And if you're wondering, the black box ones are called the "glossy" set. If you put the cards side by side they pretty much look the same, but in direct light, the black box ones are definitely more glossy. It's easiest to tell on the white bordered cards as the "glossy" ones end up looking more of an off-white.
If you have cards PSA won't grade, what is the next most desirable grading company?
My thoughts are that for new cards BGS is better than SGC. Doing an eBay search shows far more BGS graded Ripken cards than SGC.
I know tunahead was going to send his 1990 Donruss Aqueous Test Ripken to SGC. Do you think a valuable or rare new card is better in an SGC holder than BGS if PSA won't grade it? Does rarity or value play a part in deciding?
What are the considerations for who gets your cards next if PSA won't grade them?
Kevin
I collect PSA cards of the following: Billy Ripken Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002 Cal Ripken, Sr. Hall of Fame Rookies
If your question is resale then yes I think the newer ones are better in BGS. If your question is displaying then I would say SGC or 1 screw holders work fine.
Wonderful, I'm bidding on a card for my Basic set but Kingrang just jumped into the mix. If I do win it I'm going to be seriously overpaying... I'll keep you posted.
<< <i>Wonderful, I'm bidding on a card for my Basic set but Kingrang just jumped into the mix. If I do win it I'm going to be seriously overpaying... I'll keep you posted. >>
Prices are starting to get really out of hand with all the Ripkens. I mean I'm just as much to blame as anyone for this happening, but we're all on the same team here.
Personally I'd really like to see everyone finish their sets in all 10. Then maybe we could all get together and write to Joe Orlando to get featured in an SMR with some group photos or something.
Frankly I'm willing to post what I'm going after here so I stop bidding against the people on this board. It seems silly. I have no desire to pay $50 for a cheapie card like a Kay-B even though I need it in my set. We are all bidding against each other which seems kind of silly. Even though those cards went for that money, they aren't worth it. I don't care that someone will pay it. They aren't worth it.
Kevin
I collect PSA cards of the following: Billy Ripken Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002 Cal Ripken, Sr. Hall of Fame Rookies
<< <i>If you have cards PSA won't grade, what is the next most desirable grading company?
My thoughts are that for new cards BGS is better than SGC. Doing an eBay search shows far more BGS graded Ripken cards than SGC.
I know tunahead was going to send his 1990 Donruss Aqueous Test Ripken to SGC. Do you think a valuable or rare new card is better in an SGC holder than BGS if PSA won't grade it? Does rarity or value play a part in deciding?
What are the considerations for who gets your cards next if PSA won't grade them?
Kevin >>
What card are you looking to get graded that PSA won't do? I chose SGC for my Aqueous and the Blue/White test just because I like how the holders look. That Will Clark collector posted the picture of his Aqueous Test in the SGC holder and I think it looks terrific, so that's what made the decision for me.
Unfortunately I wasn't in the mix in the most recent power-bidding on those Ripkens. I DID however have them in my watch list because I was curious how they would end. I already have one of the KayBee cards in my "ready to sub" pile, so I'll just have to hope for a high grade! I did try for a few of Kevin's 9s, but I didn't succeed.
The problem at this particular time is, the top 7 or 8 (at least) in the Basic and B&CI Sets are very active right now, so we're all bidding against each other. For a while there, Wynne and O'Connor were taking (what appeared to be) a break, and "BL" and "Gr8CalOs" were stock-piling their 10s until they could blast onto the scene with their incredible collections. My feelings are still hurt about BL saving his set until he had enough to debut on the list at #1. Talk about toying with my emotions! I was only a couple months away from earning my star in the Basic Set. lol
That's okay really, I needed that kind of motivation to improve my set. My main objective now is to sub as many cards myself until I earn my upgrades, because I can't seem to rely on the cards I need to appear on ebay.
