Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

The Jordan Star #101 RC - So Awesome - So Slept On - AKA The Star Basketball Thread

There was a fun discussion we had a few weeks back about the most undervalued or surprisingly affordable cards and sports stars. From specific cards like the Bird/Magic RC to players like Yogi Berra and Stan Musial, it was enlightening to learn of awesome cards and players who don't command what one would think, based on their rarity/toughness and achievements, respectively.

One card I have been looking at recently that has really blown me away is the 1984-85 Star Jordan #101.

I suppose that I, like many collectors, had heard whispered concerns about Star cards being too tough to grade-- because PSA no longer grades them. Yet the more educated I became on the topic, the more I realized that this is not the case at all. In fact what I learned made me feel that this Star Jordan RC gets nowhere close to its due props in the hobby. True, it commands solid coin whenever offered, but given Jordan's towering stature in the collectibles world, that this is his first licensed card, and how rare it is relative to the Fleer, I believe it should sell for way, way more.

First off, I want to be upfront: I have no axe to grind here or ulterior motive. I am a writer and private collector and own both cards, and rarely sell anything. My interest is only in shining a light on a card I feel is tragically undervalued, primarily due to erroneous information.

That said, what I first noticed about this card was its total pop as compared to the Fleer RC:

Fleer RC: 13,000+ in PSA slabs + 6360 in BGS slabs = @ 20,000 slabbed
Star RC: 242 in BGS slabs

That is a staggering comparison, and no matter how we interpret and parse it speaks to overall rarity.

What I next noticed was how often OC the card is, and how tough it is to find an example with eye appeal, given its low pop in any state.

I then began to tackle just why PSA no longer grades this card, and why BGS does. The fact is that these cards can be authenticated, with the proper training. Having made past mistakes is no reason for a company to simply abandon an entire issue-- especially one that is important to the hobby and card history and enthusiasts. Rather, the right thing to do would be to acquire the knowledge and arm its graders to get it right from here on out. Running from past mistakes is never the way to go; instead, learn from them and get better. I think every rational person can agree with that statement.

I thought these two articles were a fantastic read as well, for those interested:

http://www.jordancards.com/blog/12-02-25_84-85-star-101-xrc-or-true-michael-jordan-rookie-card.php

Jordan Star RC Discussion

http://www.jordancards.com/blog/10-08-12_the-real-star-co-cards-story-interview-with-steve-taft.php

Article #2

Anyways, I just think that it is time to show this card some major and deserved love-- from its highly debatable (and entirely arbitrary/subjective) designation as an XRC to the way PSA does not grade it to the way its sales are not tracked on VCP, this card has had everything stacked against it... and yet it still manages to be highly desired and sell for a good amount, whenever one is offered. Imagine if a real light was shined on it and if PSA began to grade it as well as BGS. Though perhaps there wouldn't even be many to grade?

I suppose that whatever can be said for this card can be said for all the Star Co. RCs of those NBA greats from the 80's. No doubt collectors who are heavily into BGS already are onto these cards, but as someone whose collection is 99%+ PSA (Postwar through 1970's baseball), I was surprised to learn all this about this awesome card. IMO it is the true RC of one of the most famous athletes to ever perform.

And none of this is to take away anything from the 86 Fleer. I love that card. But this #101 goes right up there with the Mantle RC, Berra RC, and Bird/Magic RC in my list of undervalued greats.
«13456

Comments

  • mikeschmidtmikeschmidt Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭
    I disagree with your conclusion.

    So long as the majority of collectors believe that there are counterfeits that are hard to detect, they will be unwilling to pony up huge amounts of money for this card. That PSA and SGC do not grade this card helps continue the perception that the counterfeits are well made and hard to detect.

    Additionally, value is a combination of supply and demand. The reality is that the 1986 Fleer set is one of the most widely collected basketball sets ever, even moreso than the 1961 Fleer set. In this regard, the Jordan RC reigns supreme as the key card to a fantastically popular set.

    I'm glad that you own and love your Star Jordan RC. I personally do not see a step change over the next decade or two that will cause there to be a huge uptick in valuation on that card vis a vis the Fleer.

    Happy Collecting
    I am actively buying MIKE SCHMIDT gem mint baseball cards. Also looking for any 19th century cabinets of Philadephia Nationals. Please PM with additional details.
  • sportscardtheorysportscardtheory Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭
    Nice write-up. People always love a player's first licensed card. And seeing that Jordan is the most popular basketball player in the history of the sport, you could be right about some of this stuff. It's not there yet, but who knows what the future holds. If PSA and SGC do decide to grade them someday, then it will certainly create higher demand.

    There are many popular cards that have been "reprinted" that PSA still grades. The 1989 Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr. comes to mind. It seems like they are holding the Star Jordan RC card back and should be more proactive in figuring out how to grade it.
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    Schmidt,

    I totally agree: "That PSA and SGC do not grade this card helps continue the perception that the counterfeits are well made and hard to detect."

    This is the precise problem that we educated collectors can correct together. The perception is false; we can get the truth to light by discussing it with more and more collectors-- and then ideally PSA would follow. I believe that we would THEN see a run on this card, and in turn perhaps the other Star greats from the 80's.

    Interesting side note with respect to price and demand/supply: at each grade level, it's interesting to note that the Star #101 does sell for higher prices than the 86F. For example a BGS 9 Star sells for higher than a PSA or BGS 9 Fleer and a BGS 6.5 Star sold for $1200, which outpaces a Fleer RC in the same grade.

