SGC 5 T206 Wagner

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by G1911

This is not true and PSA has never even tried to claim this. People will just make things up to defend corporations they don’t even work for lol.

Well it sure sounded good, to him, as he was posting it. There ya go again wrecking things for these good folks. Everything with you is about facts and truth. You are so unreasonable.

[FrankWakefield]

A "new to the hobby" Wagner T206 graded 5 by
SGC....

And everyone is all in a wad because they think it's over-graded, that is, the card's numerical grade is higher than it should be.

I think the number may be high, I'm not particularly torn up about that. It's like the slab heads telling slab haters to buy the card, not the slab... while they're continuing to buy the number. But THAT isn't what I deem noteworthy. What IS NOTEWORTHY is that out from someone's collection we, the "hobby," have a previously unknown "to the hobby" T206 Wagner to contemplate. Do I remember saying, in one or two Net54 threads, that there are other T206 Wagner's in the hands of collectors who haven't bothered to get theirs graded, or who don't care about grading. And I suggest that you "hobby" folks consider that there are more out there. THAT is the news.

Congrats to the owner of that SGC 5 card. I'm not a hater because of that numerical grade.

As for me, I've just about outgrown breaking out graded cards. it annoys me to leave the little cards in that plastic, I don't like collecting the slabs, but I'm now more willing to leave them graded.

[G1911]

This card is also factually not new to the hobby at all. It was slabbed years ago which is why we have links to a previous thread about this card. It’s just getting hyped again as an advertisement for Goldin’s show. It is not a new discovery.

I can’t wait to see what other demonstrably false things will continue to be posted ad nauseum until the thread dies, so we can move on to a series of repeated falsehoods in a new thread about something else.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by G1911

This card is also factually not new to the hobby at all. It was slabbed years ago which is why we have links to a previous thread about this card. It’s just getting hyped again as an advertisement for Goldin’s show. It is not a new discovery.

I can’t wait to see what other demonstrably false things will continue to be posted ad nauseum until the thread dies, so we can move on to a series of repeated falsehoods in a new thread about something else.

I mean hell, if it was in John Wagner's collection then it has been a known example for decades. A card isn't only "known" after it's been slabbed! The nun Wagner was a good example of an unknown copy. We need to put "to the hobby" after "known" or "unknown" not "to a TPG"

[Beercan collector]

Cool card
I wonder if the Wagner is the one card you can “shop” around to TPG’s for the best grade Before submitting (?)
“ hello PSA I have a Wagner do you mind having someone look at it and give me an opinion ? “

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

I mean hell, if it was in John Wagner's collection then it has been a known example for decades. A card isn't only "known" after it's been slabbed! The nun Wagner was a good example of an unknown copy. We need to put "to the hobby" after "known" or "unknown" not "to a TPG"

I certainly agree, but I cannot prove with documentation how long it was 'known' to more people than the owner and when an image was first made public, as there are many points one could argue is the point a card is 'known' (essentially every card is known to someone). I can prove the slab and media coverage from a few years ago though. Thus I focus with what I can prove with receipts.

[stutor]

This is from the Lemke files accessible via t206resource.com
Not sure if this helps or not…but there was a story in the 1944 Philadelphia Record

[brunswickreeves]

Burn Notice Season 1 Episode 6 covers this very topic when moving $10MM in cash…’nobody thinks to put handles on it.’

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by G1911

I certainly agree, but I cannot prove with documentation how long it was 'known' to more people than the owner and when an image was first made public, as there are many points one could argue is the point a card is 'known' (essentially every card is known to someone). I can prove the slab and media coverage from a few years ago though. Thus I focus with what I can prove with receipts.

John Wagner was pals with Jefferson Burdick and a number of other early titans of the hobby. They all knew he had the Wagner (he actually had two and gave one to Burdick) this story is fairly well-known in the hobby. That's why I feel calling this a previously unknown example is just ludicrous. If anything it's got more provenance and is better known than most other examples!