[uvaspina]

I've changed all of mine to 8s, but i don't think it's that big of a deal when I see guys who still have theirs as 9s. A $25 card is really $20, and so forth. If you are ever uncertain, just click on the card and it'll pull up the OPG. -If it's a 20 plus card deal, I can see how it would be a pain. But most of my deals are for 5-10 cards, so it's not a problem for me.

The only thing that I watch out for is guys who have 9s mixed in with the 8s and who make straight-up offers for my 8s.

[bonds20001]

The vintage cards I have are sight graded approx...
The modern cards are 8 because that is the standard for the ungraded, out of pack, no flaws seen card. Anything higher than thet should be graded by a professional.
Beckett made the adjustment and I ask my traders to as well. However, if they insist that the card is mint (9) then I can adjust the value as needed, but generally, I do not accept their grading of the card...some people say ALL the cards are MINT..maybe they are, but for trading value..card to card...I can not say any of mine are "mint" unless graded.

[ricelynnevans75]

The modern cards are 8 because that is the standard for the ungraded, out of pack, no flaws seen card. Anything higher than thet should be graded by a professional.

That's how I feel about it as well. The way people like to overgrade their cards, I have a hard time accepting at face value that the card is Mint, especially after I got a "mint" Joe Mauer '02 Topps RC with a dinged corner one time.

It's kind of funny because I know people will scrutinize the heck out of a card that they may receive in a trade but the ones going out, eh, not so much. And no, this does not apply to everyone, but a select few that I had dealt with in the past, a couple of which are/were the "veteran great traders" on here.

[matrix99]

I agree with Cardboard Fan. Beckett made the mistake, they need to fix it. I have made a few trades knowing the issue and other should also when dealing with the trade. If someone asks for me to change the card during the trade to reflect hte correct pricing I will. but i also know if I hav e acard that lists $25 and I know it isn't I am not going to ask for a card they have marked correctly and get somethign higher than the other user might think it atually $25.
If we change all to an 8 and have some vintage, as I do and I know they are not, than I have to rechange all my vintage again. (or at least best as I can describe them). And as jakelovescards, I am no grader so I think I am harder on my cards and tell users where they can go to soo pics of my vintage so they can look as I ask for theirs. Only is fair.

[ceocards]

I agree with Cardboard Fan. Beckett made the mistake, they need to fix it.

That's what they did.

The MISTAKE was the old way (Mint pricing = default hi BV); it was not that way in any other publications or stated policies. It was wrong in the OPG.

They fixed it so that default Hi BV on modern stuff is NRMT/MT; consistent with their policies and other publications.

For those who are dealing in vintage or graded cards where condition is/was determined on a card by card basis, no change is necessary.

But for those who just deal in bulk modern base, inserts etc, all it takes is 30 seconds to go into org, select all, and update condition. Or, leave as is, but when trading remember to take the value overstatement into account.

[bonds20001]

That's what they did.

The MISTAKE was the old way (Mint pricing = default hi BV); it was not that way in any other publications or stated policies. It was wrong in the OPG.

They fixed it so that default Hi BV on modern stuff is NRMT/MT; consistent with their policies and other publications.

For those who are dealing in vintage or graded cards where condition is/was determined on a card by card basis, no change is necessary.

But for those who just deal in bulk modern base, inserts etc, all it takes is 30 seconds to go into org, select all, and update condition. Or, leave as is, but when trading remember to take the value overstatement into account.

AMEN!!!