    Again I am a huge fan of both cards, and the purpose of this discussion is not to "unseat" the Fleer RC, which is no doubt the most popular card in a fantastically popular set. All the fanfare there is well deserved. Nor do I intend to compare them in a mutually exclusive way.

    Rather, I believe that the #101 RC can begin to receive greater appreciation and status than it currently has, through a closer look at its rarity and at the false perception that continues. Companies make decisions and then would often times rather stick with that decision, falling victim to inertia, rather than get educated and change course. Perhaps they view changing course as an admission of some past mistake, but that's silly IMO. That inertia can definitely be corrected through discussion and knowledge and perhaps then PSA will join BGS in grading the card.



    Also, seeing that you are a Schmidt fan-- I was always curious about that Puerto Rican league card, or is it a sticker? Where does that fall in the pantheon of Schmidt cards? It seems incredibly rare and I don't know any collectors who are very familiar with it. Thanks.
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think there is definitely some logic to your argument and I think for the most part you are right.

    The problem is PSA dominates third party grading at this point and my understanding is they have no intention of starting to grade this card.

    With the PSA guarantee and this card being a very expensive card they put themselves at great risk and if the stated low supply is true the potential reward on their behalf is quite low as they will not be able to grade a large number like the Fleer.

    I think there will always be interest in a card like this and the BGS examples bring strong prices but if the two other third party grading companies do not join the fray this card will be range bound is my belief.

    Clearly if PSA started grading these this set has the potential to explode but there is great risk that many sitting in BGS holders are fake. This statement is not a knock against BGS as clearly many have brought examples to this board of cards that are indeed counterfeits that PSA has graded.

    I think it is fair to say that a company like PSA is reluctant in many cases to cross cards to diminish their competition and clearly your chances are greater of a cross outside of another third party graders holder but the risks in many cases are quite high and not worth the effort.

    This scenario makes it all the more risky to buy a high end BGS example if one would prefer their collection be in PSA slabs.

    If there was a way to know for certain that one of these was indeed a true example from the original printing there would certainly be greater interest but if both PSA and SGC contend there is not then this will continue to hold back it's value.

    I personally am a fan of this card and would certainly be a buyer of one if I knew for sure it was real.

    For the time being I will stick with my mint counterfeit example. image






    image
  • sportscardtheorysportscardtheory Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭
    So let's have the discussion. How can you spot the counterfeits/reprints from the originals?
  • Yes I would also like to know the ways to spot the fake. I have heard the "Cut off knuckle" spot and that is about it.
  • shagrotn77shagrotn77 Posts: 5,562 ✭✭✭✭
    I absolutely love the Jordan Star rookie, but while I do see it as underappreciated, I don't think it's undervalued. High-grade copies sell in the $2K range and above.
    "My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    I agree the prices it does fetch are nothing to sneeze at.

    From what I have learned in a couple months of research on the matter, some politics are at play regarding PSA's decision to not grade the card.

    The salient point that I find most compelling is this: BGS is also a solid company and has a good piece of the modern market. They grade the card. Clearly they would not do so if they felt it would be deleterious to their brand down the line.

    The point made above about there not being enough profit in it for PSA is very strong-- also they would need to acquire the grading knowledge from experts like Taft, and that might take effort that's not worth the return from a business standpoint. But I think in terms of what's good for the hobby and purely just to the card, they should grade it.

    Bottom line IMO: if it can be graded (and BGS shows it can), then simply have your staff trained for it and grade it. I think PSA's not grading it has more to do with decision making inertia than an active desire to do what is right based on knowledge that's out there. The interview with Taft in the second link I provided above really bears this out quite well, I think.

    It's definitely an important card and it is healthy for hobby enthusiasts to question-- and try to get to the real heart of-- why PSA can't just step up with the knowledge now available. Just because an opinion/course/decision was rendered in the past does not mean it must hold forever. Society at large is full of apt analogies to this case-- regimes can correct a course that seemed right in a previous time; verdicts get overturned on new evidence, etc.
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Jordan




    I have read that you can tell a real one from a fake one from the hand of the defender. The PSA graded example looks perhaps slightly different but not much.


    Can anyone reading this point out if the PSA graded example is real and why?



  • << <i>I absolutely love the Jordan Star rookie, but while I do see it as underappreciated, I don't think it's undervalued. High-grade copies sell in the $2K range and above. >>



    A BGS 9 sold for $13K last week on ebay. Given the limitied quantities of the card, if it were say graded by PSA and added to registries I would expect at least a small bump in price from that alone.
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Relisted so no sale



    BGS 9 Jordan


    This one is listed for $7,999 and not moving.


  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    GAI 9



    This one looks very similar to my $8 counterfeit.
  • vladguerrerovladguerrero Posts: 4,077 ✭✭✭


    << <i>I absolutely love the Jordan Star rookie, but while I do see it as underappreciated, I don't think it's undervalued. High-grade copies sell in the $2K range and above. >>



    +1

    I would just add to the points already made that I classify this card equal to a Mothers Cookies or Traded Set card that was not 'really' pack pulled, in addition Star Co. cards are generally considered crap.
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    Well "generally" would depend on whom was asked; the majority of the basketball collectors I know think the 80's era Star RCs have great flavor. That aspect is very much a personal taste thing.

