<< <i>I can call Steve tomorrow and ask if possible (or Mark can).
I see no reason for PSA to turn down a Topps BB pack that Steve has verified as legit.
Just think, there will never be very many of these packs slabbed. How many full box submissions that have been verified by the recognized expert chosen by PSA will there ever be? >>
If this is possible I would suggest a limit of 1 per person for the first 48 hours to allow maximum participation for what would likely become a rarity.
And I'd be in for 1 pack in that first 48 hour window.
On a different note, I wonder how many desert shield boxes and packs have been accidentally ripped thinking they were just the regular topps series? It seems silly for topps to not have put anything at all on the packs or box to distinguish it?
The Clockwork Angel Collection...brought to you by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Chase TheClockworkAngelCollection
<< <i>You are right he is a businessman, do you think he would be in for taking a $500 hit after our 10% discount? >>
Although he usually gives 10% he does not always with every product. I'm thinking in particular of the 1975 racks he had at the national last summer at $250, no discount. Suggest you talk to him if you can put a name to 36 packs. Steve may well be willing to do a little extra work to make a $5000 box sell. After all, this is his business and he alone knows what is needed for the benefit of BBCE. Wish you guys good luck and it may happen.
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming 'WOW What a Ride!' Mark Frost
Steve is always good to board members on these tips but in this case if the slabbed pack break idea flies we should be happy to pay $139+grading and S&H.
They do not holder the desert shield packs. Its my understanding that there is no way to tell if its just a regular pack or a desert shield pack. If you buy one from bbce, just ask Steve if he can maybe wrap it like the boxes and label it for you. That is of course if you plan on keeping it sealed and not opening it. >>
That would be great if Steve could do something like that.
<< <i>You are right he is a businessman, do you think he would be in for taking a $500 hit after our 10% discount? >>
Although he usually gives 10% he does not always with every product. I'm thinking in particular of the 1975 racks he had at the national last summer at $250, no discount. Suggest you talk to him if you can put a name to 36 packs. Steve may well be willing to do a little extra work to make a $5000 box sell. After all, this is his business and he alone knows what is needed for the benefit of BBCE. Wish you guys good luck and it may happen. >>
Yes, I already know we won't be getting 10% off on the 72BB or the desert shield. He also consigns a lot of stuff and has less room
The Clockwork Angel Collection...brought to you by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Chase TheClockworkAngelCollection
<< <i>Steve has said that PSA will never be able to slab the DS packs. I think we're all barking up the wrong tree on this one. >>
I think this was said because there was no way to differentiate between a regular pack and a ds pack. It's a reach but I think it's worth a shot to at least ask. It makes sense to me that this could happen if Steve sends the purchased authenticated packs from bbce directly to psa. Now wether or not psa will want to deviate from their standard procedure is prob doubtful
<< <i>I'm just shooting from the hip, but something tells me that if PSA would slab the packs, Steve would have slabbed packs for sale. >>
Are we really having this discussion again? smh... >>
I have absolutely no clue what conversation you're referring to so I don't know if it has occurred on the board in the past.
I had a conversation with Steve a week ago in regard to the DS packs. He said PSA would "never" be able to slab them. Perhaps he is able to rig up some tamper-proof packaging on his own for these but I doubt it. As soon as he did some scumbag out there would be faking his wrapping and selling regular 91 Topps packs for hundreds.
ETA: when I spoke to him about it it was under the assumption that Steve would send the packs directly to PSA and it was a no go.
Steve has verified the full box. As long as it is submitted as a full box there should be no issue that the packs are legitimate.
So why should PSA not be willing to grade them? They are the standard size of every other Topps BB pack they grade. They fit in the same holders (no special mold to create). It's all STANDARD PSA processing.
The ONLY difference is that it is not a pack that would be commonly submitted because it is only possible for Steve to verify a full box in its entirety. How is it any different than if someone submitted a rare T206?
If Steve himself sends in such a box that he himself has shrink-wrapped and stickered (and possibly even hand wrote a keyword that he calls and tells Joe that needs to match the box that gets received from Steve himself) then it works. If we have to worry that some dirtbag is going to substitute for what Steve sent or forge such a shipment then how can the cards we send to PSA already be safe?
The real issue may be that PSA hasn't come up with an up charge for a rarer pack!!!
