I'm just putting it out there. Here's the interpretation of a Silver sticker claiming excellent eye appeal while elevating the value of a '68 Topps Bench RC in PSA MINT 9. Whomever consigned it should be very pleased with the final outcome.
@mintonlypls said:
Nice! Thanks, ElMagoStrikeZone pointing out that Bench RC auction…
Not to be Johnny rain cloud, but what are all of the white dots on the Ron Tompkins side of the card? I was looking at the auction earlier but decided not to bid after seeing them.
@mintonlypls said:
Nice! Thanks, ElMagoStrikeZone pointing out that Bench RC auction…
Not to be Johnny rain cloud, but what are all of the white dots on the Ron Tompkins side of the card? I was looking at the auction earlier but decided not to bid after seeing them.
No argument. I think it's wise to examine cards like this to understand what MBA is looking for in presentation. While some of us may not necessarily be attracted to such a card, it's good to know that being able to secure a sticker on one of your own could potentially increase its value. It's pertinent to this discussion. It was also intended for the OP to compare with his own PSA 9 example. As we know, there will be opinions about it and some may differ.
Here is mine (non-error version also)...which came back today as a diamond candidate. I looked up the certification number...and its image likewise shows those print fisheyes...there also is one fish eye in the blue circle on the 0xxxxxxx.
I would think that a sticker on a 9 would imply it should be a ten, which I don’t see with either of these benches. The eBay one seems to have print issues and the one above is out t/b front and the back being OC.
I normally wouldn’t be critical of cards on a thread like this but really wondering how MBA makes calls on cards that are already high grade. There are lots of 5s that look like 7s, but a sticker on an already really nice 9 has to mean it is presents like a ten IMO.
Monty - to be clear, you have fantastic cards and I really respect the way you collect. And if these stickers improve the value or your collection, that is awesome. Just very skeptical of these schemes.
On 68s and others like it when there is clearly an undefined border such as 54s too…I measure centering of the undefined border as the percentage of the two defined borders. In case of 68s…the undefined border is the top when viewing horizontally. I measure then 55/45 the top to bottom centering on my 68 Bench RC.
A gold diamond means that the assigned technical grade is low by 1/2 or 1 grade.
A silver diamond means that the card has exceptional eye appeal for the assigned grade.
The special running thru August for a digital review to determine candidates for a diamond credits submitters to the full amount of a digital review charge towards the charge to physically submit a card to MBA to be assigned either a silver or gold diamond. I have accrued a $550 credit for an actual submission which has a sliding price point based on value of the card. I have not tallied up the total charge upon submitting the 27 cards…and counting (10 additional cards come back today from a digital review). These final charges in the process are not only based on card value…but also turnaround time.
A digital review is cost effective in that only diamond candidates will be submitted.
Does anybody know if MBA sets up at the Philly show?
Steve Saldutti sjjs28@comcast.net Collector of Baseball Hall of Famer's and Stars, 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game and 1969 Topps Decals Registered Sets: 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game, 1969 Topps Decals
MBA seems to be more critical of centering on the reverse than PSA or SGC or BGS. I had two (2) cards rejected for a diamond based only on centering of the reverse. I very much like the very specific notes on why a card is NOT a candidate...much more so than PSA notes. Here are the two (2) cards rejected for a diamond...solely on the reverse centering.
I agree about the registration issue…but a 7 is ridiculously harsh. I would give it an 8.5. I paid $3300 in 2008. The nameplate is flawless…and a cherry red as opposed to the tomato red on most..and centering is very, very nice on the front of the card. Corners are exceptional. Little toning...bright colors on the front of the card.
I did a bunch at the National a few years ago and I believe it was around $40 a card then. Sounds like it’s quite a bit more now. I thought it was affordable enough that I paid to re-MBA a gold that I had cracked for auto and r received back from PSA. In that case it did again receive its gold sticker but lost its PSA 10. Sad. Trombone.
Monte - The 58 mantle is a stunner on the front side. I think in looking at the back the centering is probably 95/5 and almost a miscut so I would have to say I agree with his assessment. Still does not take away from the fact the card is absolutely gorgeous on the front which is really all anyone looks at on a card.
@80sOPC said:
I would think that a sticker on a 9 would imply it should be a ten, which I don’t see with either of these benches. The eBay one seems to have print issues and the one above is out t/b front and the back being OC.
I normally wouldn’t be critical of cards on a thread like this but really wondering how MBA makes calls on cards that are already high grade. There are lots of 5s that look like 7s, but a sticker on an already really nice 9 has to mean it is presents like a ten IMO.
Monty - to be clear, you have fantastic cards and I really respect the way you collect. And if these stickers improve the value or your collection, that is awesome. Just very skeptical of these schemes.
The claim is that Silver means it's top 15% and Gold means top 5% and technical grade of +.5 or higher.
I just don't see how he can say top 5% unless he's seen all the cards in that grade for comparison.
A card is beautifully centered with great eye appeal. Top 5% right?
What if 75% of the others in that grade he didn't see, have the same attributes? Are they all top 5%?
No doubt Monty's stickered cards will increase in value, as long as the public accepts the sticker hype.
I mean, people believe that PSA 10s should be worth more than other grading company's 10s.
I saw this in the coin world years ago, when CAC became a thing.
A coin with a CAC sticker now costs 1.5-2x what it did before, even though it's the same coin it always was.
A decades long coin dealer I spoke with thought CAC was a sham, but he also had a stack of coins ready for submission.
He didn't have to believe in it, but if it meant he could charge a lot more for stickered coins, why not take the gamble.