    As to the technical part of how they are authenticated, I'd have to reach out to one of the known experts in that field and perhaps they'd write something up for the board members here, at least to have as a reference resource for anyone interested down the line, but these excerpts from the Taft interview may help:

    JordanCards.com: It is commonly reported that the 1984-85 Star Co set was reprinted by Star Co in the early 90's. Is this true and if not which sets were reprinted, if any?

    Steve Taft: No, this is NOT true! Now that we know about the 1997 Shop at Home scandal, I think if the owner of Star could have made exact duplicates of his cards, he might have given it a try. Problem is, I don't think it's possible to match the cutting characteristics of the original cards, plus, the original printers were no longer in business.

    Star did not print their own cards, the work was contracted. So, the original equipment is no longer available. The paper stock could probably be duplicated, but, I just don't see how they could have cut the cards the same.

    Steve Taft: Where this is important to the hobby, and, what is almost always confused, is that Star Co. and their printer did not re-print their original cards. They made new cards (in 1997), but, back-dated these cards to 1985 and 1986. A couple examples are a 1986 Lite All Stars and a 1986 Crunch N Munch. These sets have different color borders and a different date than the original sets. Many of the cards from this 1997 counterfeit run used the same photos from original Star Co. cards, but, the set names and/or dates were different. Border colors were also different. The cutting patterns were another easy thing to spot.

    An easy way to work thru this is to use the Beckett Annual Price Guide. If the set is not in the Annual Beckett, specifically by year and name, it's not an original.

    JordanCards.com: Without giving away any trade secrets what are some basic techniques that collectors can use when identifying authentic 1984-85 Star Co cards?

    Steve Taft: I think you want to know about the tricks of the 1985-86 Star Co. issue, card #'s 95-172.The original issue cards tend to have front border color bleed to the back edge(s).The 2nd batch, that I consider counterfeit, even though it was printed at the original printer, where the time of printing is in question, among other things, does not bleed onto the back edges. The original batch tends to have flatter colors and cards tend to be a fraction larger. The 2nd batch tends to be brighter in color, have more gloss, and, tends to be a fraction smaller. When those factors are difficult to figure out, you go to the layering of the film negatives. Border frames around the picture will vary, but, that's a card by card difference, not something that I can spell out here. Of note, GAI and BGS grader's pick up on these differences very quickly. Once they've got these mastered, the rest is very easy...


    ***Note that the perception in some corners of the hobby, perpetuated by PSA not grading the card, is false: the cards that were "reprinted" and are still detectable were 85-86 series, NOT 84-85. This is a misconception that many collectors, myself included, held. There are fakes of both the Fleer and Star and both can now be spotted by the experts, as BGS has chosen to bet their brand on it. Although there are a very small amount of them compared to the Fleer, it is a high dollar and high profile card, so getting embarrassed by it would be a major screw up by BGS. Hence if they weren't confident in grading them I'm sure they wouldn't climb out on that limb and take the risk.
  • I remember when they came out and getting an ad in the mail selling team sets. I think they were $5 or somewhere around there.
  • markmacmarkmac Posts: 412 ✭✭✭
    Growing up in NC in the 70's and 80's, I tried to get my hands on any MJ cards. I was lucky enough to buy the Gatorade set and Miller Lite All-Star set for $2.00 per bag. I never had a chance to buy any of the others because I never saw them to buy. As a collector, I got the 1986 Fleer card first and the Star Co. card a few years later. The Star Co. card was always the holy grail of Jordan cards in my eyes. I waited many years to buy one and I made sure it was a GAI graded example. SCD and GAI used to be the best two companies to grade these. I have emailed Steve Taft a few times about this card and I knew I had to get an example. I would much rather have the Star card. I look at it more and treasure it more than the 1986 Fleer. I know many fellow collectors who have the 1986 Fleer but not many have all 3 of the 1984 Star Co. cards.
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    Mark,

    What you just wrote sounds like every collector I personally know. They have and love their Fleer, but the Star is special to them. I keep mine side by side and I have to admit it's true: when I take them out of the display I reach for the Star first. It has that mystique from having seen it, but not having seen it nearly as much in hand as the other.

    One scenario I can see playing out over the next several years is this: as new basketball or MJ collectors enter the hobby, they will likely be younger and into modern. They will likely be into BGS, since it skews modern. They will thus have loyalty and trust with that brand and be comfortable going after the card. Whereas guys like me have been primarily baseball and PSA, and then there is a hump to get over when your brand doesn't grade something. Of course some research is all it took to see that the brand I choose more often is not infallible, as so many of us know, lol. But it's all good.
  • scooter729scooter729 Posts: 1,730 ✭✭✭
    I bought the full Star set back in '84 as an 11 year old, and still have it. I just wish I kept them in a bit better condition at the time and didn't end up with the corner nicks on most cards from having them tossed in a bureau drawer!