My guess is that it's a liability issue. While Steve has done his due diligence and is comfortable enough to sell the packs the facts of the matter are that it's impossible to know for certain what's inside until you open the pack. The analogy to a rare T206 is confusing to me as you can obviously tell that they're grading a T206, these packs are different in that there's no way to know what's inside. Steve is obviously willing to take on more of a liability risk than PSA.
<< <i>My guess is that it's a liability issue. While Steve has done his due diligence and is comfortable enough to sell the packs the facts of the matter are that it's impossible to know for certain what's inside until you open the pack. The analogy to a rare T206 is confusing to me as you can obviously tell that they're grading a T206, these packs are different in that there's no way to know what's inside. Steve is obviously willing to take on more of a liability risk than PSA. >>
As explained above, the way Steve verifies these boxes is by removing 4 packs at random from different levels and then opening them. He then substitutes 4 loose DS packs he has from his own inventory. With such a process what are the odds that he just HAPPENS to pull out 4 good DS packs unless the whole box is good?
What he ends up with is not a factory box, but it's as close as anyone could get and have near certainty that all 36 packs are DS.
With all due respect to Steve, who has my complete confidence and business, 4 out of 36 is by no means "near certainty."
Hey, if PSA slabbed them I would absolutely be in for at least one pack. But the odds of that happening appear to be slim to none, and I can't blame PSA for their stance on this. It's like slabbing those plain silver foil packs that manufacturers use to send out redemption cards in. There's no way to know what's inside.
I would love the idea of PSA slabbing these packs, but I don't see it happening. If PSA has stated they will not grade DS packs, then that rule is and probably should be applied evenly to any case, even this one. I doubt they will afford any nspecial treatment in other words. I do think that Steve may be able to shrinkwrap the packs with his BBCE sticker on it, but the PSA flip is a whole 'nother can of worms and though he is obviously the authenticator, PSA has their own rules and guidelines for what they will agree to holder.
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.
I wouldn't bother with the 85-85 topps hockey box. I bought one from them and with no exaggeration 90% of the cards were "snowy" which I didn't realize till after I bought it was a common problem with that set. Fortunately for me, Steve was nice enough to make good on the deal but I would never buy that product again. Obviously this is no slight at BBCE.
<< <i>With all due respect to Steve, who has my complete confidence and business, 4 out of 36 is by no means "near certainty."
Hey, if PSA slabbed them I would absolutely be in for at least one pack. But the odds of that happening appear to be slim to none, and I can't blame PSA for their stance on this. It's like slabbing those plain silver foil packs that manufacturers use to send out redemption cards in. There's no way to know what's inside. >>
If there are exactly 4 DS packs in the box the odds of Steve randomly pulling those 4 are just under 1.7 out of 100,000
If there are exactly 5 DS packs in the box the odds of Steve randomly pulling 4 DS packs jumps to just under 8.5 out of 100,000
If we move to 6 packs then the odds become about 2.55 out of 10,000. At 7 packs its just under 6 out of 10,000.
In fact, if half the packs in the box (18) were DS the odds get as high as about 5.2 out of 100.
I stand by what I said earlier. NEAR certainty. It is extremely unlikely that anyone would have enough raw boxes of DS to include enough good packs with the rest being regular packs such that Steve's method wouldn't be highly accurate most of the time. Even splitting a single box into two the odds of getting one of them through is only 1 in 20 and both around 1 in 400. How many of these get presented for verification anyway?
No expert opinion is foolproof but at these odds I'd suggest that even psa examination of raw cards isn't far off this level of accuracy
If the only way to verify whats inside is to open packs, then I don't know what we're even talking about here. Even if Steve opened 35 packs, he still could not say with any certainty that pack 36 was a true DS. He'd have to open it too. This is not a statistics issue....this is a "there is no way for PSA to know whats inside" issue. A pack slabbed by PSA would not hold any additional value to me. I'd prefer to purchase directly from a collector/vet who still has unopened material that was given to him directly. Most of those guys are the same people on the registry list anyway.
There is no way to say with certainty that ANY pack that passes examination by an expert is "for certain" authentic without opening it. The same goes for raw cards. How many times has someone gotten cards back from a submission returned EOT or MINSIZREQ only to resub them and have them slabbed?
The bottom line is that grading is a human process. It is subjective and prone to some level of error. The value of PSA and Steve's opinion is that the amount of error is much lower than most non-experts could achieve. Therefore it is most definitely valid to use statistical methods.
