When you do high volume with skilled labor mistakes will be made. They're usually pretty efficient about identifying flaws on cards, front or back. And no, I'm not in the Cult.
GM vintage hall of famers (pre 81) have been selling for crazy prices for at least a year. Example let's say a 1975 Hall of Famer sells for $70 in PSA 8 he will consistently get $100 + for a raw NM-MT + or better card. Buyers are thinking if they submit the card to PSA they might received a PSA 9. In reality they will receive a 7 or an 8. Rarely will they receive a 9 especially the way PSA is currently grading vintage cards.
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.
@Yankees70 said:
GM vintage hall of famers (pre 81) have been selling for crazy prices for at least a year. Example let's say a 1975 Hall of Famer sells for $70 in PSA 8 he will consistently get $100 + for a raw NM-MT + or better card. Buyers are thinking if they submit the card to PSA they might received a PSA 9. In reality they will receive a 7 or an 8. Rarely will they receive a 9 especially the way PSA is currently grading vintage cards.
Yeah I noticed that. In my opinion, he buys nice 6's and sells them as near mint-or better. Pays $60 for a 1975 Ryan PSa 6, lists it as near mint or better and gets $125 for a raw one. Just my opinion of course.
@Yankees70 said:
GM vintage hall of famers (pre 81) have been selling for crazy prices for at least a year. Example let's say a 1975 Hall of Famer sells for $70 in PSA 8 he will consistently get $100 + for a raw NM-MT + or better card. Buyers are thinking if they submit the card to PSA they might received a PSA 9. In reality they will receive a 7 or an 8. Rarely will they receive a 9 especially the way PSA is currently grading vintage cards.
Yeah I noticed that. In my opinion, he buys nice 6's and sells them as near mint-or better. Pays $60 for a 1975 Ryan PSa 6, lists it as near mint or better and gets $125 for a raw one. Just my opinion of course.
I've noticed more recently how some raw cards at GMC have achieved absolutely insane hammer prices which don't even relate to graded equivalents. Some folks must REALLY want these cards, when similar prior sales had presumably been completed at a fraction of the price. That being said, I sincerely doubt they have the need to crack out a PSA 6 and resell as a raw NM when they have a separate account for auctioning graded material. Their business is pretty well-oiled machine. They have been pumping out massive amounts of consigned or purchased collections. Lately there's been a lot of 80's and 90's, like almost every day. Pre-war, modern bling, current bling, non-sports, autos, oddball stuff, you name it.
There's always blips on the radar. Know your dealer. I follow and examine his accounts almost every day. And formulate my opinions.
@Yankees70 said:
GM vintage hall of famers (pre 81) have been selling for crazy prices for at least a year. Example let's say a 1975 Hall of Famer sells for $70 in PSA 8 he will consistently get $100 + for a raw NM-MT + or better card. Buyers are thinking if they submit the card to PSA they might received a PSA 9. In reality they will receive a 7 or an 8. Rarely will they receive a 9 especially the way PSA is currently grading vintage cards.
Yeah I noticed that. In my opinion, he buys nice 6's and sells them as near mint-or better. Pays $60 for a 1975 Ryan PSa 6, lists it as near mint or better and gets $125 for a raw one. Just my opinion of course.
I've noticed more recently how some raw cards at GMC have achieved absolutely insane hammer prices which don't even relate to graded equivalents. Some folks must REALLY want these cards, when similar prior sales had presumably been completed at a fraction of the price. That being said, I sincerely doubt they have the need to crack out a PSA 6 and resell as a raw NM when they have a separate account for auctioning graded material. Their business is pretty well-oiled machine. They have been pumping out massive amounts of consigned or purchased collections. Lately there's been a lot of 80's and 90's, like almost every day. Pre-war, modern bling, current bling, non-sports, autos, oddball stuff, you name it.
There's always blips on the radar. Know your dealer. I follow and examine his accounts almost every day. And formulate my opinions.
Like I said, that's my opinion on what he does. The graded stuff I would assume are mostly consignments, not ones he is buying raw and grading himself.
@Yankees70 said:
GM vintage hall of famers (pre 81) have been selling for crazy prices for at least a year. Example let's say a 1975 Hall of Famer sells for $70 in PSA 8 he will consistently get $100 + for a raw NM-MT + or better card. Buyers are thinking if they submit the card to PSA they might received a PSA 9. In reality they will receive a 7 or an 8. Rarely will they receive a 9 especially the way PSA is currently grading vintage cards.
