1949 Jackies on Memory Lane

[orly57]

These two cards are up for auction on Memory Lane. As of right now, the PSA 9 is Edging out the SGC by about 10%. In my mind, the SGC example BLOWS AWAY the PSA by any measure (most notably the registration, the whiter borders, and that awful print-Mark). I am extremely interested to see which carries the day: the card or the holder.

[pokerplyr80]

My bet is on holder. By more than 10%. But yea, the sgc card looks way nicer. If they were both in psa 9 holders I would easily bid 20-30% more for the sgc card.

[orly57]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

My bet is on holder. By more than 10%. But yea, the sgc card looks way nicer. If they were both in psa 9 holders I would easily bid 20-30% more for the sgc card.

I don't disagree with you Jesse, but how crazy is that? It is simply mind-numbing.

[Stonepony]

...and what's with that "O" on the cap? Print defect?

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by Stonepony

...and what's with that "O" on the cap? Print defect?

Yes. They are called "fisheyes".

[megalimey]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

Yes. They are called "fisheyes".

Hickey

here is a detailed description
A hickey is a small spot or imperfection that appears in print on images or flat tints. It is sometimes called a bulls eye or fish eye. The problem is most visible in areas of heavy ink coverage.

There are two types of hickeys:

Void hickeys are blank, unprinted spots in a printed area.
Doughnut hickeys are solid printed areas surrounded by a circular unprinted area. Doughnut hickeys produced by particles of ink skin collecting on the blanket or plate are called ink hickeys.
Hickeys are caused by dirt, paper fibers or hardened specks of ink on the printing plate or blanket. On offset presses the addition of a special roller, called a hickey-picking roller, can minimize the effects of hickeys.
one good thing you will never ever see a Fake with a printers defect
also with PSA you can look up Cert and Population report easily , try looking up cert at SGC not as easy

[toledo_mudhen]

Originally Posted by Stonepony

...and what's with that "O" on the cap? Print defect?

Or could just be Bo Jackson's cap?

Yea I agree - The SGC card should blow the PSA out of the water at the final hammer...the card - not the holder - after 20ish years of looking at slabs - I may be there..........

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Normally in these threads I don't see the big deal, or even disagree with the premise completely. But this one is spot on, the SGC is SO much nicer it's mind-blowing.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by orly57

I don't disagree with you Jesse, but how crazy is that? It is simply mind-numbing.

I think most collectors assume a card like that has already been submitted for a cross to a psa 9 and didn't make it. I sure would have tried. The perception is that PSA's standards are tougher and that it's difficult to cross straight across. I have no data to back that up, other than the couple of times I've tried to cross sgc to psa and failed.

Peter I don't really think the watch analogy fits in this case. People associate value and quality with a watch brand just like they do with cars, clothes, etc. That new Hyundai may claim to have the same features as an s550, but I'm not going to drop 100k on one.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

I think most collectors assume a card like that has already been submitted for a cross to a psa 9 and didn't make it. I sure would have tried. The perception is that PSA's standards are tougher and that it's difficult to cross straight across. I have no data to back that up, other than the couple of times I've tried to cross sgc to psa and failed.

Peter I don't really think the watch analogy fits in this case. People associate value and quality with a watch brand just like they do with cars, clothes, etc. That new Hyundai may claim to have the same features as an s550, but I'm not going to drop 100k on one.

Right but my point is that at least in watches, and I don't know about cars, there is no good reason IMO to associate that quality and value with the higher priced brand. You can get the same or a higher quality watch for much much less. So I think it's right on point. It's the same phenomenon that leads people to pay more for the PSA brand.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Right but my point is that at least in watches, and I don't know about cars, there is no good reason IMO to associate that quality and value with the higher priced brand. You can get the same or a higher quality watch for much much less. So I think it's right on point. It's the same phenomenon that leads people to pay more for the PSA brand.

Did you know that Mercedes once purchased their clutches from Ford?

Same clutch different holder.

QED

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Right but my point is that at least in watches, and I don't know about cars, there is no good reason IMO to associate that quality and value with the higher priced brand. You can get the same or a higher quality watch for much much less. So I think it's right on point. It's the same phenomenon that leads people to pay more for the PSA brand.

I think a more apt comparison would be if two identical watches were offered for sale in different boxes/cases.... with people willing to pay more just because they liked a certain box/case better.

[JeremyW]

Originally Posted by orly57

These two cards are up for auction on Memory Lane. As of right now, the PSA 9 is Edging out the SGC by about 10%. In my mind, the SGC example BLOWS AWAY the PSA by any measure (most notably the registration, the whiter borders, and that awful print-Mark). I am extremely interested to see which carries the day: the card or the holder.

Assuming they were scanned in the same manner, there is no comparison here. If you couldn't see who graded it, the SGC card would far outsell the PSA.

[jbl79]

WOW! The SGC example is over $91K while the PSA is at $39K.

[glynparson]

The Jackie looks like it was graded many years ago by the serial number. Back then even with the print dot a 9 was not shocking and from the looks and Mike's description I would have probably expected a 9 from 1992-2007. And before people scream that the standards should not change I agree but all three have tightened up in one way or another over the years in my opinion.

[gradedeflator]

Wow - strong sale on the JR SGC, but beautiful card...glad to see the market forces work as they should, someone buying the card, not the holder

I believe SGC has also graded two other high-end copies of the 1949 Bowman Jackie, one 98 and another 96. Curious what that SGC 98 might fetch.

[mantlefan]

A 1/8 inch piece of ink caused a $62,000 price difference! Amazing.

[WWG]

Originally Posted by JeremyW

Assuming they were scanned in the same manner, there is no comparison here. If you couldn't see who graded it, the SGC card would far outsell the PSA.

The SGC card is nicer than the PSA but SGC got it wrong when calling this a "rookie"

[rats60]

Originally Posted by WWG

The SGC card is nicer than the PSA but SGC got it wrong when calling this a "rookie"

What do you think is his rookie? The hobby has always considered the 1949 Bowman and 1949 Leaf cards as Robinson's rookie cards.

[darwinbulldog]

There's plenty to choose from, but I like the 1947 D302 portrait.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

There's plenty to choose from, but I like the 1947 D302 portrait.

The 1947 Bond Bread Exhibit (not actually from the Chicago Exhibit Supply Co.) is particularly elusive. The powers that be in the hobby used to call the 1933 Goudey Ruth his rookie too, in decades gone by. Whether a card is "mainstream" or a regional has ceased to matter much in the days of the internet and large auction house offerings--take a look at the 1914 Baltimore News Ruth or the various locally issued but scarce to extremely rare 1907 Ty Cobb issues. See also the 1921 Tip Top Lefty Grove. I got a kick out of an auction house recently calling the 1938 Goudey DiMaggio his "mainstream" rookie. T'ain't no such thing!

Regards,

Larry

[WWG]

Originally Posted by rats60

What do you think is his rookie? The hobby has always considered the 1949 Bowman and 1949 Leaf cards as Robinson's rookie cards.

Didn't the 1948 Leaf card appear first? Many also consider the 1947 Bond Breads.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by WWG

Didn't the 1948 Leaf card appear first? Many also consider the 1947 Bond Bread.

The Leaf cards came out in 1949, not 1948.