As for my T206 comparison, just because someone submits a real T206 and gets it slabbed does not guarantee for certain that it has not been altered (trimmed, recolored, etc.). There is a very high likelihood that it is legitimate based on the level of expertise of the grader and the methods and tools used, but no one can say for CERTAIN that it is 100% unaltered.
<< <i>If the only way to verify whats inside is to open packs, then I don't know what we're even talking about here. Even if Steve opened 35 packs, he still could not say with any certainty that pack 36 was a true DS. He'd have to open it too. This is not a statistics issue....this is a "there is no way for PSA to know whats inside" issue. A pack slabbed by PSA would not hold any additional value to me. I'd prefer to purchase directly from a collector/vet who still has unopened material that was given to him directly. Most of those guys are the same people on the registry list anyway. >>
If Steve is the person who does the authentication for psa for packs then what is the difference if he is authenticating a 52 topps pack or Ds pack? When buying a psa slabbed pack you essentially just buying the bbce guarantee in better tamper proof slabs than the bbce shrink wrap
No one is questioning whether the packs are factory sealed and unopened. The difference is, if Steve says a 1985 Topps pack is unopened then we know there are 1985 Topps cards inside. That same logic doesn't apply to the 1991 DS packs.
I also suspect that PSA isn't going to start authenticating packs that can't be authenticated unless under a unique set of circumstances that basically ensure their customers can never authenticate a pack unless they have a complete box.
70sTopps, I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I fear it's all a moot point anyway.
I understand your point. If psa cant authenticate a pack themselves why is it relevant if they can tell what the contents are. If they get a 81 topps FB pack in 79 wrappers and Steve authenticates the pack as such... Does psa then try to see through the wrapper to double check if Steve's assessment is true? I just think that if psa relies on Steve's opinion to authenticate a pack its not just the seal. If he has a full box that he has authenticated it should be sufficient for psa. I trust bbce enough to buy the raw pack from them. The only problem is that once the pack leaves bbce if becomes a 10 cent wax pack because there is no way for me to prove its a ds pack. I think this actually a unique opportunity for the client, bbce and psa to all coordinate together to get these in slabs. It's not really worth arguing over this. The best we can do is ask and hope for the best. It's a long shot but I think under the circumstances it's worth a shot
<< <i>No one is questioning whether the packs are factory sealed and unopened. The difference is, if Steve says a 1985 Topps pack is unopened then we know there are 1985 Topps cards inside. That same logic doesn't apply to the 1991 DS packs.
I also suspect that PSA isn't going to start authenticating packs that can't be authenticated unless under a unique set of circumstances that basically ensure their customers can never authenticate a pack unless they have a complete box.
70sTopps, I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I fear it's all a moot point anyway. >>
You do not know for CERTAIN that there are 1985 Topps cards in the pack that was passed by the expert. That is an assumption based on the very low probability that the expert might have been wrong. It is exactly the same thing for ANY pack. The only foolproof way to know is to open it.
So why is it ok to make such an assumption for the 1985 pack but not the 1991 DS pack? Does PSA not employ different tools and techniques for some issues versus others (e.g. Black light test for 1971 Topps BB)? The fundamental question still comes down to how small they can get the risk of error down to.
There is a guy in WV who has built a micro-trimming device that he uses to clean up card edges before he submits them. He claims to have a better than 50% success rate when he submits these cards (he says he only keeps them for his personal collection). I've seen dozens of these cards in slabs.
Between resubs of EOTs and MINSIZREQs that get passed and people like the guy in WV it would seem that a percentage of error in the low single digits is probably inherent in the system. So if a similar level error could be achieved with DS boxes then it's the same thing the way I look at it.
What should matter is whether or not there is a legitimate way to authenticate and grade an item. They certainly already do things differently for certain issues and for high value cards.
I think we have to remember that BBCE which is owned by Steve Hart and PSA are two separate entities. Steve works for PSA and if PSA has ruled that DS packs should not be slabbed I don't think that making special exceptions is necessarily the proper thing to do. I see no problem with Steve shrinkwrapping these packs with his sticker on them, however.
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.
