Would you have disclosed the fisheye in this eBay listing?

RiceBondsMT2Yng · 10-25-2018, 04:20 AM

I know I'd be upset if I paid $2000 for a modern PSA 10 and had to see that eye staring back at me. True, I only saw it after peering at the card closely but isn't that how we look at our cards?

Think this should've been a 9 or does it not really bother you? How do you think fisheyes should be treated in modern graded? Sellers, wouldn't Probstein have better guarded against a return if they had drawn attention to this?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1987-O-Pee-...p2047675.l2557

TarjetasBéisbol · 10-25-2018, 05:54 AM

Classic buy the card and not the grade right here. I think Probstein workers just list and don’t bother actually looking at the card. That fisheye should bug the heck out of me if I bought that without realizing it.

ksemmel · 10-25-2018, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TarjetasBéisbol

Classic buy the card and not the grade right here. I think Probstein working just list and don’t bother actually looking at the card. That fisheye should bug the heck out of me if I bought that without realizing it.

What are his employees supposed to do? What is he supposed to do?

TarjetasBéisbol · 10-25-2018, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ksemmel

What are his employees supposed to do? What is he supposed to do?

List it...just like any other large volume sellers. My response wasn’t negative towards that seller or the employees.

Vosen8832 · 10-25-2018, 06:26 AM

I'm missing it what is the fish eye?

jstephens24 · 10-25-2018, 06:29 AM

next to the Y in Barry

mjohnatgt · 10-25-2018, 06:30 AM

Next to the Y in Barry. It's a print defect.

Bowman1951 · 10-25-2018, 06:48 AM

Now that I see it, I can't unsee it.

It's silly this is a PSA 10....but Probstein has nothing to do with it or its disclosure. They aren't the grader who missed it.

callers · 10-25-2018, 06:58 AM

Everyone sends their garbage to Probstein......its no secret.

shrevecity · 10-25-2018, 07:29 AM

Not true. I send my better stuff to them. Less hassle

dictoresno · 10-25-2018, 09:00 AM

honestly, I didn't even notice it at first. ive seen a lot worse. but it was more common on the cards from the 80's. PSA may take that into account when grading, just like they do the factory rough edges. they also may not feel it takes away from the overall eye appeal of the card, which compared to others, really doesn't.

jr24ai3 · 10-25-2018, 09:06 AM

I wouldn't disclose it because it is visible in the scan and it is graded by PSA. If you list a PSA 5, you don't list the reasons why it's a 5.

superdan49 · 10-25-2018, 10:26 AM

No reason to disclose that.

ThoseBackPages · 10-25-2018, 11:15 AM

Beautiful card!

rainmaker · 10-25-2018, 11:19 AM

no reason to disclose. psa shouldnt have graded it a 10.

SaveMeTheGum · 10-25-2018, 11:36 AM

If you show a picture of an item, and the flaw is visible in the picture, isn't that disclosure? If you drop a couple grand on a card, aren't you examining the pics very closely?

no10pin · 10-25-2018, 11:44 AM

It seems that PSA typically ignores those. I've had to watch for them buying Brett RCs, because I've seen several 8s and 9s that have them.

I wouldn't want it, but I don't think the seller did anything wrong. That's the grade it was given, and the print defect is clearly visible in the picture. Not all 10s are created equal.

Bowman1951 · 10-25-2018, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaveMeTheGum

If you show a picture of an item, and the flaw is visible in the picture, isn't that disclosure? If you drop a couple grand on a card, aren't you examining the pics very closely?

dictoresno · 10-25-2018, 12:24 PM

Grading with fisheyes can be a case by case basis. Some are obvious and ruin the eye appeal, some like the one above, aren't that bad at all.

Here is PSA's definition of a PSA 10 directly from their website. Please take note of the "an allowance may be made for a slight printing imperfection". No need to "disclose" anything. It falls perfectly within the guidelines of its current grade. Is it the best PSA 10, no. But its a PSA 10 nonetheless. Case closed.

superdan49 · 10-25-2018, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dictoresno

Grading with fisheyes can be a case by case basis. Some are obvious and ruin the eye appeal, some like the one above, aren't that bad at all.

Here is PSA's definition of a PSA 10 directly from their website. Please take note of the "an allowance may be made for a slight printing imperfection". No need to "disclose" anything. It falls perfectly within the guidelines of its current grade. Is it the best PSA 10, no. But its a PSA 10 nonetheless. Case closed.

