Did This 1981 Topps Joe Montana PSA 10 Sell Lower Due To An "Odd" Flip?

JackWESQ

Just ended today was an auction for a 1981 Topps Joe Montana PSA 10 S/N 31603269 that ended at $3,151.00. (See pic below.) It's a nice looking card and I see no issue with it. A few days ago, another 1981 Topps Joe Montana PSA 10 S/N 05038624 did not meet the reserve at $2,000.00. (See pic below.)

I wonder why the second Montana received such a low bid? I think maybe it might be attributable to the flip. I can't pinpoint it, but there appears to be something "odd" about the flip. What do you think?

/s/ JackWESQ

P.S. Also, note the seller of the second "odd" looking Montana has a 1986 Topps Jerry Rice PSA 10 S/N 09033032 that has a similarly odd looking flip.

brianwintersfan

Older flip or fake?? The second Montana has a few frosty spots along the border edges, but I have also seen that in cards I have gotten back directly from PSA. Not sure.

CoinRuckus

The spacing of the "#216" in position over the "Gem MT 10" as well as the smaller barcode look very wrong to me on the Montana. The Rice has similar problems with the flip. I don't know if it's a fake or not, I just noticed the difference that made it look off to me. I know PSA has had a couple different flips/fonts, but don't know if the spacing ever varied or size of the barcode.

CoinRuckus

Something just jumped out at me. I think they are photoshopped and the cert #'s might have been pieced together from chopped up scans. Doesn't the 2 zero's look tilted too far to the right, and the five look tilted to the left? I see the same thing with some numbers in the Rice.

MeteoriteGuy

<< <i>Something just jumped out at me. I think they are photoshopped and the cert #'s might have been pieced together from chopped up scans. Doesn't the 2 zero's look tilted too far to the right, and the five look tilted to the left? I see the same thing with some numbers in the Rice. >>




I agree. Perhaps it is easiest to see with the "5" in Montana.

ElToroLoco

No, it looks like all of the auctions could have feedback issues. Also, it only takes two bidders to get it really high, timing is everything here.

SportsCardCollector

To me, the Montana seems a hair too thin. Maybe trimmed?

And are those really Gem 10 corners on the Rice?

I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.

jmoran19

The holder on the 2nd montana has more frosting than a birthday cake

Jeff85fan

Something with both the Rice and Montana look a bit off, it's hard to place but they just don't look right. Also, why would someone who is listing cards of this caliber be taking photos and not scanning them?

Littletweed

Older flips, cards are good, bad grades. The Montana, would that get a 10 now, heck no! Looks like a 9 or 8.5 because of the printing not being perfect. The Rice is an 8.5 or 9 as well, the centering sucks.

bsfastball

I dont think the fonts match between the "jerry rice" and the "gem mt" portions on the flip. I've had old flips like these before - but something looks off about these cards

Stingray

That is a good flip IMO. I have seen several flips like that, yes they are older ones, that have the words like that and sometimes they are not lined up at all. This flip with the rounded bordering on the the red outline part has had many different ways that the font seems to be lined up inside on the white part.