1955 Topps 'New' Jackie Robinson Variation

[swarmee]

If it's an obvious variation (like this or yellow fingerprint 1972 or streaks in sky 1963), I don't see why it wouldn't be cataloged and distinguished by the grading companies. Is it because Master set collectors wouldn't want to keep having to buy cards when new variations are blessed?
Why do white back/gray back differences get precedence in a master set in some sets, and aren't distinguished in other sets? There's no consistency.

Why doesn't PSA recognize all the different T205 backs by company instead of putting them all into a single bucket? It's definitely not value, because some commons with rare backs might be worth thousands more than ones with common backs. And those backs are fully recognized as different variations.

Maybe SGC sees an underserved niche in the hobby for variation collectors. PSA requires price guides to bless new variations, but SGC has decided they will try to do it themselves. PSA lost out on the Mascot Dog Food Mantle to BGS because they would not slab it without knowing the entire Mascot set listing.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by swarmee

If it's an obvious variation (like this or yellow fingerprint 1972 or streaks in sky 1963), I don't see why it wouldn't be cataloged and distinguished by the grading companies. Is it because Master set collectors wouldn't want to keep having to buy cards when new variations are blessed?

Then should all of the non-intentional print variations on Richard D's list be cataloged and distinguished by grading companies? Where would it ever end?

A card like the 73 Band-Aid Kaline still has not been distinguished by grading companies, so why should yet another card with a non-intentional print variation receive a designation?

If any one person had enough time, some sort of print variation could be found on almost any card.....