• 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.

Debaser17

Member
  • Posts

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Debaser17

  1. I was wondering what you all thought of the new point system associated with the Registry?

    I’m ok with it.  It’s all a bit of a mystery how the points are allocated (I know they look at grade, recent sales, age of card, players stats, HOF, scarcity, etc.), but it seems to me they are giving greater weight to the age of the card.  I say this as I collect mostly vintage baseball and I moved up on the Top Collector’s list.  I always thought that a 60-year-old card, graded 5-7 from a HOF should be allocated more points than a Gem Mint 10 from a current day All Star.  Just my take.

    What do you think?

  2. On 6/26/2023 at 8:55 AM, Maribeth 1694433772 said:

    Hi, 

    I see we emailed you a request on April 21st to send 1401000566009 back due to a labeling error.  I will report the other cards to our programmers to determine the issue.  We apologize for the delay in adding cards to registry sets.

    Thank you. I attempted to send it back with my next bulk order but as it had been over 14 days there was a relabeling cost. 

  3. Hi Maribeth.  Thanks a bunch...greatly appreciated.

    I'm curious though, the card just added, (1031851002) is a first round HOF and was allocated under 100 points, while the other two cards were allocated over 400?  Do I need to request a correction?

    Again, thank you!

  4. I have submitted several 1 of 1 cards for the same set.  While most of the cards were allocated points (1031851001 and 1033119001), one card (1031851002) was not and the following is listed in the description "Non-competitive; for display only".  Can you please clarify why some 1 of 1 cards are allocated points, and others are not?  Thank you.

  5. Hello,

    I submitted a mechanical error Order #: CSG3191716759 on 3/8/23.  This was submitted at the same time as my bulk order CSG3627164630 (submission #1401000566).  I received the bulk order today, but the mechanical error cards were not included.  Do you have an update on my mechanical error submission (CSG3191716759)?

    Thank you.

  6. On 12/1/2022 at 9:54 AM, Glen Campbell said:

    When is CSG finally going to get cases to accommodate vintage cards that are slightly oversized from the 50’s??

    As a vintage collector, I am trying to build sets from this era and every single order I am getting cards returned ungraded due to cards not fitting in the holders.

    My order that just popped today has 3 cards from 1954 Bowman Football that all graded 8 or higher, but are being returned to me unslabbed because after two years, CSG still doesn’t have a holder that can accommodate this.

    I am trying to support CSG and their registry, but I am really getting frustrated that I have to send high grade vintage cards to other companies to get them graded / encapsulated.  This screws up my collection and I have to buy new copies if I want to include them in my registry set - which I clearly do.  This doesn’t even include all the cards that get returned as altered that are then graded without issue at other graders (SGC, specifically).

    I would really like to understand this.  I am considering sending my vintage cards somewhere else consistently if CSG continues to have these repeat issues.

    Good question, Glen.  I'm having the same issue with '56 Topps football and '55 and '56 Topps baseball

    SU.jpg