Times have definitely flipped. Used to be just the opposite if you were patient----- could consistently buy NM-MT+ for EX price point, grade at 6 bucks a pop and always come out ahead. Rinse & repeat to build a hobby paid collection.
GM is kinda like Dean's to me. Shake my head and blow by those listings.
He’s not preying on anyone. Good scans and auction format. Let the market decide what this stuff is worth, he isn’t a consultant he is an auction house.
@80sOPC said:
He’s not preying on anyone. Good scans and auction format. Let the market decide what this stuff is worth, he isn’t a consultant he is an auction house.
For sure. He’s not hiding anything from anyone. Photos are on there and we have no idea why the person who bought it wanted it. Maybe they thought it was a fair price for the card and were happy to have it.
GM is not acting on good faith by listing the card as NM-MT or better.
Sure he can play dumb and say he's not a professional grader, or claim he really felt it was NM-MT+, or he can say the consignor told him it was NM-MT+, so that's how we, as an auction house, listed it without even checking. (I've run across this before.)
Bottom line, he violated "eBay card condition guidelines."
Under "NM-MT or Better," it list Discoloration: NONE, Staining: NONE
It was clearly a listing mistake and the scans clearly show the condition. Do people really bid on a card just based on the listing title without looking at the scan?
@80sOPC said:
It was clearly a listing mistake and the scans clearly show the condition. Do people really bid on a card just based on the listing title without looking at the scan?
Listing mistakes will happen in a very high volume account. But I'm certain there was no conscious intent to deceive anyone. And I'm certain the return policy of 30 days is quite enough to protect the interests of the winning bidder. Or eBay's QC police will reject it and send it back.
@80sOPC said:
He’s not preying on anyone. Good scans and auction format. Let the market decide what this stuff is worth, he isn’t a consultant he is an auction house.
"1975 Topps Set-Break #228 George Brett RC NM-MT OR BETTER"
I guess you may not have noticed that the card was listed as, "NM-MT OR BETTER"
If you believe that card is an 8 or 9, well then good luck to ya.
@80sOPC said:
He’s not preying on anyone. Good scans and auction format. Let the market decide what this stuff is worth, he isn’t a consultant he is an auction house.
"1975 Topps Set-Break #228 George Brett RC NM-MT OR BETTER"
I guess you may not have noticed that the card was listed as, "NM-MT OR BETTER"
If you believe that card is an 8 or 9, well then good luck to ya.
@80sOPC said:
It was clearly a listing mistake and the scans clearly show the condition. Do people really bid on a card just based on the listing title without looking at the scan?
We post here in our own little world of cards and grading, fully understanding both. However most of the public doesn't.
Somebody say a parent who doesn't know squat about cards or grading, but wishes to buy their baseball card collecting son a nice vintage card as a present. They see the scan and have no idea what they're looking at in terms of value. They rely on the integrity of a seller for an accurate description. Thus they look up the value based on that, and make a determination on buying the card for a certain price.
It's still a nice present for their son, but they simply overpaid for what the card is actually worth.
@80sOPC said:
It was clearly a listing mistake and the scans clearly show the condition. Do people really bid on a card just based on the listing title without looking at the scan?
We post here in our own little world of cards and grading, fully understanding both. However most of the public doesn't.
Somebody say a parent who doesn't know squat about cards or grading, but wishes to buy their baseball card collecting son a nice vintage card as a present. They see the scan and have no idea what they're looking at in terms of value. They rely on the integrity of a seller for an accurate description. Thus they look up the value based on that, and make a determination on buying the card for a certain price.
It's still a nice present for their son, but they simply overpaid for what the card is actually worth.
As I was posting I was thinking exactly that.
Remembering the time when I was a kid and my mom with no clue about cards, bought cards for me as a gift and being duped by a "reputable" dealer. She was more bothered by my poorly hidden disappointment (c'mon I was a kid) than any money lost. Of course, as time passed, the gesture became more appreciated (it's the thought that counts, right?) and it makes for a good 'Remember when...' story.
@RonSportscards said:
GM is not acting on good faith by listing the card as NM-MT or better.
Sure he can play dumb and say he's not a professional grader, or claim he really felt it was NM-MT+, or he can say the consignor told him it was NM-MT+, so that's how we, as an auction house, listed it without even checking. (I've run across this before.)
Bottom line, he violated "eBay card condition guidelines."
Under "NM-MT or Better," it list Discoloration: NONE, Staining: NONE
I agree. Pictures are fine but failing to disclose major flaws while listing the card as NM-MT (or better!) in the title, if done intentionally, would be downright dishonest and shady at worst and just sloppy at best. I will assume it's the latter. .In any case, it's an easy SNAD case for the buyer.
