[lowsyplayer]

So this is my first post as I want to get back into collecting Michael Jordan cards again, I would like to think I have an amazing collection but I would like to grow it...

Anyways, the card in question is my 1997-98 Finest gold refractor 195/289, and I was lucky to pull this in a pack the very first day I could buy this pack a looong time ago. I never took the Finest protective cover on this card and is in gem condition in my opinion, however I knew of a factory defect the moment I opened it...This card was cut short actually on the bottom of the card by literally half a millimeter.

As i decided to get back in collecting, I decided to have this card graded among of about 60 cards from my Jordan collection that all range between $100-1000 bv. I was glad to see almoat every card get a 9 or 9.5, however.....

I actually got a call from Beckett talking about this card, basically this card did not make the sizing requirements to be graded and if I wanted it slabbed, they would put Authenic altered on the slab in which I DID NOT agree and became very agitated because this is not altered and if it was, the protective film would somehow show proof of altercation but there is no such evidence of it, and I received it like that. So I decided they just not do anything with the card.

To me this has to be some sort of 1/1 unless anyone else has heard of this card being short trimmed from the factory. I see a couple from time to time graded on ebay so I believe I have something incredibly rare, although the card is of course rare as it is. Also I am going to figure out how to post pics, from my phone, the attachment says my pics are too large.

[carrollm09]

No one is going to think that it's a 1/1 because it is missized. Your statement that you've seen them from time to time and, as such, they might be incredibly rare has more to do with 99% of the cards being cut to spec rather than 1% being intentionally cut short. There's always a market for MJ and it's still a great card, but I'd expect less for it, not more.

As for Beckett grading, they don't have a separate label for 'production flaws', only for errors or altered cards. Errors refer to incorrect labeling, missing stamps or foil, missing die-cut, embossing or serial numbers...things that can't be changed after the fact since you can't reasonably remove them.

I'm not entirely sure what response you'd like. Obviously people buying graded cards do not want to buy a graded 9-9.5 with a known error and it would compromise Beckett's grading service if they did it. I understand it's not altered, but what would you like Beckett to do?

Edit: I don't think it's a 1/1 and I don't think most people would consider it one. There 'might' be someone out there who would, and I can understand your frustration over a defect that might lower a great card's value as well as a desire to get the most out of your card. If you advertise it as a 1/1 most people are going to scoff at it, but it's the v Internet and that's what people do and it shouldn't affect you.

Welcome to the boards, though!

[jacobystealshome]

congrats! you have a flawed card, not a 1/1

that could have been a sweet card, but, its flawed. not an error, but we can call it unique. but unique doesnt increase value. being flawed, it deeply DECREASES value

and of course beckett wont grade it without a proper labeling. it doesnt matter if it came from the pack that way or not

[djohn]

It sucks that the card came from the pack that way. Had you noticed it back in 1998 then you probably could have had Topps send you a properly cut one in exchange. However a production flawed card is still considered a damaged card. It is like saying, I opened a pack and one of the cards had a huge crease in it, or that it was so badly centered that you could see the next card, or that it was cut in half and it was only 1/2 the normal card size. It doesn't make the card rare, it makes it damaged and less desirable. It really is a bummer that such a nice card was mis-cut, but it happens. It's really no surprise that Beckett wouldn't grade it, as they would have to take you on your word that the card came out of the pack that way and wasn't altered afterward. Simply saying that the protective film is still in place doesn't say much as an expert could easily trim a card and the film without it being noticeable.

[altz11]

Welcome to the boards.
I'm also a Jordan collector!
I'm with the majority on this one, definitely don't consider it a 1/1.
I'm not sure if it would be beneficial to have it slabbed or left raw.
It's really cool that you actually pulled that card from a pack though.

[zinger82]

Super confused by this post, there was a 97-98 refractor listed on eBay completed auctions with the same serial number (#195) graded as mini size by PSA. The eBay listing looks like the sheet cut version that had a serial number added afterwards (different size font). Pictures from the eBay listing below...

[xarzy]

Super confused by this post, there was a 97-98 refractor listed on eBay completed auctions with the same serial number (#195) graded as mini size by PSA. The eBay listing looks like the sheet cut version that had a serial number added afterwards (different size font). Pictures from the eBay listing below...

Minsizreq means the card didn't meet minimum size requirement to be slabbed

[jacobystealshome]

so, op went grade shopping, tried psa, then said no, now he tries beckett, and he whines they wont do it

hint: aint nobody buying this whole thing

[zinger82]

I clearly know what minisizerq means. The card I posted pics of was actually sold on eBay just a few weeks ago. Meaning the OP is not likely being honest with us and trying to figure out what to do with his miscut card.

[crimedawg47]

I clearly know what minisizerq means. The card I posted pics of was actually sold on eBay just a few weeks ago. Meaning the OP is not likely being honest with us and trying to figure out what to do with his miscut card.

Aka try to hype it up but nobody here is buying this one bit.