|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
As set collectors, most of us just wouldn't have the room to store slabbed cards.
I collect low grade cards, and I've cracked numerous cards out of PSA SGC BVG holders (mostly T206). I always save the "flip" as I think it might be of benefit to me (or my kids) when/if they are sold. A few years ago, a friend showed me his T205 cards slabbed in SGC holders, and I just fell in love with that look! I am now very close to completing a low grade T205 set (down to needing just three) all slabbed in SGC holders. You've never seen so many "A"s and "10"s LOL! Most of these I have submitted to SGC myself, and would recommend all collectors become familiar with the process. My T205 cards are listed in the SGC Registry (look towards the bottom LOL). I have enjoyed that too. In todays collecting world, when you see an expensive card on eBay that is "raw", collectors must ask "why is it not slabbed"? Just last week I purchased a post war "raw", high dollar card off eBay. The scans looked good, and the sellers feedback was perfect (even though it was a new seller to me). When the card arrived, it looked great, but I still shipped it right off to SGC and did not leave seller feedback. In a few days I will be able to see the results, well within the offered return policy time frame. And if all goes well, I'll leave the seller his deserved positive feedback, and I'll get a card that is even more "valuable" because it is slabbed. When you sold that '67 Schneider, did you mention in the description that the card was "cracked" out of a PSA 4 slab? I don't think many sellers would, unless it would benefit the seller. PSA said that card was in VG-EX condition, but the best thing for you to do would be just post an actual scan of the card. Larry Quote:
__________________
Member of OBC (Old Baseball Cards), the longest running on-line collecting club www.oldbaseball.com |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
I'm surprised you've never read anything negative about SGC grading. You must have missed a lot of threads on this board, including the one from the JustCollectVP last week.
PSA is like Microsoft Windows. Serves 90% of the population, so it gets 99% of the fraudsters. BGS is more like Apple OS (hipper modern crowd), and SGC more like UNIX (outdated). The PSA Set Registry is the best thing about them. It got me to invest $2K in grading fees on a couple really nice vintage sets (T51 Master and T56). When I liquidated my lower grade duplicates last month on eBay, I probably got $1500 on $200 in raw cards and $600 in grading fees.
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. Last edited by swarmee; 06-18-2016 at 07:56 PM. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
John Otto 1963 Fleer - 1981-90 Fleer/Donruss/Score/Leaf Complete 1953 - 1990 Topps/Bowman Complete 1953-55 Dormand SGC COMPLETE SGC AVG Score - 4.03 |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
So I got to add this for irony...I routinely go through my sets and make upgrade lists and replace cards with defects, sets are never done. I found about 20 cards I wanted to replace in my 69 set, and got the final one I bought in today's mail. # 225 Don Kessinger...and it came trimmed!! Who trims a 69 Topps common? Seriously? It was trimmed to the point it was obvious in hand by sight. Unreal...the fun of buying raw! Happy Fathers day to me! Haha....
__________________
John Otto 1963 Fleer - 1981-90 Fleer/Donruss/Score/Leaf Complete 1953 - 1990 Topps/Bowman Complete 1953-55 Dormand SGC COMPLETE SGC AVG Score - 4.03 |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
They have also been known to grade trimmed or altered cards and grade them with a number. That's what was confirmed in the JustCollect thread I referred to.
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
BGS, BVG and SGC are far, far more consistent in their grading than PSA. For cards I have seen there is no comparison. It seems PSA WANTS resubmissions and grades low to get them. There are thousands of lemmings lining up too. To that I say, BS. If someone wants to buy my erroneously graded cards they will have to pay for the card and not the idiot's opinion on the flip. And with that statement I will buy this kind of '51 Mantle, in a PSA 2 holder, for SMR 2 prices all day long. Please someone PM me with some for sale.....I will buy all of them.
__________________
Leon Luckey Last edited by Leon; 06-19-2016 at 09:43 AM. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1951-Bowman-...oAAOSwgApW~WWs http://www.ebay.com/itm/1951-Bowman-...p2047675.l2557 .
