbying going on for higher grades. How could there not be?
|
|
#79
05-09-2010, 06:54 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Barry, I'm chaning your name to Joe for a a moment...
"Say it aint so, Joe". I shouldn't think about the grades and difference in value that others put on that label. It makes my head hurt. I just couldn't imagine wasting my money on a label. If it cannot immediately cross over between reputable grading companies then why bother "wanting the best", because it aint.
__________________
fr3d c0wl3s - always looking for OJs and other 19th century stuff. PM or email me if you have something cool you're looking to find a new home for.
|
|
#80
05-09-2010, 07:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I have found the stock market to be an absolute joy the last 18 months. Alot of under valued stock were scooped up when there was a rush to sell. Like the card market, if you do your research, homework and don't let emotions get in the way of good business sense your portfolio could have risen by 40% over the same period. Not many cards turned that kind of return in the same time period.
|
|
#81
05-09-2010, 07:52 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
There are some people who are very good at making money in the stock markets.And I'm sure there are people who are very good at making money selling cards also.But just like in the stock markets,you are always aware of the risks-you can lose just as fast as you can win.
As is always discussed on this board,you can't just go off of pop reports for an accurate number of what is out there.How many Gem Mint 10 Rose rookie cards are out there sitting in collections that are not graded?Who knows,but I bet there are a few...........and if they were to be graded,what would that do to the prices?Your 1/1 is now a 1/6,1/7,etc. And,it is amazing to me how the price of the 96 Mint Rose rookie and the 98 Gem Rose rookie have this $10,000.00 gap in between..............I honestly do not get it. Clayton
|
|
#82
05-09-2010, 08:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
thought BMW had too much contrast and color saturation in their scans. The comparison quoted above ^^^ shows how a BMW scan can be misleading to a potential buyer. Look at how much more the color pops on the BMW SGC 96. We now return you to your regularly scheduled topic.... 
|
|
#83
05-09-2010, 08:22 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Large price gap between the SGC 96 Rose's on ebay. One is 20,000 OBO, the other one has a BIN of 7495.
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/
|
|
#84
05-10-2010, 03:29 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The contrast on the SGC 96 Rose on my website is about the same as the one sold by REA as well as the SGC 98 on eBay. I'm not seeing what you are. Please explain to me how I'm being misleading. Thank you. Last edited by MW1; 05-10-2010 at 03:33 AM.
|
|
#85
05-10-2010, 06:18 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
geez.... just scan it !!
why can't dealers just scan the card and be done. why do they have to adjust the contrast and color saturation. That side by side comparison is pretty obvious to me. If it's not misleading to adjust a scan of a card then what do you call it ? Picture modification.....this reminds me of Heritage auctions use of the terms "bid modification" to describe their employees placing bids on items in their own auctions. I am beginning to think that a lot of dealers think guys on this board are stupid or just desperate to buy cards at any cost.
I've started reporting auctions based on what I think are modified scans, and actually had one guy take the auctions down and re-scan his cards normally after I showed him that modifying the contrast or sharpness a tiny bit can mask wrinkles and small creases and flaws in cards. This "picture modification" seems to occur alot on Old judge cards.
|
|
#86
05-10-2010, 06:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
dave,
you nailed it again!!  Quote:
|
|
#87
05-10-2010, 06:53 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The side by side Roses look the same to me. I don't think it's a fair accusation. People buying BMW's cards know what cards look like; if the scan is a bit bright they can tell that by the color of the flip.
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/
|
|
#89
05-17-2010, 01:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I noticed the seller pulled this auction down....any idea what he wound up flipping this for??
|
|
#90
05-17-2010, 02:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi bobbyw8469
i took it off ebay because i'm done showcasing the card. I received several offers, with the highest $24,000 (a quick $4K profit), but at the end, i decided to keep the card. It's a beautiful card, and i enjoy looking at it daily. I asked Beckett for an onsite grading over the weekend in SF, and based on their 4 points criteria (center, corner, surface, and edge), this card could've easily cross over to BVG 9.5.
|
|
#91
05-17-2010, 02:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#92
05-17-2010, 02:37 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Has anyone weighed in on whether it might be better to cross to PSA instead of Beckett? I'm sure there are a lot of opinions on this topic as well and you might get some good feedback on what to do with that beauty. Perhaps a poll or another thread?
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/sets
|
|
#93
05-17-2010, 02:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Ladies and gentlemen... now batting for Chicago206... ichieh!
__________________
My collection can be viewed at http://imageevent.com/jeffintoronto Always looking for interesting pre-war baseball & hockey postcards!
|
|
#94
05-17-2010, 03:15 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 05-17-2010 at 03:15 PM.
|
|
#96
05-17-2010, 05:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Calvindog
For modern cards, it's better to be in BGS holder. But anything pre 1980's, my personal belief is that PSA cards hold better value than BGS. But the fact that BVG is willing to cross this card further validify the quality of this card, and install my further trust in SGC grading.
|
|
#97
05-17-2010, 05:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I think he should give PRO Grading a shot at it. Who knows? This may cross to a PRO 11!
__________________
Jim Van Brunt Last edited by Jim VB; 05-17-2010 at 05:20 PM.
|
|
#99
05-17-2010, 05:24 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
For modern cards, it's better to be in BGS holder. But anything pre 1980's, my personal belief is that PSA cards hold better value than BGS. But the fact that BVG is willing to cross this card further validify the quality of this card, and install my further trust in SGC grading." Yes, can we do a poll. Pretty please
|
|
#100
05-17-2010, 05:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| FS: 1958 Jim Brown ROOKIE PSA 3 (SOLD); 1963 Pete Rose ROOKIE PSA 5 (SOLD) | bobbyw8469 | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 3 | 04-18-2010 11:41 AM |
| 1963 Topps Pete Rose PSA/DNA autographed rookie card $425.00 | thenavarro | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 2 | 08-16-2009 01:02 PM |
| N162 Jack Dempsey, 1963 Topps Pete Rose rookie on ebay | Archive | Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T | 1 | 11-25-2007 04:52 AM |
| Pete Rose Rookie Autographed | Archive | Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T | 0 | 08-18-2007 10:04 AM |
| PSA 7 (High End) 1963 Pete Rose Rookie - $700 (includes insured shipping!). | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 2 | 10-17-2005 11:06 PM |
Linear Mode