<< <i>I understand your point. If psa cant authenticate a pack themselves why is it relevant if they can tell what the contents are. If they get a 81 topps FB pack in 79 wrappers and Steve authenticates the pack as such... Does psa then try to see through the wrapper to double check if Steve's assessment is true? I just think that if psa relies on Steve's opinion to authenticate a pack its not just the seal. If he has a full box that he has authenticated it should be sufficient for psa. I trust bbce enough to buy the raw pack from them. The only problem is that once the pack leaves bbce if becomes a 10 cent wax pack because there is no way for me to prove its a ds pack. I think this actually a unique opportunity for the client, bbce and psa to all coordinate together to get these in slabs. It's not really worth arguing over this. The best we can do is ask and hope for the best. It's a long shot but I think under the circumstances it's worth a shot >>
+1
That is EXACTLY the point. As I pointed out, if only 50% of the box was legitimate only 5 such boxes out of 100 would get through Steve's method. That's a 95% success rate (of Steve's method, that is)! And if you are a dirtbag scammer are you going to risk breaking up a $5000 box into 2 boxes with only a 5% chance of success of getting either of the resulting boxes through?
Even at 75% of the box being legitimate the odds of getting it by Steve's method are no better than 30%. You would need to have 3 DS boxes + 1 regular and pull nine packs from each of the DS boxes to end up with 4 semi legitimate boxes. Who is their right mind is going to risk $15,000 of good DS boxes with only a 30% chance of getting any 1 of them through Steve's method (or only a 9% chance of getting 2 of them, 2.7% for getting 3 of them and 0.81% chance of getting all 4 boxes through)?
The math is simple and it says the risk/reward just isnt there!
Yeah good question... If Steve gave credit or otherwise reimbursed a dissatisfied customer because of some snow on the cards (whether or not common for the issue in question), then my already high opinion of him goes higher. Now we obviously don't know the whole story, but I'm just hoping he's the one that offered to do so, as a customer requesting such because of snowy cards seems absolutely out of line to me.
Yeah good question... If Steve gave credit or otherwise reimbursed a dissatisfied customer because of some snow on the cards (whether or not common for the issue in question), then my already high opinion of him goes higher. Now we obviously don't know the whole story, but I'm just hoping he's the one that offered to do so, as a customer requesting such because of snowy cards seems absolutely out of line to me. >>
Agreed. Buying vintage wax is a risk to begin with and one who is willing to purchase unopened product should be assuming those risks if he decides to open the packs. It's one thing to return packs that are still unopened, but to ask for a refund after opening the packs (as long as the packs were authentic) is inappropriate, especially if the issue was something as minor as "snow" on the surface. There were a lot of people who bought 72 OPC wax packs from Steve in which several cards in each pack were ruined by gum damage, but I don't recall anyone asking for refunds in those cases.
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.
Perkins, after I opened the box, I asked Steve about the snow problem on the cards and I learned a lot. It was obvious to both of us that there was no way that high a percentage of cards should have been affected. We worked it out. At no point was I as you suggest out of line.
<< <i>Perkins, after I opened the box, I asked Steve about the snow problem on the cards and I learned a lot. It was obvious to both of us that there was no way that high a percentage of cards should have been affected. We worked it out. At no point was I as you suggest out of line. >>
Snow on the surface of cards is not at all uncommon if you are opening packs.
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.
Yeah good question... If Steve gave credit or otherwise reimbursed a dissatisfied customer because of some snow on the cards (whether or not common for the issue in question), then my already high opinion of him goes higher. Now we obviously don't know the whole story, but I'm just hoping he's the one that offered to do so, as a customer requesting such because of snowy cards seems absolutely out of line to me. >>
Agreed. Buying vintage wax is a risk to begin with and one who is willing to purchase unopened product should be assuming those risks if he decides to open the packs. It's one thing to return packs that are still unopened, but to ask for a refund after opening the packs (as long as the packs were authentic) is inappropriate, especially if the issue was something as minor as "snow" on the surface. There were a lot of people who bought 72 OPC wax packs from Steve in which several cards in each pack were ruined by gum damage, but I don't recall anyone asking for refunds in those cases. >>
Agreed. Remarkable if Steve "made good" on that
The Clockwork Angel Collection...brought to you by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Chase TheClockworkAngelCollection
Guys neither one of us won or lost on the exchange. We worked it out and I learned a lot. I never asked for neither did I receive anywhere close to a full refund.
<< <i>Did they put away these boxes for the group rip already? I'm asking because I don't see 1983 Topps Football or 89 Score football on their site? >>
Yes, Steve has pulled all the boxes for the rip for us.
