M101-2 Supplements in Memory Lane

[BobC]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I noticed that too Bob, although the Shoeless Joe has visible fold lines both front and back, and went for the most money. The Cobb may have a diagonal fold line also, unless that's just the holder. Fold lines are sometimes really tough to discern on these, but IMHO, even if they were treated as creases, that would not knock the grade down to 1.

There are some very small white spots on the back, often in the corners, that may be evidence of these at one time being in an album. Kind of hard to say as those instead could be some sort of pressure spots from being held in the PSA holder. Speaking of that, it will be interesting to see if these premiums slide in the holder. I own a couple of M101-2s in Beckett holders where they don't slide. Then again, the holders are way too bulky--I would have paid more for the premiums to have them raw then to now worry about trying to crack open these tombs and somehow damage the fragile contents inside.

That is kind of what I was thinking as well, even if some spider creases (as the AH termed them) existed, I couldn't see the grades all being lowered to PSA1's. I did not really notice the white spots on the backs till you mentioned them. The original back scans looked fairly clean, and coupled with the AH's comments of no visible issues on any of them, I didn't use the magnification to really examine them. After doing so I can see what you're referring to on the pieces. Seems the visible white spots (maybe some kind of glue or adhesive residue) you described are most prominent in the upper corners of the supplements, and then down the right and left hand sides, seemingly more pronounced towards the bottoms. There also seems to be some stain, discolorization, or something on the lower, right side edge of the back of the Wagner supplement as well. And there is most definitely what looks like some tape residue in the upper and lower left hand corners on the back of the Jackson supplement. Can't easily detect the spider creasing they described from the scans, so glad they did mention that in their descriptions.

So if there is some tape, glue, or paper residue on the backs, along with some creasing, I can maybe understand now the PSA1 grades. Looks like these may have been in some scrapbook or attached to something then, as you said. Being paper, I don't think anyone would ever try to soak a supplement to get rid of any such residue as it would probably ruin the supplement. So if these back issues are what really lowered the condition of these M101-2s, I would have loved to have seen these in person to be able to see just how bad these really are to only get PSA1 grades. The scans of these definitely make them look way better than the grades then.

As for the white spots possibly being pressure points from the PSA holders, can't really tell from the scans, but doubt it. Those white marks look more like random residue. The plastic surfaces of the holders should be smooth so the pressure points, if any, would more likely be larger, more pronounced, and consistent for all the supplements, which they are not. As for an M101-2 supplement possibly moving around in a PSA holder and damaging it, can't really say till I've had a chance to see and check one out in person. It is highly possible though that if there is any movement that a supplement could be damaged, they are fragile paper and over 100 years old. I've got one M101-2 supplement in a Beckett holder also. And you're right, the supplements aren't moving around in those, and they are also way too bulky to or store or keep easily. Like you, I would rather a supplement not be encased in such a bulky, Beckett holder, but would never try to crack a supplement out of one either for fear of damaging it.

Which now leads to another question. Why would the AH go to the trouble of mentioning the virtually unnoticeable creasing, but then state there are no other visible issues on any of the supplements, when there clearly are? The AH even went so far as to state that all of the supplements looked to be in EX or better ccondition, despite the PSA1 grades. Yes, I know they said "to the naked eye", but to then also say there are no other visible issues aside from the spider creases doesn't seem right. I have seen the hyperbole of AH write-ups before, but this seems to go beyond that. If they were only referring to fronts of the supplements as looking EX or better, and stated there were only talking about the fronts, then that would be a different story.