Catch 22 of card grading - is it worth the gamble?
 

Before my post, I do have some graded cards and don’t begrudge collectors who grade cards. I just want to give a recent observation on grading cards and the process of grading.

At a recent card show, I met a dealer who had a large assortment of graded cards for sale. During conversations, the dealer said recently received a 500 vintage card submission back from a grading company. He said 250 of the cards were in his showcase. I asked where were the other 250 cards? He said at home because he was in a catch 22 in regards to the cards.

He believed the 250 card lot at home were either undergraded or came back as altered. He said he knew the cards were not altered. He believed he had two options.

1. Sell the slabbed (and unslabbed) as is and take a perceived loss because of the current grades.
2. Resubmit the cards back to either the first grading company or another grading company and hope for higher grades.

He said he would have think about what he would do. I wished him the best.

The conversation struck a chord with me. I couldn’t imagine trying to regrade these 250 cards, but is that commonplace? Is the first thought “if I don’t get the grade I want, I will resubmit”? To me, that is too big a gamble to take, especially with grading cost and turnaround times.

My anecdotal observation
 

I think it used to be much more commonplace. With the combination of the grading standard bar having been raised and the huge increased cost of grading - I suspect it will be happening a lot less - case in point - I am sure you would not have heard about it if they were on their way back already!

That said, I also relate to the conundrum (though I don't think I have ever sent in 250 cards in a single submission) - I just got back a 1971 Clemente that in my opinion is an "8" all day long - The grader gave it a 7. An 8 is a $2K+ card. A 7 is an ~$800 card. The card is clearly nicer than all but a couple of recently graded 7's (even nicer than a lot of 8's!). I have in the mean time decided to offer the card at $1250 - a premium over a "7" but a discount to an "8" rather than play the grading game and sending it back.

From what I am seeing and hearing, the scenario of that dealer seems to be more common, these days. The avg submitter seems to be taking the brunt of the more strict grading. For some/most/all of the larger auction houses who submit their consignors' material, they do not seem to be getting assessed as harshly. Gee I wonder why?

If he got half of a large submission back as altered or, in his opinion, undergraded,there's something wrong with his vetting process.

Sounds like SGC, their graders are on a "trimmed", "altered" kick right now when it comes to pre-war.

I’m going to preface that i myself really like sending cards in for grading only within certain limits expectations, kinda pick and choose your best cards with the most upside potential. I never crack cards without knowing the history, where it come from raw, whom it was graded by ect. I’ll only usually do this on cards I had raw first.

That being said I have noticed it seems like far to many feel the need to just grade And hope for the best. It’s like a gambler who had some luck grading in the past, maybe scored on a couple cards.
Now they think they’re good and can one up the house so then send in. When cards come back much harsher graded then expected they have an issue of wether to cut their losses or double down. Many double down and repeat the same cycle, it’s a gamble, could it work or could it be danger zone, idk but check some peoples credit card bills who are pissed when they get charged and aren’t getting the graded they perceived. If you have conviction in your card sure keep trying but to arbitrarily keep sending back in is risky business.

Has anyone heard of an instance where someone who paid for grading with a credit card took exception to the grades they got, and filed a claim with their credit card company because they felt they were cheated and not given the proper service they paid for?

I myself do not send cards in to be graded. (Only submitted items once to prove authenticity.) But I hear and understand that TPGs normally won't tell submitters exactly what they found/feel is wrong with a card when grading it, and also claim to not keep notes or records to really back up their opinions either. So, if someone felt they really got screwed by a TPG, could they get away with taking them to task and claiming they did not accurately grade their cards and, therefore, successfully file a claim for refund with their CC company? Since the TPGs claim to keep no notes or records, what would they have to show to a CC company to prove they actually did what they claimed and got paid for, to examine and ACCURATELY grade and encapsulate someone's cards.

Would be interesting to hear the outcome if someone's ever tried doing that.

I have actually heard of someone filing with their CC company. I recall it was Beckett,but not sure if I ever heard the outcome.

Bob I don’t think so. When you send in the cards you’re agreeing to only be paying for their opinion, that’s it.

Hmmmm! Interesting, and if someone were to be successful, very surprised it isn't widely done much more frequently. Too bad we don't know the outcome from this one instance.

You’re not guaranteed a specific grade. You’re paying for a service. I don’t see how you could argue that you didn’t get what you paid for.

I know, and don't disagree at all. But to form that opinion, don't they agree to examine and look over a card to make their assessment. With supposedly no notes and records, how could they ever prove to anyone they actually did a thorough and proper exam of a card? And aren't there grading standards they are supposed to go by, so their opinion is actually supposed to be based on a factual and supposed uniform and established set of those standards.

Watching a TV show or movie, and then saying you like it or not, now that is a pure opinion. But having a staff of graders who are all supposedly reviewing and grading a card based on a fixed set of standards put forth by the TPG for ALL their grading staff to follow, that isn't so clearly a true opinion to me, and clearly isn't necessarily each grader's true individual opinion either.

No disrespect, but how many threads have we had on here with people questioning TPG grades and how they always seem to be graded more harshly than they should?