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.
Of course the "problem" is that it's unlikely the kid is going to complain about a nice present. So the parents may never know that they overpaid for the card. They will perhaps even give the seller a positive with good feedback. 😝
Yes, almost assuredly this was bought by a parent for their kid. The demand for 1975 George Bretts amongst 13 year olds is overwhelming. Most likely scenario, for sure.
People still need to do their due diligence. The card shouldn't have been listed as NM-MT or better but the stain is plain to see and he offers a 30 day money back guarantee. People sometimes pay stupid prices for raw. I remember a '70 Kellogg's Killebrew NM-MT or better that actually hammered for more than what 10s were selling for at the time.
I used to do pretty well with his auctions but it's much harder to make the equation work due to the higher grading fees, stricter grading standards and the fact his auctions continue to sell for high prices.
Not a GM card but it fits into the subject regarding over grading a card. There's currently a 1979 Topps Stargell in PSA 9 condition for sale on EBAY. Seller is asking $500 for it. Besides the insane price look at the corners of the card. This card was also recently graded which is surprising since PSA has been grading very hard recently on vintage material.
The 79 Stargell is a tough card to find in PSA 9 but $500? Has there been any recent sales that sold for anything close to this?
Talk about getting lucky the same seller has another very tough 1979 card to find in PSA 9 for sale. A Jack Morris in PSA 9 condition that was recently graded. Looks like the top two corners both have wear. I have three buddies that submitted over 100 cards from 77-79 recently that were straight from vending. Nice centering and 4 razor corners and PSA assigned over 75% with PSA 7 and 8 grades. How did this guy nail two 9's on two very hard cards to find in PSA 9 with corner wear on 2-4 corners?
@Yankees70 said:
Not a GM card but it fits into the subject regarding over grading a card. There's currently a 1979 Topps Stargell in PSA 9 condition for sale on EBAY. Seller is asking $500 for it. Besides the insane price look at the corners of the card. This card was also recently graded which is surprising since PSA has been grading very hard recently on vintage material.
The 79 Stargell is a tough card to find in PSA 9 but $500? Has there been any recent sales that sold for anything close to this?
I haven't tracked sales of PSA 9 1979 Topps Stargells recently and there are none listed on 130point but recall that card being a very tough one to find in PSA 9 grade which is illustrated by the lack of recent sales.
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.
Grading cards hard vs grading cards consistent to me is the key. changing methods to keep pops down, not a good practice. SO far with SGC I have been accurate in my assessments of what I think the card will grade. I think that's all you can expect. when you 5's and 6's on brand new cards, there is a problem. When you get a PSA 6 on a perfectly centered 1975 lynn swann, cut it out and get an 8 from sgc, that's makes no sense to me. The card looks like an 8 in everyway, maybe even slightly higher. Coming back with a 6 was total off the charts wrong.
That's just one example of many others. I think if the card looks aesthetically pleasing the submitter should get the benefit of the doubt not the other way.
It does seem like a mistake with respect to the Stargell '79. I would have thought 7 or 8 if I couldn't see the grade.
Bank error in their favor.
I have posted a dozen scans of recently graded PSA 9s exactly like this one. Enough corner chipping that brown card tips are exposed at three corners. Someone at PSA has a very liberal standard for what constitutes corner wear. I personally don’t think it’s “who submitted it” as much as “who graded it.”
I'm bemused by how this thread segued from a smackdown of a generally trustworthy eBay seller to analyzing the grade of a Card (card) by cops (forum police) with drops (criticism) on Pops (Wilver Dornell Stargell) flops (inconsistent grading PSA 9).
It did come off like some kinda Dr. Seuss nonsense drivel though, dinnit?
olb31
Posts: 3,096 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Guess they didn't look at the back scan???
how is this a nm-mt or better card?
The GM return policy may save them
Yikes.
Sharp corners though! lol.
7.5 PD ?
Maybe they are intending to have it "cleaned" by Gone With the Stain.
yikes. nice corners/edges but that terrible ink line on the front and the staining on the back are pretty bad.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
PSA 7's sell for around $250 on Ebay. Nicer than that card.
But the buyer could see a well pictured front and back scan, so they got what they paid for. Just overpaid.
I> @stevek said:
I just don't get the Greg Morris Cult
When you do high volume with skilled labor mistakes will be made. They're usually pretty efficient about identifying flaws on cards, front or back. And no, I'm not in the Cult.
