SGC Pops today - ouch UPDATED WITH SCANS
jrboles
Posts: 566 ✭✭
I made my first grading submissions in over a year - this time taking advantage of the recent SGC special. As normal, results hurt a bit. This is the first time I heard of a power eraser being cause for rejection and the Posedel rejection hurt specifically. Will post scans when they get back because I want to get some insight from the board.
1 1952 Topps 67 ALLIE REYNOLDS Red Back 50
2 1952 Topps 313 BOBBY THOMSON High# 30
3 1952 Topps 330 TURK LOWN High# 20
4 1952 Topps 361 BILL POSEDEL High# 0 - E8
5 1952 Topps 376 FAYE THRONEBERRY High# 60
6 1952 Topps 379 JOE ROSSI High# 40
7 1967 Topps 150 MICKEY MANTLE 40
8 1971 Topps 26 BERT BLYLEVEN ROOKIE 0 - C4
As promised scans are below. The submission was an overall groin kick and I truly think I will take the grades with a grain of salt as advised. I am not looking to sell these in the near future so the fact that some shpootz on the back of Turk's card resulted in a fair grade isn't getting me too down. You probably won't be able to see it, but the Posedel cards does show an erasure in the right light. It's too bad cuz it looks good.
One thing that creases me a bit about SGC is that their online form allows checking a box if you want anything altered to come back slabbed as "Authentic". I checked this box and only found out when I received the cards the form put this as "No". I printed a new submission and learned that - checked or not - the form prints out as "No." SGC Customer Support emailed back saying this is a known bug and I should have written "Yes" over the "No".
That's good to know.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts. And I need a new scanner.
backs:
Turk and Faye
backs
Joe and Mickey
backs
What an erasure qualifer looks like:
And Bert and the back:
1 1952 Topps 67 ALLIE REYNOLDS Red Back 50
2 1952 Topps 313 BOBBY THOMSON High# 30
3 1952 Topps 330 TURK LOWN High# 20
4 1952 Topps 361 BILL POSEDEL High# 0 - E8
5 1952 Topps 376 FAYE THRONEBERRY High# 60
6 1952 Topps 379 JOE ROSSI High# 40
7 1967 Topps 150 MICKEY MANTLE 40
8 1971 Topps 26 BERT BLYLEVEN ROOKIE 0 - C4
As promised scans are below. The submission was an overall groin kick and I truly think I will take the grades with a grain of salt as advised. I am not looking to sell these in the near future so the fact that some shpootz on the back of Turk's card resulted in a fair grade isn't getting me too down. You probably won't be able to see it, but the Posedel cards does show an erasure in the right light. It's too bad cuz it looks good.
One thing that creases me a bit about SGC is that their online form allows checking a box if you want anything altered to come back slabbed as "Authentic". I checked this box and only found out when I received the cards the form put this as "No". I printed a new submission and learned that - checked or not - the form prints out as "No." SGC Customer Support emailed back saying this is a known bug and I should have written "Yes" over the "No".
That's good to know.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts. And I need a new scanner.
backs:
Turk and Faye
backs
Joe and Mickey
backs
What an erasure qualifer looks like:
And Bert and the back:
0
Comments
<< <i> As normal, results hurt a bit. This is the first time I heard of a power eraser being cause for rejection and the Posedel rejection hurt specifically. >>
Huh ?????????????
Neil
<< <i>Nice high numbers! >>
One wasn't graded and he's disappointed with the results on the others and that's your response?
Based on the SGC Rejection codes and Rejection zones, the Posedel was power erased long the left edge-side surface. As soon as they come back, I will post the scans.
<< <i>What does power erase mean? >>
Power-erasing is erasing the colored portion of the card next to the white border. When the erasing is done, the card will appear to be centered. Upon close inspection, with or without magnification, you can see where the erasing has taken place.
<< <i>
<< <i>What does power erase mean? >>
Power-erasing is erasing the colored portion of the card next to the white border. When the erasing is done, the card will appear to be centered. Upon close inspection, with or without magnification, you can see where the erasing has taken place. >>
You learn something new every day....
<< <i>
<< <i>What does power erase mean? >>
Power-erasing is erasing the colored portion of the card next to the white border. When the erasing is done, the card will appear to be centered. Upon close inspection, with or without magnification, you can see where the erasing has taken place. >>
What am I missing? How could that be done to *1952* Topps card? I could see how it could be done with a 1955 or 1956 Topps card, but a 1952?
<< <i>You see a lot more power erasing on older cards (pre 1940) but I would not put it past any white bordered card including 1952 >>
1952 Topps cards have a black line around the picture. If the card is power erased, the black line would have to be drawn back on, no? Or, don't they even bother?
<< <i>
<< <i>Nice high numbers! >>
One wasn't graded and he's disappointed with the results on the others and that's your response? >>
I try to keep positive sorry.
<< <i>Crazy. Power earasing? Does anyone have any pics for examples. >>
Here's a couple of auctions.
link1
link2
<< <i>Would love to see scans when they return. Take your SGC grades with a grain of salt..... >>
Good advice. Scans are now included in the original post
<< <i>
<< <i>What does power erase mean? >>
Power-erasing is erasing the colored portion of the card next to the white border. When the erasing is done, the card will appear to be centered. Upon close inspection, with or without magnification, you can see where the erasing has taken place. >>
I don't think that is what was done with this card, because there is no "color" to erase on these cards. Even if there were, erasing "color" on the left side of this card would make it even MORE O/C.
I think that the white border was just very dirty and someone erased the "crap" off the card, leaving an erasure mark.
Edited to add: BTW JR, those 52s present VERY WELL for the grades!
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
I sure like the Allie card - is it what you expected. I enhanced it a bit - very nice card.
<< <i>
I sure like the Allie card - is it what you expected. I enhanced it a bit - very nice card. >>
Exactly! I threw that in because I thought it could go as high as an 84. While I did not inspect it through a loupe (sp?), it presents really well. When it came back with a 50, I was resigned that it was simply my night in the barrel for this submission. I gotta stack of 50 1952's (non high numbers), 40 1971 Topps, and 20 1984 Fleer Updates I want to get graded this year. But as I have not re-upped my PSA platinum membership in 2 years and have the taste of SGC bile still in my mouth, I doubt 2012 will see too many more submissions on my part.
Thanks for the comments fellas. Makes me feel better about the cards inside the slabs. I will get these ready for the 1952 set we are building.
Your pal
jr
Perhaps there was some foxing or other discoloration on it.
Steve
Why are you surprised at your grades when you admit not inspecting them through a loupe (magnifier)?