Well stated. /thread

RiceBondsMT2Yng · 10-26-2018, 04:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dictoresno

Grading with fisheyes can be a case by case basis. Some are obvious and ruin the eye appeal, some like the one above, aren't that bad at all.

Here is PSA's definition of a PSA 10 directly from their website. Please take note of the "an allowance may be made for a slight printing imperfection". No need to "disclose" anything. It falls perfectly within the guidelines of its current grade. Is it the best PSA 10, no. But its a PSA 10 nonetheless. Case closed.

Good point. But a PSA 9 "is a superb condition card that exhibits only one of the following minor flaws: a very slight wax stain on reverse, a minor printing imperfection or slightly off-white borders." The difference between what a grader - a fallible, unique person - calls a "slight" versus "minor" printing imperfection is the difference literally between a $2000 card and a $100 card.

If this had come back a 9, most people would also have been ok with it. It's one of those, the ruling on the field stands because there was not enough video evidence to overturn. PSA's subjective test is the type of thing that keeps a graded card admirer like me up at night. In this case a PSA 9 and PSA 10 are literally indistinguishable since they describe the same card.

That's why I thought maybe a little note about it might save Probstein the trouble of an extra return or two because it's admittedly easy to miss. And depending on the lighting and the purchaser's eyeballs, this could look a lot worse or better in person. And I'm a relatively newb but isn't that grounds to claim "not as described" or whatever? Or even just a regular return just because?

KhalDrogo · 10-26-2018, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RiceBondsMT2Yng

That's why I thought maybe a little note about it might save Probstein the trouble of an extra return or two because it's admittedly easy to miss. And depending on the lighting and the purchaser's eyeballs, this could look a lot worse or better in person. And I'm a relatively newb but isn't that grounds to claim "not as described" or whatever?

Probstein doesn't describe items. Anyone buying from them should be aware of that. You should look at every item they offer at the highest magnification to make sure you don't see anything wrong.

You can return for whatever reason you want. But with them or PWCC, you're going to run the risk of getting blocked from their auctions if you do so.

Hamfisted9 · 10-26-2018, 07:01 AM

Why would there be a need to disclose? Picture is of the actual card and its graded. No ambiguity here.

FT35 · 10-26-2018, 08:57 AM

There are some 10's that are "would be 11's" and there are 10's that just missed 9's. Think about that on a different scale using the 8 as the middle. There are some 8's that should be 9's and some that could be 7's--the difference between a 7 and a 9 is HUGE. So..you have to trust that the overall quality of the card falls in the 10 range. It's one of the best examples of that card--all requirements/standards considered. There might be another 10 out there without the fish eye--but with centering that isn't as strong.

I think this fish eye is less impacting on the overall eye appeal because it's yellow on yellow as opposed to say the common eye that shows up on the 87 Fleer Jordan--which is a light grey circle on black. I've never seen that particular fish eye grade out as a 10--no matter what the rest of the card's condition is in.

10-25-2018, 04:20 AM	#1
RiceBondsMT2Yng Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Oakland, CA Posts: 727	Would you have disclosed the fisheye in this eBay listing? I know I'd be upset if I paid $2000 for a modern PSA 10 and had to see that eye staring back at me. True, I only saw it after peering at the card closely but isn't that how we look at our cards? Think this should've been a 9 or does it not really bother you? How do you think fisheyes should be treated in modern graded? Sellers, wouldn't Probstein have better guarded against a return if they had drawn attention to this? https://www.ebay.com/itm/1987-O-Pee-...p2047675.l2557

10-25-2018, 05:54 AM	#2
TarjetasBéisbol Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: NOVA Posts: 10,891	Classic buy the card and not the grade right here. I think Probstein workers just list and don’t bother actually looking at the card. That fisheye should bug the heck out of me if I bought that without realizing it. __________________ De oppresso liber - RLTW "The Mexicans taught me that trick", "Let me be very clear, crystal clear" Last edited by TarjetasBéisbol; 10-25-2018 at 06:18 AM.

10-25-2018, 06:29 AM	#6
jstephens24 Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 2,598	next to the Y in Barry __________________ At the age of 5, a bear told me only I could prevent forest fires. Why I was chosen, I'll never know https://8thwondercards.weeblysite.com/ Twitter/IG: 8thWonderCards

10-25-2018, 11:15 AM	#14
ThoseBackPages Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Long Island Posts: 89,738 ThoseBackPages	Beautiful card! __________________ Pumpers Paradise #YouCryIBuy Four things that we cannot change each others minds about: Politics, Religion, Third Party Grading, and 2021 Bowman's Best Rookie Cards

10-25-2018, 11:19 AM	#15
rainmaker Member Join Date: Jan 2017 Posts: 2,824 thewescoast	no reason to disclose. psa shouldnt have graded it a 10. __________________ https://www.flickr.com/photos/152850287@N08/albums

10-25-2018, 06:26 AM	#5
Vosen8832 Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: Madison, Wisconsin Posts: 503 vosen8832	I'm missing it what is the fish eye?

