Greg Morris Overgrading

[bcookie]

Bought a card advertised as NM-MT+ and SGC just gave it a 3.5

No bueno

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

All opinions.

[scooter729]

What did you think of the card? Did you think it was NM-MT as well, and is that why you sent it in to SGC?

[butchie_t]

Calculated risk and it did not pan out.

Butch Turner

[Leon]

At least they didn't give it a 2.5!

.

[Lorewalker]

Clearly you and the grader at Greg Morris must have missed a small wrinkle.

[oldjudge]

I bet Greg’s grade is closer to reality than SGCs.

[CardPadre]

That stinks, but maybe there's a gold sticker in your card's future.

[tiger8mush]

let's see scans

[Yoda]

Greg is very sensitive about his grading. Several years ago, I made a very mild
comment about one card I thought was a bit overgraded. Since then I have been banned from bidding on his site, which is a shame because I think he runs a clean operation and brings some nice raw cards to the market. I hope one day he will reinstate me.

[ALBB]

How dare you question him !!

[BRoberts]

Let's hope FedEx doesn't ban you.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It happens. As posted some time ago, I had a gorgeous card that SGC weirdly graded a 4, resubmitted to PSA and it received a 9.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by BRoberts

Let's hope FedEx doesn't ban you.

Then it gets personal.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

All opinions.

Yes. And nothing but opinions. Not that it's at all rare for dealers to overgrade what they're selling anyway.

Originally Posted by scooter729

What did you think of the card? Did you think it was NM-MT as well...?

Precisely. Your opinion of your own cards is the only one that should count to you.

Originally Posted by scooter729

...and is that why you sent it in to SGC?

Indeed! Why did you need SGC's opinion? In fact why did you pay money you could have spent elsewhere for their opinion?

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by Yoda

Greg is very sensitive about his grading. Several years ago, I made a very mild comment about one card I thought was a bit overgraded. Since then I have been banned from bidding on his site, which is a shame because I think he runs a clean operation and brings some nice raw cards to the market. I hope one day he will reinstate me.

Why bother to give him any further business if he's been a jerk to you? There are countless other dealers running clean operations who bring some nice raw cards to the market.

Incidentally, does Greg Morris post here? I wonder what his take here would be?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Have you contacted Greg? Would seem an appropriate thing to do before complaining about his grading.

[Beercan collector]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

let's see scans

And/or a link to the listing

[doug.goodman]

He tends to have pretty great scans on his auctions doesn't he?

"Pretty great" of course being only an opinion...

[Kutcher55]

Yeah I think when you're bidding on his stuff listed as NM/MT or better, you really need to eyeball the scans carefully and come to your own conclusions. Of course even the best of photos sometimes fail to illustrate a bubble or other small surface inconsistency, so sometimes that is easier said than done.

[doug.goodman]

Imagine what it was like pre-internet, hahahaha.

[Yoda]

[QUOTE=Balticfox;2544047]Why bother to give him any further business if he's been a jerk to you? There are countless other dealers running clean operations who bring some nice raw cards to the market.

Incidentally, does Greg Morris post here? I wonder what his take here would be?

[/QU

Probably because I had some great, profitable deals with him before I was shown the door. And I wouldn't call Greg a jerk, just sensitive about his grading.

[refz]

I haven’t boughten off him in a few years as I purchased a raw 1955 Topps Sandy Amoros RC advertised as ex or ex + and I picked it up for around $15. No biggie, but in hand it was clearly trimmed and bad. I mean how can you label it something like this. I guess on the same token the people he has working for him after looking at 10,000 or so cards a day or every few days are bound to let one slip or the inexperience of the worker perhaps.

[bcookie]

Scans added

[Zan]

Snap it and try it again, never know.

My buddy bought this card raw at the National, graded first time, snapped it and sent it back to SGC for a second time. See next post for that result

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by bcookie

Scans added

Nice card!



Pity it's entombed in a plastic slab though.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by bcookie

Bought a card advertised as NM-MT+ and SGC just gave it a 3.5

No bueno

I was going to say paper loss to the left of "LIFE," but a search shows that strip of white appears there regularly.

[Zan]

Originally Posted by Zan

Snap it and try it again, never know.

My buddy bought this card raw at the National, graded first time, snapped it and sent it back to SGC for a second time. See next post for that result

see here

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by bcookie

Scans added

Looks like you got a nice looking card for a nice price, why you would pay for an opinion on a $8 + tax card is beyond my scope of knowledge, except for your hope that you bought a lottery ticket, I suppose. What did the opinion cost you "all in"?

Doug "quitcherbitchin" Goodman



PS - you're big mistake was not buying the already opinioned 10 a week earlier (I can't get the link to work).

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by bcookie

Scans added

Did you see anything when you had the card in hand that would make you think SGC was right and Greg Morris was wrong?

[calvindog]

That's a crazy nice 3.5.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

I was going to say paper loss to the left of "LIFE," but a search shows that strip of white appears there regularly.

Staring at the scans on the screen definitely makes this card seem like it should grade higher than 3.5.

But then again, it's always dangerous to try to grade cards based on scans on a screen, and there could always be stuff that isn't showing up in the scans.

Or maybe you just got the grader of death, and a little crack and resubmit will get you a more appropriate grade, assuming you can dodge that bullet the next time around.

[Beercan collector]

Thanks for adding the pics Brian. The front looks Great the reverse has some noticeable toning. Looks like GM and SGC we’re a bit overzealous in opposite directions.
Searching eBay GM has sold a bunch of these recently including already graded PSA 7 - This day and age probably best to go after one’s already graded.

[Smanzari]

Originally Posted by jayshum

Did you see anything when you had the card in hand that would make you think SGC was right and Greg Morris was wrong?

Am I the only one seeing the discoloration on the back? I think 2.5 is Harsh, but this card is visibly not "NM-MT+"

[Beercan collector]

Originally Posted by Smanzari

Am I the only one seeing the discoloration on the back? I think 2.5 is Harsh, but this card is visibly not "NM-MT+"

Just mentioned it in the post before yours - 5.5 would seem like a fair grade , of course TPGs being Inconsistent is an understatement

[Smanzari]

Originally Posted by Beercan collector

Just mentioned it in the post before yours - 5.5 would seem like a fair grade , of course TPGs being Inconsistent is an understatement

Definitely missed that, was honesty distracted by the photo! Agreed on the grade - definitely somewhere in "EX Land"

[Eric72]

On my computer screen, it appears the back has uneven "blotches" of discoloration. It looks like dots spread out in a somewhat random pattern.

To my eye, it seems the back of that card has something known as "foxing" on it. That's a term very common to collectors of vintage comic books. Unfortunately, it's a form of mold.

If this is the case, I agree with the low "technical" grade of the card.

If I'm wrong, and the card is not speckled with spots, I apologize.

[theshowandme]

The back with some simple iPhone photo enhancements

Brilliance, exposure, brightness, contrast, etc. turned up slightly