• 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.

northkorea

Member
  • Posts

    451
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by northkorea

  1. I agree it was graded, as I’ve never had an actual label included with my returned ungraded subs… just that post it sheet.
  2. That’s not what OP was asking. OP wants to be able to request min grade 8, but have the card be slabbed as “authentic” if it falls below that, as opposed to being returned ungraded. He wants to proverbially “have his cake and eat it too.” If CSG ever did anything like that, I feel it would destroy trust in the brand.
  3. Out of curiosity, why not call him Nick?
  4. What does grade SU mean? Does it stand for status unavailable? I wonder if they graded it, but it didn’t fit the standard holder, but was too thin for the thickest holders.
  5. And, based upon Ryan’s link, I would be wrong. Why would CSG opt to holder the coin in the rectangle holder instead of using the actual coin holders from NGC? Does NGC grade the sport coins, too?
  6. I assume CGC will grade them, since CCG has access to NGC holders.
  7. Just check eBay sales history: #12/25 sold for $2.25 #17/25 & #21/25 sold $5.50
  8. Why ask here if you already know? Anyhow, the math doesn’t really hold. #/25 versions consistently sell for ~$8k-$10k. If a #/10 sold somewhere for $15k, that would place the #/2 price closer to $17k than $25k-$35k.. Again, it seems you know your own answer, in any case.
  9. My understanding (previously) was that CGC cards had longer serial numbers, but it seems apparent that they used the same numbers when doing your cards.
  10. Almost always, a PSA 3 is the result of a crease. As for why people use PSA: registry.
  11. Isn’t this just deflating? CGC decided to keep the Perfect 10 grade, after all.
  12. That is both funny and a sad result at the same time.
  13. To clarify: CSG Black 9.5 Mint+ cards will not be granted CGC Black 10 Gem Mint grades. CSG Green/CGC Blue 9.5 Gem Mint cards will be CGC Black 10 Gem Mint grades.
  14. My understanding is that it will simply be regraded.
  15. I didn’t see the best offer as a choice on the listings as I was scrolling.
  16. I finally got around to checking out their listings… VERY overpriced… like their prices are higher than I would expect people to ask for the same cards in PSA equivalent slabs.
  17. Better start looking into EPA rules about fire based disposal of plastics, paper, and inks. Oh! Stock up on some lighter fluid, too!
  18. I disagree. If cards are known to be stolen or printed beyond company defined print runs, there is always a large risk that, in the future, a way to discern a difference might be uncovered. I recall Steve Taft discussing how specific sets and the 1986 Star cards being reprinted or outright unauthorized runs, however, you seem to be saying that employees also printed 1983-1985 cards. That is a problem, if true. Technically, such information could cause the Star cards to be deemed unlicensed, since the employee ones would not have been accounted for in contracts. Beyond that, the rumor used to be that someone purchased (stole?) the plates/paper/inks at auction (warehouse liquidation? dumpster dive?) and created new cards. If Star never bothered to destroy/deface the plates and proofs, it causes authentication of legitimate issues to be more difficult. PSA guarantees their grades. I’m not exactly certain this includes guaranteeing authenticity. For some reason, although common sense would imply it does, legally, it may not. By contrast, CSG/CGC (much like SGC when CCG owned them) financially guarantees authenticity of cards they grade. If, at some point, a way is discovered to discern official and unofficial print runs for Star, it might leave CCG open to liability that they simply don’t want their shareholders to bear. Given Star Co issues are nearly four decades old at this point, there is no real financial incentive to accept the risk on this situation.
  19. Effectively, your post preceding this one quantifies why they may hesitate to authenticate. If you can’t tell *now* which cards are legit and which are the employee overrun, then CCG can’t afford to guarantee/grade the entire set.
  20. I thought I had replied to this somewhere, but I think that’s cut from the TOP of the box, not the bottom. When you say “sealed deck,” do you mean some sort of blister pack that would hang? If so, those aren’t issued by Topps. Those are after market repacks.
  21. They posted this same question before. They want to know what the standard thickness is (without having to pay for the thicker holders).
  22. You may need to pay for the extra thick holder (7.25mm), but I don’t know if they plan to still offer them under CGC. Based upon a pt of thickness being 0.01% of an inch, 7.25mm would be about 285 pt in thickness.
  23. The “error” (in this case) being the off-center/miscut centering.
  24. I was wondering if this card would be regraded as an 8/8.5 Error by CGC. :P