August Pick-ups.

[irv]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Fantastic cards, guys!

I don't get the Aaron being a PSA 5, either. Irv is right, that 5 looks nicer than his 7 (not to disparage his 7 at all; it's a nice card, too). I'm going to withhold ripping PSA mercilessly until I see the back of the card, but I really think PSA has gone off the deep end.

If I were a PSA grader, or exec, and I saw those two cards side to side, with the grades given, I'd be embarrassed. Hell, I'd be embarrassed that the first card we ever graded was a major F up, but that's just me. "Little" things like consistency, personal convictions/ethics are important to me.

And that Dan-dee Mick is gorgeous!

I hear what you are saying about PSA. I have similar thoughts, trust me, but in their defense, mine is an older slab and from what I have seen, PSA is a lot tougher than what they use to be.

[DBesse27]

What was the first card they graded?

[KCRfan1]

The first card graded was the Gretzky Wagner. Even though the card was trimmed, they still gave the card an 8. I recommend reading the book, The Card

[DBesse27]

Oh, I know all about the trimmed Wagner, but I thought they were in business a while before they graded that one.

[the 'stache]

Nope. Serial # 00000001

Originally Posted by DBesse27

Oh, I know all about the trimmed Wagner, but I thought they were in business a while before they graded that one.

[begsu1013]

.

[KCRfan1]

There was some controversy over the Wagner back in the day, about whether it had been trimmed or not.

The owners of the card needed a way to " authenticate " it, and PSA was a fledging company that had just started up. PSA needed to make a " splash ", to get a name for themselves and what better way to do that than to grade the hottest card in the market.

For the owners , the card HAD to grade numerically. This would justify the price paid and help remove doubt about the credibility of the card.

For PSA, delivering a numerical grade to the card would be a positive for the hobby and THEMSELVES. People would be reluctant to submit cards for grading if the very first card graded, was deemed authentic or trimmed. Hence, negative news. PSA took off after the press coverage in the news and hobby industry after the very favorable grade the Wagner received.

This was a huge shot in the arm for a hobby that was on the decline.

Like it or not, this was great for the hobby and certainly PSA.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Nope. Serial # 00000001

Right in that it was the first graded card, but it's been re-holdered at least once. The 0's in the original slab had the slashes through them a la dot-matrix style. The slabs you still occasionally see like that are the oldest ones. My guess is it was probably re-holdered before Ken what's his name that owns the Diamondbacks bought it.

[the 'stache]

John, I'm not exactly sure how this is germane to the point I was making. It's late, so maybe I'm missing something. Or, perhaps I'm just being dense. Again, here's the comment I was responding to:

Oh, I know all about the trimmed Wagner, but I thought they were in business a while before they graded that one.

My only aim was to produce a picture of the graded card. A re-slabbed PSA maintains its original serial number.

BTW, I know what the original slabs look like. I selected this particular picture for the sake of expediency. The other pictures I found of the Wagner were much larger; I didn't feel like messing with resizing code, or reducing the picture size in Photoshop, and uploading it again.

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Right in that it was the first graded card, but it's been re-holdered at least once. The 0's in the original slab had the slashes through them a la dot-matrix style. The slabs you still occasionally see like that are the oldest ones. My guess is it was probably re-holdered before Ken what's his name that owns the Diamondbacks bought it.

[the 'stache]

I understand that ; that's why I said "if I were a PSA grader", I'd be embarrassed. Their inconsistency is awful. What they graded a 7 not real long ago is now less appealing than what they give a 5 now.

That is a black mark on them, if you ask me. Their wild inconsistency now makes cards with older slabs less valuable.

A little bit of variance is ok, but the difference between those two cards is staggering, and completely unacceptable.

Originally Posted by irv

I hear what you are saying about PSA. I have similar thoughts, trust me, but in their defense, mine is an older slab and from what I have seen, PSA is a lot tougher than what they use to be.