Hey Clarence, think the slab and report are good, especially the report. Slabs could use a little tweaking but all looks good.
Might submit a couple of my cards to them now, and I have never sent any cards off to be graded as I don't trust Beckett grading or that my card will return in the same shape, seen and heard to many horror stories.
Would be good to give the company some feedback so they can improve.
Ill tell you, if you listed a card on ebay (or here) as NEAR MINT and it came to me with that many faults, it would be getting sent back as NOT AS DESCRIBED!! unless of coarse those faults were clearly listed! But then im sure the word MINT would not be getting used in that same paragraph.
Funny. You NBA guys need to remember card grading is new to us AFL/NRL guys.
I completely understand where Sasha is coming from with the whole grading scale thing.
100% agree with where you are coming from Adam.I do understand that, hence the comment about CGA being great for NRL/AFL collectors. And I also understand his POV about the terms used, but the reality is that he/you need to accept the commonly used terms in order to be able to compare cards.
The thing is, grading is already a subjective thing. The 'grade' a card receives is based on the opinion of the grader. However, if there is no common scale used to describe the condition of the card, then that makes the actual terms used to describe the condition opinionated as well! You need to have uniform terms in the hobby to allow people to compare apples and apples. If I described a card on eBay as 'nearly immaculate' then how would you ever know what to expect?
I see that all NRL and AFL collectors have no problem picking up on the term 'Mint' as a description, so now they just need to look into what the common terms are for the other conditions!
You seem to be assuming a ratio scale. It's actually ordinal. Translation - the numeric value is not a percentage.
I do understand that, hence the comment about CGA being great for NRL/AFL collectors. And I also understand his POV about the terms used, but the reality is that he/you need to accept the commonly used terms in order to be able to compare cards.
The thing is, grading is already a subjective thing. The 'grade' a card receives is based on the opinion of the grader. However, if there is no common scale used to describe the condition of the card, then that makes the actual terms used to describe the condition opinionated as well! You need to have uniform terms in the hobby to allow people to compare apples and apples. If I described a card on eBay as 'nearly immaculate' then how would you ever know what to expect?
I see that all NRL and AFL collectors have no problem picking up on the term 'Mint' as a description, so now they just need to look into what the common terms are for the other conditions!
Hmm definitely something I will look into and research about. Yep, it's something that would be new to AFL & NRL collectors, so we may not have as much extensive knowledge as you NBA guys.
Using the 2012 Footycards Draft Prospects Cards as an example, would it be reasonable to expect a high grading since all the cards are pre-packed in a penny sleeve & toploader?
Are there any basketball products that come pre-packaged in toploaders etc?
Excuse my ignorance.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?