• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

TwoYewts

Member
  • Posts

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TwoYewts

  1. @NickiO CS Hello Nicki, not to hijack a thread but I would offer a contradicting opinion and state that there is definitely a collecting interest in Sports Card error cards. From the various Billy Ripken errors, Frank Thomas no name error, Mickey Mantle name in white and so on and so on. If CGC offers error designations for TCG cards it shouldn't be that much of a lift to offer it for sports cards and a service\benefit that CGC can offer its collector base.
  2. Vintage Tobacco Card Non-Sport Sets Supposedly CGC wants to promote that they are grading Non-Sport cards other than TCG, yet anytime new sets are added its all TCG or predominately TCG. I have tried to help your push by sending in a vintage tobacco card set based on actors/actresses, put in a request to have the set added and nothing for over a month. I was hoping to have the set in place prior to the registry contest deadline but even with sending the cards in September and requesting the set in November when I received them back did not help. I would like to send in more to help boost your non sport registry but it appears that CGC does not truly want to embrace this community of collectors.
  3. @Leiataua Dr. Jon When you state "I suspect that if CGC offered grading for $7 per slab and then marketed that price point throughout the year for vintage, modern, and ultra modern specials, including on new releases, they would gain a greater following." I agree that would bring in a greater following; but, do you believe CSG/CGC would be able to handle the influx? I only state that because with the current low numbers that are being churned I see many posts here on the chat threads of users saying "what's with the delays in grading". Add on the backlog that I see when slot and set requests are made to when they are fulfilled, i'm not sure CSG/CGC's operations would be able to handle the influx that such an undercut would bring. I mean take for example their latest registry awards "contest". Stated on their announcement is " Ensure your CGC Cards Registry set is at its best by 10 a.m. EST on December 29, 2023" yet how are you suppose to accomplish this when they have such a backlog on slot, set and submission requests? I'm only speaking from experience as I have submission orders that arrived at CSG in September, were graded and shipped back by November and have slot requests or set requests unfulfilled. I do agree with you that building up special promotions throughout the year ala PSA style, offering specials on vintage or modern, etc, etc, will bring attention and more traffic to CSG/CGC grading...BUT, from what I see, I don't think they can currently handle it and that may be why they are not attempting your suggestions.
  4. Completely agree with MoshPit. I came over to CGC because I was sick and tired of paying high submission fees over at the 500lb gorilla's place only to get ridiculously inconsistent grading back. I find CGC's slabs superior to other slabs in the industry, bulk pricing that I can afford and the most important of it all...consistent grading. But, I am a primarily PC collector and I do understand and agree with the argument that the gorilla gets you more bang for the buck.
  5. Hello CGC community, Anyone else receiving errors when requesting new slots for existing sets? Each and every time I try to request a slot I receive an error displaying "Failed to save set type request". I am using a Win 10 machine and I have tried on Chrome, Microsoft Edge and Firefox. I have tried a different computer running Windows 10 as well and I have tried on my android based phone. I get the same error everywhere I try. Clearing cache and rebooting does not solve the issue. Anyone else seeing this?
  6. Hello Ryan, Apologies for never following up on this post. I do see the discount now on new submissions. Thank you. BUT, I was charged full price on the order that I had submitted when the error was occurring. Thankfully your co-workers on the accounts team rectified the issue by applying the difference in a credit to my account. For fellow submitters, if you experienced the same issue that I encountered back in September, I advise you double check what you were charged for your submissions. I was charged full price and had to reach out to CGC support in order to be refunded the difference in the form of a credit for future submissions. I personally do not believe that is the proper resolution to the issue (I should be refunded to the CC that was used to pay for the order since I was overcharged) but since I plan to send in a future submission I accepted the credit to my account and did not open a dispute with my CC company.
  7. Hello CGC admins, I have attempted to request a new set type in Sports Cards and keep getting an error message when pressing the submit button. Please see the screenshot below. I have closed my browser (Google Chrome on Windows 10Pro) and re attempted the request submittal but receive the same error.
  8. Like Iceman399, I have always used Cardboard Gold brand Card Saver I and Card Saver II holders when sending in my orders. Never had an issue.
