Odd Packaging -- anyone ever seen this in an SGC Flip

[Rookiemonster]

While I have never seen this before I don’t own many sgc graded cards.

But that pwcc sticker reminds of the movie Tommy boy with Chris farly. If you want me to take a Dimp in a box and mark it guaranteed I will I have a few minutes.

[Rhotchkiss]

Thanks Tony, that is good to know. I look at CJs often and will buy SGC cards all day long, and I had never seen this (admittedly, I dont look at cabinets much). Personally, I dont like the plastic -- makes the card look cheap and harder to see. But, good to know that this has become standard practice with them and there is not something odd or unique about this one that caused them to put this extra cover over it.

[rainier2004]

Beautiful card...whats the big deal though, not even a HOFer?

[3-2-count]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Thanks Tony, that is good to know. I look at CJs often and will buy SGC cards all day long, and I had never seen this (admittedly, I dont look at cabinets much). Personally, I dont like the plastic -- makes the card look cheap and harder to see. But, good to know that this has become standard practice with them and there is not something odd or unique about this one that caused them to put this extra cover over it.

Just to clarify, Sgc does not insert the baggie into all encapsulations as standard practice. And that goes for all Cracker Jacks submitted as well.

It's very possible that whoever submitted the CJ Jax to Sgc requested that the baggie be used for the exact reasons mentioned. Just a guess.

[griffon512]

as far as the grading goes, it certainly presents much better than a typical 1.5 but on a technical basis the assigned grade could be accurate if what looks like a typical crease extending from the left border of the card is something greater, like a heavy crease or surface tear of the cardboard stock. it's difficult to tell given the scan from pwcc. regardless, given the eye appeal it will probably sell for around what an average looking sgc 3 would sell for.

[rainier2004]

Originally Posted by griffon512

as far as the grading goes, it certainly presents much better than a typical 1.5 but on a technical basis the assigned grade could be accurate if what looks like a typical crease extending from the left border of the card is something greater, like a heavy crease or surface tear of the cardboard stock. it's difficult to tell given the scan from pwcc. regardless, given the eye appeal it will probably sell for around what an average looking sgc 3 would sell for.

It was removed from an album and still has residue on the back.

[iowadoc77]

All other logic is appropriately discarded once it is designated PWCC high end.

[Throttlesteer]

Looks like a fair amount of paper loss on the back, unless I'm getting glare off of the baggie. Certainly presents nicely for the grade. But, what else would you expect for "high end".

Not sure why, but I always picture a cat holding its butt in the air when someone pets it..high end. Now if it were pack fresh?????

[griffon512]

Originally Posted by rainier2004

It was removed from an album and still has residue on the back.

i don't see any signs of album removal and residue, but maybe you have a better eye than me. looks like some remnant caramel staining that may have been partially removed in the past.

i just read the pwcc description and it reinforced what i originally wrote: that what looks like a typical crease in the scan is an actual tear. any tear should not get higher than a sgc 1.5. true of paper loss as well. it will still get the final price of a higher grade card given eye appeal.

[rainier2004]

Originally Posted by griffon512

i don't see any signs of album removal and residue, but maybe you have a better eye than me. looks like some remnant caramel staining that may have been partially removed in the past.

i just read the pwcc description and it reinforced what i originally wrote: that what looks like a typical crease in the scan is an actual tear. any tear should not get higher than a sgc 1.5. true of paper loss as well. it will still get the final price of a higher grade card given eye appeal.

If you look close at the top of the back there is a light "shadow" or area. The tear seems to starts where the residue ends and I am guessing happened during removal. That area I am referring to does not look like typical caramel to due to its geometry and based on the presence of the darker staining.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by griffon512

as far as the grading goes, it certainly presents much better than a typical 1.5 but on a technical basis the assigned grade could be accurate if what looks like a typical crease extending from the left border of the card is something greater, like a heavy crease or surface tear of the cardboard stock. it's difficult to tell given the scan from pwcc. regardless, given the eye appeal it will probably sell for around what an average looking sgc 3 would sell for.

In their description PWCC clearly mentions that it is a tear on the left side near the top about 1/2" in length

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Rookiemonster

While I have never seen this before I don’t own many sgc graded cards.

But that pwcc sticker reminds of the movie Tommy boy with Chris farly. If you want me to take a Dimp in a box and mark it guaranteed I will I have a few minutes.

what's a "Dimp"?

[DeanH3]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

what's a "Dimp"?

I think it's similar to a shat.

[Rhotchkiss]

Anyway, it's at $15.6k right now with 9 days left. it's got a rip in it and it's wrapped in an ugly card condom- but pwcc slaps "certified high end" on it and they come running.

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

It's a pretty nice rip upper left. Here's same card sold at LOTG back in 3/29/15 for $15,600

[midmo]

I don't care for the baggies either. I've broken a few out, but still have some. I've only submitted cards to SGC for grading once and these Piedmont Art Stamps were in that group. I didn't ask for them to get baggied. I assume they did it because they are so thin.

[frankbmd]

1. People don’t like when thin items slide under the gasket and complain that SGC should fix the problem.

2. People like the way the SGC “gasket” frames the card and makes the colors “pop”.

3. SGC then puts thinner items in a transparent sleeve to prevent the cards from sliding under he gasket.

4. People don’t like the transparent sleeve, that keeps the card from sliding under the “gasket”.

5. SGC removes the sleeve and thin cards are then framed and their colors pop
Until the card slides under the gasket again.

6. Return to #1 and repeat as needed.

[Jay Wolt]

[Stampsfan]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Anyway, it's at $15.6k right now with 9 days left. it's got a rip in it and it's wrapped in an ugly card condom- but pwcc slaps "certified high end" on it and they come running.

Good one.

Seems like a stretch to label it a "High End 1". Kinda like a beautiful toad. Opposite of an ugly bikini model.

[Rookiemonster]

Originally Posted by DeanH3

I think it's similar to a shat.

You are correct in your assement a dimp is a spelling error of Dump and is also known as a shat! Lol

[T206Collector]

Read the back of the Certified High End certificate. It’s nice to have someone willing to tell me whether a card has visual appeal beyond the technical grade.