Comments
The Soccer card might receive a gold label for a 9, maybe. Definitely not as a 10.
IMHO with the centering and weak left edge 10 might have been a gift. It certainly does NOT present at high end of grade.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
8/10 today...see list above, if interested!
Folks read this other current thread about MBA. Glean what u want from it...
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1116041/mba-mike-baker-authenticated-crossover-attempt-psa-says-altered#latest
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
6/10 today...see list at top of page 1.
I'm just putting it out there. Here's the interpretation of a Silver sticker claiming excellent eye appeal while elevating the value of a '68 Topps Bench RC in PSA MINT 9. Whomever consigned it should be very pleased with the final outcome.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/146758759290
Farewell Ryno.
Nice! Thanks, ElMagoStrikeZone pointing out that Bench RC auction…
Not to be Johnny rain cloud, but what are all of the white dots on the Ron Tompkins side of the card? I was looking at the auction earlier but decided not to bid after seeing them.
No argument. I think it's wise to examine cards like this to understand what MBA is looking for in presentation. While some of us may not necessarily be attracted to such a card, it's good to know that being able to secure a sticker on one of your own could potentially increase its value. It's pertinent to this discussion. It was also intended for the OP to compare with his own PSA 9 example. As we know, there will be opinions about it and some may differ.
Farewell Ryno.
Here is mine (non-error version also)...which came back today as a diamond candidate. I looked up the certification number...and its image likewise shows those print fisheyes...there also is one fish eye in the blue circle on the 0xxxxxxx.
A very deserving candidate. Vote Yes on Johnny. I'm kinda biased anyways. It's always been one of my favorite cards. Good luck.
Farewell Ryno.
I would think that a sticker on a 9 would imply it should be a ten, which I don’t see with either of these benches. The eBay one seems to have print issues and the one above is out t/b front and the back being OC.
I normally wouldn’t be critical of cards on a thread like this but really wondering how MBA makes calls on cards that are already high grade. There are lots of 5s that look like 7s, but a sticker on an already really nice 9 has to mean it is presents like a ten IMO.
Monty - to be clear, you have fantastic cards and I really respect the way you collect. And if these stickers improve the value or your collection, that is awesome. Just very skeptical of these schemes.
On 68s and others like it when there is clearly an undefined border such as 54s too…I measure centering of the undefined border as the percentage of the two defined borders. In case of 68s…the undefined border is the top when viewing horizontally. I measure then 55/45 the top to bottom centering on my 68 Bench RC.
A gold diamond means that the assigned technical grade is low by 1/2 or 1 grade.
A silver diamond means that the card has exceptional eye appeal for the assigned grade.
What was the final cost to get these stickers on the cards you sent? It isn’t cheap from what I can tell.
The special running thru August for a digital review to determine candidates for a diamond credits submitters to the full amount of a digital review charge towards the charge to physically submit a card to MBA to be assigned either a silver or gold diamond. I have accrued a $550 credit for an actual submission which has a sliding price point based on value of the card. I have not tallied up the total charge upon submitting the 27 cards…and counting (10 additional cards come back today from a digital review). These final charges in the process are not only based on card value…but also turnaround time.
A digital review is cost effective in that only diamond candidates will be submitted.
Does anybody know if MBA sets up at the Philly show?
sjjs28@comcast.net
Collector of Baseball Hall of Famer's and Stars, 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game and 1969 Topps Decals
Registered Sets: 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game, 1969 Topps Decals
MBA seems to be more critical of centering on the reverse than PSA or SGC or BGS. I had two (2) cards rejected for a diamond based only on centering of the reverse. I very much like the very specific notes on why a card is NOT a candidate...much more so than PSA notes. Here are the two (2) cards rejected for a diamond...solely on the reverse centering.
The 63 Koufax has a registration issue which is really distracting on a PSA 9.
This is a 7, much better registration....
I agree about the registration issue…but a 7 is ridiculously harsh. I would give it an 8.5. I paid $3300 in 2008. The nameplate is flawless…and a cherry red as opposed to the tomato red on most..and centering is very, very nice on the front of the card. Corners are exceptional. Little toning...bright colors on the front of the card.
I did a bunch at the National a few years ago and I believe it was around $40 a card then. Sounds like it’s quite a bit more now. I thought it was affordable enough that I paid to re-MBA a gold that I had cracked for auto and r received back from PSA. In that case it did again receive its gold sticker but lost its PSA 10. Sad. Trombone.
8/17 updated list...6/10 Diamond candidates today.
Monte - The 58 mantle is a stunner on the front side. I think in looking at the back the centering is probably 95/5 and almost a miscut so I would have to say I agree with his assessment. Still does not take away from the fact the card is absolutely gorgeous on the front which is really all anyone looks at on a card.
KC
The claim is that Silver means it's top 15% and Gold means top 5% and technical grade of +.5 or higher.
I just don't see how he can say top 5% unless he's seen all the cards in that grade for comparison.
A card is beautifully centered with great eye appeal. Top 5% right?
What if 75% of the others in that grade he didn't see, have the same attributes? Are they all top 5%?
No doubt Monty's stickered cards will increase in value, as long as the public accepts the sticker hype.
I mean, people believe that PSA 10s should be worth more than other grading company's 10s.
I saw this in the coin world years ago, when CAC became a thing.
A coin with a CAC sticker now costs 1.5-2x what it did before, even though it's the same coin it always was.
A decades long coin dealer I spoke with thought CAC was a sham, but he also had a stack of coins ready for submission.
He didn't have to believe in it, but if it meant he could charge a lot more for stickered coins, why not take the gamble.