Ebay Authentication - It Gets Personal

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

I guess I didn't realize that if a raw card goes to CSG, they are both authenticating it AND matching up what the seller said it would grade? That must get interesting fast, since descriptions of raw cards on eBay many times don't conform to a TPG's 10 point scale. What if they said a card was EX, but in the opposite direction - CSG said no, this is NM! Would that be rejected for being the "wrong" grade even if it were higher? I once bought a '61 Willie Mays AS that was described as "EX" by an eBay outfit that was more of an antique mall than a pure card dealer. When I sent it off to SGC, it came back an 8. Would that have "failed" authentication?

They aren't grading the card or making judgements on sellers grading, they make sure its not counterfeit and they match it to photos in the auction to make sure its the same card.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Jim65

They aren't grading the card or making judgements on sellers grading, they make sure its not counterfeit and they match it to photos in the auction to make sure its the same card.

This is not true. This is not what the raw program claimed to do - they are supposed to make sure the card matches the sellers description, including condition. Cards have been rejected for sellers over grading them, like the Bowman Spahn card.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by G1911

This is not true. This is not what the raw program claimed to do - they are supposed to make sure the card matches the sellers description, including condition. Cards have been rejected for sellers over grading them, like the Bowman Spahn card.

I can see where this would get super frustrating. Agreed that buyers should have an option to opt out of the authenticity guarantee. Some of the vintage cards I have seen thus far in CSG slabs are waaaaaay overgraded. I wouldn't want them casting judgement on raw cards that I bought online.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

I can see where this would get super frustrating. Agreed that buyers should have an option to opt out of the authenticity guarantee. Some of the vintage cards I have seen thus far in CSG slabs are waaaaaay overgraded. I wouldn't want them casting judgement on raw cards that I bought online.

Do you have links you can share for the overgraded CSG slabs you've found? I've come across a couple, but not a lot. They've been pretty on point from most of what I've encountered.

[Jim65]

The authenticators aren't supposed to reject cards that are off grade from what the seller claims (VGEX instead of EX or EX instead of EXMT) They are looking for hidden undisclosed damage and flaws, wrinkles, trimming, erasures, etc. If those flaws are disclosed or clearly shown in the photos, as long as the card is authentic, its supposed to pass.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Jim65

The authenticators aren't supposed to reject cards that are off grade from what the seller claims (VGEX instead of EX or EX instead of EXMT) They are looking for hidden undisclosed damage and flaws, wrinkles, trimming, erasures, etc. If those flaws are disclosed or clearly shown in the photos, as long as the card is authentic, its supposed to pass.

They are looking for undisclosed damage or a lying grade. I doubt they will go so literal as to reject a EX+ they think is EX, but they are absolutely rejecting cards with overstated grades. List a card as gem mint and disclose the crease, watch what happens.

[Peter_Spaeth]

So here's a good one. I recently bought a PSA graded Pedro Martinez autograph card, standard Leaf issue, was clearly fine, PSA REJECTS it and ebay refunds me. PSA tells the seller the case was cracked. He gets it back it's not cracked at all. But here is where it gets even stranger, they send him a note telling him when he RELISTS it, to use a higher resolution scan, when his scan was already outstanding. The whole thing makes no sense, and why are they telling him to relist it if they just rejected it?

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Do you have links you can share for the overgraded CSG slabs you've found? I've come across a couple, but not a lot. They've been pretty on point from most of what I've encountered.

Sorry Travis, somehow missed your reply. I was talking most recently about a card I saw in person. It was a '63 Topps Ernie Banks at my LCS in a CSG 2.5. It looked pretty decent and I was actually considering buying it, when I noticed a cut and not small area of paper loss on the surface on the bottom right. It should have been pretty obvious to a grader. No way that card should have been more than a 1.

Others, like with shopping online - I seem to see some discrepancies with cards in upper midgrade that have questionable corner wear for the grade assigned.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Sorry Travis, somehow missed your reply. I was talking most recently about a card I saw in person. It was a '63 Topps Ernie Banks at my LCS in a CSG 2.5. It looked pretty decent and I was actually considering buying it, when I noticed a cut and not small area of paper loss on the surface on the bottom right. It should have been pretty obvious to a grader. No way that card should have been more than a 1.

Others, like with shopping online - I seem to see some discrepancies with cards in upper midgrade that have questionable corner wear for the grade assigned.

Ya, paper loss on the front should probably be a bit harsher than that. Although I'm somewhat of the mind that PSA & SGC do this wrong as well sometimes, but it's the standard of the industry, so might as well uphold the it.

The corners thing is mostly where I've seen CSG overgrade cards, but I'm not sure I've seen them overgrade for that at a higher rate than what I've seen from PSA or SGC. As an example, here's a Jackie card in a 6 holder that I came across recently. Beautiful card, but if I sent that in, I'd be crossing my fingers for a 4, and PSA probably gives it a 3.5 nowadays (once upon a time, they would have given it a 5). Basically, all the TPGs are seemingly all over the place with respect to corners.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Sorry Travis, somehow missed your reply. I was talking most recently about a card I saw in person. It was a '63 Topps Ernie Banks at my LCS in a CSG 2.5. It looked pretty decent and I was actually considering buying it, when I noticed a cut and not small area of paper loss on the surface on the bottom right. It should have been pretty obvious to a grader. No way that card should have been more than a 1.

Others, like with shopping online - I seem to see some discrepancies with cards in upper midgrade that have questionable corner wear for the grade assigned.

Ya, paper loss on the front should probably be a bit harsher than that. Although I'm somewhat of the mind that PSA & SGC do this wrong as well sometimes, but it's the standard of the industry, so might as well uphold the it.

The corners thing is mostly where I've seen CSG overgrade cards, but I'm not sure I've seen them overgrade for that at a higher rate than what I've seen from PSA or SGC. As an example, here's a Jackie card in a 6 holder that I came across recently. Beautiful card, but if I sent that in, I'd be crossing my fingers for a 4, and PSA probably gives it a 3.5 nowadays (once upon a time, they would have given it a 5). Basically, all the TPGs are seemingly all over the place with respect to corners.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Snowman

As an example, here's a Jackie card in a 6 holder that I came across recently. Beautiful card, but if I sent that in, I'd be crossing my fingers for a 4, and PSA probably gives it a 3.5 nowadays (once upon a time, they would have given it a 5). Basically, all the TPGs are seemingly all over the place with respect to corners.

Yeah, no way that Jackie realistically has 6 corners. So what you are saying is what has always more or less been true about professional grading: The subjective scale based on eye appeal waxes and wanes, and standards fluctuate over time. This is why all TPG's to me at the end of the day still smack of at least some type of gimmick.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Jim65

They aren't grading the card or making judgements on sellers grading, they make sure its not counterfeit and they match it to photos in the auction to make sure its the same card.

This is not true. In fact, the only cards I've purchased that were rejected were done so because of the condition not matching the description.

I even consigned some cards with Probstein that got rejected by CSG. When I looked at the listings, it was difficult to see that there were wrinkles (they were low-grade raw cards). He sent them back to me, and I relisted them myself and put "wrinkle" in the title and showed clear pics of the wrinkles and called them out in the description (something Probstein should have done as well). They passed authentication for me.