  9. Hello CGC Support, Since the online form has become merged, I no longer see the 10% discount on grading submissions that my membership should provide. When I attempt to use the new online form for bulk card submission, the button for bulk submissions displays $12/card and not $10.80/card. I tried to add a card to see if it was just the button that was no longer labeled correctly but I also do not see the discount when a card is added. Could you let me know if its an issue with my account or if it is something else so that I can put in a new order at the right price. Thank you in advance!
  10. Hello Matt, Thank you for the response. I will send over the information that you mentioned in an email to service@cgccards.com. Thank you again for your reply.
  11. Figured this would be a topic relevant to most CGC subscribers/members. I plan on contacting support directly to see what answer they reply with as well. The question is, if a CSG/CGC card is purchased from a third party (eBay, card shop, card show vendor, etc) and it has an incorrect label, can the card be submitted back to CGC as a mechanical error at no cost? I know that the policy is that mechanical errors can be sent back to CGC within 14 days of receiving back your submitted cards to have the correct label applied to the card at no cost. But if you purchase a card third party you are not the original submitter. So I'm looking for input on what would apply to this scenario. I would think that CGC would want the card corrected to properly reflect in registry and pop reports but should the collector bear the cost? Thoughts anyone?
  12. NK, I believe BamaFan is listing on eBay (bamafancards)
  13. This site has a nice write up that should help: https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/identifying-fake-cards-as-counterfeiters-scammers-gain-better-technology/
  14. Hello jgresham07, I can't speak to the testing that CGC conducts to authenticate cards they receive. But in my opinion, when it comes verifying authentic vintage, doing a light test in combination with other tests (such as looking at the card's print patterns with a loupe, etc) is always best. As for the light test, the Topps 1959 set is an exception. A light will shine through the cards in the set because of their lighter paper stock. It’s also possible that a few authentic cards will fail a light test if a different supply of paper was needed at the time of printing. So definitely always do multiple types of tests to verify authentic vintage cards. Hope that helps!
  15. Hi Karl_Racki, Yes, they grade relics here are two of my graded examples: 1021502050 1020150017 There is an upcharge for the bigger holder. I believe it may have been $5 or so but I'll let someone from CGC inform you as I don't see that upcharge in the fee table right now for some reason. Hope that helps.
  16. I have encountered the same issue. I collect more vintage than modern and variations (and obscure issues) that I would have no problem getting notated/graded with PSA or SGC are not considered by CSG/CGC which has been disappointing.
  17. Bitter sweet as most of you have already stated. I have been waiting for the day where CSG would start to grade non-sport cards and since CGC was only doing TCGs it was not the answer. So it looks like I will finally be able to send some non-sport to get graded but at the cost of another label change which will hit the pocket. Been using CSG exclusively after several disappointing interactions with PSA support and issues with their grading consistency. Love the CSG holder, the low submission cost, the change to the black label and the consistency that I have received on my submittals. My PC is small potatoes compared to most of you and as most collectors I like to see a uniform look in my collections. At over 400 slabs that would put me out $2k which is not a cost I wish eat at this time, not to mention the cost that was already paid to move most of my greens to the CSG blacks to get that desired uniform look in my collection. So definitely disappointed that it appears CSG/CGC is sticking it to us collectors again. I believe CSG/CGC should take this into consideration as the collectors that have been with them from the beginning are the ones that they are screwing over the most with another relabeling move. I believe something should be provided to show some sense of gratitude to those collectors that decided to stick with them during the growing pains (I mean besides the multiple relabels this whole "system upgrade" has been annoying at best on how it has been handled and all of the associated glitches that have come out of it). I also believe the September 30th cutoff for $5 reholdering needs to be extended further as even though we are told this combination will happen mid July if the previous system upgrade schedule showed anything is that modifications/changes do not go as planned. So, bittersweet....I'll finally get some non-sport collections graded but it won't be right away since my funds will be spent having to relabel some sets (ugh).
