SGC processing times

[gunboat82]

OK, now I think SGC is just trolling. After they misidentified my 1931 W502 #29 Ruth the first time, they agreed to take it back for another label.

Here’s their second try:

1928 W502 #29 Babe Ruth

Tony Lazzeri is #29 in that set, not Ruth. I’m not sure who’s doing the research over there now, but they’re looking in all the wrong places.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by gunboat82

OK, now I think SGC is just trolling. After they misidentified my 1931 W502 #29 Ruth the first time, they agreed to take it back for another label.

Here’s their second try:



Tony Lazzeri is #29 in that set, not Ruth. I’m not sure who’s doing the research over there now, but they’re looking in all the wrong places.

They are certainly VERY frustrating to deal with. They are very hard on those handcut cards too. I might have just left the damn card in the PSA holder and sent it in or not. Not sure how much PSA charges for the refresh? Still, they got your money and that's ALL THEY CARE ABOUT!

I think better of sending them anything other than the occasional Refresh of the old holder. Even that is moronic on my part. I'd limit myself the trouble with both these companies. They certainly don't care about us, the collector. Good luck!

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

They are certainly VERY frustrating to deal with. They are very hard on those handcut cards too. I might have just left the damn card in the PSA holder and sent it in or not. Not sure how much PSA charges for the refresh? Still, they got your money and that's ALL THEY CARE ABOUT!

I think better of sending them anything other than the occasional Refresh of the old holder. Even that is moronic on my part. I'd limit myself the trouble with both these companies. They certainly don't care about us, the collector. Good luck!

+1

Best advice currently offered on net54. Take heed!

[gunboat82]

Originally Posted by gunboat82

OK, now I think SGC is just trolling. After they misidentified my 1931 W502 #29 Ruth the first time, they agreed to take it back for another label.

Here’s their second try:



Tony Lazzeri is #29 in that set, not Ruth. I’m not sure who’s doing the research over there now, but they’re looking in all the wrong places.

More evidence of SGC's descent into the abyss.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/15648576778...7789&recoPos=1

This one was graded last year, but somehow they slabbed a plain ol' W519 unnumbered Ruth as the rarer Type 2 #20 variation. As with my recent W502 and W511 submissions, I don't know how SGC manages to screw up the distinction between numbered and unnumbered cards. It doesn't even require special expertise -- just the gift of sight.

[JollyElm]

With my new SGC submission, I've arrived at Post-Grading Processing.
Is that exactly what it sounds like? The cards have been graded (11/01) and they're being readied for the shipment back to me?

The reason I ask is one of my cards was (what appears to be naturally) a hair short side to side and I was worried that it could possibly end up as "AUTH - Evidence of Trimming," which would be a big old bummer, man.
However, I unchecked that box saying to 'Slab if Authentic' (or whatever) on all of my cards, so wouldn't I have gotten a notification of a refund if they deemed it to be too short (and didn't holder it)?

FYI: It's a 1971 Topps card, so those seem to be undeservedly deemed 'trimmed' much more than other sets, so my fear is real.

[bcbgcbrcb]

No refund if they deem a card to be trimmed, whether you checked off the box or not.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

No refund if they deem a card to be trimmed, whether you checked off the box or not.

Thanks. And bummer.