How about this, take a TPG to court and as part of your argument, bring along a card graded by them say 10-20 years ago, and put it up against a similar card graded by them say this past year. And then ask them to explain to a jury why the cards may look like they have been graded on completely different standards. Would love to hear what a TPG owner/employee/rep would say on a witness stand, under oath. Would be interesting to see if they would actually admit to maybe having changed their standards over the years, and hear them then maybe explain why they supposedly changed them without having informed any of their customers they've been doing this. And instead of giving their grade "opinions" based on a supposedly constant and unchanging set of fixed standards.

And before you, or anyone else, again says it doesn't matter because it is just an opinion, try telling that to Trump regarding his issues with real estate appraisals in New York. Those appraisals are nothing more than opinions also. And you can't really claim those issues are different from cards because they involve property values as these TPG grades are what are basically used to determine a card's market value as well. And as we've learned of late over the years, even a slight error and/or difference in a card's TPG given grade can easily equate to a difference of thousands, tens of thousands, or even more dollars, in a card's value.

Well you also have to be willing to never use said company again, so it is a game with consequences.

Bob, I understand what you're saying and in a way agree, but companies like SGC and PSA have terms and conditions that outline what they offer. They both have your example of grading standards today versus 10-20 years ago covered. Below are two quotes taken from their websites:

SGC
"Customer acknowledges and agrees the grading and/or authentication of items requires the exercise of individual judgment and professional opinion, which is subjective in nature, and can change from time to time. Therefore, SGC makes no warranty or representation and shall have no liability whatsoever to Customer for the grade or determination of authenticity assigned by SGC to any item."

PSA
"Customer acknowledges that such grading involves individual judgments that are subjective and require the exercise of professional opinions, which can change from time to time. Therefore, except as provided below, Customer agrees that PSA shall have no liability to Customer or any other third party for the grade assigned by PSA to any card."

Some common terms:
Customer acknowledges
Individual judgment
Professional opinion
Subjective
Can change from time to time
No liability

That is grading in a nutshell. Each company gives you two sentences that include the same ideas from the list above. Professional opinions might be partially formed by existing grading standards. However, an opinion, by definition, is "not necessarily based on fact or knowledge." There might be a loose set of grading guidelines, but there is no checklist or proof required. Nowhere in the terms and conditions does it say that a card with a 1/2" crease can't grade higher than a certain grade, while a card with a 1" crease must be graded lower.

Someone that sends in cards for grading is asking for subjective individual judgments and professional opinions that can change from time to time. That is what they get.

Whether grading companies should offer more quantifiable data can be debated, but people don't even seem all that interested in simple sub-grades, let alone a list of data that can be derived from artificial intelligence. For an extra 50 bucks a card, would most people want a 20 point artificial intelligence inspection report that is available online that helps to justify the overall grade? I doubt it.

How many people complain about owning overgraded cards? For many sellers, the large majority of their graded cards are undergraded and none are overgraded. The cards that had to be graded four times are the only accurately graded ones. Only auction houses have overgraded cards. (some degree of sarcasm in the last few sentences)

Too many, and most are premised on the fact that if a card doesn’t get the grade you wanted, that it’s the grader that was wrong. Rarely does the poster consider that they had an overinflated opinion of their card.

The whole premise that a card got the “wrong” grade if the grade is lower than you want is shaky. I bet you could take the five most experienced graders here and give them the same card and it wouldn’t get five identical grades. If the card got two 3s, one 3.5, and two 4s, which of the graders were “wrong”?

Circling back, I just felt bad for the dealer. Seemed to be in a bad spot.

As for grading, has it gotten harder on cards? It sometimes feels that way.

I don't think it has gotten harder.

That is true.

I do the same thing: if the card has nice eye appeal, price it for the card and not the grade. I don't see any other option with some of the cards that are overly strictly graded. Personally, I won't pay for a second grading.

So, my question is: If you believe the card should be an "8" which is going for $2K+ and it received a "7", why not just offer it at an "8" price and let the market determine its value? As everyone says, the grade is arbitrary for the most part. I assume there are plenty of people who look for those "7's" at a "7" price because they think they can get it re-graded to an "8" because they may be a heavy hitter and might receive the benefit of the doubt on their submissions. I don't mind leaving money on the table for others to be able to make something, but I also don't like being taken advantage of.

I assume I'm missing something.

Trey,

You are absolutely right, but then to my knowledge, no one has really taken on a TPG in court over their terms and conditions, have they? Ask the attorneys on here if terms and conditions on many different types of agreements and contracts always prevail when finally challenged in court.

Both statements you quoted are typical CYA commentary to dissuade anyone from even thinking of ever coming after them for a bad job. But in both of those they refer to the "individual" grader whose opinion is the one that is subjective and can change over time? It almost sounds as if the TPG companies are coming out and saying they only hire these individual experts and that it is these so-called grading experts who make the decisions and not them, so therefore they, the TPGs, have no liability for what these graders do because everything is just these graders' opinions.

First off, if that is true, the TPGs are literally saying they don't really have to stand behind anything they grade because it is all just an opinion. So, if that is the case, why do some TPGs have clauses and conditions where they claim they'll end up buying a card back or pay someone the difference in perceived value because of a supposed error or whatever? Based on what you posted, they shouldn't have to make up or agree to pay for anything, it is all just based on opinions for which they have no liability, right? And yet they do.

