Any experience with CTA

WhosYourVladdy

Hi all,

I am new to the boards. I have been reading your posts for the last few months and decided to join. I find all of you very knowledgable. My wife bought me a 1970 Thurman Munson card. Unfortunately it was graded by CTA, and I have no experience with them. After reading some of your threads, I am afraid that it may be tampered with or trimmed. Anyone have any experience with their cards? I would appreciate to know what you think. Thanks.

David
WhosYourVladdy

pc

remain afraid.
stay with PSA

40ozman

They were out of northern california, and have went out of business. While they were open, I always thought of them being legit. Not in the same league as most of the garbage out there (pro, ect.). I saw a lot of there slabs here because they were local, and never saw anything that raised eyebrows. I never heard anything either way on them. I wouldn't count it as trimmed right away. I'd crack it out and send it to PSA.

jrdolan

When I rejoined the hobby and thought all graders were equal, I bought some CTA's. These are not as bad as PRO, which slabs trimmed cards as a business practice, but CTA did let some trimmers slip through. Of the half-dozen I bought, all were 2 or 3 grades worse than stated on the flip, and a couple were trimmed.

If your ultimate goal is PSA 6, and you can get a CTA 9 for dirt cheap (include the PSA regrade in your cost), and don't mind risking a trim job ... To hell with it. Just avoid! Stick with PSA / GAI / SGC. I wish I had asked the question you're asking much earlier in the process.

RepublicaninMass

Bought a cta 8 looked like an 8, scatch it when I cracked it came back PSA 6 would have been 8 or higher????

Vargha

Some CTA's were good. I would imagine that the newer the flip, the greater the chance of it being a bad card. The joke was that CTA stood for "Cut, Trimmed & Altered".

NickM

CTA used computers to analyze the cards and grade. Computers are lousy at spotting alterations.

When grading was in its fad stage in 2000 and plenty of companies were seeking to come in and be legitimate graders in competition with PSA, SGC, and BGS, there were a number of dealers who submitted large quantities of legitimate material to CTA for grading. However, from what I saw at shows, most of this was new material (especially modern rookies). I've seen their grading on this material, and it seemed fair (large number of 8s and 9s).

If you were in the market for a Jamal Lewis rookie, I'd be quite confident that a CTA card was unaltered and reasonably graded. For a Thurman Munson rookie, I would not be.

Nick

Steve1124

I'm surprised no one has mentioned CTA's ridiculous "grade report" system of grading. I'll say this: It was THOROUGH, and left no question as to where on the card it's flaw(s) were located. The problem was, it was a real pain having a SEPARATE "grade report" to keep track of, along WITH the encapsulated graded card. The whole concept was somewhat convuluted and awkward, and hard to figure out. They would break down each card in "zones", with quadrants on the front and back, and issue a "damage assessment" where they spotted flaws. It was just too sophisticated to catch on. I sent them ONE card for grading, just as an experiment, and never fooled with them again.

WhosYourVladdy

Thanks to all.

My wife asked my brother-in-law to buy it for me using his EBAY ID. I know that they did not pay anything close to market value for this card which is good if it has problems, but on the other hand really concerns me, because people in the know probably would have bid it up for way more than they paid. I guess the only thing to do is resubmit and regrade. On the surface it looks good.

I agree with you that the zone ratings are really convuluted. I really like a more simple, more consistent approach. Thanks for your insight.

David
WhosYourVladdy