Yikes! From 88 to Auth

[ChiefBenderForever]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

That card has really big borders and looks fine. I have to agree that the risk buying high grade cards, even graded ones, is great.

I agree, it has to measure out, there is thousands of graded T206 with less border than that, wtf ?

[autograf]

There must be something with the border of one or more sides that leads them to believe it's been trimmed. I understand having all your cards be of a single TPG company but geez.....why break something like that out when there are absolutely no guarantees. Just seems kinda crazy. If he paid $15K for it, how much will it bring now? $1500-$2000 just based on the 'look'. It'll be interesting to see what it brings. Cautionary tale for the resubmit game......

[barrysloate]

Anybody who has a beautiful SGC 88- and that card is gorgeous- and cracks it out to resubmit, deserves what he got.

[Mikehealer]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Anybody who has a beautiful SGC 88- and that card is gorgeous- and cracks it out to resubmit, deserves what he got.

No doubt.

[Rob D.]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Anybody who has a beautiful SGC 88- and that card is gorgeous- and cracks it out to resubmit, deserves what he got.

Once again, conclusions drawn and assumptions made without knowledge of all the facts.

Ah, the beauty of Net54.

[barrysloate]

Never let facts get in the way of a good story.

[Mikehealer]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

Once again, conclusions drawn and assumptions made without knowledge of all the facts.

Ah, the beauty of Net54.

Fill us in, what are all the facts. In the description the seller states "This card was originally purchased in an SGC 88 holder (see scan below) and was cracked out for grading by PSA a while back by an unfortunate collector."

It would be interesting to know the whole story.

[Rob D.]

I don't know all of the facts, Mike, which is why I would not assume that the person who cracked it out "deserves to get" anything.

Collectors on this board post all of the time how they like to have all of their cards slabbed by one company. Quite often the company of choice is SGC, so few on the board ever question those decisions. Who knows why the owner of this card did what he did? And even if it was greed in hopes of getting a higher grade, so what? Again, people often post on the board about resubmitting cards in hopes of getting a half-point bump.

I can only imagine the reaction to this story if the card had started in a PSA 8 slab and was submitted to SGC, which deemed it trimmed. There would be the usual outcries demanding that "we" have to "hold PSA responsible" for such sloppy work. This post already would have 100-plus posts by people jumping on PSA with both feet.

But because it was SGC that originally missed the trim, that's conveniently overlooked, and it's the owner of the card who somehow is at fault and is deserving of the monetary misfortune he experienced.

[bigfish]

SGC made a mistake and corrected it. What seems to be the issue here?

[Peter_Spaeth]

SGC = Teflon.

Originally Posted by Rob D.

I don't know all of the facts, Mike, which is why I would not assume that the person who cracked it out "deserves to get" anything.

Collectors on this board post all of the time how they like to have all of their cards slabbed by one company. Quite often the company of choice is SGC, so few on the board ever question those decisions. Who knows why the owner of this card did what he did? And even if it was greed in hopes of getting a higher grade, so what? Again, people often post on the board about resubmitting cards in hopes of getting a half-point bump.

I can only imagine the reaction to this story if the card had started in a PSA 8 slab and was submitted to SGC, which deemed it trimmed. There would be the usual outcries demanding that "we" have to "hold PSA responsible" for such sloppy work. This post already would have 100-plus posts by people jumping on PSA with both feet.

But because it was SGC that originally missed the trim, that's conveniently overlooked, and it's the owner of the card who somehow is at fault and is deserving of the monetary misfortune he experienced.

I agree to some point but the fact is that there are FAR more PSA mess ups than SGC. Maybe this is the reason. Now if it was in a GAI holder they (most) would be saying "should have seen it coming". GAI wasn't that bad, just not that good

[Abravefan11]

I know with SGC when a card is submitted for crossover in another companies holder and fails to meet the minimum grade declared by the customer, it will be returned as it was sent in.

Many collectors though feel that submitting a card in a holder effects the graders ability to look at the card objectively and crack them out and submit them raw.

I don't know the motives of this particular person, but I know I personally wouldn't risk sending it in raw. Even if it drops one grade it's a five figure loss.

And one other note: If this card was cracked out, isn't it possible it was trimmed even in the slightest before being resubmitted to PSA?