Some nice stuff, for sure. Most of the lots don't have a text description yet, and many of the PSA 9's seem to have marginal centering, even diamond cuts.
The '54 Williams is disconcerting... how can the borders be so much more blazing white than the PSA label? And than the white of Ted's name on the card? There's something funny here, either bleaching or Photoshop work - course I'm not an expert on the set, it just seems like there's something to hide. And it does have a serious diamond cut... I measure it as 59/41 at the top and 48/52 at the bottom.
The '62 Tarkenton looks really nice.
The 38 Bridge Street '68 set looks very nice as well.
There are a few nice 53 Bowmans and some okay 71 Topps
Collector of baseball PSA sets from the 1970's & hockey rookie cards; big New York Rangers fan (particularly now that they are sleeping with the enemy with Holik and Kaspiritus). Also starting to collect 53 Bowman Color as I think they are the most beautiful cards I have seen.
With 15 9's and two 10's I am a bit shocked that the 72 Harmon Killebrew IA card (lot 591) is already over $1,150 with the buyers premium. Any other 72 collectors know why? I gave up at half the price - the link is below
Collector of baseball PSA sets from the 1970's & hockey rookie cards; big New York Rangers fan (particularly now that they are sleeping with the enemy with Holik and Kaspiritus). Also starting to collect 53 Bowman Color as I think they are the most beautiful cards I have seen.
<< <i>With 15 9's and two 10's I am a bit shocked that the 72 Harmon Killebrew IA card (lot 591) is already over $1,150 with the buyers premium. Any other 72 collectors know why? >>
I have two 71 PSA 10's and I paid about 700 for both. Which is why I am surprised that the 72 Killebrew is already much higher. 71 10's are much nicer cards than 72 10's, but I guess there is always supply and demand
Collector of baseball PSA sets from the 1970's & hockey rookie cards; big New York Rangers fan (particularly now that they are sleeping with the enemy with Holik and Kaspiritus). Also starting to collect 53 Bowman Color as I think they are the most beautiful cards I have seen.
<< <i>I have two 71 PSA 10's and I paid about 700 for both. Which is why I am surprised that the 72 Killebrew is already much higher. 71 10's are much nicer cards than 72 10's, but I guess there is always supply and demand >>
Don't forget to add a premium for the fact that it's Killebrew. He's not the most collectable player but he is a HOFer and 500HR club member. Certainly he would demand more of a premium than a nobody.
Lots of 69's on the board are you going to upgrade any? I am expecting the package from NJ today they shipped on wed to me. I will forward to you your part as soon as I recieve.
Centering on the Williams measures 59-41 R-L. Taking away the 5% additional leeway for a 9 (65-35), the card is marginal but it does meet the standard.
Lots of 69's on the board are you going to upgrade any? I am expecting the package from NJ today they shipped on wed to me. I will forward to you your part as soon as I recieve.
Dave >>
Thanks for the update Dave. I forgot to ship out the cards last week but I'm heading over to the post office this morning and will get them shipped today. As for the auction, I may shop for bargains but I don't see anything I have to have. I may make a run at the 1968 set if bidding doesn't get too crazy.
Look at lot 478. Does that meet the centering standards for a PSA 8?
Strong buyer of 1970 Kelloggs Football & 1971 Kelloggs Baseball and Football. Please help me find cards! I have a few hundred extra PSA graded 1971 Kellogg's cards. E-mail for price list. Looking for 1970 Topps Supers in PSA 9 too.
I was thinking about going for the 68 set as well but it will probably be out of my price range pretty quick. Is it just me or do the all of the big cards in the 68 set that are pictured look off-centered for the grades?
LOL Bruce. Come to think of it though, I don't know if I've ever seen an OF qualified card before, and I've seen some pretty fuzzy pictures in PSA slabs.
<< <i>Look at lot 478. Does that meet the centering standards for a PSA 8? >>
It's hard to measure that one because the edges are blurred, particularly at the bottom right corner where the centering looks to be at its worst. Based on my measurements, at best it's 70-30 L-R and 65-35 T-B. In my opinion, that card should not have received an 8NQ
<< <i>I was thinking about going for the 68 set as well but it will probably be out of my price range pretty quick. Is it just me or do the all of the big cards in the 68 set that are pictured look off-centered for the grades? >>
It's hard to tell because the scan is too small. Looking at them, I would say they are within the spec but marginally so. That will affect my (potential) bid as well.
I'm with gemmy -- I get around 62/38 (depending upon where you measure). That is certainly within the standards for a 9. Just bid accordingly. Not all 9's are 52/48 or better.
and then there are those card PH.D's... anyone notice a dealer on ebay selling hundreds of seemingly desirable cards in the same format and description as you know who(s)???.... i hope this post is sufficiently optuse or opaque.
Early this morning I was looking at the auction titles but not clicking on any right away.When I did find an auction or two to click on the cards were all red X and some didn't even have a description. Did anyone else have any problems?I started from the highest page numbers backwards when discovering this.
I checked the site several times today starting around 10:00AM EST and had no problems. Sounds like it might be on your end. As far as the catalog goes, what do you have to do to get it? I won over $1000 worth of cards from their Dec. auction. I know that's not that much, considering what some people spend, but don't you think that would get you a catalog? Maybe I just haven't received it yet. Does anyone know?
Come to think of it it probably was on my end my norton reported some errors but thank God No virus.
