Star basketball cards from 1984-1986 1 1

[micky 8]

Does CGC grade star basketball cards from 1984-1986?  Will ya's ever? or will ya's do a crossover from BGS to CGC? 

[CrystalM CS]

Hello,

We currently do not accept the "STAR" basketball cards that were produced from 1984-1986, this includes crossovers of this card. We are sorry for any inconvenience this may cause. 

[FusionXA]

PSA and Beckett are the only ones. I wouldn't count on them doing it anytime soon if ever. Have had this conversation several times with Westin and Andy in the past. 

[micky 8]

On 8/16/2023 at 9:53 AM, FusionXA said:

PSA and Beckett are the only ones. I wouldn't count on them doing it anytime soon if ever. Have had this conversation several times with Westin and Andy in the past. 

i thought the hobby was moving past that whole debacle with star, even the star cards produced by the ex star employees are legit, they use to work their ya cant tell the difference the print runs are still super low. MJ is becoming more of a legend everyday, the 84-86 jordan star cards are gonna be some of the biggest cards in the hobby, CGC has to get involved sooner or later, the 84 jordan star is his rookie its a liscensed card how can CGC not grade the original MJ rookie.. Collectors including myself want to get their star cards out of bgs but psa is insanely brutal on MJ's controlling popcounts, we need a CGC option to crossover..  Lets go Andy you know Im right! its like not grading the 52 mantle because of some rogue employees at topps

[micky 8]

On 8/16/2023 at 8:55 AM, CrystalM CS said:

Hello,

We currently do not accept the "STAR" basketball cards that were produced from 1984-1986, this includes crossovers of this card. We are sorry for any inconvenience this may cause. 

hopefully ya's reconsider in the future for reasons i mentioned below, If CGC wants to the number one grader they gotta grade the goats rookie! ha thanx for responding so fast 

[northkorea]

On 8/16/2023 at 2:02 PM, micky 8 said:

hopefully ya's reconsider in the future for reasons i mentioned below, If CGC wants to the number one grader they gotta grade the goats rookie! ha thanx for responding so fast 

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.

[micky 8]

On 8/17/2023 at 7:02 AM, northkorea said:

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.

they should authenticate the ones made by the employees as long as they can discern ones from the mid 80's from ones counterfeited today 

[northkorea]

On 8/18/2023 at 7:02 PM, micky 8 said:

they should authenticate the ones made by the employees as long as they can discern ones from the mid 80's from ones counterfeited today 

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.

[micky 8]

On 8/19/2023 at 3:41 PM, northkorea said:

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.

i did hear that psa figured out a way to tell the the difference between the original prints n the post liscense star cards thats why they started grading them but who knows how true that is ... , I like how cgc dont take chances when it comes to their guarentee but the 84-86 star are important cards in the hobby i hope they can figure out a way to differentiate the liscensed from the non in the future.. CGC over 200,000 cards subbed in july 💪 hopefully they can maintain those numbers to be the clear number two grader 

[FCT4NYI]

I do not trust PSA. Full stop. 

[micky 8]

On 8/23/2023 at 8:58 AM, FCT4NYI said:

I do not trust PSA. Full stop. 

💯💯 fr i watch a lot of reveals its insane how inconsistent they are, im baffled why psa gets a premium on their slabs, sometimes it seems like they are guessing or just putting random numbers on cards huge swings both undergrading and overgrading in the same submission within same sets of cards 90/10 centering getting a psa 8, a flawless card getting a psa 3..Ill buy n sell psa but ill never sub with em its a crapshoot 

[northkorea]

Almost always, a PSA 3 is the result of a crease. As for why people use PSA: registry.

[micky 8]

On 8/27/2023 at 10:41 PM, northkorea said:

Almost always, a PSA 3 is the result of a crease. As for why people use PSA: registry.

the psa registry has to be insane so many cards over the years I like cgc registry because you have a chance of having the best sets