Come on people now. Smile on your brothers.
GM vintage hall of famers (pre 81) have been selling for crazy prices for at least a year. Example let's say a 1975 Hall of Famer sells for $70 in PSA 8 he will consistently get $100 + for a raw NM-MT + or better card. Buyers are thinking if they submit the card to PSA they might received a PSA 9. In reality they will receive a 7 or an 8. Rarely will they receive a 9 especially the way PSA is currently grading vintage cards.
Ugh. Straight graded, that's a PSA 4.
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 I noticed that. In my opinion, he buys nice 6's and sells them as near mint-or better. Pays $60 for a 1975 Ryan PSa 6, lists it as near mint or better and gets $125 for a raw one. Just my opinion of course.
I've noticed more recently how some raw cards at GMC have achieved absolutely insane hammer prices which don't even relate to graded equivalents. Some folks must REALLY want these cards, when similar prior sales had presumably been completed at a fraction of the price. That being said, I sincerely doubt they have the need to crack out a PSA 6 and resell as a raw NM when they have a separate account for auctioning graded material. Their business is pretty well-oiled machine. They have been pumping out massive amounts of consigned or purchased collections. Lately there's been a lot of 80's and 90's, like almost every day. Pre-war, modern bling, current bling, non-sports, autos, oddball stuff, you name it.
There's always blips on the radar. Know your dealer. I follow and examine his accounts almost every day. And formulate my opinions.
Come on people now. Smile on your brothers.
Like I said, that's my opinion on what he does. The graded stuff I would assume are mostly consignments, not ones he is buying raw and grading himself.
Times have definitely flipped. Used to be just the opposite if you were patient----- could consistently buy NM-MT+ for EX price point, grade at 6 bucks a pop and always come out ahead. Rinse & repeat to build a hobby paid collection.
GM is kinda like Dean's to me. Shake my head and blow by those listings.
Also known as preying on the ignorant.
This "strategy" can be seen from some sellers in almost any type of business. Real estate, automobiles, whatever, you name it.
He’s not preying on anyone. Good scans and auction format. Let the market decide what this stuff is worth, he isn’t a consultant he is an auction house.
For sure. He’s not hiding anything from anyone. Photos are on there and we have no idea why the person who bought it wanted it. Maybe they thought it was a fair price for the card and were happy to have it.
GM is not acting on good faith by listing the card as NM-MT or better.
Sure he can play dumb and say he's not a professional grader, or claim he really felt it was NM-MT+, or he can say the consignor told him it was NM-MT+, so that's how we, as an auction house, listed it without even checking. (I've run across this before.)
Bottom line, he violated "eBay card condition guidelines."
Under "NM-MT or Better," it list Discoloration: NONE, Staining: NONE
It was clearly a listing mistake and the scans clearly show the condition. Do people really bid on a card just based on the listing title without looking at the scan?
Listing mistakes will happen in a very high volume account. But I'm certain there was no conscious intent to deceive anyone. And I'm certain the return policy of 30 days is quite enough to protect the interests of the winning bidder. Or eBay's QC police will reject it and send it back.
Come on people now. Smile on your brothers.
"1975 Topps Set-Break #228 George Brett RC NM-MT OR BETTER"
I guess you may not have noticed that the card was listed as, "NM-MT OR BETTER"
If you believe that card is an 8 or 9, well then good luck to ya.
And if you believe humans don’t make mistakes then this life must be hard.
We post here in our own little world of cards and grading, fully understanding both. However most of the public doesn't.
Somebody say a parent who doesn't know squat about cards or grading, but wishes to buy their baseball card collecting son a nice vintage card as a present. They see the scan and have no idea what they're looking at in terms of value. They rely on the integrity of a seller for an accurate description. Thus they look up the value based on that, and make a determination on buying the card for a certain price.
It's still a nice present for their son, but they simply overpaid for what the card is actually worth.
"1975 Topps Set-Break #228 George Brett RC NM-MT OR BETTER"
"Condition Ungraded - Near mint or better: Not in original packaging or professionally graded"
"Card Condition NM-MT OR BETTER"
Yes, three listing mistakes for the price of one. 😆
As I was posting I was thinking exactly that.
Remembering the time when I was a kid and my mom with no clue about cards, bought cards for me as a gift and being duped by a "reputable" dealer. She was more bothered by my poorly hidden disappointment (c'mon I was a kid) than any money lost. Of course, as time passed, the gesture became more appreciated (it's the thought that counts, right?) and it makes for a good 'Remember when...' story.
