COMC grading service

[kairi-2008]

At COMC you can get your card graded, in the eyes of COMC, by COMC. Not referring to sending it to BGS. Just the COMC in house grade or condition might be a better word.
Looking to hear from someone who has used the service and if they thought it was worth it ?

[OLDPAPER]

Originally Posted by kairi-2008

At COMC you can get your card graded, in the eyes of COMC, by COMC. Not referring to sending it to BGS. Just the COMC in house grade or condition might be a better word.
Looking to hear from someone who has used the service and if they thought it was worth it ?

I understand that this does not answer your questions....but I know that when you send in a vintage card and you do not pay to have them look it over with a fine tooth comb....they are horrible.....the processor just seems to pick a grade out of a hat and you are stuck with it.

I would never pay them to do something that should be done right the first time when they accept a card to be listed in your port.

[kairi-2008]

Originally Posted by OLDPAPER

I understand that this does not answer your questions....but I know that when you send in a vintage card and you do not pay to have them look it over with a fine tooth comb....they are horrible.....the processor just seems to pick a grade out of a hat and you are stuck with it.

I would never pay them to do something that should be done right the first time when they accept a card to be listed in your port.

It may not answer my question, but I understand your point.
Thanks heaps.

[mjohnatgt]

1969 Topps #260 - Reggie Jackson [Good to VG-EX] - COMC Card Marketplace

Here's where I think it would come in handy. Basically, the cards priced over $100 are being overshadowed by the $44 and $70 cards. If your card is actually EX and you want to have it in a different bucket, splurge on the $2 charge and your $125 card doesn't look so overpriced. Or pay the $15 to send it off to BGS.

[cardsrus1]

Originally Posted by kairi-2008

It may not answer my question, but I understand your point.
Thanks heaps.

This is the slapstick you get from the "review" process...

[cardsrus1]

Originally Posted by mjohnatgt

1969 Topps #260 - Reggie Jackson [Good to VG-EX] - COMC Card Marketplace

Here's where I think it would come in handy. Basically, the cards priced over $100 are being overshadowed by the $44 and $70 cards. If your card is actually EX and you want to have it in a different bucket, splurge on the $2 charge and your $125 card doesn't look so overpriced. Or pay the $15 to send it off to BGS.

Except that those cards are simply over priced. I would not put any of them above VG. Corners, color and centering are not in favor of any one of those cards. Color could be an COMC issue, Deans cards sure do look good though...

[roro17]

I don't think its worth it. I did it on a Kris Bryant rookie card they just put a label on it and mark it mint/ near mint etc

[OLDPAPER]

Originally Posted by cardsrus1

Except that those cards are simply over priced. I would not put any of them above VG. Corners, color and centering are not in favor of any one of those cards. Color could be an COMC issue, Deans cards sure do look good though...

One of those Reggie's is mine.....mine is VG- in my opinion...no creases..but rough corners and edges..I think it is BGS 3..I think we all agree that there is a big difference between a Good condition card and a VG-EX card....apparently COMC does not....plus the SRP is $125....which proves how worthless that is....first $50 offer gets it gladly for those of you that like to pad your SRP

[ReggieEvansPC]

I've wrote about this on OZCT, I can provide a link to the thread through PM if you are interested.

[cardsrus1]

Originally Posted by OLDPAPER

One of those Reggie's is mine.....mine is VG- in my opinion...no creases..but rough corners and edges..I think it is BGS 3..I think we all agree that there is a big difference between a Good condition card and a VG-EX card....apparently COMC does not....plus the SRP is $125....which proves how worthless that is....first $50 offer gets it gladly for those of you that like to pad your SRP

Interesting that the one card that is likely the best of the group (not yours paper) actually might have been trimmed on one edge. At least from my non scientific way of measuring the cards, one card is off...

[mjohnatgt]

Originally Posted by cardsrus1

This is the slapstick you get from the "review" process...

I don't get your example. If you look at this one:

1976 Hostess All-Star Team #79 - Nolan Ryan
Courtesy of COMC.com
You can see that there is a broken border that should be on the card for it to be identified with a number grade (PSA) or anything other than Authentic. Since the dotted border is not there, I have no problem with their Authentic tag.

[cardsrus1]

Originally Posted by mjohnatgt

I don't get your example. If you look at this one:

1976 Hostess All-Star Team #79 - Nolan Ryan
Courtesy of COMC.com
You can see that there is a broken border that should be on the card for it to be identified with a number grade (PSA) or anything other than Authentic. Since the dotted border is not there, I have no problem with their Authentic tag.

Anybody hunting these down is well aware that they were not inserted in packs and had to be hand cut. I highly doubt there is much of a market for forged Hostess cards. I guess we could credit them for not tagging them as trimmed...

[bkcardcollector]

I actually just used this service for the following cards. They don't give gem mint grades. I submitted one or two others and I will be sending the mint ones off to BGS and we will see how that goes. I am hoping the Robinson get a 9.5. I wonder if I should get them to peel the cover or just send the KG in as is?

1998-99 SP Authentic #95 - Vince Carter /3500 [Near Mint‑Mint+]
Courtesy of COMC.com
1998-99 Topps Finest Refractor #230 - Vince Carter [Mint]
Courtesy of COMC.com
1998-99 Bowman's Best Refractor #110 - Paul Pierce /400 [Mint]
Courtesy of COMC.com
1996-97 Bowman's Best Rookies Atomic Refractor #R18 - Steve Nash [Near Mint‑Mint]
Courtesy of COMC.com

1989-90 NBA Hoops #138 - David Robinson [Mint]
Courtesy of COMC.com
1995-96 Topps Finest #115 - Kevin Garnett [Mint]
Courtesy of COMC.com
1996-97 Bowman's Best Rookies Refractor #RR1 - Allen Iverson [Mint]
Courtesy of COMC.com
1996-97 Bowman's Best Rookies Refractor #RR18 - Steve Nash [Near Mint‑Mint]
Courtesy of COMC.com

[cardsrus1]

While checking a port for sale last night I ran into a bunch of head scratcher's that would lead me to believe they have at a minimum of one person that is absolutely clueless when it comes to cards origins. Found a bunch of Sports Illustrated card marked as "EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING." For now we can ignore that the cards are basically unlicensed Broder cards that per their own "rules" should not be listed, but it is common knowledge they need to be cut from the magazine to be sold separately.

[mjohnatgt]

As to the Sports Illustrated cards, they have to be separated by their perforations by clean tearing to be graded with a number by PSA. Otherwise they will be graded as Authentic/trimmed. So again, COMC is going by the proper guidance because if those cards are graded, they will not get numbers. Which is what people who grade want.

[Jonathon M]

I wouldn't pay these amateurs 2c to condition review my cards... What qualifications/experience do these ppl have to do this... Look at their categorizing of VG-Ex, fair, etc and you can see it's all over the place

[Swipe79]

This is correct - the SI cards should not be cut out of the magazine. You have to carefully separate them along the perforations.

Originally Posted by mjohnatgt

As to the Sports Illustrated cards, they have to be separated by their perforations by clean tearing to be graded with a number by PSA. Otherwise they will be graded as Authentic/trimmed. So again, COMC is going by the proper guidance because if those cards are graded, they will not get numbers. Which is what people who grade want.