Opinions PSA 1962 POST Mickey Mantle... see last post, PSA regraded

1966CUDA

Opinions welcomed. Don't know why this only received "authentic". Border is visible all four sides---shouldn't this receive a numeric grade?

JoeBanzai

PSA absolutely dropped the ball on this one!

I have quite a bit of experience with Post Cereal cards, and that card should get a numeric grades.

The only thing I am wondering is, that's a Life magazine card, could those be graded differently? I wouldn't think so.

PROMETHIUS88

I can't tell due to the angle if the border is complete on the top above the "No. 5" or not. If it is, it should garner a numerical grade. They don't grade the Life Magazine any differently in my experience. I have sent several in for grading.

PSA is not consistent in grading 1962 Jell-O cards at all I have never been able to get an answer on what their guidelines are. I have probably submitted more 62 Jell-O for grading than anyone and they are all over the place. I have cards and have seen cards that aren't close to having full borders, even chunks missing, that get numerical grades. I have seen cards that don't get numerical grades that should. For that particular issue, I just don't think they have the knowledge. Some boxes of 62 Jell-O didn't have a black border on the left hand side. Seems they get it right sometimes but not a majority of the time.

JoeBanzai

I agree with the above statement.

I have seen cards with little or no border get a numerical grade and cards like the example here get "Authentic".

Bottom line, it's up to the individual grader and there is going to be differences, until PSA gets more specific with their guidelines and trains the graders.

Probably not going to happen with these issues.

Chicago1976

That's a head scratcher. Border cut very similar to my Banks. Assuming SGC and PSA have similar standards, it should have received a number.

Could it be something else like an alteration? Coloring on black border, cap, or sleeves? Hard to tell, but there seems to be darker spots on his cap.

CWUCAT62

Here is a front & back scan of my Graded Panel. I hope you can tell, but perforation that divides the 2 cards is about 1/16 of an inch from the black border of the card. They may take this into consideration when grading this card after being cut away from the panel. Anyway, just was trying to add a "what if" or a "maybe" to this conversation. Great Card by the way! It is a beauty!

~Ground Chuck~

JoeBanzai

@Chicago1976 said:
That's a head scratcher. Border cut very similar to my Banks. Assuming SGC and PSA have similar standards, it should have received a number.

Could it be something else like an alteration? Coloring on black border, cap, or sleeves? Hard to tell, but there seems to be darker spots on his cap.

Altered cards do not receive an "Authentic" designation unless "altered" is listed.

This is a PSA error one way or the other. I would just crack and resubmit and see what happens.

Chicago1976

Altered cards do not receive an "Authentic" designation unless "altered" is listed.

This is a PSA error one way or the other. I would just crack and resubmit and see what happens.

Thanks Joe. I was not aware...that makes sense. Really nice card, hope it gets fixed!

secretstash

@JoeBanzai said:

@Chicago1976 said:
That's a head scratcher. Border cut very similar to my Banks. Assuming SGC and PSA have similar standards, it should have received a number.

Could it be something else like an alteration? Coloring on black border, cap, or sleeves? Hard to tell, but there seems to be darker spots on his cap.

Altered cards do not receive an "Authentic" designation unless "altered" is listed.

This is a PSA error one way or the other. I would just crack and resubmit and see what happens.

In this example, PSA made the mistake and they should be footing the bill on the re-holder, not the customer. If they crack it out and resend it, the customer is definitely eating all of the costs.

JoeBanzai

@secretstash said:

@JoeBanzai said:

@Chicago1976 said:
That's a head scratcher. Border cut very similar to my Banks. Assuming SGC and PSA have similar standards, it should have received a number.

Could it be something else like an alteration? Coloring on black border, cap, or sleeves? Hard to tell, but there seems to be darker spots on his cap.

Altered cards do not receive an "Authentic" designation unless "altered" is listed.

This is a PSA error one way or the other. I would just crack and resubmit and see what happens.

In this example, PSA made the mistake and they should be footing the bill on the re-holder, not the customer. If they crack it out and resend it, the customer is definitely eating all of the costs.

ABSOLUTELY! I have always felt that if the mistake is this obvious, PSA should fix the problem at no charge.

Since there's no chance that is going to happen, keep it as is, knowing they got it wrong, or spend the money if you just HAVE to get it in the proper holder.

If PSA had to eat the cost for getting it wrong the first time, you can bet they would not make a lot of these obvious mistakes.

I am not talking about a card that's off by one grade, but anything off by two or more, should be on them.

1966CUDA

I contacted PSA thru the customer support center questioning this. Waiting for an answer.

JoeBanzai

Good luck!

1966CUDA

Update: Customer service got back to me. Sent me return label and they are going to review card on their dime. I will keep posted of results.

1966CUDA

Well the verdict is in: PSA 5 just arrived.

DBesse27

Awesome! Justice prevails.

JoeBanzai

SWEET!