But then, who is it that actually trains these expert graders? I'm not aware of any college or vocational institution that provides courses, training, certifications, and so on to create them, are you? Could it possibly be the TPGs who find, hire, and train these grading experts then, and if so, how do they train them on what they're supposed to do to come up with their grades for cards? Could it be that a TPG has a set of fixed, documented standards they use to train their so-called grading experts? But wait a second, I thought these grading experts were just giving THEIR opinions on card grades, not what they're maybe being taught by the TPGs they work for. So, are those grades based on opinions or set standards after all?

And those statements you posted said the individual graders' opinions can change over time, but they said nothing about any standards the TPGs may be using to train them with possibly being changed over time. And opinions and documented standards are two very decidedly different things.

If these TPGs are in fact training these graders, I'm not so sure they can just set the grading standards and then absolve themselves of any and all liability by blindly claiming it is all just an individual grader's opinion. Attorneys can, and do, use very specific words and language to supposedly get across a precise meaning and intent in contracts and agreements, yet we have lawsuits about such things all the time.

I always look back at Clinton's testimony saying, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman!" as the epitome of lawyer-speak and logic. Now go back and re-read those TPG statements you quoted, and really think about exactly what they are actually saying. But in the end, you are correct in that it seems most all the people in our hobby only care about a card's grade, and otherwise just let the TPGs get away with doing what they want. But just because it isn't likely to be changing anytime soon, it doesn't mean it wouldn't possibly be better for the hobby if it did change.

I was wondering about the resubmission of cards. I remember reading on another thread that PSA now keeps detailed digital scans of cards they have graded before, and they will know if it is a resubmission. Is this true? I don't know how they could tell for sure if a card was a resubmission. If they can tell, it wouldn't do any good to resubmit a card for regrading, right?

Supposedly, though they haven't commented on this endeavor.

And the sad part is, it will more than likely just sit and shit. Too many people are married to the label.

If this dealer sent in 500 cards and thought 250 of them were undergraded, then he almost certainly doesn't know what he's doing or looking at.

However, you can occasionally get screwed on a submission. I've sent in 100 card lots to PSA of modern cards and had ~90 come back as PSA 10s, then sent in another 100 card lot from the same exact same case using my same standards only to receive ~30 PSA 10s on the next submission. Different graders on different days have different standards. Especially when it comes to grading 9s vs 10s on modern cards. For these reasons, I never send in huge submissions all at once. I don't want the same grader for every card. You could get really screwed if you get a bad grader on a bad day. Then you've wasted your entire submission. It's better to break them up into smaller lots and send them in.

If you are experienced at grading though, and have a good eye for detail, you can definitely have good success cracking cards out and sending them back in. I've cracked out countless cards that I believe were under graded over the years and sent them back in. Almost every single time, they've gotten a bump in grade. Recently, I had a 59 Topps Mickey Mantle I sent in to SGC. It should be a 5, but it came back as a 3. I just rolled my eyes and laughed, cracked it out and sent it in to CSG. They gave it a 6.5. lol

As a collector, I am totally cool with that. I had my eye on a 7 of a particular card for a while, most of which were going for ~$1700. I recently found a wildly harshly graded 5 that could pass for a strong 6 if not a 7 all day long for $850. Average 5's sell for ~$500, but I was thrilled to pay a 70% "premium" to get what I considered to be a 50% discount from what I was expecting to pay.

+1

Well, they promote that on cards since a few months after they bought Genamint, is when they started scanning those cards and "fingerprinting" the fibers/damage on cards. Now is that every service level from $10 bulk all the way up? Or is it more likely only on cards that are Regular ($100 fee) or higher? And again, only on a year's worth of cards at whatever those levels are. So if you have current lighthouse labels with cert numbers below 40,000,000 or so, I'd be fairly confident that those cards do not fall under the window of high-res scans used for fingerprinting.

There was a guy two years ago who sued Beckett for $500K or so when a BGS number-graded card he bought was identified as altered.
You could look through auburn35's posts on Blowout to see if you can find it. I don't recall seeing an update on it. But yes, choosing the nuclear option of suing a grading company basically cuts you out of ever using that company again.

Good luck with that auburn35, lol. Sounds like someone has some money to burn.

From the outside looking in, I hear much about undergraded cards but mostly see overgraded cards. I find a majority of my crack outs are overgraded (since these are the cards I can best examine, a scan doesn’t show everything but a card broke free in hand does), some of them grossly so.

The majority of my "under graded" cards are in my PC and will never leave. If I get an "over graded" card it is going to COMC for me to sell. I think that is how a lot of collectors are. Over graded cards hit the marketplace much more often.

This is probably true, which is what it makes it so difficult to get any kind of a valid dataset or batch to look at.

Bs. Most of the larger submitters are making the exact same claims as the smaller guys. I love the internet every wakadoidle conspiracy theory is given as much credence as scientific fact.

Every...Single.....Time....You....Are ...Negative. You should get some counseling.
.