<< <i>Mark, What are your thoughts on adding the 91 DS box to the mix?? It doesn't look like they come up often at all.. >>
Personally, if it were up to me, I would leave intact. To me, that is the beauty of the box. However, I serve the un-opened masses and will follow the majority on the board. I can email Steve to see if we can reserve and what the price would be.
<< <i>Mark, What are your thoughts on adding the 91 DS box to the mix?? It doesn't look like they come up often at all.. >>
Personally, if it were up to me, I would leave intact. To me, that is the beauty of the box. However, I serve the un-opened masses and will follow the majority on the board. I can email Steve to see if we can reserve and what the price would be.
Mark >>
I called Steve today with the idea of approaching PSA about grading full 1991 DS boxes. He said he would approach PSA with the idea given his methodology and the math behind how well it eliminates the possibility of errors and see what they say.
I called Steve today with the idea of approaching PSA about grading full 1991 DS boxes. He said he would approach PSA with the idea given his methodology and the math behind how well it eliminates the possibility of errors and see what they say. >>
I'd be in for a DS pack too in the unlikely even PSA does holder them as such.
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.
I will check with Steve Tuesday to see if he was able to make any progress on getting DS packs graded based on his full-box authentication methodology.
I know Steve was speaking to psa about this on Friday... So there is hope at least. It's really the only way for there to be a secondary market in these. I want 1 and its for my personal collection and don't plan on selling it but its nice to have the option if the time ever comes to sell off the collection
Comments
<< <i>I can call Steve tomorrow and ask if possible (or Mark can).
I see no reason for PSA to turn down a Topps BB pack that
Steve has verified as legit.
Just think, there will never be very many of these packs slabbed.
How many full box submissions that have been verified by the
recognized expert chosen by PSA will there ever be? >>
If this all works out, I am in for two!
eBay Store
Greg Maddux #1 Master SetGreg Maddux #2 Basic Set
<< <i>I'm just shooting from the hip, but something tells me that if PSA would slab the packs, Steve would have slabbed packs for sale. >>
Are we really having this discussion again? smh...
first 48 hours to allow maximum participation for what would
likely become a rarity.
And I'd be in for 1 pack in that first 48 hour window.
Dave
TheClockworkAngelCollection
<< <i>You are right he is a businessman, do you think he would be in for taking a $500 hit after our 10% discount? >>
Although he usually gives 10% he does not always with every product. I'm thinking in particular of the 1975 racks he had at the national last summer at $250, no discount. Suggest you talk to him if you can put a name to 36 packs. Steve may well be willing to do a little extra work to make a $5000 box sell. After all, this is his business and he alone knows what is needed for the benefit of BBCE. Wish you guys good luck and it may happen.
but in this case if the slabbed pack break idea flies we
should be happy to pay $139+grading and S&H.
It would be worth it to get that kind of rarity
Dave
<< <i>
<< <i>Does PSA holder Desert Shield packs? >>
They do not holder the desert shield packs. Its my understanding that there is no way to tell if its just a regular pack or a desert shield pack.
If you buy one from bbce, just ask Steve if he can maybe wrap it like the boxes and label it for you. That is of course if you plan on keeping it sealed and not opening it. >>
That would be great if Steve could do something like that.
Joe
<< <i>
<< <i>You are right he is a businessman, do you think he would be in for taking a $500 hit after our 10% discount? >>
Although he usually gives 10% he does not always with every product. I'm thinking in particular of the 1975 racks he had at the national last summer at $250, no discount. Suggest you talk to him if you can put a name to 36 packs. Steve may well be willing to do a little extra work to make a $5000 box sell. After all, this is his business and he alone knows what is needed for the benefit of BBCE. Wish you guys good luck and it may happen. >>
Yes, I already know we won't be getting 10% off on the 72BB or the desert shield. He also consigns a lot of stuff and has less room
TheClockworkAngelCollection
<< <i>Steve has said that PSA will never be able to slab the DS packs. I think we're all barking up the wrong tree on this one. >>
I think this was said because there was no way to differentiate between a regular pack and a ds pack. It's a reach but I think it's worth a shot to at least ask. It makes sense to me that this could happen if Steve sends the purchased authenticated packs from bbce directly to psa. Now wether or not psa will want to deviate from their standard procedure is prob doubtful
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm just shooting from the hip, but something tells me that if PSA would slab the packs, Steve would have slabbed packs for sale. >>
Are we really having this discussion again? smh... >>
I have absolutely no clue what conversation you're referring to so I don't know if it has occurred on the board in the past.
