SGC - say it aint so

[BobC]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

�� I've learned so much from people on here, I try to offer something back when i can... here is one from the same subset that shows the advertising lines:

Matthew,

You are so right. If you have ever collected Old Judge cards, you'd know in an instant that bottom advertising section has always been considered as part of a complete card, and that in the past all recognized TPGs have always considered an OJ card with that bottom part cut off as only being Authentic, at best. It is technically a trimmed card. Just pick up a copy of Jay, Joe, and Ron's book on the Goodwin/Old Judge cards. It is pretty much accepted throughout the hobby as the bible on that particular subject.

Nice Silver Flint card by the way.

(And no, I don't get a kickback or anything for helping to promote how good their book is. So no troll comments, please.)

[Rad_Hazard]

Yikes, that poor Darling...

Not that it's any excuse, but that could have been a reholder. And, IF it was, that means SGC stood behind their past product, for better or worse.

PS - Matthew, I will take that Silver Flint off your hands...please and thank you .

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Rad_Hazard

Yikes, that poor Darling...

Not that it's any excuse, but that could have been a reholder. And, IF it was, that means SGC stood behind their past product, for better or worse.

PS - Matthew, I will take that Silver Flint off your hands...please and thank you .

I think you are right about it being a reholder. Cert# says it was graded in 2017, and I think SGC went to the current all-black slabs/flip in 2018.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

I think you are right about it being a reholder. Cert# says it was graded in 2017, and I think SGC went to the current all-black slabs/flip in 2018.

That would mean they they missed it TWICE. I didn't realize SGC went to this new holder back in 2018, for some reason I thought it was more recent than that, but I don't keep up with those details. Good to know though.

[Rad_Hazard]

Originally Posted by Fred

That would mean they they missed it TWICE. I didn't realize SGC went to this new holder back in 2018, for some reason I thought it was more recent than that, but I don't keep up with those details. Good to know though.

That’s my point. If it is a reholder they missed it the first time and stuck by their product a second time. For better or worse. Unlike the dumpster fire that is PSA. That being said, it was quite the initial swing and miss.

[Orioles1954]

Do you think they gave it a numerical grade because it is miscut top-to-bottom?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

Do you think they gave it a numerical grade because it is miscut top-to-bottom?

That was my guess but I don't know the issue.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

Do you think they gave it a numerical grade because it is miscut top-to-bottom?

You're absolutely right there is what seems to be a lot of extra card on the top edge. But then look at the Silver Flint card that Matthew posted in Post #9, and you'll quickly see about how much of the bottom part is actually missing. There is way too much bottom missing to ever be accounted for by the excess top part of the card.

Plus, these OJ cards are actual photos basically attached to cardboard backings. And for as early as they are, you don't normally find them with what I or others would term as a miscut. I honestly do not know their exact printing process, but don't believe these were created using sheets like T206s and more modern day cards are, that could then be mishandled in the cutting machines, creating the top-to-bottom, and side-to-side miscuts, along with the diamond cuts, that are prevalent in many sets. Otherwise, I think you'd see a lot more miscut OJs out in the wild.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

Do you think they gave it a numerical grade because it is miscut top-to-bottom?

I think it's because it was trimmed 140 years ago and the remaining corners show consistent rounding on all four sides.
That, and they failed to measure it against a spec.

[glynparson]

Originally Posted by Rad_Hazard

That’s my point. If it is a reholder they missed it the first time and stuck by their product a second time. For better or worse. Unlike the dumpster fire that is PSA. That being said, it was quite the initial swing and miss.

Listen sgc is a great company but this is an ignorant statement. Sgc has. An entire generation of holders that they won’t guarantee to cross. The era prior to Dave buying the company where the holders have one grade. Under the old 10,20,etc system. The era where they really were lax on centering standards. So if you are going to try and pump up your favorite company by attacking their competition how about you at least be accurate with the information.

[Fred]

For clarification -

SGC will not cross over the cards in the older holders (cards graded with the 10, 20, 30, etc scale) to a new slab? Is that correct (it seemed fairly clear in the post).

Is there an easy way to determine if the cards were placed in the slabs by the old or new management? I see SGC has newer style flips. Are these new flips indicative of the new "regime" in place at SGC?

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by BobC

Matthew,

You are so right. If you have ever collected Old Judge cards, you'd know in an instant that bottom advertising section has always been considered as part of a complete card, and that in the past all recognized TPGs have always considered an OJ card with that bottom part cut off as only being Authentic, at best. It is technically a trimmed card. Just pick up a copy of Jay, Joe, and Ron's book on the Goodwin/Old Judge cards. It is pretty much accepted throughout the hobby as the bible on that particular subject.

Nice Silver Flint card by the way.

(And no, I don't get a kickback or anything for helping to promote how good their book is. So no troll comments, please.)

Thanks, Bob - yes, I love that book