[begsu1013]

agreed about the museum part, but i don't think it significantly adds value.

i have to disagree about it looking better than the 7's/8's. maybe one outta that bunch.

centering, registration and colors are, indeed, hard to beat but if someone is willing to spend 7/8 money, they will want one near that grade and w/ a pop that is significantly lower.

they aren't gonna shell out that 7/8 money for a grade that is near half of that and a pop that is trumped by the number of higher vs lower.

again, the card is gorgeous. the 4.5 does not fit and the eye appeal simply blows away the technical grade. no one is arguing that at all.

a big question is why hasn't it been submitted for a review? and if it has, that would make me tend to believe that there might be a minute surface wrinkle/issue somewhere that may be barely noticeable in hand, let alone in a scan.

a card that has an otherwise flawless appearance and just the hint of a wrinkle or crease is an auto 5. one w/ those corners, the only real flaw that can be seen via scan, would be designated a 4.5.

that's the only conclusion that i can derive as to why it's unfairly slabbed that grade.

if it hasn't been done so, i would send it in for a reholder, a definite review, and ask about slabbing the label "louisville slugger museum card" or something to that effect.

send it off to pwcc and let the market determine it and hopefully get a good bidding war going.

but that's me.