__________________
Leon Luckey Last edited by Leon; 06-19-2016 at 12:34 PM. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
As far as the gaskets go - Wrap around isn't really correct, They're sometimes a bit too thin, and thinner cards can slide under them. Hasn't happened to me, but I've seen the pics and yeah, those really should be done better. Thicker for sure, and I'd love to see them in colors besides black. T51s are really thin, so I think you were better off with PSA. On the other hand, they make the slab very adjustable. So odd sets don't have to get a weird looking plastic bag, and oversize cards can be holdered easily. that's more of an issue for prewar than postwar. Resale - PSA does have an advantage in a number of areas, not all, but a lot especially postwar. And that's entirely because of the registry. Love it or hate it it's probably there to stay. Registry - SGC was a bit too late to the game, to get much traction there, and I will say their new setup for pop reports and registry needs work. The old one wasn't great, but worked. The new one is really hard to navigate at times. When I started grading a few cards PSA didn't make the pop reports public? They do now and that's a huge improvement. The holder overall - SGCs could use some major updating physically. But as we saw when they tried going to a really different flip, there was a LOAD of resistance. PSA did some upgrades, but apparently still sneaks a few of the old slabs in here and there. I haven't really looked at the new one, but everyone says it's harder to compromise and that's a good thing. Retooling the slabs might be considered as too expensive, but really needs to be done by SGC. (Why neither company laser etches the SN onto the slab itself is a puzzle.) Grading fakes /altered cards - If it's fair to take SGC to task over stuff supposedly done 15+ years ago, then it should be fair to say the same about PSA. Consistency - I will say that the last year or so I've seen some pretty weak mid grade T206s from SGC. 50's that look to me more like 40's, that sort of thing. Overall I think they're more consistent, maybe having fewer cards to do helps. PSA certainly has a much larger volume, so even if they have the same rate of mistakes we'll see more from them. Probably also because the customer base is more into grading for immediate sale rather than grading and holding the card for a few years. (Just my impression, could be wrong) Overall business approach - I don't like the "Pay us for the privilege of paying us " approach of PSA. Just as I'd be pretty put off by a bar charging $100 as a cover but saying it included my first 8 beers. I dropped off my first few cards with SGC at a show, and they were pretty nice about answering some questions I had about the slab itself - was it totally sealed? No (That's good, at least if there's acidic outgassing from the cardstock it won't be totally sealed inside to make things worse) How do I figure the value of the cards I'm sending in? Based on what I think the grade might be, or on what it's worth ungraded? - Quick look, "Mid grade T206s put 100 each" They were also very nice and quick about showing me the stuff I'd missed on a couple where I really questioned the grade. Also at a show, and for free. I haven't talked to anyone from PSA since they were new, so nothing really to compare. When they were new my questions were about grading cards that might be factory miscut oversized, and the answer was sort of a dismissive "meh, if it won't fit the holder there's not much we can do" But that was during their first year, so not a good comparison. Overall, I think either one is fine *, and I'll include Beckett in that as well although I only have maybe one or two cards they've done and don't look at many. *I do however think that the tiering and turnaround for both (Maybe Bekett too? ) Is totally backwards. My other current active hobby has certification, and the leaders take their time doing it, and more time on the expensive stuff. They're also more willing to not offer an opinion if something is really unusual to the point where it cant reliably be deemed authentic. Steve Birmingham |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
David, you should make that image your avatar.
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
I didn't know that saying they correctly graded one card made me a "PSA advocate." Now I know. Regardless, your card is a 2, and if you subbed it 10x it would never get higher than a 2.5 . Nevertheless, I love the card and would be proud to own it.
__________________
Actively collecting Carl Yastrzemski ! Also 1964 & 68 Topps Venezuelans |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Exactly, glad to see someone finally make this distiction. I've cited this very thing when people in other threads or in online sales want to get all high and mighty about PSA. Have you watched the ESPN 30-for-30 short "Holy Grail" with Keith Olbermann, where he just (very convincingly) rips the entire history of that card and exposes it and Bill Mastro as total frauds? The worst part is where PSA founder David Hall's reasoning for the slab on the Gretzky Wagner is "well, it didn't look trimmed to me." Come. On. The company whose very reason for being is that they are ostensibly the experts and know more about cards than anyone to the point where they can be the unquestioned authority - and that right there proves it's built on a foundation of total rubbish. Other graders in the room said they knew it was trimmed but to give it an Altered designation would be too detrimental to the hobby. They may have been right, but it does not change the fact that yes, the whole foundation of PSA essentially is built on a gigantic lie. If they ever just hand out Wagner cards one day, I'd much rather have Mr. Burdick's from the Met - even though it's in worse shape and has a few visible wrinkles.
__________________
Vintage Cubs. Postwar stars & HOF'ers. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
When you sold that '67 Schneider, did you mention in the description that the card was "cracked" out of a PSA 4 slab? I don't think many sellers would, unless it would benefit the seller. PSA said that card was in VG-EX condition, but the best thing for you to do would be just post an actual scan of the card.
Larry[/QUOTE] I didn't on that one...and was honestly surprised after the fact. I actually found the scans back from back in 2014 from my recycle bin, haha. I was kinda shocked it was still in there - again, this was a busted out PSA 4. I really enjoyed everyone's comments and experiences, thanks... Al...I know how you feel and no surprises there...haha. I do have a question. I know you've probably had most of your cards for a long time now, but if you were still searching for say a 55 Clemente or a 63 Rose, do you really trust buying raw of Ebay? Wait to buy in person? There are so many good reprints out there buying cards like that scare me. I am sure I have trimmed cards, altered cards, ect in my sets, I hope not, but with 20,000 plus the odds are there. But in the big boy cards I just need them clean.
__________________
John Otto 1963 Fleer - 1981-90 Fleer/Donruss/Score/Leaf Complete 1953 - 1990 Topps/Bowman Complete 1953-55 Dormand SGC COMPLETE SGC AVG Score - 4.03 |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Thoughts About A Grading Proposal | frankbmd | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 03-02-2016 09:50 AM |
Thoughts on GAI grading? | paulcarek | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 31 | 11-16-2014 08:58 PM |
Thoughts on GAI grading? | paulcarek | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 0 | 11-14-2014 03:36 PM |
My thoughts on these stupid grading posts | Kenny Cole | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 91 | 05-21-2010 11:47 PM |
Thoughts on grading | ptowncoug3012 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 03-30-2010 09:52 PM |