    image
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    That still looks like a pretty sweet card. And nothing beats having your OG one from childhood!
  • eagles33eagles33 Posts: 2,676 ✭✭✭
    Great write up. I like the star cards much better than the 86 fleer. After doing a little reading I think there are quite a few misconceptions out there about the counterfeiting. The base cards were never reproduced from the original templates. Some subsets were produced on the 90s for A shopping network and being sold as cards produced on the 80s. From what can tell this issue was not with the base sets. There are definitely fakes of the 84 101 Jordan... But those fakes are no different or more sophisticated than the counterfits of other expensive cards like the 86 fleer or 79 opc Gretzky. I really don't get why psa won't grade them since they grade other cards that are known to be counterfeited. I don't really know how undervalued these star cards are though. Graded Jordan's seem to sell really well. I have picked up the hof xrc but haven't ponied up for a Jordan yet. Hopefully psa doesn't change their policy on grading them until after I buy mine. The star cards have a ton of upside IMO. It's kne of the few sets that can think of that is licensed, short printed, loaded with hof rookies and has a potential catalyst to significantly increas demand.
    Scans of most of my Misc rookies can be found <a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://forums.collectors.com/m...y&keyword1=Non%20major">here
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    Couldn't agree more and well said. That's the thing: it's not as if the few Jordan Star RC fakes that are out there were made by some super diabolocal genius who makes the most perfect fakes ever-- and only of that one card. It's really silly when one does the homework and looks past the mere fact that PSA decided not to grade them because they lacked the expertise in the issue and decided it wasn't worth the time to acquire that knowledge. I can only hope one day they come around, but really as long as BGS is stepping up and doing the right thing, the card will still be desired and sell for pretty respectable prices.

    There are only about 200 in BGS slabs (20,000 of the Fleer in PSA + BGS), so the few who have them AND are willing to sell seen to put them on BIN and negotiate, which serves to keep the prices stable. But as you say, if PSA ever does step up then look out-- though as I said I do wonder how many out there are left to be graded?
  • sportscardtheorysportscardtheory Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Couldn't agree more and well said. That's the thing: it's not as if the few Jordan Star RC fakes that are out there were made by some super diabolocal genius who makes the most perfect fakes ever-- and only of that one card. It's really silly when one does the homework and looks past the mere fact that PSA decided not to grade them because they lacked the expertise in the issue and decided it wasn't worth the time to acquire that knowledge. I can only hope one day they come around, but really as long as BGS is stepping up and doing the right thing, the card will still be desired and sell for pretty respectable prices.

    There are only about 200 in BGS slabs (20,000 of the Fleer in PSA + BGS), so the few who have them AND are willing to sell seen to put them on BIN and negotiate, which serves to keep the prices stable. But as you say, if PSA ever does step up then look out-- though as I said I do wonder how many out there are left to be graded? >>



    PSA would probably get all the BGS graded ones and that 200 number would be false. lol
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    Probably. I'd likely cross mine out of preference for conformity of slabs in display cases. No doubt pop numbers across the board are full of phantom cards from crackouts and crossovers too.
  • I was a big star collector and fan of the cards from about 1992-96 or 97.

    I had many of the key cards...84 Star Bird (supposedly, 800 made? A very low number). The 85 Olajuwon, 85 Gatorade and Last 11 Roy bags (with Jordan). 86 Ewing bag (paid $500 cash for, lol). 86 Barkley and Olajuwon. The 86 Magic is gorgeous, from the base set.

    -To take a flip side, think about all the cards PSA does grade. That's kind of a sad indictment on Star. They grade many sets with a much smaller collector base than Star. The fact that they've stayed away for 10 or 12 years, that's not very good.

    In another world, the XRC in high grade in the bag would be $50 or $75 k. Much higher than a Chamberlain rookie PSA 10 or Jordan 86 Fleer 10. Comparable to a PSA 10 Gretzky rookie.

    Maybe Jordans inserts from the 90's will get so expensive (plus his 86 Fleer), it'll bring up the Star card almost by default. The other Jordans from the base set also seem cheap...the ROY blue bordered one, and the Olympic card.
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    That is precisely what is sad and what we can collectively correct: interpreting PSA's not grading these as an indictment against the cards. How we choose to interpret PSA not grading them is our choice; let it be a choice that is tempered by the knowledge that is out there for us to obtain.

    It seems on the surface very logical, very tempting to say: "Well PSA doesn't grade them, so something must be wrong with the cards." But we must be wary of that logic being potentially specious; it is just as likely that PSA is making their choice based on other motives, and in fact there is nothing wrong with Star cards as compared to any other.

    In truth they CAN be authenticated-- so certain is their rival that they essentially bet their brand on it. When we choose to interpret PSA's decision as an indictment against the cards, we are ignoring the possibility that PSA's decision is based on politics, or a panic reaction to a mistake made years ago, or current inertia/stubbornness to change that decision that may have been right when it was made, but is silly now given what can be done and the knowledge that currently is available.

    I believe what happened is that PSA did not have the expertise in these cards; they then either got embarrassed by grading a few bad ones, or perhaps just felt unsure based on the expertise level their graders had at that time-- they then had a panic reaction and stopped grading them. Yet today it is possible to obtain the knowledge and expertise and do a good job with them.

    The alternative doesn't smell right to me: that PSA chooses not to grade these cards because they have such supremely higher standards than a rival company in BGS, and that the fakes that are out there are just super-fakes that are somehow miraculously better than the fakes of any other cards out there.

    Edit to add:

    Interpreting PSA's decision to not grade Star cards as proof there is something bad about Star cards seems extra illogical when we view it through the prism of BGS's decision to grade the cards.

    What I mean is this: think of it from BGS's standpoint...

    You know your rival doesn't grade them. That should make you extra wary of them... And yet still you do your homework, see through the rumors to the reality, and decide to go ahead and grade them.

