|
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Why or how is that?
__________________
429/524 Off of the monster 81% 49/76 HOF's 64% 18/20 Overlooked by Cooperstown 90% 22/39 Unique Backs 56% 80/86 Minors 93% 25/48 Southern Leaguers 52% 6/10 Billy Sullivan back run 60% 237PSA / 94 SGC / 98 RAW Excel spreadsheets only $5 T3, T201, T202, T204, T205, T206, T207, 1914 CJ, 1915 CJ, Topps 1952-1979, and more!!!! Checklists sold (20) T205 8/208 3.8% |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Actually, it'll be $700 per submission attempt. That's the PSA fee for cards worth over $10,000.
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think it is worth the crossover. My only question would be why did Mile High not submit it to PSA for crossover if it is worth so much more in a PSA holder.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
OP bought it five years ago.
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
WOW!!!!! $700 for the submit?!?!?!?
So if one is not current/up to date on SMR values...or values in general and submits a card. Is that submitter less likely to get a higher grade if they've undervalued their submission...whether intentionally or not???? |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
If PSA charged $50 per review for a $25,000 card, the owner will submit it 50 times just to see if they can get a bump. In my opinion it's a sort of luxury tax to help prevent market manipulation. There are very few $10,000 raw cards on earth, so this fee structure essentially only affects resubmitters. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Who says they didn't try?
|
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
So they'll check to see if it meets the minimum grade while it's in the other holder? Considering that there is minimal (or, if you're being cynical, no) difference between an 8.5 and a 9, is that even something that they can do? Like, can you get proper magnification on the sides of the card to check for bumps etc., while it's in the holder? I mean, I guess the answer is yes, but man...
What would they do if you sent them something graded by a really sketchy grading company? The kind of place that sometimes grades fakes. If you put a minimum grade on it they'd need to authenticate it without holding it, and so, e.g., without being able to check to see if it's the right card stock. Would they refuse to grade it, and if so on what grounds? |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bought the card in 2010 and doubt the price difference between PSA and SGC was large. After all it was a $6000 card so maybe PSA 9 was 6500. Maybe they tried but doubt it was worth the effort in 2010.
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Successful transactions with peter spaeth, don's cards, vwtdi, wolf441, 111gecko, Clydewally, Jim, SPMIDD, MattyC, jmb, botn, E107collector, begsu1013, and a few others. |
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
__________________
T206 156/518 second time around R312 49/50 1959 Topps 568/572 1958, 1961, 1963, 1964, 1957, 1956… ...whatever I want |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I believe it was answered above, but I initially thought PSA, seeing your good fortune also wanted a piece of the action? Just curious, do any of you see either of these cards costing me $700 dollars U.S. ($1000+ CdN) to get these graded?
__________________
52 Topps cards. https://www.flickr.com/photos/144160280@N05/ http://www.net54baseball.com/album.php?albumid=922 Last edited by irv; 04-05-2017 at 02:57 PM. |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| THANKS - Got the advice I needed | jason.1969 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 12-05-2014 09:47 AM |
| Newbie advice needed... | kllrbee | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 12-29-2010 01:21 PM |
| Advice and Help Needed | felada | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 4 | 08-05-2010 04:36 PM |
| Advice Needed...Trimmed or not? | ullmandds | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 25 | 06-19-2010 12:00 AM |
| Advice on selling needed | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 01-25-2009 09:19 PM |