I had a conversation with Steve a week ago in regard to the DS packs. He said PSA would "never" be able to slab them. Perhaps he is able to rig up some tamper-proof packaging on his own for these but I doubt it. As soon as he did some scumbag out there would be faking his wrapping and selling regular 91 Topps packs for hundreds.
ETA: when I spoke to him about it it was under the assumption that Steve would send the packs directly to PSA and it was a no go.
there should be no issue that the packs are legitimate.
So why should PSA not be willing to grade them? They are the standard
size of every other Topps BB pack they grade. They fit in the same
holders (no special mold to create). It's all STANDARD PSA processing.
The ONLY difference is that it is not a pack that would be commonly
submitted because it is only possible for Steve to verify a full box in its
entirety. How is it any different than if someone submitted a rare T206?
If Steve himself sends in such a box that he himself has shrink-wrapped and
stickered (and possibly even hand wrote a keyword that he calls and tells Joe
that needs to match the box that gets received from Steve himself) then it
works. If we have to worry that some dirtbag is going to substitute for what
Steve sent or forge such a shipment then how can the cards we send to PSA
already be safe?
The real issue may be that PSA hasn't come up with an up charge
for a rarer pack!!!
Dave
<< <i>My guess is that it's a liability issue. While Steve has done his due diligence and is comfortable enough to sell the packs the facts of the matter are that it's impossible to know for certain what's inside until you open the pack. The analogy to a rare T206 is confusing to me as you can obviously tell that they're grading a T206, these packs are different in that there's no way to know what's inside. Steve is obviously willing to take on more of a liability risk than PSA. >>
As explained above, the way Steve verifies these boxes is by removing 4 packs at random from different levels and then opening them. He then substitutes 4 loose DS packs he has from his own inventory. With such a process what are the odds that he just HAPPENS to pull out 4 good DS packs unless the whole box is good?
What he ends up with is not a factory box, but it's as close as anyone could get and have near certainty that all 36 packs are DS.
Dave
Hey, if PSA slabbed them I would absolutely be in for at least one pack. But the odds of that happening appear to be slim to none, and I can't blame PSA for their stance on this. It's like slabbing those plain silver foil packs that manufacturers use to send out redemption cards in. There's no way to know what's inside.
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.
<< <i>With all due respect to Steve, who has my complete confidence and business, 4 out of 36 is by no means "near certainty."
Hey, if PSA slabbed them I would absolutely be in for at least one pack. But the odds of that happening appear to be slim to none, and I can't blame PSA for their stance on this. It's like slabbing those plain silver foil packs that manufacturers use to send out redemption cards in. There's no way to know what's inside. >>
If there are exactly 4 DS packs in the box the odds of Steve randomly pulling those 4 are just under 1.7 out of 100,000
If there are exactly 5 DS packs in the box the odds of Steve randomly pulling 4 DS packs jumps to just under 8.5 out of 100,000
If we move to 6 packs then the odds become about 2.55 out of 10,000. At 7 packs its just under 6 out of 10,000.
In fact, if half the packs in the box (18) were DS the odds get as high as about 5.2 out of 100.
I stand by what I said earlier. NEAR certainty. It is extremely unlikely that anyone would have enough raw boxes of DS to include enough
good packs with the rest being regular packs such that Steve's method wouldn't be highly accurate most of the time. Even splitting a single box into two the odds of getting one of them through is only 1 in 20 and both around 1 in 400. How many of these get presented for verification anyway?
No expert opinion is foolproof but at these odds I'd suggest that even psa examination of raw cards isn't far off this level of accuracy
Dave
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
"for certain" authentic without opening it. The same goes for raw cards. How many times has
someone gotten cards back from a submission returned EOT or MINSIZREQ only to resub them
and have them slabbed?
The bottom line is that grading is a human process. It is subjective and prone to some level of
error. The value of PSA and Steve's opinion is that the amount of error is much lower than most
non-experts could achieve. Therefore it is most definitely valid to use statistical methods.
As for my T206 comparison, just because someone submits a real T206 and gets it slabbed does not
guarantee for certain that it has not been altered (trimmed, recolored, etc.). There is a very high likelihood
that it is legitimate based on the level of expertise of the grader and the methods and tools used, but
no one can say for CERTAIN that it is 100% unaltered.