    That BGS chooses to stake their rep on grading these AFTER PSA has stayed away from them means that BGS must be extra certain and confident. This makes PSA's choice seem like a dated panic reaction to not having had all the knowledge when they made their decision.
  • Matty,

    There's been a cloud over the cards for a long time. I remember selling my Ewing rookie bag for $50, maybe in 1998 or 99, a low point for Star cards.

    The perception of the cards is quite a problem. I remember back in the hot days of 1992-96/97, the 85 Gatorade Barkley for example was thought of as a short print. I think it peaked at $500 book value in Beckett? It was at a crazy number.

    Granted Barkley's career was pretty hot and peaking. The suns got to the Finals in 93. Another collection of cards that were very hot...the 86 Best of the Best set (with Jordan) and Best of the New. Those were way off the charts. I think Best of the Best peaked at $1,500? Best of the New? $2,400. Something crazy.

    The problem is, someone comes back to the collecting world in 2005-2012, what do they see? Some have retained their value. Some have plummeted. That's why the XRC rookie is kind of in the middle. It hasn't plummeted, but it hasn't shot up.

    There were also new cards that were created. Like, I think 86 Crunch n Munch. With the Jordan. The only legitimate set in the 80's was 85. A lot of the new cards/counterfeits were capitalizing on Jordans fame in the mid to late 90's. I think his XRC rookie was also printed with a white border? It may have been black. That's something you don't want to see if you have an original.

    I think prices got up so high, a lot of people got scared. I think the XRC rookie peaked at $3,000 or $4,500. A lot of money in 1996. Then Jordans retirement and the NBA has sunk since then.....reasons why the card has softened.
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    BGS hasn't really staked their reputation at all. If they say they are real they are as the other two major third party grading companies won't even examine the card and therefore it would just be speculation on the card holders part that the card is indeed a counterfeit.

    It is possible that they have gotten good and grading them and I certainly don't dispute that but I would bet they have graded a few fakes before that now sit in their slabs.

    As I said before this is a business decision and when you don't know the risk in many cases you don't take them.

    Let's just suppose there are 1,000 Jordan's in circulation and PSA grades each once. If PSA charges on average $20 per card they generate $20,000 in revenue. Currently Collectors Universe has a profit margin of 13.96% so on average they would make $2,792 from this venture. I realize these numbers are speculation but they serve to prove a point.

    If you get ONE card wrong and PSA has to buy them back you have killed ALL potential profits from grading Star Jordan's. Now clearly if they began grading these cards you would see a great deal of other Star cards graded and perhaps you could make it up with grading fees from those cards but why on earth would you put yourself at so much risk if you don't have to.

    Just imagine if they got one wrong and it graded mint and sold for $10,000. The possibilities are endless of what type of perceived risk there is.

    PSA grades hundreds of thousands of cards a year and if the fact that they are not grading Star cards was hurting their overall business perhaps they would examine the issue further but clearly the market opportunity is not huge and it is not stopping enough people from submitting to them to adjust their policy.

    I understand your opinion that you think they could do a great deal of more research and offer collectors the service and generate additional interest in the cards but I would not hold your breath and base investment decisions on that belief. If you are comfortable with BGS and their ability to properly grade these then just be glad that they have chosen to go that route.

  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    Dpeck I think you're right on about how they evaluate the issue as a business decision. Then there is also the cost of acquiring the knowledge, i.e., the time to train your staff.

    If those hardcore business/profit motives contributed to their not grading the cards, that would be a prime example of other reasons being at play behind the decision, as opposed to the cards themselves. In that very logical scenario you sketched out, we have a business decision (albeit a totally sound one) being all too easily interpreted as an indictment on the cards. It's good to keep in mind when anyone is looking at the TPG landscape regarding these cards.

    In the end you are also right, it's nice that BGS does it for those of us who are into them. There are many collectors who want some MJ in their collection and many of those will want the Star RC in a BGS slab-- its value may be held back to an unknown degree by PSA not grading them but the current reality is a fine and satisfactory one for sure.
  • FrozencaribouFrozencaribou Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭✭✭
    To be assured PSA thinks of volume and risk when assessing which sets to grade, but the overall reputation of any business in relation to their mission, vision, and values plays into this as well. I think PSA should grade these cards, as it runs contrary to their assurance that they are the premier leader in sports card authentication.

    Just think of autograph authentication. You are telling me that PSA can authoritatively authenticate tens of thousands of peoples autographs over each of their entire lifetime, but Star basketball is beyond them?

    It appears that this set is beyond PSA's expertise, and that has long term ramifications for the company as a whole.
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    That is a fantastic point.

    When you are the industry leader, it is very easy to rest on your laurels and fall victim to inertia, letting past decisions and logic become cemented. I bet it hasn't been an active issue for them in a long, long time.

    The fact is it can be done. I think they should get active again-- and by that to say they should dig deep into the topic, do some research, and if they come to the same conclusion that Beckett did, they should trust their expertise to avoid the worst case scenario that Dpeck outlined so well above.

    Really great point, Frozencaribou.
  • Let me chime in on a couple things..... I have talked with Joe Orlando about the basics of how I train and prepare grader's to authenticate Star Co. I would prefer to keep his comments private, but, I will say I don't think he has a policy to never grade Star Co. in the future. In my opinion, it is possible that they will consider grading Star at some point in the future. I don't know if they will, but, I don't see it as a dead issue.