<< <i>Anyone up for forming a petition to keep custom cut panels off the registry? >>
I don't so much mind having a couple versions of a card, like with the 87 M&M panels. Having one of just Cal (cut panel) and then a second with Cal and George Brett (full panel) isn't so bad imo. But I think we need to come up with something especially in regards to the All Star Program Cards and the 83 Fleer Stamps, where there are virtually a limitless amount of cuts that can be made.
I don't so much mind having a couple versions of a card, like with the 87 M&M panels. Having one of just Cal (cut panel) and then a second with Cal and George Brett (full panel) isn't so bad imo. But I think we need to come up with something especially in regards to the All Star Program Cards and the 83 Fleer Stamps, where there are virtually a limitless amount of cuts that can be made. >>
One of my thoughts is that they should only have 2 versions of it in the registry, the single cut card and the whole panel as it was issued. So if it's a Drake's or M&M's type issue you have the single cut card and the panel of 2-3. But for issues like the All-Star inserts, you just have the single cut card added as the whole panel is 30 players
Or you could just make all the different variations fill the same individual slot. So essentially if you had a single cut stamp or a panel of say 4, 6, 9 or whatever, they would all just take up one spot on the checklist.
<< <i>Or you could just make all the different variations fill the same individual slot. So essentially if you had a single cut stamp or a panel of say 4, 6, 9 or whatever, they would all just take up one spot on the checklist. >>
Here's another idea...what about making them optional for the set? Don't some sets allow optional cards? To me it seems if you have the version that has Ripken only that should be required with every other item as optional.
I collect PSA cards of the following: Billy Ripken Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002 Cal Ripken, Sr. Hall of Fame Rookies
I think on the collector sets it has an option not optional. Like if the Ripken has 3 different cards in the 98 Upper Deck you could have any single one but not all three? Sorry if that dosen't make sense.
I've basically only been paying about $10-15 for Ripken 10's so it isn't me. It's kingrang. He is totally throwing things off. I remember a couple years ago when holdyoudada was buying everything in sight. I remember seeing a 1987 Donruss PSA 10 go for over $100. Now you can't give them away it seems. Anyone see the 1983 Donruss PSA 10 that sold for $23? Crazy...
Kevin
I collect PSA cards of the following: Billy Ripken Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002 Cal Ripken, Sr. Hall of Fame Rookies
Yes it's the same one. I was going to send mine to Beckett since I already have some items graded by Beckett. I also didn't like the fact that the Will Clark Aqueous was given an Authentic by SGC and I didn't see any other Aqueous cards graded by SGC.
Kevin
I collect PSA cards of the following: Billy Ripken Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002 Cal Ripken, Sr. Hall of Fame Rookies
<< <i>Yes it's the same one. I was going to send mine to Beckett since I already have some items graded by Beckett. I also didn't like the fact that the Will Clark Aqueous was given an Authentic by SGC and I didn't see any other Aqueous cards graded by SGC.
Kevin >>
I think the authentic was a mistake on SGC's part. I had talked to Brian from SGC and they said they should grade both the Aqueous and Blue/White as long as they are legit.
This card made an appearance on this thread before, back when he bought it. I forget what he bought it for. One of my top five favorite Ripken cards. I own a raw one, but it's PSA 7 at best.
Condition-wise that is probably one of the toughest cards of the 90s. Not sure about the price tag though. That's more than the PSA 8 1980 Charlotte O's set that I saw on eBay for $1,500. Which would you rather have?
Kevin
I collect PSA cards of the following: Billy Ripken Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002 Cal Ripken, Sr. Hall of Fame Rookies
I think that's a good starting price anyway. It's got the Best Offer on it, so it won't necessarily go for THAT much. Honestly, I think I would buy the Elite Auto over the Charlotte O's card, even though the Charlotte O's card is much harder to find. For me personally, that 1992 Donruss Elite Auto was my unicorn back when I was 15 years old. I spent a lot of my paper route money on 1992 Donruss boxes (yuck). I'll definitely be watching this one (again).
