|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: T206Collector
Am I missing something, with the off-center borders and apparent chipping/paper loss on the lower left border -- how is this a 6? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Joann
Deleted until after auction ends. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Gilbert Maines
I agree, this is a slider 6 = the highest grade this card could ever achieve under the most favorable conditions + it will never cross. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Steve M.
to discuss this card after the auction closes. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)
Why does THIS card deserve to be above scrutiny until after the auction ends? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: steve yawitz
Good gawd, people. I'll say it: That card is a turd. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: bigfish
#$@#$@#!????? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Frank Evanov
Looks short top to bottom. Terrible side to side centering. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: warshawlaw
worst cut job I've seen since Joan Rivers. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Peter_Spaeth
Leon can set board policies against discussing live auctions, but until he does, hell, all we are doing is expressing our opinions what's wrong with that do we owe it to people to crawl under a cone of silence or something? To me the card looks quite short and I agree with Paul it appears there may be paper loss. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: jay behrens
Short? That thing needs a condom so it won't slide around so much in the holder. The black on the left boarder doesn't look good. Either ink is missing or there is paper loss. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Lee Behrens
Where are the PSA defenders? This is another great example of PSA ineptitude. I think Sean could have seen this card was trimmed. Always curious who actually submitted cards like this. I would be very wary if I was a PSA collector of high grade cards, examples like this put the whole lot in question. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: John S
Bad grading job, no doubt. As far as discussing auction items before they end, I see no true problem. What is wrong with critiquing a card...kind of like taking a car for a spin with some friends before the purchase. The only exception that comes to mind would be if one of us had a personal issue with the seller. It is still a very presentable Matty, just not worth PSA 6 dollars. If someone wants to spend PSA 6 money for the card that is their business. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Steve M.
. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Bobby
I think this post is alright...it's not by the seller trying to promote the listing...and if it was it would be a big mistake. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: jackgoodman
T206 collector - At first I thought you had stolen my card. But mine is safe and sound. BTW, very nice card! |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: T206Collector
...that's a nice one, too! We should get them together sometime and brag about how we have the two nicest cards in the world. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Frank Wakefield
First, the bid price has exceeded the card's value. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Mike
You're right, it should be a 7. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Josh K.
That card would grade a 30 (if not trimmed) if presented to SGC. Not sure how the grader missed the paperloss on the left border. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: fkw
Card in auction (PSA) is Obviously short top to bottom...... especially when compared to those 2 SGC cards. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)
Absolutely right about the PRO card reference but I think it would have been a PRO-8. Too bad the buyer paid a PSA price for it. It's almost difficult to feel sorry for someone like that. How the heck does someone spend that kind of money for a card and not know much about T206's in general. Like people have been saying, the buyer bought the holder, not the card. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: dennis
anyone who has owned a t206 should question this card as a possible trim job. the concensus here is that this card is trimmed, or at least it is short. the reality (because of the slab)is that this is an ex/mt 6 matty card. the bidders put 100% faith in PSA, and as long as the card remains in that slab, it is a 6. it could be a factory short cut, a vintage trim,or a modern($)trim. that is all speculation. any card that is this old and in a slab with sharp corners and a grade of 6 or higher should be looked at in the same light as we look at this card.but the reality is they are not. some are just more obvious that others. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Steve M.
the final price took all of your concerns into consideration. The last 3 PSA 5's at auction sold for between $2,000 and $2,250. The last SGC 60 at auction sold for $2,250. Plain and simple it's a 5 in a 6 holder. There have been no reported auction sales of a PSA 6. A PSA 7 went for $8,500+ in Mastro's Spring auction. Might the original poster opine for us what he beiieves a "true" PSA 6 should bring? |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Josh K.
Sorry, but its not even a 5 if its trimmed or has paperloss. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: T206Collector
...would not have posted if he thought it might just be a 5 in a 6 holder. That would not have been significant enough to take the time to write about. Yes, if it was a true 5, it would've sold for what this one sold for. But if that's paper loss on the front left border, then that ain't a 5. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Peter_Spaeth
Mine sucks in comparison lol. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Noel
That is a very nice Matty 4. Certainly beats the crap out of the one that just sold. I have a GAI 3.5 that is at least as nice and no paper loss. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: BcD
it would be a typical 6 O/C. It just looks funky because we have so many more T-206's to compare this card to including the two scanned above that are centered so much better. I don't think its short but does command poor eye appeal.It's a psa 6 that needs the qualifier but we all know about their quality control. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: John
I’m with BCD on this one, really bad eye appeal. But as you know T206’s can come in funky shapes and cuts, and there are so many nicely centered versions to compare to that sometimes they can really stand out. My guess is OC, spotting not paper loss. As for trimming I would have to see the card in person to come to that conclusion. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: John
"Might the original poster opine for us what he beiieves a "true" PSA 6 should bring?" |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)
Did anyone take a close look at the card in question with respect to the holder. That card has a lot of room between the top border of the holder and the top border of the card. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: John_B_California
I wouldn't call myself a PSA "defender", but yes I own some of their cards. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: T206Collector
I already did respond above. I've pasted my comments again below for your convenience. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Steve M.
When I asked my question of the "original poster" it had nothing to do with the subject card. It was a simple request that based on the information I presented regarding recent 5 and 7 auction sales what he though a PSA 6 should go for. Why he persists in denegrading the card quite honestly is beyond me. I think everyone who has posted has agreed with his initial question, i.e. "This is a weak 6, right?" Simple answer: Right. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: John
Hmmm…Paul are you always this nebulous??? |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: T206Collector
1) I continue to denegrate the card because I like PSA pile-ons. Find me a good thread about PSA pile-ons, or better yet, let me start one, and I'm all in. I have dozens of scans to add to the mix, and if you'd like to send me some more, please send them to -- pmifsud3d@gmail.com |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: ScottIngold
I am not a PSA fan.... |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Steve M.
that's pretty much what I had a PSA 6 pegged at. |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: John
I think they all make mistakes IMO. I even have a few SGC bumbles in my collection, as for the amount of mistakes. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
This is a weak 6, right?
Posted By: Steve M.
that Chance is way over-graded. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Paying weak for a strong T206 Dummy Taylor | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 07-10-2008 07:43 AM |