Options
$50,000.00 BIN For 1979-80 O-Pee-Chee Wayne Gretzky BVG 9.5
JackWESQ
Posts: 2,133 ✭✭✭
Msohn's Best Offer of $50,000.00 for a 1979-80 O-Pee-Chee Wayne Gretzky BVG 9.5 was accepted by seller 800hitter. I wonder if the buyer will follow through on payment. That sure is a lot of coin.
/s/ JackWESQ
/s/ JackWESQ
0
Comments
I doubt anyone who buys cards like this guy does would just throw a fake 50,000 offer.
There are not too many of those around, definitely a good investment for those that can afford it.
This is the Holy Grail of Hockey Collectors.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
This sale might have also been somewhat influenced by the recent $150,000 BGS 10 Michael Jordan rookie. There are after all only 5 of the Gretzky 9.5's, and none higher.
<< <i>I hope that for $50K, that the seller sends the rest of the cards from the sheet with the Gretzky. >>
Exactly
<< <i>Kind of makes me feel mine was a steal at 1/50th the price. . >>
Your card is much nicer to the purest collector.
<< <i>definitely a good investment for those that can afford it. >>
I would have to strongly disagree with that statement.
Given that it's a modern card and that plenty of unopened material from that year still exists, you have to think that other cards of similar quality will eventually be graded. Also consider that it sold for roughly 10x the PSA 9 price, and would in all likelihood be a PSA 9 if the owner ever tried to cross it.
I think that there is a much greater risk that the buyer will lose his shirt on this purchase than he will make money from it.
<< <i>
and would in all likelihood be a PSA 9 if the owner ever tried to cross it.
. >>
It would most likely come back trimmed if ever sent to PSA.
<< <i>I hope that for $50K, that the seller sends the rest of the cards from the sheet with the Gretzky. >>
Steve
<< <i>
<< <i>definitely a good investment for those that can afford it. >>
I would have to strongly disagree with that statement.
Given that it's a modern card and that plenty of unopened material from that year still exists, you have to think that other cards of similar quality will eventually be graded. Also consider that it sold for roughly 10x the PSA 9 price, and would in all likelihood be a PSA 9 if the owner ever tried to cross it.
I think that there is a much greater risk that the buyer will lose his shirt on this purchase than he will make money from it. >>
Matt:
I agree that it is probably not a great investment given the direction that high profile, high end RC's graded by BGS and BVG have been trending lately.
I disagree with the premise that there are many more waiting to be graded that would grade this high -- FROM RAW PRODUCT. While there is unopened product from this issue and there are probably some nice cards still residing in wax packs, I do not subscribe to the theory that there are a lot of MINT and GEM MINT cards in that group.
Having dealt with that market for quite awhile from the mid 1980's through to about 1999, I can attest to the fact that a majority of what I saw come out of CLEAN unopened wax was consistently NM to NM-MT at best. Printing flaws, centering, cutting issues and toning consistently knock even the sharpest cards down to a mid level grade for a modern card.
Now, if we want to talk about "creating" a GEM MINT card, that's a horse of a different color and I think that is one of the primary reasons that there has been a decline in the "value" of high profile, high end BGS and BVG cards. Collectors and investors are becoming more astute in realizing that what they possess in a BGS or BVG holder will most likely need to remain entombed as there is a strong likelihood that attempting to cross said BGS/BVG card to a PSA or SGC holder will result in a rejection.
In my opinion, anyone buying a GEM MINT BGS/BVG 1986 Fleer Jordan, 1993 SP Jeter, 1994 SP ARod, 1979-80 OPC Gretzky, or 1985-86 OPC Lemieux with the intent of crossing it to a PSA 10 or SGC 98 is taking a significant gamble. And if what Boo says about Beckett tightening up the ship, the buyer would be hard pressed to get the item BACK into the equivalent Beckett holder.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>definitely a good investment for those that can afford it. >>
I would have to strongly disagree with that statement.
Given that it's a modern card and that plenty of unopened material from that year still exists, you have to think that other cards of similar quality will eventually be graded. Also consider that it sold for roughly 10x the PSA 9 price, and would in all likelihood be a PSA 9 if the owner ever tried to cross it.