    As to can they learn to authenticate Star Co.? Yes, the vast majority of Star Co. counterfeits are quite easy to detect. When you're dealing with a grading staff with the experience of PSA, people that have strong understanding of paper stock, inks, printing techniques, etc., they learn real fast. That "hobby perception" that the Star Co. counterfeits are exactly the same as the originals is one of the hobby's biggest MISperceptions.

    There are a handful of Star Co. cards that do take a bit of advanced knowledge to authenticate, but, that's the exception, most are quite easy. My training sessions with SCD, GAI, and BGS were never more than one day, with some follow-up questions on individual cards. I'm pretty sure if the grader's from these companies can do it, the PSA staff could, too.....

    In regard to the link for the GAI 9 1st Graded MJ-101, that is a real card. I owned that one a LONG time ago. It has been re-holdered multiple times since I sold it.....

    Also, one of the guy's that was part of the biggest Star Co. counterfeit distribution rings is currently awaiting sentencing on a couple of fraud charges (that will include mandatory prison time). The conviction was hobby related, but, not to the specific card counterfeiting, nonetheless, it appears his partners have stopped the printing press for fear of joining him. With that, I'm hopeful the Star Co. counterfeiting may have ended. I won't name this person, here, since he was not convicted for Star Co. counterfeiting, but, he has been frequently mentioned on these boards for many years in regard to other frauds.

    There's multiple 101 counterfeits, so, there's no single list of how to tell the fakes. In general, the 101 fakes are quite easy to spot. It's more about the fear that somebody will show up one of these days with a fake that actually is good. At this point, quality of '86 Fleer fakes is much better than any of the MJ-101 fakes. The 101 fake that is most common is the wide border version, with the red border significantly wider than the original. The other one I see frequently is a copy of the picture, leaving the card very blurry. Both of these are VERY easy to spot.
  • BPorter26BPorter26 Posts: 3,499 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Matty Thank you!! This has been very educational thread for me, since I got out of basketball cards in the early 90's and now I have fallen victim most recently to get back into collecting basketball cards. I have also been intrigue by the Star cards every since the mid to late 80's and always wanted some in my personal collection. I also believe if PSA gets back into the grading game to grade Star cards then those cards will sky rocket in price and demand. I do wonder why PSA doesn't contact Steve Taft who's an expert on Star cards, He could train the PSA's graders as he does for Beckett. Steve Hart authenticates packs for PSA, so why can't Steve Taft do the same for PSA on the Star cards?

    The 85 Jordan XRC #101 is out of my price range in a high grade 8 or higher, but have always liked the look of the card. In the last few months I did pickup a 85 Barkley XRC as well as a 86 Jordan Best of the Best.

    "EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE WALL" - JACKIE MOON
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    Steve,

    Thanks so much for coming onto these boards and weighing in on this topic.

    As both a future reference for collectors and a means of prevailing against current misconceptions, your post is valuable to the card(s) and in turn to the hobby.

    The MJ-101 is an important card, as are the other early Star issues of NBA greats.

    It is the continued hope of many collectors that PSA will embrace its role as a leading industry expert and one day grade "The Card" and its brethren, making these important cards available to a wider group of enthusiastic collectors.

    It really is great to hear and share all these well-considered viewpoints, and also to see the MJ-101 RC getting props from fellow collectors.

    Matt Cirulnick
  • gregmo32gregmo32 Posts: 2,648 ✭✭✭
    Steve,

    Welcome the boards! I have bought from you many times over the years and am glad to see you weigh in on this topic.

    For those whose collecting hobby does not extend back over twenty years, it is difficult to fathom how scarce, difficult, and desirable the Star basketball cards were in the hobby during the early to mid nineties. It is a shame what has happened to their pedigree as these cards had every factor in their favor for hobby success.

    I do not think it is out of line to speculate that, if not for the fallout from all that has been discussed, the Jordan card in true mint condition would be on par with the 1952 Topps Mantle by this time.
    I am buying and trading for RC's of Wilt Chamberlain, George Mikan, Bill Russell, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, and Bob Cousy!
    Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
  • shagrotn77shagrotn77 Posts: 5,562 ✭✭✭✭
    You know this thread is legit when Steve Taft makes an appearance. Thought I'd share this Star rookie card that I picked up a while back:

    image
    "My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
  • Thanks, Greg, nice Dylan avatar.... Makes me want to put "Blood On The Tracks" in the CD player.....

    As to the PSA 9 Ewing Rookie.... Ahhh, whoops....


  • << <i>It appears that this set is beyond PSA's expertise, and that has long term ramifications for the company as a whole. >>



    I don't see their stock falling because of a now defunct company from the 80's and a quantitive number of cards they refuse to grade.
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    As to the PSA 9 Ewing Rookie.... Ahhh, whoops....



    So I take it you are suggesting this card is a fake. I am not trying to put words in your mouth but the response sounds sarcastic to me and if so this is perhaps why they stopped grading them.

    Care to elaborate?

    Also since you are the expert please share how one would immediately know my card above is indeed a counterfeit. I did buy it for $8 off EBAY so there is no belief on my part it is an original copy but it looks pretty good to me.

    Thanks for chiming in on the thread.
  • I too enjoy these cards and always have ! I purchased , traded and sold many of these cards in the 80's and early 90"s but sold them when they got extremely high in the early 90's. I have recently started to acquire some BGS graded copies recently again. I hope to track down a #101 Jordan again some day and have it graded and slabbed. Here are a few cards I have recently purchased.

    image

    image

    image

    image

    image

    image

    <a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.collectorfocus.com/...tion/svtPONY95/pre-war">Pre war
  • I'm trying to attach an original Ewing so you can see the difference between the two cards, but, it does not seem to be loading to the page. Assuming my scan does not post, is there someone that can put an original Ewing up for comparison?

