5 all day. Someone sleeping at the switch during the grading of that one.
From what I can tell, 707 is the DOLLAR STORE compared to deans_cards. For what that guy charges, if I ever bought anything from him I would expect it to be delivered to me in a frickin' limo. ~WalterSobchak
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
This is mine...this is typical of what a '7' looks like.....I cant see the sides of the PSA case, but I am thinking someone HAD to have switched that card out. No way could PSA miss a card that obvious!! It looks like a '4' to me.
From what I can tell, 707 is the DOLLAR STORE compared to deans_cards. For what that guy charges, if I ever bought anything from him I would expect it to be delivered to me in a frickin' limo. ~WalterSobchak
<< <i>Did you make this threat to bash PSA and show off your pretty SGC? >>
Uh...lookie boys and girls...a new alt/troll.......
I for one am full supporter of PSA....last year, I spent $5,000+ with them. SGC got around $500. Just wanted opinions about a '4' in a '7' holder. Thinking it HAS to be switched out. If PSA totally missed that one, well, that is pretty bad......
I am buying and trading for RC's of Wilt Chamberlain, George Mikan, Bill Russell, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, and Bob Cousy! Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
I think that it is much more likely a mech error than it is a case of someone switching the card. There have been a few well-documented mech errors on the grade, not just the other parts of the label, in other threads. It can happen even though it is rare.
I do see what looks to be a small crack in the holder. Look about a half inch southwest of the 3 in the cert #. Otherwise the holder looks good from the scan.
That card is on PSA's new tamper-proof holder with the concealed sonic weld. I doubt this card was switched out unless, 1) Someone has access to these unwelded holders (WIWAG), or, 2) Someone has already figured out how to unseal and reseal them (doubt it).
Probably just a mistake on the grading, or was graded on the 4SC grading scale.
the card is pretty weak but it is not a 4. the crappy 2X scan is magnifying the corner wear. the card probably should be a 6 due to the corners. as for the tilt, that is a non issue , the card probably measures 60/40 at worse at all points.
<< <i>the card is pretty weak but it is not a 4. the crappy 2X scan is magnifying the corner wear. the card probably should be a 6 due to the corners. as for the tilt, that is a non issue , the card probably measures 60/40 at worse at all points. >>
If only factoring centering and corners, maybe a 6, but Fading/discoloration where the player's names are? Check. should get it a PD qualifier or maybe a straight 5.
Comments
~WalterSobchak
PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 77.97% Complete)
PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 19.26% Complete)
PSA Basketball HOF Players Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 6.02% Complete)
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
Easily noticeable tilt? Check
Fading/discoloration where the player's names are? Check.
PSA 5. Chaz.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
This is mine...this is typical of what a '7' looks like.....I cant see the sides of the PSA case, but I am thinking someone HAD to have switched that card out. No way could PSA miss a card that obvious!! It looks like a '4' to me.
~WalterSobchak
<< <i>Did you make this threat to bash PSA and show off your pretty SGC? >>
Uh...lookie boys and girls...a new alt/troll.......
I for one am full supporter of PSA....last year, I spent $5,000+ with them. SGC got around $500. Just wanted opinions about a '4' in a '7' holder. Thinking it HAS to be switched out. If PSA totally missed that one, well, that is pretty bad......
No, I am not an alt but you can call me a troll all you like. I just find your actions a bit curious.
You seem to be very paranoid, Bobbyw8469
<< <i>You seem to be very paranoid, Bobbyw8469 >>
Yes...I'm paranoid....I love seeing people break open cases and switch out cards! Is that what you do for a living?
<< <i>
<< <i>You seem to be very paranoid, Bobbyw8469 >>
Yes...I'm paranoid....I love seeing people break open cases and switch out cards! Is that what you do for a living? >>
OH! You caught me! Nice going, Sherlock!
Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
I think that it is much more likely a mech error than it is a case of someone switching the card. There have been a few well-documented mech errors on the grade, not just the other parts of the label, in other threads. It can happen even though it is rare.
Probably just a mistake on the grading, or was graded on the 4SC grading scale.
it definitely doesn't compare to this one
<< <i>the card is pretty weak but it is not a 4. the crappy 2X scan is magnifying the corner wear. the card probably should be a 6 due to the corners. as for the tilt, that is a non issue , the card probably measures 60/40 at worse at all points. >>
If only factoring centering and corners, maybe a 6, but Fading/discoloration where the player's names are? Check. should get it a PD qualifier or maybe a straight 5.