Considering first submission **Scans with slabbed cards**

jmaciu

I am considering my first PSA submission, so I wanted some critique/advice on these 1972-1981 cards. Thanks in advance. (Backs are all clean and not MC)


These 2 I think are at least PSA 8.

[URL=http://s1328.photobucket.com/user/jmaciu/media/Scan0013_zpsfaf99c39.jpg.html][/URL]




I think these are 8's based on centering being a little off. The Aaron may be a 7, but it is close.

[URL=http://s1328.photobucket.com/user/jmaciu/media/03d6e8ec-dccf-4180-823a-85ffc9c2b19b_zpsdde0dc95.jpg.html][/URL]




I really like these. I pulled these from rack packs from my childhood. If only the Gibby didn't have the print dots or slight chipping on the lower right.


[URL=http://s1328.photobucket.com/user/jmaciu/media/Scan0019_zpsf4cc2ccc.jpg.html][/URL]

Finally, 2 1977 O-Pee-Chee beauties!! The case is scratched on the Seaver near the top of the card.

[URL=http://s1328.photobucket.com/user/jmaciu/media/Scan0011_zpsc61b1a80.jpg.html][/URL]

Foo3112

Hello. Congrats on getting ready to send in your first sub, however - Heres my take on it:

Killebrew - looks like a 7. Not good. If it came back as an 8, has an average of only $22. I don't think its an 8 however.

Perry - Top left has a knick and bottom right looks also touched.

The Rose - 3 corners look touched (top left, top right and bottom right) and the centering although not OC but doesn't look appealing either for resale value if thats what you were going to do.

Hank - Looks sharp but will come back as OC for sure which will practically make it almost worthless.

81 Gibson - Looks like a 7 - MAYBE an 8 on a good day but the print mark on the top right doesn't help. Only if it was a shoe in for a 9 I would say go for it, otherwise its not even worth it.

Murray - The average for a 9 is $7.39 and I can tell you right now that were not looking at a 10 so just skip that one or you will lose money.

I don't mean to discourage but its good to ask questions because that means that you're learning. Being on these boards has helped me in recognizing what to look before considering sending in. Also, just because a card looks like a 9 doesn't mean that a 9 will be valuable either. For example, the Murray. A 10 can get you about $75 but a 9 will bring in an average of less than $8. After grading fee's, shipping, and then selling and shipping back out to new buyer - you will be losing money guaranteed in the end. If you just want these graded because of sentimental value, then by all means go for it but I personally wouldn't send in any of these and just keep them raw as is.

Hope this helps.

Stingray

Will that Seaver get marked down because of all that snow??

ldferg

I like the 77 opc Rose.

jbox

<< <i>I like the 77 opc Rose. >>



+1

dytch2220

'76 Rose is approximately 57/43 Centering Left/Right. '73 Aaron is approximately 61/39 Centering Left/Right. Rose meets 9 standards, Aaron meets 8 standards from a centering perspective.

grote15

If top left corner of 77 Rose isn't dinged, that's a Mint 9 card all day long.

Killebrew and Perry are 8s, imo. I wouldn't be shocked to see either card in a Mint 9 holder, either, though bottom left corner on Killebrew may limit grade to an 8 in all likelihood. Terrific centering and registration on those cards.

81s are always tough to call, but Gibby looks sharp and worth subbing.

As dytch said, Aaron centering, while off L/R, is within parameters for a straight 8, and is worth subbing, too, as is the 76 Rose, which looks like an 8, as well, imo.

wrestlingcardking

Have fun and go for it, if you learn a lesson so be it. I like to have some cards in slabs, just to have them in slabs. You may be surprised too and get a decent hit. I say go for it, the experience will be well worth it.

MrNearMint

send em all in

markj111

Two thoughts:

1. Send them all. It will be a learning experience.
2. Bottom left corner of Killebrew is a little soft, but it might get an 8. It will look better in actual size.

jmaciu

I ended up submitting some of the cards that I posted raw and just got them back from PSA. Here a couple scans:

I made a major rookie blunder on the 1977 Rose OPC. I missed a wax stain on the front. The card still presents well and the ST will serve as a reminder to always check the surface. I was pleased with the PSA 8 on the 1976 Rose.




I was happy with a 7 on the OC 1973 Aaron. I was extremely pleased with the 1972 Killer.



I have several cards at PSA right now, with a majority being OPC.

bumpskier

Congrats! That is a nice sub. That Killebrew sure didn't look like a PSA 9 from the scan. I thought the corners made it look , more like a PSA 6. However, I think that is just how it looks from the fuzzy scan. Sometimes it is very hard when a card is scanned to tell if the corners are sharp or soft. That is why it is hard to sometimes to tell someone what grade to expect just from looking at a scan.

grote15

<< <i>Congrats! That is a nice sub. That Killebrew sure didn't look like a PSA 9 from the scan. I thought the corners made it look , more like a PSA 6. However, I think that is just how it looks from the fuzzy scan. Sometimes it is very hard when a card is scanned to tell if the corners are sharp or soft. That is why it is hard to sometimes to tell someone what grade to expect just from looking at a scan. >>



Well stated and 100% true regarding scans.

As I stated above, I am not surprised to see the Killer in a Mint 9 holder. Rose is on the money, too. Nice work!

heritage

Nice Sub

DanBessette

All 4 of those cards are great looking and I'd be proud to own any of them.

cpamike

Nice submission John. I've learned a lot regarding submitting cards from reading this forum, but I still like my cards raw. With that said, I think the one thing people who get grading surprises miss is the surface and registration issues. When choosing which cards go in my raw sets, I tilt the cards to look for any spiderlines or gum and wax marks, etc. and you'd be surprised what you miss without looking closely. Congrats again!!!

hyperchipper09

Great Killebrew. That card alone is why it's tough to gauge a scan when you don't have the card in hand.