    If we get a comparison, look at the white frame along the top border and note the difference in how the two black lines "frame" this border area. This is a key difference in the 85-6 series two cards, ie. the variation in the layering of the film negatives.

    Gloss, bleed on the back edge or edges, ink coverage over the STAR '86 logo, size, and ink color matching all come into play in varying degrees. These are important issues when dealing with the 85-6 Star NBA 2nd series, the Jordan 10-Card Set, and, Best of the NEW. These issues are completely irrelevant when looking at 83-4 or 84-5 Star.

    And, yes, this 85-6 Star 2nd series directly led to PSA deciding to stop grading Star. This was year's before Joe Orlando became President of PSA.

    Relating specifically to the Ewing RC, I have never seen an original Ewing with more blue border on the "right side" (as you're looking at it). It is super rare centered, with virtually every original having more blue border showing on the left side (as you're looking at it). Note the PSA Ewing has more border on the right side. And, I have seen a LOT of Ewing RC's over the years.....
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    Here's a nice MJ. Recently acquired. Great seller and very knowledgable about the cards.

    This one compares very favorably to many 9s. I am a huge fan of cards that got toughly assessed on their judgement day. Makes for good value versus overgraded cards!

    image
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    And PONY those scanned cards have crazy flavor. Love those yellow Stocktons and that Nique especially.
  • Star Co. basketball cards are and will always be shady.

    As was pointed out earlier in this thread, these cards were very difficult to find back in the day. Why are they so abundant now?

    And does it not throw up a huge red flag that the 2 self-appointed so-called "experts" that claim to be able to differentiate between the originals and reprints are the same 2 guys that have the largest inventories of these cards for sale?

    The originals were produced in tiny amounts. Look at how many BGS graded Star Co. Jordan cards are on ebay. Something isn't right.
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I just counted 15 for sale at the moment.

  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    I don't think they are abundant at all. I've seen periods on eBay when there were an "abundance" of 52 Mantles listed. In times of relatively high unemployment, it doesn't shock me that people holding an expensive sportscard may want to test eBay out and see what they could fetch for it-- especially at the start of the season of the sport in question.

    Bottom line, there are only about 200 Jordan Star RCs in BGS slabs. That overall pop is consistent with a card that was hard to obtain upon its initial release.

    To each his own though, and if one is dubious then it's easy to just pass. I concur with others who have said here that the premiere TPG service can and should use available expertise to authenticate the cards, and thus tell the community which examples are shady. That's their job. If autos and expertly altered cards and great artworks can be authenticated, I have to believe the premiere card grading company can do its thing with some basketball cards. Especially when another such company is doing so.

    It also does not strike me as odd that an aficionado of X may also possess X...

    After all, doesn't Steve Hart authenticate packs himself for PSA and also sell them? I believe he has the largest inventory of unopened in the world.

    Lastly, I think we are on stepping out onto very thin logical ice once we begin to cite the number of listings as proof of shadiness. Following this reasoning, at what arbitrary number of listings should alarms go off for collectors? Should it differ for each card? Grading and Authentication companies are ideally supposed to remove this type of specious, reductive reasoning and skepticism-fueled logic jumps on our part by simply detecting the fakes and alterations and slabbing the legit examples for the collectors. Skepticism can be healthy, especially in our hobby, it can wind up protecting us and saving us lots of money, but PSA's not grading the cards directly creates a climate in which skepticism and thin logic can run rampant, possibly to untrue conclusions. This can all be addressed simply and corrected by grading the cards and doing the collectors a great service.

    But as Dpeck said well above, BGS is doing this now and that is satisfactory for those of us interested in the cards-- if not optimum in terms of the cards finding the broadest audience and achieving their maximum value. But as along as those who want to can enjoy the cards, that's what it's all about in the end-- enjoying cards. It's just that more collectors could and would if PSA stepped up and applied their staff and expertise to this issue, even if it would not put tons of dollars in their coffers or see their stock price rise. It would however, be a statement that they can indeed authenticate any and all issues, and as someone said above that is a positive thing for their brand. PSA would be saying: We are the best at grading and authentication, and we can do it with Star Basketball. There is nothing another TPG can do that we cannot.
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    Guys,

    I found this 2009 exchange between a collector named "Fred" and an executive at BGS to be a perfect example of the rampant misconceptions in some quarters regarding the Star Jordan RC and other Star cards...


    COLLECTOR/FRED:

    What a joke. At least PSA was honorable enough to stop when it was discovered that the original plates were used to produce some counterfeits. If the original process plates, blanks, etc were used how is BGS really going to be able to tell? Sure the lower quality counterfeits won’t get through, but I have heard that a counterfeit done on the original plates did get through. There are bound to be more. Unfortunately the 1984 Star card is scarred for life.

    RESPONSE:

    Fred, PSA did not stop grading Star to be “honorable”. They simply did not have the expertise to grade them, and chose to no longer deal with them after they graded some of the counterfeits.

    Allow me to clarify the real story on Star, as many people have fallen prey to the myth that “everything Star was reprinted and it all looks the same.”

