SGC - say it aint so

Orioles1954 · #1 01-14-2023, 11:39 AM

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

bnorth · #2 01-14-2023, 11:41 AM

Quote:

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.

Fred · #3 01-14-2023, 01:54 PM

The bottom part of the card is trimmed off. There are many OJs like this but all are accepted as being "trimmed". The TPGs usually give the card an "A" rating when the trim has been made.

I have one or two OJs in TPG holders that have the bottom trimmed off with an assigned numerical grade. For the most part, I usually don't collect the OJs in this condition, but since the price was right I purchased them.

It'd be nice if the TPGs made a few less errors. I used to save the pictures of really poor TPG grading errors. Maybe we'll start a thread some day and have people post pictures of the TPG errors they've come across.

BobC · #4 01-14-2023, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred

The bottom part of the card is trimmed off. There are many OJs like this but all are accepted as being "trimmed". The TPGs usually give the card an "A" rating when the trim has been made.

I have one or two OJs in TPG holders that have the bottom trimmed off with an assigned numerical grade. For the most part, I usually don't collect the OJs in this condition, but since the price was right I purchased them.

It'd be nice if the TPGs made a few less errors. I used to save the pictures of really poor TPG grading errors. Maybe we'll start a thread some day and have people post pictures of the TPG errors they've come across.

I'm with you Fred, I don't normally collect trimmed OJs, but do have some since at the end of the day, they are still OJs. LOL And also like you, have seen some that should not have been given numeric grades due to being trimmed, but got one anyway. Hard to not pick them up, regardless of such issues, when as you said, "the price was right". My personal favorite OJs are the ones that are severely downgraded because of some damage, scrapbook glue/residue, or even writing, on their blank backs. If there was ever a set that the mantra "Buy the card and not the holder." applied to, it is the N172 OJ set IMO.

BobC · #5 01-14-2023, 02:02 PM

Quote:

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.

Fred · #6 01-14-2023, 02:25 PM

See post #9. That is a full card. The entire front part of the card is an albumen photo that is adhered to a stiff backing.

Something else to look for in OJs are the "skinned" cards. The photos can be removed from the backing. What is left is a very thin photo. After the card is skinned, it can be affixed to a different cardboard backing which collectors will call "rebacked" cards.

All of those defects count against the OJ when being evaluated for sale/trade.

What could happen with this trimmed/numerically graded card is that someone that doesn't understand the OJ will purchase it thinking it's a "2".

Perhaps a couple years go by and the collector decides that they want to sell the card. People that know it's trimmed will not accept it as a "2" and the collector will most likely will be told it's trimmed. If the collector is a good person, they'll disclose the problem to someone that doesn't know OJs, but then that collector will probably be selling it at a loss.

Is that when these TPG guarantees are supposed to protect the collector? Can they go back to SGC and let them know they purchased it thinking it was a "2" and now it's dropped in value by 50% because it's really only an "A" card?

BobC · #7 01-14-2023, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred

See post #9. That is a full card. The entire front part of the card is an albumen photo that is adhered to a stiff backing.

Something else to look for in OJs are the "skinned" cards. The photos can be removed from the backing. What is left is a very thin photo. After the card is skinned, it can be affixed to a different cardboard backing which collectors will call "rebacked" cards.

All of those defects count against the OJ when being evaluated for sale/trade.

What could happen with this trimmed/numerically graded card is that someone that doesn't understand the OJ will purchase it thinking it's a "2".

Perhaps a couple years go by and the collector decides that they want to sell the card. People that know it's trimmed will not accept it as a "2" and the collector will most likely will be told it's trimmed. If the collector is a good person, they'll disclose the problem to someone that doesn't know OJs, but then that collector will probably be selling it at a loss.

Is that when these TPG guarantees are supposed to protect the collector? Can they go back to SGC and let them know they purchased it thinking it was a "2" and now it's dropped in value by 50% because it's really only an "A" card?

Great points and question Fred.

swarmee · #8 01-14-2023, 04:46 PM

Quote:

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.

Fred · #9 01-14-2023, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swarmee

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.

