Options
FS: PSA 2 '54 Banks (Looks like an 8)
Card is well centered with sharp corners. A small crease on the left side of the card below Ernie's ear bumped the grade all the way down to a 2. Otherwise it's a killer 7 or 8. Asking price is $450 firm, which is exactly what I paid.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
0
Comments
Always plenty of PSA-graded cards in my ebay store -- https://ebay.com/str/thelumbercompanysportscards
Its the top left corner also stained? Or is that the scan?
<< <i>Serious coin for a PSA-2, good luck. >>
Thanks. I think enough about the card to have paid well over $400 for it back in February of this year. A quick check of VCP will confirm this. I'm only thinking about selling to possibly fund a Banks 7. This 2 really is a spectacular card though.
looking for low grade t205's psa 1-2
Not trying to upset the seller just giving my .02
Dave
1957 Topps 99% 7.40 GPA
Hank Aaron Basic PSA 7-8(75%)
Regards,
Shane
I just saw that you are selling it. I will PM you in a sec.
Shane
Is the crease really deep? It's hard to tell in the scan.
Mickey71
.......Look at the rest of Andy's collection. His eye is one of the best...Period.
His collection is strickly high end material
I have a raw 54 banks that would grade higher but not nearly as nice.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
<< <i>See those two roller type marks on the back? I have the same thing on a 1915 cracker jack that looks like a solid 7, but has graded a 2...four times >>
I thought those were old wax stains because the way vintage packs were folded? If those are roller marks then I learned something about reverse of vintage cards today. Do they indent into the card?
Just calling it a PSA 2 says that the Banks is equal in condition to this card:
PSA 2
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
When some of you can actually speak coherently about cards and understand that the assigned grade does not always accurately represent the overall presentation of the card, then maybe we could have some more civil and constructive dialog.
<< <i>Scott
We can all agree the card appears much better than what the grade says. I think more of what people are saying is that there is a reason why it grades a PSA 2 so it is curious why it would command a PSA 5 price. I agree it deserves a premium price for its appearance. But just how much? A card is only worth what someone is willing to pay. I would be happy paying the VCP average for a PSA 3. But if Im going to pay PSA 5 money, I would rather find a PSA 5 that looks like a 6 or 7 for the same price rather than a card that has a flaw(s) that would bring it all the way down to a 2.
Im not putting down the OP. The card is a visual beauty and as its his card, he can ask any price he wants and I hope he finds someone to pay that asking price.
Shagroten, good luck on the sale...please keep me in mind if you ever decide to sell at VCP of a psa 3. I know you dont want to take a loss...God knows Ive had to a few times and it doesnt feel good! >>
The answer to what premium it can or will command is simple; whatever Andy decides to accept. He was willing to pay a high end PSA 5 price for it (as was at least one other bidder). Regardless of what you, or others might find comfortable, there's no need to suggest that Andy is out of line in his asking price. There is a rational reason for it.
Cracked out, many sellers would put the card up raw and describe it as EX/MT or better. Rather than being critical of the card or Andy's asking price, why not commend him on being honest and demonstrating some integrity in not taking the easy way out that too many other sellers do on too consistent of a basis.
As was stated by KBCards, another grading service might see the "crimp" with a less critical eye and they would be justified in putting the card in an EX holder (giving you your 5 that looks like a PSA 6 or 7 or even an 8) and the card would most likely sell at a significant premium over the "new" EX grade. Having viewed the card in person, I can attest to it presenting far better than the technical grade, and I would recommend not getting so hung up on the fact that it was graded a PSA 2...
<< <i>I guess scott doesnt care if a sale of someone's card may be affected. Hope you have sold your card Andy. I hope you dont feel I was trying to give you a hard time personally. >>
Barry:
First you wanted me to remove what I quoted you as writing and now you want to blame me for not deleting what you wrote as you feel it may have an effect on Andy being able to sell the card in the thread.
I appreciate that you asked me to edit my post to remove the comments you made, but I don't do that. Nor do I edit my posts to correct something I may have said in error or in anger. I stand behind whatever I say and will post the appropriate apology when warranted. No one had to know that you wrote what I quoted, but they could probably figure it out from all of your edited posts. But now they do know that you wrote them...
Andy is quite capable of selling the card without me having to edit my posts.
Any damage that may have been done in this thread would be by those that posted. They now want to come back and try to blame me for THEIR words.
I don't mean for this to be a flame or an attack at you. I like and respect you, Barry, but this is about a standard that I set long ago when I began posting on message boards. I would hope that rather than try to attack me for maintaining some level of integrity (too many others say things and then change them to cover their azzes), you can accept the reason that I don't go back and edit my posts. I will only edit the post if a hyperlink is coded incorrectly or their is an egregious error of content (usually a cut-and-paste that went awry).
<< <i>Do what you gotta do Scott. I was just trying to give some respect to Andy. >>
Understood. I don't think what I quoted and then responded to should have any effect on the ability to sell the card. It is just a difference of opinion versus the flip versus the presentation of the card in question.
No hard feelings . . .