I think that there is a much greater risk that the buyer will lose his shirt on this purchase than he will make money from it. >>
Matt:
I agree that it is probably not a great investment given the direction that high profile, high end RC's graded by BGS and BVG have been trending lately.
I disagree with the premise that there are many more waiting to be graded that would grade this high -- FROM RAW PRODUCT. While there is unopened product from this issue and there are probably some nice cards still residing in wax packs, I do not subscribe to the theory that there are a lot of MINT and GEM MINT cards in that group.
Having dealt with that market for quite awhile from the mid 1980's through to about 1999, I can attest to the fact that a majority of what I saw come out of CLEAN unopened wax was consistently NM to NM-MT at best. Printing flaws, centering, cutting issues and toning consistently knock even the sharpest cards down to a mid level grade for a modern card.
Now, if we want to talk about "creating" a GEM MINT card, that's a horse of a different color and I think that is one of the primary reasons that there has been a decline in the "value" of high profile, high end BGS and BVG cards. Collectors and investors are becoming more astute in realizing that what they possess in a BGS or BVG holder will most likely need to remain entombed as there is a strong likelihood that attempting to cross said BGS/BVG card to a PSA or SGC holder will result in a rejection.
In my opinion, anyone buying a GEM MINT BGS/BVG 1986 Fleer Jordan, 1993 SP Jeter, 1994 SP ARod, 1979-80 OPC Gretzky, or 1985-86 OPC Lemieux with the intent of crossing it to a PSA 10 or SGC 98 is taking a significant gamble. And if what Boo says about Beckett tightening up the ship, the buyer would be hard pressed to get the item BACK into the equivalent Beckett holder. >>
Here's the funny thing: If Beckett was in the habit of slabbing sheet cuts, then it would seem that they would have zero reservations about slabbing any card that measured up correctly. I mean, what's really the difference between a sheet cut card and a card that came from a pack that's been trimmed down to exactly 2 1/2 by 3 1/2? I can't imagine one could tell the difference. So, if Beckett did slab these cards then every high profile dealer would be buying up PSA and BGS 8's of high dollar cards, looking for slightly oversized copies, then cracking and trimming these oversized copies and getting them into BGS 9.5 slabs.
But this isn't happening-- or at least I don't see any evidence that it is. But there's no question but that a LOT of high end sheet cut cards are currently residing in BGS slabs, which meanst the only conclusions I can come to are that either a) someone who is friendly with a BGS grader or two is 'backdooring' the sheet cut OPC cards and getting them slabbed, or b) BGS used to slab these sheet cuts but is no longer doing so.
But to think SGC and PSA is perfect and BGS is garbage for cards like a 86 jordan or jeter rc's?? I don't know..
I've seen within the past month 1 very sharp Jordan rc get kicked back by BGS for a shaved edge and it now sits in a SGC 9 holder.. so who got it right?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>definitely a good investment for those that can afford it. >>
I would have to strongly disagree with that statement.
Given that it's a modern card and that plenty of unopened material from that year still exists, you have to think that other cards of similar quality will eventually be graded. Also consider that it sold for roughly 10x the PSA 9 price, and would in all likelihood be a PSA 9 if the owner ever tried to cross it.
I think that there is a much greater risk that the buyer will lose his shirt on this purchase than he will make money from it. >>
Matt:
I agree that it is probably not a great investment given the direction that high profile, high end RC's graded by BGS and BVG have been trending lately.
I disagree with the premise that there are many more waiting to be graded that would grade this high -- FROM RAW PRODUCT. While there is unopened product from this issue and there are probably some nice cards still residing in wax packs, I do not subscribe to the theory that there are a lot of MINT and GEM MINT cards in that group.
Having dealt with that market for quite awhile from the mid 1980's through to about 1999, I can attest to the fact that a majority of what I saw come out of CLEAN unopened wax was consistently NM to NM-MT at best. Printing flaws, centering, cutting issues and toning consistently knock even the sharpest cards down to a mid level grade for a modern card.
Now, if we want to talk about "creating" a GEM MINT card, that's a horse of a different color and I think that is one of the primary reasons that there has been a decline in the "value" of high profile, high end BGS and BVG cards. Collectors and investors are becoming more astute in realizing that what they possess in a BGS or BVG holder will most likely need to remain entombed as there is a strong likelihood that attempting to cross said BGS/BVG card to a PSA or SGC holder will result in a rejection.
