Grading question

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by xplainer

Hey, they even produce the "price guide" most modern collectors use. Do you see a problem there?


But, to each his own. But Beckett's "conflict of interest" issues rule me out there. PSA - Modern cards, SGC - Vintage.

Off the soap box. Next?

Funny you mention the conflict of interest with the price guides. One could argue that PSA has the same conflict potential with their SMR pricing (which I presume many vintage collectors have used as a reference.) Yet, SMR prices are almost always lower than actual market prices (just look at SMR Cracker Jack prices). Seems like they are almost trying to avoid a conflict, or they are simply out of touch with actual market transactions (which seems hard to believe). Head scratcher.

[glchen]

Here's another card that neither PSA nor SGC would encapsulate due to the damaged paper stock. However, Beckett had no problems. Note that SGC stated the card might blow up if encapsulated.

All in all, the point is Beckett is usually able to encapsulate the most cards regardless of condition. SGC is next most capable, and PSA is last in that they reject the most cards due to fragility concerns.

[slinger23]

Originally Posted by glchen

Here's another card that neither PSA nor SGC would encapsulate due to the damaged paper stock. However, Beckett had no problems. Note that SGC stated the card might blow up if encapsulated.

All in all, the point is Beckett is usually able to encapsulate the most cards regardless of condition. SGC is next most capable, and PSA is last in that they reject the most cards due to fragility concerns.

Wow, the card might blow up had me laughing. I can't believe they wrote that. But, hey what do I know. I like Beckett, but as people said they primarily do modern cards and do a great job with that. I personally like the subgrades and wish they would do that with BVG as well. I believe they use to but then went to just the overall grade.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

Funny you mention the conflict of interest with the price guides. One could argue that PSA has the same conflict potential with their SMR pricing (which I presume many vintage collectors have used as a reference.) Yet, SMR prices are almost always lower than actual market prices (just look at SMR Cracker Jack prices). Seems like they are almost trying to avoid a conflict, or they are simply out of touch with actual market transactions (which seems hard to believe). Head scratcher.

SMR prices are clearly not always lower than actual market...check out T202s or almost any commons for most sets SMR is usually higher, 1974 topps cards I don't think any card goes for SMR...I can go on and on...yeah Cracker jacks go for more..but almost every Topps set is the opposite in terms of number of cards........that was really a blanket statement

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

SMR prices are clearly not always lower than actual market...check out T202s or almost any commons for most sets SMR is usually higher, 1974 topps cards I don't think any card goes for SMR...I can go on and on...yeah Cracker jacks go for more..but almost every Topps set is the opposite in terms of number of cards........that was really a blanket statement

Seems like you have a comment for everything, Jake. We are on a pre-war forum, and yet you use 1974 Topps cards as an example. Why don't you look at the waterfront properties you reference ad nauseum and compare actual prices vs. SMR. How about your Green Cobb 4s. $4000 SMR. Is that the market price right now? No. Blanket statement? Sure. But looking at many data points within the most popular pre-war sets, and I'm sure most would draw the same conclusion. I don't currently follow T202 cards, but perhaps that's an exception. I have no idea what 74 Topps commons sell for, and I probably never will. Sam Swartz

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

Seems like you have a comment for everything, Jake. We are on a pre-war forum, and yet you use 1974 Topps cards as an example. Why don't you look at the waterfront properties you reference ad nauseum and compare actual prices vs. SMR. How about your Green Cobb 4s. $4000 SMR. Is that the market price right now? No. Blanket statement? Sure. But looking at many data points within the most popular pre-war sets, and I'm sure most would draw the same conclusion. I don't currently follow T202 cards, but perhaps that's an exception. I have no idea what 74 Topps commons sell for, and I probably never will. Sam Swartz

So I did talk about T202s..are those prewar? Plus the comment you were commenting on did address modern cards....sometimes comments can involve both pre and post war....but I guess that's like crossing the streams in ghostbusters......Back to the T202s....I don't think theres a card (maybe the cobb/Christy variations in a high grade) that goes even close to SMR or over and I had almost the entire set..

HOF big guys are the exceptions to the market going over SMR...green cobb probably one of the hottest cards right now..maybe next you will bring up the 1951 Bowman Mays goes for over SMR or maybe a T206 big guy like Cy Young......I know when I was selling the two green cobbs on net54 in 2015.....I was quoted SMR and how people would be doing me a great favor to pay 100 over SMR.......most will draw the conclusion that almost every card sells for less than SMR....save the hottest cards in the hobby....the hottest cards in the hobby make up less than 1% of all cards....pointing out the waterside properties are the exceptions..and exactly my point...

The T202 card example aren't the exception in terms of SMR versus market price they are the rule...... .....

seems like it is YOU that has a comment for everything. ....i simply just pointing out a comment that I believed to be wrong.......do I now got to get ready for the why PSA really doesn't sell for more than SGC argument again? I think everyone knows my position on that.

[sbfinley]

The "service unavailable" note is most likely due to the fact you didn't check the box on the first page of the submission form granting them the ability to slab the card(s) as authentic only if they don't deserve a numerical grade. Although it might seem leaving a note within the package would be enough, the form presented with the submission is the defacto "contact" of the service they are providing. Notes can be misplaced or lost in the chain of the service so in the eyes of Beckett, if you didn't check the box indicating authentic grades are desired if necessary no service can be provided for particular items.

The silver lining is that one time I received a "service unavailable" return from Beckett (although for another reason) my credit card was not charged for the particular card. Whether or not the will do the same (or provide vouchers) for you I can't say for certain.

Good luck and happy collecting.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

The "service unavailable" note is most likely due to the fact you didn't check the box on the first page of the submission form granting them the ability to slab the card(s) as authentic only if they don't deserve a numerical grade. Although it might seem leaving a note within the package would be enough, the form presented with the submission is the defacto "contact" of the service they are providing. Notes can be misplaced or lost in the chain of the service so in the eyes of Beckett, if you didn't check the box indicating authentic grades are desired if necessary no service can be provided for particular items.

The silver lining is that one time I received a "service unavailable" return from Beckett (although for another reason) my credit card was not charged for the particular card. Whether or not the will do the same (or provide vouchers) for you I can't say for certain.

Good luck and happy collecting.

If the card was fake, I am sure they will charge you. If not, everyone would send their questionable cards to Beckett.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

If the card was fake, I am sure they will charge you. If not, everyone would send their questionable cards to Beckett.

It wouldn't pop as "service unavailable" if they deemed it a fake. The return note sheet has three or four different issues the card could have that prevented it's encapsulation or the reason the for an authentic designation. Off the top of my head I remember it having service unavailable, questionable authenticity, and altered. I think it has one more (might say "other"), but I don't have one near me at the moment.

If it was a fake card it would pop as questionable authenticity and would warrant a charge. From my experience and hearing from others, service unavailable refers to an issue that keeps a likely legitimate card from being slabbed. In my instance the card in question was a Topps released auto card they released in two versions (autographed and regular) without anything else different between the two version. It popped as "system unavailable" and beckett told me because of the way Topps released the cards there was no way to tell if it was packed pulled or IP. I wasn't charged, PSA said the same, and I eventually had the card slabbed PSA/DNA. I have also heard of Beckett using service unavailable when the card is marked with the player's name. This prevents people from confusing the card with an authenticated autographed example, something I wish PSA did because it's a simple scam people have been running for years now.