1989FleerBillRipkenCollector just posted this in another thread:
"From SGC on 7/2......
"The Aqueous cards only qualify for Authentic at this time, and for the Blue/White test cards, the graders would need to have them in hand prior to making a decision as to whether or not we will grade them." "
I checked Beckett's site on the Blue/White Test and there aren't any in the population reports and there aren't any in the price guide. Not a great sign.
Kevin
I collect PSA cards of the following: Billy Ripken Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002 Cal Ripken, Sr. Hall of Fame Rookies
I thought I would just celebrate this thread reaching 800 posts with some news that I just won my first PSA 10 Ripken RC!! I finally bit the bullet and bought the 1982 Donruss (from 4SC) for only $152.59!! That's a steal in my book. It shouldn't have taken me this long to get a RC in 10, but I've been much too busy filling in my holes to spend that kind of money on a high-pop 10. Now that I'm upgrading, I figured it was time. Completely STOKED that I got it for that little. Made my day!
Comments
My thoughts are that for new cards BGS is better than SGC. Doing an eBay search shows far more BGS graded Ripken cards than SGC.
I know tunahead was going to send his 1990 Donruss Aqueous Test Ripken to SGC. Do you think a valuable or rare new card is better in an SGC holder than BGS if PSA won't grade it? Does rarity or value play a part in deciding?
What are the considerations for who gets your cards next if PSA won't grade them?
Kevin
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
If your question is displaying then I would say SGC or 1 screw holders work fine.
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
Kevin
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
<< <i>How old is the flip on this card? It isn't like any of the others I've ever bought.
Kevin >>
Kevin it is definitly early on. I would say 95/96 era?
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
<< <i>Wonderful, I'm bidding on a card for my Basic set but Kingrang just jumped into the mix. If I do win it I'm going to be seriously overpaying... I'll keep you posted. >>
1994 Fleer by chance?
BTW I already have a 94 Fleer.
<< <i>No, it was a 95 Score and I ended up winning it for $33.22. (About double what I wanted to pay for it) Oh well 122 down, 50 to go...
BTW I already have a 94 Fleer. >>
Ah ok, just saw the 1994 Fleer that ended at $50.00, thought might be the one
Here's some other nice realized prices I just added to my list:
90 Topps Glossy AS of 22 $45.00
88 Kay-Bee Superstars $51.11
95 Score Gold Rush $51.66
Personally I'd really like to see everyone finish their sets in all 10. Then maybe we could all get together and write to Joe Orlando to get featured in an SMR with some group photos or something.
Kevin
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
<< <i>If you have cards PSA won't grade, what is the next most desirable grading company?
My thoughts are that for new cards BGS is better than SGC. Doing an eBay search shows far more BGS graded Ripken cards than SGC.
I know tunahead was going to send his 1990 Donruss Aqueous Test Ripken to SGC. Do you think a valuable or rare new card is better in an SGC holder than BGS if PSA won't grade it? Does rarity or value play a part in deciding?
What are the considerations for who gets your cards next if PSA won't grade them?
Kevin >>
What card are you looking to get graded that PSA won't do? I chose SGC for my Aqueous and the Blue/White test just because I like how the holders look. That Will Clark collector posted the picture of his Aqueous Test in the SGC holder and I think it looks terrific, so that's what made the decision for me.
Link 1
Link 2
Link 3
And a Drake's panel that should be 3 cards slabbed as 2:
Link
Anyone up for forming a petition to keep custom cut panels off the registry?
The problem at this particular time is, the top 7 or 8 (at least) in the Basic and B&CI Sets are very active right now, so we're all bidding against each other. For a while there, Wynne and O'Connor were taking (what appeared to be) a break, and "BL" and "Gr8CalOs" were stock-piling their 10s until they could blast onto the scene with their incredible collections. My feelings are still hurt about BL saving his set until he had enough to debut on the list at #1. Talk about toying with my emotions! I was only a couple months away from earning my star in the Basic Set. lol
That's okay really, I needed that kind of motivation to improve my set. My main objective now is to sub as many cards myself until I earn my upgrades, because I can't seem to rely on the cards I need to appear on ebay.