I wonder how many thousands of the same type 'honest mistakes' does it take before you start to question the competence or integrity of a seller.
I wonder how many baseball card collecting sons are currently interested in an almost 50-year old rookie card of some guy they never heard of.
Come on people now. Smile on your brothers.
I agree. Pictures are fine but failing to disclose major flaws while listing the card as NM-MT (or better!) in the title, if done intentionally, would be downright dishonest and shady at worst and just sloppy at best. I will assume it's the latter. .In any case, it's an easy SNAD case for the buyer.
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.
Of course the "problem" is that it's unlikely the kid is going to complain about a nice present. So the parents may never know that they overpaid for the card. They will perhaps even give the seller a positive with good feedback. 😝
Yes, almost assuredly this was bought by a parent for their kid. The demand for 1975 George Bretts amongst 13 year olds is overwhelming. Most likely scenario, for sure.
People still need to do their due diligence. The card shouldn't have been listed as NM-MT or better but the stain is plain to see and he offers a 30 day money back guarantee. People sometimes pay stupid prices for raw. I remember a '70 Kellogg's Killebrew NM-MT or better that actually hammered for more than what 10s were selling for at the time.
I used to do pretty well with his auctions but it's much harder to make the equation work due to the higher grading fees, stricter grading standards and the fact his auctions continue to sell for high prices.
i agree with ron and grote.
Not a GM card but it fits into the subject regarding over grading a card. There's currently a 1979 Topps Stargell in PSA 9 condition for sale on EBAY. Seller is asking $500 for it. Besides the insane price look at the corners of the card. This card was also recently graded which is surprising since PSA has been grading very hard recently on vintage material.
The 79 Stargell is a tough card to find in PSA 9 but $500? Has there been any recent sales that sold for anything close to this?
Talk about getting lucky the same seller has another very tough 1979 card to find in PSA 9 for sale. A Jack Morris in PSA 9 condition that was recently graded. Looks like the top two corners both have wear. I have three buddies that submitted over 100 cards from 77-79 recently that were straight from vending. Nice centering and 4 razor corners and PSA assigned over 75% with PSA 7 and 8 grades. How did this guy nail two 9's on two very hard cards to find in PSA 9 with corner wear on 2-4 corners?
.and sell it here? loololololol
it matters who you are.
I haven't tracked sales of PSA 9 1979 Topps Stargells recently and there are none listed on 130point but recall that card being a very tough one to find in PSA 9 grade which is illustrated by the lack of recent sales.
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.
looked through everyone I could find on COMC and EBAy and they all suck. Reminds me of the 1979 Ozzie.
Does anyone think the Stargell on EBAY is really a 9? Corners are soft which is surprising for a card that was currently graded.
once again depends on who you are, in my opinion. I would get a 6 on it.
Grading cards hard vs grading cards consistent to me is the key. changing methods to keep pops down, not a good practice. SO far with SGC I have been accurate in my assessments of what I think the card will grade. I think that's all you can expect. when you 5's and 6's on brand new cards, there is a problem. When you get a PSA 6 on a perfectly centered 1975 lynn swann, cut it out and get an 8 from sgc, that's makes no sense to me. The card looks like an 8 in everyway, maybe even slightly higher. Coming back with a 6 was total off the charts wrong.
That's just one example of many others. I think if the card looks aesthetically pleasing the submitter should get the benefit of the doubt not the other way.
https://www.psacard.com/cert/87347020
It does seem like a mistake with respect to the Stargell '79. I would have thought 7 or 8 if I couldn't see the grade.
Bank error in their favor.
Card cops drops on Pops flops.
Come on people now. Smile on your brothers.
Is this a mantra? Does it mean anything ?
I have posted a dozen scans of recently graded PSA 9s exactly like this one. Enough corner chipping that brown card tips are exposed at three corners. Someone at PSA has a very liberal standard for what constitutes corner wear. I personally don’t think it’s “who submitted it” as much as “who graded it.”
or the Williams and Stargell were input-ed by someone who through a disorder or simply haste is seeing/mistaking 6's for 9's
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
I'm bemused by how this thread segued from a smackdown of a generally trustworthy eBay seller to analyzing the grade of a Card (card) by cops (forum police) with drops (criticism) on Pops (Wilver Dornell Stargell) flops (inconsistent grading PSA 9).
It did come off like some kinda Dr. Seuss nonsense drivel though, dinnit?
Come on people now. Smile on your brothers.
just like kindergarten. lol!