  18. Hello NK, With regards to your question, I found the following on pokemoninvesting.com with regards to Pokemon cards: "These Miscut/Off Centered cards are very rare due to the quality control from WOTC and Nintendo to make sure that most cards come out in decent condition before being packaged into booster packs. Collectors tend to pay a lot more for a Miscut/Off Centered card compared to a really good centered version of the same card. Some collectors even get these cards graded and hope for a "Miscut" placed on their PSA label. " I don't know how true the comment above is and it may simply be a perception thing that has circulated around the TCG collecting community where OC cards are deemed a rarity instead of an instance of bad luck that gets thrown away. But then again, it could be true as I remember how bad Topps quality control was in the past. Hope that helps -TwoYewts
  19. Hello Maribeth, Thank you for the reply. Ok, I would prefer the 1910 T220 Mecca Cigarettes and 1910 T220 Tolstoi Cigarettes set descriptions..wasn't sure if I needed to submit with the set manufacturer or not. Thanks again for the reply.
  20. Hello CSG Support/Moderators, When attempting to request a new Set Type via the "Request a new set type here >" link in the registry, I receive an error (as seen in the screenshot below). I am looking to have the two following sets available: 1910 ATC Champion Athlete and Prize Fighter Series - Mecca Back 1910 ATC Champion Athlete and Prize Fighter Series - Tolstoi Back Let me know if I am doing something incorrectly or if I should go about the request differently. Thank you in advance.
  21. Good to know because I have a Reyauca Ronaldo that was on my list to send in, so I won't bother with that. My recent IT was an 06 UK Traditions Ronaldo. It did not show up during the card submission search so I manually added it figuring I was still good since PSA and SGC have graded copies. But CSG does not recognize the card.
  22. NK, I was under the same impression you were until I happened to look at my cc statement and I saw the full amount charged even though I had a card come back as IT. The card met the size specifications but CSG deemed that it was a card they did not grade. I was a little upset about it because PSA and SGC have graded copies of the card in their registries so I couldn't figure out why CSG would not grade it; but, regardless it is their choice on what they will grade. But then I noticed that I was still charged the full submission cost. I went through their webpage detailing cards that they do not grade and I didn't see mine listed there but i did see that there was a definition for Service Unavailable for cards that are not a size graded by CSG or are "obscure" which is the only thing I can think of why they did not grade my card. But, my card did not come back as Service Unavailable, it came back as Ineligible Type and I am hoping I can be told why because the only difference I see is that one definition is charged a fee while the other is not.
  23. Hello CSG Moderators/Support, Hoping to get a clarification between a card being classified as Ineligible Type or as Service Unavailable. Over the past orders I have submitted, I have had a couple of cards that came back as Ineligible Type. The cards in question were not listed on the "Cards We Do Not Grade" Page (https://www.csgcards.com/card-grading/cards-we-grade/#sports-cards-no-grade) and when submitting them I was unable to find them using the card search; but, I also did not see any mechanism during the submission process where I could chat/contact a CSG service agent to verify that the card I was submitting would be graded by CSG. So, what I am asking is why were these cards classified as Ineligible Type instead of Service Unavailable. From reading what CSG classifies as Service Unavailable, I see: "When a card is either of a size CSG currently does not grade, or is an issue that is obscure, it may be returned as “Service Unavailable.” Submitter is not charged the grading fee." So I believe the cards submitted were of acceptable size; but, they were not manufactured by your more well known card manufacturers so wouldn't that fall under "obscure"? I ask because I see that Inelgible Type cards still incur a grading fee whereas Service Unavailable cards do not. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Dan
  24. Good question. As a hobbyist collector who sends in cards primarily for preservation/authentication in order to be able to complete and showcase sets with a uniform look, I believe any price point within the $10 - $15 range for cards valued under $250 is reasonable. It fills the void that was left by PSA once they removed their low price point for subscriber bulk orders and grading specials. As a vintage collector, I have several sets that I would love to send in to have encapsulated. As we all know, many cards within a set do not carry the value of the more sought after cards and therefore I can't justify paying over $15 for common cards just to complete a graded set. At the current price point that CSG offers for bulk, a collector like myself can send in a set and not break the bank to encapsulate in order to add it to their PC. I don't know how feasible that price range would be for CSG to permanently maintain with the cost of materials on the rise; but, even just offering "Grading Specials" as they are currently offering is a welcome opportunity for me to send in another set or two to be graded.