In my opinion, anyone buying a GEM MINT BGS/BVG 1986 Fleer Jordan, 1993 SP Jeter, 1994 SP ARod, 1979-80 OPC Gretzky, or 1985-86 OPC Lemieux with the intent of crossing it to a PSA 10 or SGC 98 is taking a significant gamble. And if what Boo says about Beckett tightening up the ship, the buyer would be hard pressed to get the item BACK into the equivalent Beckett holder. >>
Here's the funny thing: If Beckett was in the habit of slabbing sheet cuts, then it would seem that they would have zero reservations about slabbing any card that measured up correctly. I mean, what's really the difference between a sheet cut card and a card that came from a pack that's been trimmed down to exactly 2 1/2 by 3 1/2? I can't imagine one could tell the difference. So, if Beckett did slab these cards then every high profile dealer would be buying up PSA and BGS 8's of high dollar cards, looking for slightly oversized copies, then cracking and trimming these oversized copies and getting them into BGS 9.5 slabs.
But this isn't happening-- or at least I don't see any evidence that it is. But there's no question but that a LOT of high end sheet cut cards are currently residing in BGS slabs, which meanst the only conclusions I can come to are that either a) someone who is friendly with a BGS grader or two is 'backdooring' the sheet cut OPC cards and getting them slabbed, or b) BGS used to slab these sheet cuts but is no longer doing so. >>
Boo:
Many of the Jeter, ARod, and Jordan cards that are in GEM MINT BGS holders ARE trimmed from oversized cards! I have seen this happen and I can attest to it being fact. Has it happened in the past two years? I don't know, but I can assure you that MUCH of the high end material in HIGH END BGS/BVG holders that was submitted in the first 5-6 years was altered!
Much of the 1970's and 1980's OPC product is from sheets. You will note that most often, the lowest grade tends to be the surface. The ONLY aspect that can't be controlled when cutting from a sheet. The cutter can control the corners, the edges, and the centering! If anyone doubts this, please advise why almost every OPC card from the '70s and '80s that is in a GEM MINT or PRISTINE BGS holder has perfectly smooth edges and nary a hint of the traditional OPC airplane wire cut...
<< <i>True.. I wouldn't touch any opc in BGS/BVG holders unless the rought cut was present or I knew who submitted the said card well and knew the history ect..
But to think SGC and PSA is perfect and BGS is garbage for cards like a 86 jordan or jeter rc's?? I don't know..
I've seen within the past month 1 very sharp Jordan rc get kicked back by BGS for a shaved edge and it now sits in a SGC 9 holder.. so who got it right? >>
dizzle:
I will not suggest that PSA and SGC are perfect. We all know that such a statement would be naive and completely without merit. However, the preponderence of questionable HIGH END, HIGH PROFILE material in BGS/BVG holders is, in my opinion, suspect.
Are there cards that Beckett has rejected that end up in PSA and SGC holders? Certainly. But I would suggest that there are more PSA and SGC rejections in BGS holders than there are the other way around.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>definitely a good investment for those that can afford it. >>
I would have to strongly disagree with that statement.
Given that it's a modern card and that plenty of unopened material from that year still exists, you have to think that other cards of similar quality will eventually be graded. Also consider that it sold for roughly 10x the PSA 9 price, and would in all likelihood be a PSA 9 if the owner ever tried to cross it.
I think that there is a much greater risk that the buyer will lose his shirt on this purchase than he will make money from it. >>
Matt:
I agree that it is probably not a great investment given the direction that high profile, high end RC's graded by BGS and BVG have been trending lately.
I disagree with the premise that there are many more waiting to be graded that would grade this high -- FROM RAW PRODUCT. While there is unopened product from this issue and there are probably some nice cards still residing in wax packs, I do not subscribe to the theory that there are a lot of MINT and GEM MINT cards in that group.
Having dealt with that market for quite awhile from the mid 1980's through to about 1999, I can attest to the fact that a majority of what I saw come out of CLEAN unopened wax was consistently NM to NM-MT at best. Printing flaws, centering, cutting issues and toning consistently knock even the sharpest cards down to a mid level grade for a modern card.