Dave
<< <i>If the only way to verify whats inside is to open packs, then I don't know what we're even talking about here. Even if Steve opened 35 packs, he still could not say with any certainty that pack 36 was a true DS. He'd have to open it too. This is not a statistics issue....this is a "there is no way for PSA to know whats inside" issue. A pack slabbed by PSA would not hold any additional value to me. I'd prefer to purchase directly from a collector/vet who still has unopened material that was given to him directly. Most of those guys are the same people on the registry list anyway. >>
If Steve is the person who does the authentication for psa for packs then what is the difference if he is authenticating a 52 topps pack or Ds pack? When buying a psa slabbed pack you essentially just buying the bbce guarantee in better tamper proof slabs than the bbce shrink wrap
I also suspect that PSA isn't going to start authenticating packs that can't be authenticated unless under a unique set of circumstances that basically ensure their customers can never authenticate a pack unless they have a complete box.
70sTopps, I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I fear it's all a moot point anyway.
<< <i>No one is questioning whether the packs are factory sealed and unopened. The difference is, if Steve says a 1985 Topps pack is unopened then we know there are 1985 Topps cards inside. That same logic doesn't apply to the 1991 DS packs.
I also suspect that PSA isn't going to start authenticating packs that can't be authenticated unless under a unique set of circumstances that basically ensure their customers can never authenticate a pack unless they have a complete box.
70sTopps, I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I fear it's all a moot point anyway. >>
You do not know for CERTAIN that there are 1985 Topps cards in the pack that was passed by the expert. That is an
assumption based on the very low probability that the expert might have been wrong. It is exactly the same thing
for ANY pack. The only foolproof way to know is to open it.
So why is it ok to make such an assumption for the 1985 pack but not the 1991 DS pack? Does PSA not employ different
tools and techniques for some issues versus others (e.g. Black light test for 1971 Topps BB)? The fundamental question
still comes down to how small they can get the risk of error down to.
There is a guy in WV who has built a micro-trimming device that he uses to clean up card edges before he submits them. He
claims to have a better than 50% success rate when he submits these cards (he says he only keeps them for his personal collection).
I've seen dozens of these cards in slabs.
Between resubs of EOTs and MINSIZREQs that get passed and people like the guy in WV it would seem that a percentage of error
in the low single digits is probably inherent in the system. So if a similar level error could be achieved with DS boxes then it's the
same thing the way I look at it.
What should matter is whether or not there is a legitimate way to authenticate and grade an item. They certainly already do things differently
for certain issues and for high value cards.
I'll agree to disagree with you on this one.
Dave
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.
<< <i>I understand your point. If psa cant authenticate a pack themselves why is it relevant if they can tell what the contents are. If they get a 81 topps FB pack in 79 wrappers and Steve authenticates the pack as such... Does psa then try to see through the wrapper to double check if Steve's assessment is true? I just think that if psa relies on Steve's opinion to authenticate a pack its not just the seal. If he has a full box that he has authenticated it should be sufficient for psa. I trust bbce enough to buy the raw pack from them. The only problem is that once the pack leaves bbce if becomes a 10 cent wax pack because there is no way for me to prove its a ds pack. I think this actually a unique opportunity for the client, bbce and psa to all coordinate together to get these in slabs. It's not really worth arguing over this. The best we can do is ask and hope for the best. It's a long shot but I think under the circumstances it's worth a shot >>
+1
That is EXACTLY the point. As I pointed out, if only 50% of the box was legitimate only 5 such boxes out of 100 would get through Steve's method. That's a 95% success rate
(of Steve's method, that is)! And if you are a dirtbag scammer are you going to risk breaking up a $5000 box into 2 boxes with only a 5% chance of success of getting either of
the resulting boxes through?
Even at 75% of the box being legitimate the odds of getting it by Steve's method are no better than 30%. You would need to have 3 DS boxes + 1 regular and pull nine packs from each of the DS boxes to end up with 4 semi legitimate boxes. Who is their right mind is going to risk $15,000 of good DS boxes with only a 30% chance of getting any 1 of them through Steve's method (or only a 9% chance of getting 2 of them, 2.7% for getting 3 of them and 0.81% chance of getting all 4 boxes through)?
The math is simple and it says the risk/reward just isnt there!