10-25-2018, 06:30 AM	#7
mjohnatgt Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Niceville, FL Posts: 14,611 mjohnatgt mjohnatgt	Next to the Y in Barry. It's a print defect.

10-25-2018, 06:48 AM	#8
Bowman1951 Member Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Boston 'Burbs Posts: 4,717 djblitz Bowman1951	Now that I see it, I can't unsee it. It's silly this is a PSA 10....but Probstein has nothing to do with it or its disclosure. They aren't the grader who missed it.

10-25-2018, 06:58 AM	#9
callers Member Join Date: Jun 2017 Location: Eden Prairie, MN Posts: 227 callers	Everyone sends their garbage to Probstein......its no secret.

10-25-2018, 07:29 AM	#10
shrevecity Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 28,059	Not true. I send my better stuff to them. Less hassle

10-25-2018, 09:00 AM	#11
dictoresno Member Join Date: Jul 2017 Location: NJ Posts: 4,266 smzcards	honestly, I didn't even notice it at first. ive seen a lot worse. but it was more common on the cards from the 80's. PSA may take that into account when grading, just like they do the factory rough edges. they also may not feel it takes away from the overall eye appeal of the card, which compared to others, really doesn't.

10-25-2018, 09:06 AM	#12
jr24ai3 Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 3,740	I wouldn't disclose it because it is visible in the scan and it is graded by PSA. If you list a PSA 5, you don't list the reasons why it's a 5.

10-25-2018, 10:26 AM	#13
superdan49 BODA Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 4,272	No reason to disclose that.

10-25-2018, 11:36 AM	#16
SaveMeTheGum Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: NH --> CA --> SC Posts: 16,515 Cardboard_Dynamite CardboardDynamite	If you show a picture of an item, and the flaw is visible in the picture, isn't that disclosure? If you drop a couple grand on a card, aren't you examining the pics very closely? __________________ Pay fast. Ship fast. Deal with people honestly. IG: CardboardDynamite

10-25-2018, 11:44 AM	#17
no10pin Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 16,842 no10pin no10pin	It seems that PSA typically ignores those. I've had to watch for them buying Brett RCs, because I've seen several 8s and 9s that have them. I wouldn't want it, but I don't think the seller did anything wrong. That's the grade it was given, and the print defect is clearly visible in the picture. Not all 10s are created equal. __________________ Always looking for more George Brett stuff. Need more rookies, low numbered inserts/parallels and on-card autos (no Panini).

10-25-2018, 12:24 PM	#19
dictoresno Member Join Date: Jul 2017 Location: NJ Posts: 4,266 smzcards	Grading with fisheyes can be a case by case basis. Some are obvious and ruin the eye appeal, some like the one above, aren't that bad at all. Here is PSA's definition of a PSA 10 directly from their website. Please take note of the "an allowance may be made for a slight printing imperfection". No need to "disclose" anything. It falls perfectly within the guidelines of its current grade. Is it the best PSA 10, no. But its a PSA 10 nonetheless. Case closed.

10-26-2018, 07:01 AM	#23
Hamfisted9 Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Posts: 1,719 biznitches6mr8	Why would there be a need to disclose? Picture is of the actual card and its graded. No ambiguity here.

10-26-2018, 08:57 AM	#24
FT35 Member Join Date: Mar 2017 Posts: 2,211	There are some 10's that are "would be 11's" and there are 10's that just missed 9's. Think about that on a different scale using the 8 as the middle. There are some 8's that should be 9's and some that could be 7's--the difference between a 7 and a 9 is HUGE. So..you have to trust that the overall quality of the card falls in the 10 range. It's one of the best examples of that card--all requirements/standards considered. There might be another 10 out there without the fish eye--but with centering that isn't as strong. I think this fish eye is less impacting on the overall eye appeal because it's yellow on yellow as opposed to say the common eye that shows up on the 87 Fleer Jordan--which is a light grey circle on black. I've never seen that particular fish eye grade out as a 10--no matter what the rest of the card's condition is in.