For the catalog all you have to do is email to subscribe.It's a great catalog and I look forward to it like a kid who waited for the Sears Christmas wish book as a kid.They sent me a question in the mail if I'd like to continually receive the catalog and I didn't call but sent an email saying yes.I hope they got it.I believe you have to email Chris or whoever it is on the superior homepage that mentions the catalog.
I sent an email. Hopefully I'll get a catalog soon to see what I've actually already placed bids on.
You would think past auction winners would automatically be on the mailing list. It's really no big deal, but that just seems like bad business. If I hadn't been reading these message boards, I would not have known about the current auction.
those ultra rare "grey border" '62 topps football (unitas & Tark) are hilarious. ooppps............ forgot to switch the border booster off the image enhancer. This is not the first offense, the '52 topps scans in the last catalogue are a hoot. I'll post a scan of one which amazingly aged to a creamy ex/mt tone during shipping.
Comments
The '54 Williams is disconcerting... how can the borders be so much more blazing white than the PSA label? And than the white of Ted's name on the card? There's something funny here, either bleaching or Photoshop work - course I'm not an expert on the set, it just seems like there's something to hide. And it does have a serious diamond cut... I measure it as 59/41 at the top and 48/52 at the bottom.
The '62 Tarkenton looks really nice.
The 38 Bridge Street '68 set looks very nice as well.
Joe
54 Williams' borders are blinding. Hmmmm...
ebay id grays
Visit my site at http://www.botn.com
John
I'm putting my guess in at $1,375, ending up somewhere in the Big Apple...
Mark
<< <i>With 15 9's and two 10's I am a bit shocked that the 72 Harmon Killebrew IA card (lot 591) is already over $1,150 with the buyers premium. Any other 72 collectors know why? >>
olander must have gotten another bonus
Psa 8 Red Man Ashburn
aconte
<< <i>I have two 71 PSA 10's and I paid about 700 for both. Which is why I am surprised that the 72 Killebrew is already much higher. 71 10's are much nicer cards than 72 10's, but I guess there is always supply and demand >>
Don't forget to add a premium for the fact that it's Killebrew. He's not the most collectable player but he is a HOFer and 500HR club member. Certainly he would demand more of a premium than a nobody.
Lots of 69's on the board are you going to upgrade any? I am expecting the package from NJ today they shipped on wed to me. I will forward to you your part as soon as I recieve.
Dave
but is the centering on this one really within
the 9 range? Seems a bit OC L/R to me.
will be a lucky guy.
<< <i>John
Lots of 69's on the board are you going to upgrade any? I am expecting the package from NJ today they shipped on wed to me. I will forward to you your part as soon as I recieve.
Dave >>
Thanks for the update Dave. I forgot to ship out the cards last week but I'm heading over to the post office this morning and will get them shipped today. As for the auction, I may shop for bargains but I don't see anything I have to have. I may make a run at the 1968 set if bidding doesn't get too crazy.
John
I have a few hundred extra PSA graded 1971 Kellogg's cards. E-mail for price list. Looking for 1970 Topps Supers in PSA 9 too.
I like the description on this lot, contrasted with the qualifier on the card.
bruce
Website: http://www.brucemo.com
Email: brucemo@seanet.com
Joe
<< <i>Look at lot 478. Does that meet the centering standards for a PSA 8? >>
It's hard to measure that one because the edges are blurred, particularly at the bottom right corner where the centering looks to be at its worst. Based on my measurements, at best it's 70-30 L-R and 65-35 T-B. In my opinion, that card should not have received an 8NQ
<< <i>I was thinking about going for the 68 set as well but it will probably be out of my price range pretty quick. Is it just me or do the all of the big cards in the 68 set that are pictured look off-centered for the grades? >>
It's hard to tell because the scan is too small. Looking at them, I would say they are within the spec but marginally so. That will affect my (potential) bid as well.
anyone notice a dealer on ebay selling
hundreds of seemingly desirable cards
in the same format and description as
you know who(s)???....
i hope this post is sufficiently
optuse or opaque.
Did anyone else have any problems?I started from the highest page numbers backwards when discovering this.
Did anyone get the catalog yet?
My Auctions
I checked the site several times today starting around 10:00AM EST and had no problems. Sounds like it might be on your end. As far as the catalog goes, what do you have to do to get it? I won over $1000 worth of cards from their Dec. auction. I know that's not that much, considering what some people spend, but don't you think that would get you a catalog? Maybe I just haven't received it yet. Does anyone know?
JEB.
For the catalog all you have to do is email to subscribe.It's a great catalog and I look forward to it like a kid who waited for the Sears Christmas wish book as a kid.They sent me a question in the mail if I'd like to continually receive the catalog and I didn't call but sent an email saying yes.I hope they got it.I believe you have to email Chris or whoever it is on the superior homepage that mentions the catalog.
My Auctions
This link should help you JEB
My Auctions
I sent an email. Hopefully I'll get a catalog soon to see what I've actually already placed bids on.
You would think past auction winners would automatically be on the mailing list. It's really no big deal, but that just seems like bad business. If I hadn't been reading these message boards, I would not have known about the current auction.
JEB.
ooppps............ forgot to switch the border booster off the image enhancer.
This is not the first offense, the '52 topps scans in the last catalogue are a hoot.
I'll post a scan of one which amazingly aged to a creamy ex/mt tone during shipping.
Carlo