Dave
<< <i>How did Steve "make good" on the deal? >>
Yeah good question... If Steve gave credit or otherwise reimbursed a dissatisfied customer because of some snow on the cards (whether or not common for the issue in question), then my already high opinion of him goes higher. Now we obviously don't know the whole story, but I'm just hoping he's the one that offered to do so, as a customer requesting such because of snowy cards seems absolutely out of line to me.
<< <i>
<< <i>How did Steve "make good" on the deal? >>
Yeah good question... If Steve gave credit or otherwise reimbursed a dissatisfied customer because of some snow on the cards (whether or not common for the issue in question), then my already high opinion of him goes higher. Now we obviously don't know the whole story, but I'm just hoping he's the one that offered to do so, as a customer requesting such because of snowy cards seems absolutely out of line to me. >>
Agreed. Buying vintage wax is a risk to begin with and one who is willing to purchase unopened product should be assuming those risks if he decides to open the packs. It's one thing to return packs that are still unopened, but to ask for a refund after opening the packs (as long as the packs were authentic) is inappropriate, especially if the issue was something as minor as "snow" on the surface. There were a lot of people who bought 72 OPC wax packs from Steve in which several cards in each pack were ruined by gum damage, but I don't recall anyone asking for refunds in those cases.
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.
<< <i>Perkins, after I opened the box, I asked Steve about the snow problem on the cards and I learned a lot. It was obvious to both of us that there was no way that high a percentage of cards should have been affected. We worked it out. At no point was I as you suggest out of line. >>
Snow on the surface of cards is not at all uncommon if you are opening packs.
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.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>How did Steve "make good" on the deal? >>
Yeah good question... If Steve gave credit or otherwise reimbursed a dissatisfied customer because of some snow on the cards (whether or not common for the issue in question), then my already high opinion of him goes higher. Now we obviously don't know the whole story, but I'm just hoping he's the one that offered to do so, as a customer requesting such because of snowy cards seems absolutely out of line to me. >>
Agreed. Buying vintage wax is a risk to begin with and one who is willing to purchase unopened product should be assuming those risks if he decides to open the packs. It's one thing to return packs that are still unopened, but to ask for a refund after opening the packs (as long as the packs were authentic) is inappropriate, especially if the issue was something as minor as "snow" on the surface. There were a lot of people who bought 72 OPC wax packs from Steve in which several cards in each pack were ruined by gum damage, but I don't recall anyone asking for refunds in those cases. >>
Agreed. Remarkable if Steve "made good" on that
TheClockworkAngelCollection
<< <i>Did they put away these boxes for the group rip already? I'm asking because I don't see 1983 Topps Football or 89 Score football on their site? >>
Yes, Steve has pulled all the boxes for the rip for us.
Mark
T206 Set - 300/524
What are your thoughts on adding the 91 DS box to the mix?? It doesn't look like they come up often at all..
<< <i>Mark,
What are your thoughts on adding the 91 DS box to the mix?? It doesn't look like they come up often at all.. >>
Personally, if it were up to me, I would leave intact. To me, that is the beauty of the box. However, I serve the un-opened masses and will follow the majority on the board. I can email Steve to see if we can reserve and what the price would be.
Mark
T206 Set - 300/524
<< <i>
<< <i>Mark,
What are your thoughts on adding the 91 DS box to the mix?? It doesn't look like they come up often at all.. >>
Personally, if it were up to me, I would leave intact. To me, that is the beauty of the box. However, I serve the un-opened masses and will follow the majority on the board. I can email Steve to see if we can reserve and what the price would be.
Mark >>
I called Steve today with the idea of approaching PSA about grading full 1991 DS boxes.
He said he would approach PSA with the idea given his methodology and the math behind
how well it eliminates the possibility of errors and see what they say.
Dave
<< <i>
I called Steve today with the idea of approaching PSA about grading full 1991 DS boxes.
He said he would approach PSA with the idea given his methodology and the math behind
how well it eliminates the possibility of errors and see what they say. >>
Great. It's worth a shot
<< <i> I would definitely be in for one graded DS pack if that was something that could be accomplished. >>
+1
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.
<< <i>Hi Mark, were you going to list the pricing ahead of time? thanks, Tom >>
Tom,
I will try and get the pricing up tonight. If not, I will have up tomorrow for you guys.
Mark
T206 Set - 300/524
based on his full-box authentication methodology.
And I am in for 1 if it is possible.
Dave
-Doug (1all)