Now, if we want to talk about "creating" a GEM MINT card, that's a horse of a different color and I think that is one of the primary reasons that there has been a decline in the "value" of high profile, high end BGS and BVG cards. Collectors and investors are becoming more astute in realizing that what they possess in a BGS or BVG holder will most likely need to remain entombed as there is a strong likelihood that attempting to cross said BGS/BVG card to a PSA or SGC holder will result in a rejection.
In my opinion, anyone buying a GEM MINT BGS/BVG 1986 Fleer Jordan, 1993 SP Jeter, 1994 SP ARod, 1979-80 OPC Gretzky, or 1985-86 OPC Lemieux with the intent of crossing it to a PSA 10 or SGC 98 is taking a significant gamble. And if what Boo says about Beckett tightening up the ship, the buyer would be hard pressed to get the item BACK into the equivalent Beckett holder. >>
Here's the funny thing: If Beckett was in the habit of slabbing sheet cuts, then it would seem that they would have zero reservations about slabbing any card that measured up correctly. I mean, what's really the difference between a sheet cut card and a card that came from a pack that's been trimmed down to exactly 2 1/2 by 3 1/2? I can't imagine one could tell the difference. So, if Beckett did slab these cards then every high profile dealer would be buying up PSA and BGS 8's of high dollar cards, looking for slightly oversized copies, then cracking and trimming these oversized copies and getting them into BGS 9.5 slabs.
But this isn't happening-- or at least I don't see any evidence that it is. But there's no question but that a LOT of high end sheet cut cards are currently residing in BGS slabs, which meanst the only conclusions I can come to are that either a) someone who is friendly with a BGS grader or two is 'backdooring' the sheet cut OPC cards and getting them slabbed, or b) BGS used to slab these sheet cuts but is no longer doing so. >>
Boo:
Many of the Jeter, ARod, and Jordan cards that are in GEM MINT BGS holders ARE trimmed from oversized cards! I have seen this happen and I can attest to it being fact. Has it happened in the past two years? I don't know, but I can assure you that MUCH of the high end material in HIGH END BGS/BVG holders that was submitted in the first 5-6 years was altered!
Much of the 1970's and 1980's OPC product is from sheets. You will note that most often, the lowest grade tends to be the surface. The ONLY aspect that can't be controlled when cutting from a sheet. The cutter can control the corners, the edges, and the centering! If anyone doubts this, please advise why almost every OPC card from the '70s and '80s that is in a GEM MINT or PRISTINE BGS holder has perfectly smooth edges and nary a hint of the traditional OPC airplane wire cut... >>
Hi Scott,
I completely agree that most of the high end OPC stuff in BGS holders is sheet cut. I've looked over (Scott?) Martin's table many times at the Toronto Expo, and have seen first hand the number of BGS 9.5 and BGS 10 cards from late '70's, early '80's OPC sets that he has for sale. None of these cards have any rough cut whatsoever, and he also usually has tons of sheets from these years for sale as well.
I just think that things over there have changed. Maybe guys like BGS Brad still get hooked up, but overall I don't think they're in the business of simply measuring a card and assigning it a grade so long as it measures up. I say this because I've personally had cards which measured up get rejected by both BCCG and BGS, and because if they did, in fact, let this go on there would be floods of high profile cards in BGS 9.5 holders for sale every week on Ebay.
My personal thought on this is that BGS made a change after 'Brady gate', when it was proven beyond any reasonable doubt that a certain SPA Brady RC had goten a haircut and gone from a BGS 8.5 to a BGS 9.5 (or BGS 10, I can't remember). With more and more people saving scans of cards, and with more cards being serial #'ed, it suddenly became much easier to tell when a high profile card had an edge shaved and got a grade bump. BGS's response to this, then, was to adopt a grading standard that was more in line with what PSA and SGC have used.
<< <i>
<< <i>True.. I wouldn't touch any opc in BGS/BVG holders unless the rought cut was present or I knew who submitted the said card well and knew the history ect..
But to think SGC and PSA is perfect and BGS is garbage for cards like a 86 jordan or jeter rc's?? I don't know..
I've seen within the past month 1 very sharp Jordan rc get kicked back by BGS for a shaved edge and it now sits in a SGC 9 holder.. so who got it right? >>
dizzle:
I will not suggest that PSA and SGC are perfect. We all know that such a statement would be naive and completely without merit. However, the preponderence of questionable HIGH END, HIGH PROFILE material in BGS/BVG holders is, in my opinion, suspect.
