$117K SGC 8.5 DiMaggio WWG trimmed heavily, previously an SGC 6

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

PSA Wouldnt have graded this it's so narrow a blind bat could tell it's trimmed. SGC to me losses credibility with this one...sad hope they tighten up.

They wouldn't?

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

They wouldn't?

Guess what check the Pop this has now been bumped the Wagner that’s right to a PSA 10

Check the Pop WOW SO COOL WHAT A GREAT CARD THIS IS THE GRAIL now a 10 WOW

The card deserves it!!

Does anyone think this was done in error??

[Leon]

The person who originally graded it told me he couldn't see any trimming, and had no other evidence of alterations, so he graded it correctly at an 8. No conspiracy, no nothing. Now, after the fact and with other evidence, it's a different story. Trimming will never be an exact science and many are hard to tell, at best. .

As far as it being a 10...just some kind of gamesmanship or joke.

Concerning the original DiMaggio card, whomever graded it should have measured it first. Big mistake. The BODA group does a fantastic job. Kudos to them and I hope they keep going forever and a day!!

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Guess what check the Pop this has now been bumped the Wagner that’s right to a PSA 10

Check the Pop WOW SO COOL WHAT A GREAT CARD THIS IS THE GRAIL now a 10 WOW

The card deserves it!!

Does anyone think this was done in error??

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Leon

The person who originally graded it told me he couldn't see any trimming, and had no other evidence of alterations, so he graded it correctly at an 8. No conspiracy, no nothing. Now, after the fact and with other evidence, it's a different story. Trimming will never be an exact science and many are hard to tell, at best. .

Begs the question of expertise. If the supposed experts cannot tell the difference, doesn't say a lot for their services: if you can't catch stuff like this, why would I spend thousands of dollars for your blessing? Oh, and when the TPG pulls the cert out from under a trimmed card because the grade was wrong and they now look stupid and have to "do something", the one holding the hot potato at the time gets burned. "Hey, man, it's just an opinion and we decided to change it. You can't rely on our opinion." I've had this case brought to me several times and the end result is the same with the TPGs. They all say the same thing: "We don't owe you compensation. Look at our disclaimer." Here is SGC's:

9. Customer acknowledges and agrees the grading and/or authentication of items requires the exercise of individual judgment and professional opinion, which is subjective in nature, and can change from time to time. Therefore, SGC makes no warranty or representation and shall have no liability whatsoever to Customer for the grade or determination of authenticity assigned by SGC to any item.

20. Except as expressly set forth herein to the contrary, SGC DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, REGARDING SGC’S GOODS AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

22. SGC OR ANY OF ITS AFFILIATES, OR ANY OF ITS OR THEIR RESPECTIVE EMPLOYEES, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS OR AGENTS SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES, NOR SHALL SGC OR ANY OF ITS AFFILIATES, OR ANY OF ITS OR THEIR RESPECTIVE EMPLOYEES, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS OR AGENTS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES WHICH ARE BASED UPON ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE, BREACH OF WARRANTY, STRICT LIABILITY, OR ANY THEORY OTHER THAN THE LIMITED LIABILITY STATED HEREIN, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SAME.

Oh, and the final kick in the nuts for the customer who trusted SGC:

"25. Customer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold SGC and (as applicable) its parent, subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors, agents, and employees, harmless from any loss, claim or demand, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, made by any third party due to or arising out of or related to the submission of an item to SGC, related to the grade and/or determination of authenticity assigned by SGC, any services or products provided by SGC to Customer, Customer’s breach of this Agreement or the documents it incorporates by reference, or customer’s violation of any law or the rights of a third party. This indemnification will survive termination."

Yep, you read it right. If SGC messes up and the hapless buyer of the card comes a knockin', SGC will not only refuse to pay for its mistake, SGC will make its customer pay for its mistake. I wish I could write that sort of crap into my retainer. It would save me a fortune in malpractice insurance if i could just disclaim liability for any mistakes I might make. Hell, if i could do that I'd probably lose 40# of stress weight and not have gastritis every other day at work.

[Johnny630]

POP IS CORRECTED NOW IT’S back to a 8

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

The person who originally graded it told me he couldn't see any trimming, and had no other evidence of alterations, so he graded it correctly at an 8. No conspiracy, no nothing. Now, after the fact and with other evidence, it's a different story. Trimming will never be an exact science and many are hard to tell, at best. .

As far as it being a 10...just some kind of gamesmanship or joke.

Concerning the original DiMaggio card, whomever graded it should have measured it first. Big mistake. The BODA group does a fantastic job. Kudos to them and I hope they keep going forever and a day!!

At least according to O'Keeffe, the grader told him a different story, yes?

In any event does anyone claim it was pack issued as opposed to being sheet cut?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

At least according to O'Keeffe, the grader told him a different story, yes?

In any event does anyone claim it was pack issued as opposed to being sheet cut?

O'keefe has 100% taken things out of context when he quoted an *auction house, concerning an item of mine, in at least one instance. I would take that into consideration when evaluating what he says.
The PSA grader, Bill Hughes, runs a baseball card and comic shop currently. He is super nice and seems as honest as the day is long. He also sets up at local shows. I have no reason not to believe him.

Also, I have not seen anyone say this was a pack issued card BUT, when graded, I am pretty sure the origin wasn't known, otherwise I don't think Bill would have graded it.

* I corrected my statement as it was an AH that was taken out of context, concerning one of my items. It was not me that was quoted.
.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Just a general observation, when you meet many of the criminals in this hobby, they can seem as honest as the day is long. There isn't much room for context or nuance here, either O'Keeffe misquoted Bill, or Bill has changed his story.

[jbsports33]

I have a feeling with the DiMaggio card, SGC just had some non-experience grader and sense it was already in an older holder - issues and problems with just getting this evaluated again could have been avoided with better eyes.
Not defending them, just saying things are happening with non-experienced graders more often now. This discussion is good to have either way and enjoyed the comments.
Also, this issue could be hard to identify the way these cards had been cut - really, we only have the standard catalog to tell us the size. Would be interesting to look more into these WWG cards - do we really know 100% it was the same card

Jimmy

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

They wouldn't?

From what I understand Bill Mastro cut that card from an oversized football shape to the size of a normal T206 card, it measures correctly and might even be slightly larger than a normal T206 card, personally I would describe it as hand cut/sheet cut rather than trimmed.