![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
It's hard to do but I hear about cards getting bumps from other collectors that seem credible. Remember Sean's post that he bumped that psa 9 60 all star mantle from a 9 to a 10? In the holder even. There are guys who regularly resubmit cards until they get the grade they want. I wouldn't be surprised if that one ends up in a 7.5 or 8 holder some day. Not that we will ever know.
__________________
Successful transactions with peter spaeth, don's cards, vwtdi, wolf441, 111gecko, Clydewally, Jim, SPMIDD, MattyC, jmb, botn, E107collector, begsu1013, and a few others. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
then again, this can be just another ridiculous post by me.. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Conspiracy theorists may say grading companies like to encourage multiple resubmissions to make more money and therefore have to bump a card once in a while. I have no idea if this is true but it wouldn't surprise me in the least.
__________________
Successful transactions with peter spaeth, don's cards, vwtdi, wolf441, 111gecko, Clydewally, Jim, SPMIDD, MattyC, jmb, botn, E107collector, begsu1013, and a few others. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Lot of merit in what you said. LOL! Plus, you are comparing apples to orangutans citing SGC/BVG/Gai as valid TPG vs earlier PSA flips of 20+ years ago. Maybe the seller tried and it failed . . . of maybe he didn't try? While I wouldn't have honked up $3100 for the K-line in 7, if I had, it would be on the road to Newport for a poss. bumpo soon as it came knocking.
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The card could have been shilled too, funny that never entered into the equation....only 2 bidders over 1400 to make it a 3500 card.....
understand buy the card not the holder but people sell the holder not the card...i have a few centered 7 kalines ..i just think i dont get more than 1500 in a pwcc auction...but maybe the market has changed.... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Although it has been many years since half grades were introduced, I can assure you there are many collectors with cards in their collection that have not submitted for review for bumps. Me for one. I was heavy into collecting 10 years ago and now getting back in. I have never submitted for review. I am sure there are many like me who just bought the cards and put them in a vault. Sending back in carries transit risk even if small and many casual collectors don't go to the big shows
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
david,
what's up! bought your 79 gretzky opc ![]() any luck on a scanner? Last edited by begsu1013; 04-14-2016 at 08:50 AM. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hey Bob. I have been following your posts here and mostly lurking for the past couple months. I haven't seen many Gretzky 9s for sale since a bit of a rush two months ago with PWCC and me when you practically stole mine 😂 with your auction skills. PSA board has been pretty quiet. Still shopping for a high quality scanner. Good to hear from you. Dave
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
yea, I heard they mod went heavy on another round of banishments over there. killing it softly seems to be their method and it seems to be working.
anyways, go w/ the epson. i'm telling ya. best scanner out there! |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
PS - +1 on the Epson. I have one. For the money, it can't be beat. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
if it is reviewed and achieves a bump, it will remain w/ the current cert number... bumped this on review sub 9/10/15. (took 2 attempts) along w/ a 71 ryan from an 8 to 8.5 1 1 31651697 MINT 9 1970 Topps 712 Nolan Ryan Card 2 1 21266885 MINT 9 1970 Topps 712 Nolan Ryan Card 3 1 09110243 MINT 9 1970 Topps 712 Nolan Ryan Card 4 1 21096450 GEM MINT 10 1970 Topps 712 Nolan Ryan Card 5 1 31045570 MINT 9 1970 Topps 712 Nolan Ryan Card 6 1 08203431 MINT 9 1970 Topps 712 Nolan Ryan Card 7 1 23027601 NEAR MINT-MINT+ 8.5 1971 Topps 513 Nolan Ryan Card 8 1 31849568 NEAR MINT-MINT+ 8.5 1971 Topps 513 Nolan Ryan Card ![]() Last edited by begsu1013; 04-04-2016 at 09:24 AM. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
submitted raw or in holder...thats an amazing feat |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"review" means it was submitted in the holder...
and thank you. Last edited by begsu1013; 04-04-2016 at 09:29 AM. Reason: to add parenthesis |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]() |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I resubmit a decent amount of cards every year. I have always had them put any card where the grade and number were on the same line in a newer flip, this is the stated policy, and it is what I have always experienced. I do not think this card was resubmitted.
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
my ryan?
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Successful transactions with peter spaeth, don's cards, vwtdi, wolf441, 111gecko, Clydewally, Jim, SPMIDD, MattyC, jmb, botn, E107collector, begsu1013, and a few others. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
That 1970 Ryan is a great looking card. I love Gem Mint cards as much as the next guy, but think about how silly it really is the price differential between a PSA 9 and a PSA 10 of any card. While that same 1970 Ryan sits between 2 pieces of plastic in a holder with PSA labeling it a 9, its worth XXX dollars. Nobody can tell the difference between a PSA 10 and a PSA 9. Its totally subjective. As is proved time and time again, the exact same card can get submitted and get graded either a 9 or 10. Now the same grading company, on a different day, takes the same 1970 Ryan and somehow determines its really a PSA 10. So it labels it as such and voila, the same card is now worth maybe 10-100 times XXX dollars. Its the same damn card. On one day its a 9, the next day its a 10. Guess what, if someone cracks it out of the 10 holder and sends it back to PSA, it will most likely come back a 9. Its a big game that PSA offers to get everyone to submit more cards and pay them more fees. And the hobby is full of suckers(I mean collectors) willing to participate. I dont blame PSA one bit for offering this game. As long as there are suckers out there who are willing to pay 10-100 times the price of PSA 9 for a PSA 10 for the exact same card in a different holder, why not offer the game. There are certainly enough wealthy folks who are willing to pay those prices and I dont blame them either, its their money and usually its really just pocket change for them, a rounding error in their millions or billions of net worth. But think about it, any card in a PSA 10 holder could easily be in a PSA 9 holder and nobody would think twice. Same on the flip side, any card in a PSA 9 holder could easily be in a PSA 10 holder and nobody would think twice. The game makes PSA alot of money, provides a lot of gamblers (ie those trying to submit raw cards to get 10s or resubmits of 9s to get 10s) with another avenue to gamble hoping to win a slot jackpot (ie score a 10 on a card), and provides another trophy for a super wealthy person to purchase. In the end, the card is the same card it was prior to having a different label put on it by PSA. Does anyone think the game will ever end?
Last edited by ashes13; 04-10-2016 at 01:40 PM. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
nope.
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Worth mentioning there are a ton of tilty or print problem PSA 9 cards out there that would come back 8s today, and never, ever get a 10.
But yes, totally agree that the best, most centered PSA 9s are 10s on the right day. Also agree that many 10s would NOT be 10s if sent back again. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
WTB: 1954 Topps Al Kaline PSA 7-8 | 1952boyntoncollector | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 06-26-2015 01:02 PM |
FS - 1954 Topps Al Kaline | Roofman4 | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 2 | 06-12-2015 08:08 AM |
1954 Topps Al Kaline PSA/DNA 10 | maddux311 | Autographs & Game Used B/S/T | 1 | 05-29-2015 01:32 PM |
1954 Topps Al Kaline PSA 5 1954 Topps Ernie Banks PSA 3 MC | Sean1125 | Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T | 0 | 05-18-2013 10:00 AM |
1954 Topps Al Kaline PSA 7 | OldSchoolBaseball | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 06-13-2010 04:50 PM |