Are there cards that Beckett has rejected that end up in PSA and SGC holders? Certainly. But I would suggest that there are more PSA and SGC rejections in BGS holders than there are the other way around. >>
It's all good and I agree on the opc... but SGC or PSA is no better and spotting trim jobs on 1980's - present IMO.. since I have seen a fair share of experiments run on all 3... hearing is one thing but seeing proof is a whole different story.. I tend to believe what my eyes see.
Edit to add: Before anybody takes this as "PSA bashing" Let me just say it's not..I just tell things how I see it no matter if it may pi$$ some off or not.. As a matter of fact you can check my ebay listings it's nothing but PSA cards.. Hi Fandango
<< <i>It's all good and I agree on the opc... but SGC or PSA is no better and spotting trim jobs on 1980's - present IMO.. since I have seen a fair share of experiments run on all 3... hearing is one thing but seeing proof is a whole different story.. I tend to believe what my eyes see. >>
Hey, if one knows what the graders look for, oft times it can be open season for getting things through. I do not disagree that alterations get slabbed. I would contend that some of the modern cuts are the hardest to detect alterations to. The modern machine techniques do not leave traditional characteristics that one finds on vintage or even cards as recent as the late 1980's.
ebay link
<< <i>OP wondered if buyer would follow thru on payment. Buyer is a whale >>
I hate to come off as judging this person, but I found this line from the "me" page funny:
"I've been an eBay user since November 1998. I'm a buyer of all sorts of random items, but I like to check for the latest CGC-graded comics, Sarah Michelle Gellar photos, high end Greg Maddux and Roger Clemens cards, and Radiohead items. Maybe I'll see your auction listing sometime soon."
<< <i>OP wondered if buyer would follow thru on payment. Buyer is a whale >>
Hmmmmm...interesting side story
his e-bay store states his name as Minyoung Sohn
There is a Minyoung Sohn who was Executive VP of Janus? managing an investment portfolio of over $6 Billion. Left suddenly with scandal going all the way to the top?
<< <i>
<< <i>OP wondered if buyer would follow thru on payment. Buyer is a whale >>
Hmmmmm...interesting side story
his e-bay store states his name as Minyoung Sohn
There is a Minyoung Sohn who was Executive VP of Janus? managing an investment portfolio of over $6 Billion. Left suddenly with scandal going all the way to the top? >>
So, I'm guessing I may be part owner since some of the funds siphoned from my Janus fund probably were used in the procurement of some of the "whale's" purchases.
Interesting!
<< <i>when it was proven beyond any reasonable doubt that a certain SPA Brady RC had goten a haircut and gone from a BGS 8.5 to a BGS 9.5 (or BGS 10, I can't remember). >>
If anyone has the "before" and "after" images saved, could you please post them? I'd love to see them. Thanks.
/s/ JackWESQ
Jeff your card is sweet.
If I were the buyer or had that kind of scratch to toss around, I would purchase 10 PSA 9's and crack and resubmit them all on one sub that I personally delivered to Newport Beach. I think there is a shot at a 10 by going that route and if your into gambling, which this buyer is surely into by the look of that card, in that slab I believe your odds and the payoff are significantly better. Worst case scenario a couple of cards do not grade as high, this particular card may not grade or be given 8 - 8.5 which would be a pure disaster.
Need some 2007 A&G Regular Back Mini's PM if you have any and I will send my needs list.
I also recall some "smaller" serial numbered cards that were sold that showed up in PSA 10 holders that had been "larger" in PSA 8, 9 and BGS 9 holders previously.
I'm sure if I went through my archives, I could come up with some SGC examples as well.
It's not a perfect world. It never will be...
they would come back over and over in higher graded holders.
I think he was a Vikings fan (that was his icon anyway)
Steve
not sure why you think they are getting better....just because they bribed someone to put a T206 Wagner card in their holder doesnt mean the righted the ship...
ps...i KNEW DIZZLE would be in this thread!
The one thing that PSA does better than BGS is that they will not grade sheet cut cards, unlike BGS/BVG. I will give PSA the upper hand on that one.
P.S. I have to disclose I am NOT a big fan of Beckett, but I have to be fair and honest when it's due.