<< <i>Anyone up for forming a petition to keep custom cut panels off the registry?
I don't so much mind having a couple versions of a card, like with the 87 M&M panels. Having one of just Cal (cut panel) and then a second with Cal and George Brett (full panel) isn't so bad imo. But I think we need to come up with something especially in regards to the All Star Program Cards and the 83 Fleer Stamps, where there are virtually a limitless amount of cuts that can be made.
<< <i>
I don't so much mind having a couple versions of a card, like with the 87 M&M panels. Having one of just Cal (cut panel) and then a second with Cal and George Brett (full panel) isn't so bad imo. But I think we need to come up with something especially in regards to the All Star Program Cards and the 83 Fleer Stamps, where there are virtually a limitless amount of cuts that can be made. >>
One of my thoughts is that they should only have 2 versions of it in the registry, the single cut card and the whole panel as it was issued. So if it's a Drake's or M&M's type issue you have the single cut card and the panel of 2-3. But for issues like the All-Star inserts, you just have the single cut card added as the whole panel is 30 players
<< <i>Or you could just make all the different variations fill the same individual slot. So essentially if you had a single cut stamp or a panel of say 4, 6, 9 or whatever, they would all just take up one spot on the checklist. >>
That would work too
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
you could have any single one but not all three? Sorry if that dosen't make sense.
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
<< <i>Prices are starting to get really out of hand with all the Ripkens. >>
Kevin
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
The cards I have that PSA won't grade are the 1990 Donruss Aqueous and 1990 Donruss Blue/White Test cards.
Kevin
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
<< <i>tunahead,
The cards I have that PSA won't grade are the 1990 Donruss Aqueous and 1990 Donruss Blue/White Test cards.
Kevin >>
Is your Blue/White test the same as mine, with Ripken on the white side?
Kevin
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
<< <i>Yes it's the same one. I was going to send mine to Beckett since I already have some items graded by Beckett. I also didn't like the fact that the Will Clark Aqueous was given an Authentic by SGC and I didn't see any other Aqueous cards graded by SGC.
Kevin >>
I think the authentic was a mistake on SGC's part. I had talked to Brian from SGC and they said they should grade both the Aqueous and Blue/White as long as they are legit.
Good luck Roger!
<< <i>I WISH!
Good luck Roger!
Holy !$%^ I want!!!
Kevin
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
Kevin
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
Kevin
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
<< <i>Maybe kingrang will blow his wallet on that one so we can have some PSA 10s!
Kevin >>
One can only hope!
<< <i>Maybe kingrang will blow his wallet on that one so we can have some PSA 10s!
Kevin >>
Haha, unfortunately I fear that kingrang has a very deep wallet.
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
1989FleerBillRipkenCollector just posted this in another thread:
"From SGC on 7/2......
"The Aqueous cards only qualify for Authentic at this time, and for the Blue/White test cards, the graders would need to have them in hand prior to making a decision as to whether or not we will grade them." "
I guess I will be sending mine to BGS
Also, check your PM
Kevin
Billy Ripken
Cal Ripken, Jr. 1980-2002
Cal Ripken, Sr.
Hall of Fame Rookies
I thought I would just celebrate this thread reaching 800 posts with some news that I just won my first PSA 10 Ripken RC!! I finally bit the bullet and bought the 1982 Donruss (from 4SC) for only $152.59!! That's a steal in my book. It shouldn't have taken me this long to get a RC in 10, but I've been much too busy filling in my holes to spend that kind of money on a high-pop 10. Now that I'm upgrading, I figured it was time. Completely STOKED that I got it for that little. Made my day!
Linky