Grading Blank Back t206

[wazoo]

Does anyone know if SGC/PSA still grades blank backed t206?

I recently contacted SGC and was told this:

“ Hi Joshua,

I spoke to my grades about your cards. If they are blank backs we would indicate that on the label. If they are skinned we would not.

Please let me know if you have any other questions.”

Unfortunately — a friend of mine submitted a blank back Sid Smith t206 to SGC and it was returned “could not/would not grade.” This worries me as I have (4) that I just recently submitted - Guiheen, Helm, Lipe, Viola. None of these cards are skinned. They have the same nominal thickness as my regular backed cards, and they are hand cut. I will try to upload better quality photos.

This seems awfully contradicting. I’m still awaiting a response from SGC and will update as I progress. This also seems odd being that I know of a card (blank back t206) that was encapsulated by SGC as of August 2020.

[swarmee]

Does SGC now require you to add something saying you're willing to accept A / AUTHENTIC grades on your submission form like PSA does? I thought I read that on a message board recently.

[wazoo]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Does SGC now require you to add something saying you're willing to accept A / AUTHENTIC grades on your submission form like PSA does? I thought I read that on a message board recently.

I believe so. And that may be the issue. But wouldn’t it still come back with an “A” label on the card saver and not be encapsulated?

[MVSNYC]

If they are not skinned, SGC should slab them "A", and they'll be labeled "Blank Back". I've owned many over the years.

Good luck with the cards. From the scans, they look fine.

[wazoo]

Originally Posted by MVSNYC

If they are not skinned, SGC should slab them "A", and they'll be labeled "Blank Back". I've owned many over the years.

Good luck with the cards. From the scans, they look fine.

Exactly my thoughts! Thanks for the input. Hopefully it was just a clerical goof. Or a lack of selecting the “encapsulate” box. Will update as I get more information.

[wazoo]

After speaking with SGC last month, I was informed today that their management no longer accepts and encapsulated authentic blank back cards. What a baffling move and a complete contradiction.

[ullmandds]

That's really lame! One of the TPG'ers should offer a service where they will grade just about any card...within a size range for an amount of $$$$$$.

I have a handful of cards...fro joy,quaker ruths...I know theres beckett...my cobb e95 cutout...someone should be able to grade these cards?

[Luke]

I hope someone from SGC can come on here and address this. It would be extremely disappointing for them to quit grading T206 Blank Backs. Missing ink and other oddball stuff I completely understand, but Blank Backs are very easy to identify and authenticate.

[benjulmag]

What about T206 proofs? They have the proof markings on the fronts and are blank-backed. Would SGC consider them to be a different category of blank-backed T206's and grade them? Such cards IMO are fundamentally different because being proofs they were manufactured with no intent of having the versos be anything other than blank-backed, and to my knowledge the fronts are full production run versions (i.e., at the time of manufacture they were not missing any intended features).

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

That's really lame! One of the TPG'ers should offer a service where they will grade just about any card...within a size range for an amount of $$$$$$.

I have a handful of cards...fro joy,quaker ruths...I know theres beckett...my cobb e95 cutout...someone should be able to grade these cards?

+1 Agreed

[fkm_bky]

SGC definitely is tightening things in a lot of areas with grading...not necessarily for the better.

This is one example that Josh points out, but they now also consider heavily creased cards ungradable, or only accepting of an "A" even though the card is untouched/cut otherwise.

And yes, you MUST note on your submission that you're willing to receive an "A" grade or they won't (I found that out the hard way last month).

Yet, you see SGC1's around with corners missing, chunks out of the side, holes, massive paper loss, etc. It makes no sense.

You'd thing SGC would want to strike while the iron is hot and PSA is languishing under a mountain of cards to grade to lure people in...instead they're pushing them away.

Bill

[MVSNYC]

Hi Corey, long time, no speak, hope you're well.

I'm surprised SGC will no longer slab Blank Backs, God knows they've slabbed a ton of them over the years...to your point, I would imagine they'll still authenticate ("A") and slab Proofs; as you said they are a different animal and have characteristics (proof cross-hatch marks, perfect registration, etc) that further distinguish them from simple Blank Backs...Regardless, I think an expert can tell if a card has been skinned or left the factory Blank...hope they reconsider, and continue to slab BB's.

[wazoo]

After seeing a caramel card, forgot what series, graded by SGC a couple months ago, I thought I’d try my luck. SGC refuses to encapsulate these cards. These are no brainers that they’ve always encapsulated - yet another goofy policy shift without justification from upper management. I guess since it doesn’t say PRIZM They don’t care…

[Bridwell]

Those are great looking cards! You don't need to have them slabbed to enjoy them. You could easily sell them as is. I'm not sure if SGC grading would add anything to the value anyways. At best, you'd get an A and not a numeric grade. I agree that SGC does grade some blank backed issues but not T206? Weird!

[wazoo]

Originally Posted by Bridwell

Those are great looking cards! You don't need to have them slabbed to enjoy them. You could easily sell them as is. I'm not sure if SGC grading would add anything to the value anyways. At best, you'd get an A and not a numeric grade. I agree that SGC does grade some blank backed issues but not T206? Weird!

Thank you for the kind words. You’re totally right, I do not need them slabbed to enjoy them at all. I guess my rant is more focused on the inconsistencies being introduced to TPG in the most recent years and the lack of transparent standards. These cards have no intention of leaving my side - I just was hoping they’d be placed in a nice holder like past copies have with the Blank Back provenance. This is obviously a personal bias, and vent session I guess haha.

[rockthree]

Are there any further updates on this? Has anyone had any luck getting blank backs graded at PSA, SGC, Beckett, or CSG?

[Yoda]

Yet a fresh spin by the TPG'ers. If they were printed blank for whatever reason at the factory and untouched later, then they should be graded like any other backed T206. When in doubt confuse the collector.

[Luke]

It's been a while now, but shortly after Josh was told they wouldn't grade his, I tried one with both companies and neither wanted to grade it.

[atx840]

I'm aware that another board member was denied by SGC within the last two months

Wonder if there were some fakes being snuck in. Way back they even gave numerical grades for some!

[Leon]

This is the way they should be graded. Great looking card, btw.

Originally Posted by atx840

I'm aware that another board member was denied by SGC within the last two months

Wonder if there were some fakes being snuck in. Way back they even gave numerical grades for some!

[wazoo]

To provide an update, both CSG and BVG offered to encapsulate if determined to be "real" blank backs. SGC and PSA still refuse. Sad....

[tedzan]

Graded or Not......it's a 50-50 judgement by the TPG.

My Schulte is "NOT SKINNED"....it is a true Blank-Back (that is a glue stain in the upper left corner).

But, SGC got the Puttman correct.


.



.







TED Z

T206 Reference
.