    The only standard Star cards reprinted from the original plates were the 1985-86 second series (#’s 95-172). All other counterfeits have simple ways to clearly distinguish them. There were also several sets created by Star in the 1990′s that they backdated to appear old, but they are really fantasy issues, not counterfeits, since there was no original set in the first place (and BGS does not grade those). As far as the 1985-86 #’s 95-172, there are differences in the printing quality, card stock, and cutting techniques used on these, making it apparent whether a card was from the original printing or a later printing. Frankly, the only thing you need is knowledge, and we contracted with the foremost authority on Star basketball for training and ongoing verification.

    Mark Anderson, Director
    Beckett Grading Services

    -------------------------------

    "Fred's" statement is almost identical to the one many of us have heard before from other collectors.

    I admit it was what I used to believe as well.

    In fact some statements in this very thread are paraphrasing what Fred wrote back in 2009.

    But this type of rumor that becomes perception which in turn becomes reality-- fueled by specious and reductive reasoning such as: "Well PSA doesn't grade them, so therefore they MUST be rotten," or, "X-many are for sale, so therefore something is off"-- all this can be dispelled the way any rumor or bad rep is dispelled...through acquiring knowledge. And of course another remedy would be PSA deciding to tackle the issue and get better at it, rather than run from a past mistake or perceived risk-- risk that is only created by lack of knowledge and training.

    I've heard negative rumors about so many things in life, be they rumors about people, political candidates, restaurants, anything. I have found more often than not that when I get to know the subject of the rumors myself and look at it closely, I wind up realizing the rumors were not always entirely accurate, and sometimes were gross exaggerations.

    Edit: sorry for the double post I am experiencing major technical difficulties with my internet right now... Whole chunks of text lost as my window blinks out and internet dies, then comes back on.
  • eagles33eagles33 Posts: 2,676 ✭✭✭
    I don't have scans but these are the star cards I've been able to get so far. The Jordan is the only other one I have on my checklist. Most of these were raw eBay purchases. The Wilkins was a great score. The Stockton came form a Gia sealed bag that I ripped. Not to get completely off topic but does anyone know shy Stockton didn't have a 86 or 87 fleer card? The toughest to find in good condition is the Olajuwon. If you find one centered it is prob fake

    1985-86 Star Patrick Ewing XRC 8
    1983-84 Star Dominique Wilkins XRC 9
    1983-84 Star Isiah Thomas XRC 8
    1983-84 Star Clyde Drexler XRC 7.5
    1984-85 Star Otis Thorpe XRC 9.5 (for my providence college collection)
    1984-85 Star John Stockton XRC 9
    1984-85 Star Charles Barkley XRC 6.5
    1984-85 Star Hakeem Olajuwon XRC 7.5
    Scans of most of my Misc rookies can be found <a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://forums.collectors.com/m...y&keyword1=Non%20major">here
  • What an interesting thread.

    -What are the opinions on the 84 Star Mavericks and Celtics sets? Supposedly 500 maverick sets were produced, 800 Celtics? Do those seem in line with what people see available every day?

    One set that has seemed consistently tough is the 85 Crunch N Munch set. It was rare 20 years ago, it's rare now. It's always been tougher than the Miller Lite, Gatorade or Last 11 ROY bag. I don't think I've ever seen many of those Crunch n Munch bagged sets in any quantity.

    Unfortunately perceptions play a big part in Star card co collecting.

    I wonder how easy or hard it would be to get a straight psa 8 or 9 set of the main sets from 84, 85, and 86. Some of the cards would certainly be tough with the centering and print quality.


  • << <i>Fred, PSA did not stop grading Star to be "honorable". They simply did not have the expertise to grade them, and chose to no longer deal with them after they graded some of the counterfeits.

    Allow me to clarify the real story on Star, as many people have fallen prey to the myth that "everything Star was reprinted and it all looks the same."

    The only standard Star cards reprinted from the original plates were the 1985-86 second series (#'s 95-172). All other counterfeits have simple ways to clearly distinguish them. There were also several sets created by Star in the 1990's that they backdated to appear old, but they are really fantasy issues, not counterfeits, since there was no original set in the first place (and BGS does not grade those). As far as the 1985-86 #'s 95-172, there are differences in the printing quality, card stock, and cutting techniques used on these, making it apparent whether a card was from the original printing or a later printing. Frankly, the only thing you need is knowledge, and we contracted with the foremost authority on Star basketball for training and ongoing verification.

    Mark Anderson, Director
    Beckett Grading Services >>



    "the real story on Star". Yeah, and "the real story on Star" comes directly from Taft and Crosner and nobody else.

    All of the "knowledge" comes directly from Taft and Crosner and nobody else.

    "The only standard Star cards reprinted from the original plates were the 1985-86 second series (#'s 95-172)." And Taft and Crosner would know this how?

    The way I see it: Mark Anderson isn't dispelling a rumor, he's fueling one.
  • gregmo32gregmo32 Posts: 2,648 ✭✭✭
    I would beg to differ that any Star card from the base sets is plentiful now.

    Have you ever tried to find a NM/MT+ copy of one of the HOF RC's?

    And for a RC of possibly the most famous athlete of all time to have less than 300 graded copies is absolutely, incredibly scarce.
    I am buying and trading for RC's of Wilt Chamberlain, George Mikan, Bill Russell, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, and Bob Cousy!
    Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
Sign In or Register to comment.