Good point - consistent rounding of corners gives the appearance of an aged card, however the TPGs should be aware that the bottom of the card should have the Goodwin information (and more in some cases) and that without it, the card is most likely trimmed. I don't know for a fact if the following is true, but it seems believable that the bottom portions of OJs were trimmed off to remove indications that the card had anything to do with tobacco products.

Sizing of OJs is all over the map. Most seem to fall within a certain range but there are many that are taller, narrower, shorter or wider than the "average" card. It's definitely an interesting "set" of cards. If you handle enough of them, you get a good idea on figuring out if the OJ is altered. I don't know how TPGs operate so I don't know if certain graders are designated for grading certain older issues of cards. It'd be wise if the TPGs didn't arbitrarily give any card to any grader to determine the condition of the card.

Steve D · #10 01-14-2023, 06:32 PM

deleted

Steve D · #11 01-14-2023, 06:32 PM

Here's the trimmed card, with a full-sized one:

Steve

BobC · #12 01-14-2023, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred

Good point - consistent rounding of corners gives the appearance of an aged card, however the TPGs should be aware that the bottom of the card should have the Goodwin information (and more in some cases) and that without it, the card is most likely trimmed. I don't know for a fact if the following is true, but it seems believable that the bottom portions of OJs were trimmed off to remove indications that the card had anything to do with tobacco products.

Sizing of OJs is all over the map. Most seem to fall within a certain range but there are many that are taller, narrower, shorter or wider than the "average" card. It's definitely an interesting "set" of cards. If you handle enough of them, you get a good idea on figuring out if the OJ is altered. I don't know how TPGs operate so I don't know if certain graders are designated for grading certain older issues of cards. It'd be wise if the TPGs didn't arbitrarily give any card to any grader to determine the condition of the card.

I agree John has a good point as well, but I'm with you Fred that a TPG with any reasonable knowledge and experience should know and realize that a significant bottom part of that card is missing. Obviously, some type of human error on the part of the grader, maybe due to inexperience, but you would think there should be some type or form of quality control review till they weren't so inexperienced then, right?

If I was working quality control and had that card, with that grade, going past me, it would have taken about 1 second or less for me to recognize the error and send it back to be corrected. I imagine that when it comes to vintage, especially pre-war cards, there are many members on here that could do just as well, and some likely better, at grading such cards than the employed graders these TPGs actually have doing it now.

Leon · #13 01-14-2023, 07:15 PM

A PSA one I own. Not mislabeled....
.

boneheadandrube · #14 01-14-2023, 07:23 PM

So this is what, a $100-$125 mistake?

Fred · #15 01-14-2023, 08:18 PM

For a common card like this, the $100-$125 difference wouldn't be too far off at today's valuations, but it could be more.

The seller has a (IMHO) very high asking price ($524.95) for a common OJ graded "2". I wouldn't pay $100 for it if it were in a correctly labeled "A") slab.

If that card was in the condition (same corner rounding and wear) it is in without the cut off portion and graded a "2" (like the card in post #26), then I'd guess someone might buy it for a couple hundred bucks (maybe more if they're a Chicago fan).

It would be interesting to see how SGC would handle it if was returned to them for being incorrectly labeled/graded.

Perhaps that'll be the next thread I start - "grading errors". I don't mean errors in one persons subjectivity compared to another. It would be labeling errors that could lead to people taking a loss on the card if they bought it and couldn't resell it. If I start that thread then I'll be sure to black out the cert numbers because I'd hate to see the TPG de-cert the card without the person possessing it knowing about the de-cert. Now that wouldn't happen, now would it?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
There aint no way.....	Bigdaddy	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	11	01-25-2020 10:12 AM
2 out of 3 aint bad?	EvilKing00	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	7	12-06-2014 07:59 PM
What you see aint what you get	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	2	11-19-2006 09:35 AM
OT - Not Vintage, but WHO's to say It Aint Funny	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	5	03-21-2005 04:39 PM
Aint nothin' like the real thing...	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	3	01-24-2002 02:00 PM