W575-1s Distributed by WD Boyce Co. back from SGC

[Leon]

Just back from SGC. These were the cards shown previously which came with the WD Boyce Co pack, which they apparently originated from.
I guess 96 yrs and they have to be jostled around a little..and no, they aren't hand cut but SGC says their policy is to put hand cut on them. And the cards are actually a nice cream color in person. My scanner settings need to be adjusted. The rest of the cards go from 55 and 60, 1 card each to a few more 80s and several 84s...

[Snapolit1]

Beautiful cards. From the front can't see why the Stengel only got a 60.

[yanksfan09]

Beautiful cards Leon!

Seems like SGC should change their policy, especially when they admit it's wrong!

These cards proved, just by being found with that "pack" that they were not all hand-cut. Really nice!

[JustinD]

frustrating that they have no room for logic with the "hand cut".

Years from now, people will not know of the pack provenance and the fact they were not hand cut will be lost to history because of stubborn thought.

[ronniehatesjazz]

I'm always fascinated with century old cards being in such great shape. A one hundred year old 7 is way more impressive than a twenty year 10 IMO. Lovely cards!

[Touch'EmAll]

If you haven't already, I would call SGC about these cards. Politely explain some information (proof) that you have regarding them not being hand cut. And ask if they (SGC) like to get things right and correct as possible.

[packs]

Why would they give a grade if they insist they're hand cut?

[Leon]

They know the whole story and I even showed them where I won them on ebay. I showed them where the seller said they were his dad's and they came from a closed down antique store.
I wanted the company put on their flips but they said no. I wanted the flips to not say hand cut and they said no. I wish they would have reached different conclusions but oh well. Here are a few more..they do look good with the black inserts and all..

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

If you haven't already, I would call SGC about these cards. Politely explain some information (proof) that you have regarding them not being hand cut. And ask if they (SGC) like to get things right and correct as possible.

[greenmonster66]

They look Awesome! Congrats Leon!

[Leon]

Originally Posted by greenmonster66

They look Awesome! Congrats Leon!

Thanks Neal.
And to address a concern above, while I wouldn't commit to it as there is no reason to, most likely the group will eventually be sold together with the pack they came in. The new owner can decide what to do after that. They will also get a printed out copy of where I got them so as to add a bit more provenance. All of the cards had the exact same look to them which is kind of neat though their grades were varying.

[Exhibitman]

TPGs do not fix their errors. They'd rather be consistent than right. I suppose that gives the eagle eyed and well informed among us an edge.

[nolemmings]

The problem here is that TPGs will not recognize these cards for what they are, which is essentially blank-backed e121s. The '21 Henry Johnson Confectioners suffer a similar fate--they are called w575-1s and hand-cut when they clearly are factory or at least machine cut and unlikely cut from strips. Many e121 blank backs are graded as w575-1 also. Either they should be acknowledged as such or, perhaps more accurately, should be called E-Unc. However, one problem there is that some of these might have been distributed with bread or bakery products, which would make them classified as D-unc, and it may be impossible to tell the difference.

[Leon]

These blank backs could be categorized as a W575 catch-all, as JR Burdick had them classified; see below from his 1960 ACC. Then after that we could get more specific with something like M-Unc for the WD Boyce Publishing Co's., or whatever letter and corresponding company. I don't think I would put hand cut on a label, if I were the grader, if I didn't think it was hand cut. But that is just me.
As for the categorizing, I believe the above is the way I have done mine in the past. So this would be W575-1/M-Unc WD Boyce Co's. I am sure there are lots of other great ways to do it too. .

Originally Posted by nolemmings

The problem here is that TPGs will not recognize these cards for what they are, which is essentially blank-backed e121s. The '21 Henry Johnson Confectioners suffer a similar fate--they are called w575-1s and hand-cut when they clearly are factory or at least machine cut and unlikely cut from strips. Many e121 blank backs are graded as w575-1 also. Either they should be acknowledged as such or, perhaps more accurately, should be called E-Unc. However, one problem there is that some of these might have been distributed with bread or bakery products, which would make them classified as D-unc, and it may be impossible to tell the difference.

[Leon]

Got a call from SGC yesterday. They are going to revisit these "handcut" designations. I am sending the cards back this week. They didn't promise anything but are re-evaluating the W cards altogether and are considering NOT putting the "handcut" caveat on some that we know weren't distributed, at least primarily, in strips. Kudo's to SGC.

[Eggoman]

,,,would LOVE to get a chance to own that Speaker for the back run of that pose that I am working on...should you tire of him...just saying!

[Leon]

You don't have a blank back?

Originally Posted by Eggoman

,,,would LOVE to get a chance to own that Speaker for the back run of that pose that I am working on...should you tire of him...just saying!

[Eggoman]

Nope, not yet...just my only Blank Back so far is a W572...got an extra??? (Don't tease me, I bruise easily!!!)

[pcoz]

Stunning cards Leon, congrats!!!

[darwinbulldog]

Perhaps a compromise is in order. How about "Hand Cut" instead of (Hand Cut)?

[Leon]

I would settle for "Not Hand Cut"

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

Perhaps a compromise is in order. How about "Hand Cut" instead of (Hand Cut)?