Has anyone taken advantage of PSA's "GRADE GUARANTEE" lately??

[bobbyw8469]

As long as I've been collecting cards, I have only had to use their "grade guarantee" one time. That being said, I was just curious if anyone has used it LATELY, as it has been awhile for me. Just curious as to the ease or hassle involved?

I won this lot last night in Huggins and Scott. I flat out missed it but the top card is graded a straight '8' with two distinct ink marks on the reverse. I will not be happy with that card. Just wondering what everyones opinions were of it?

[swarmee]

Definitely should have gotten the MK qualifier. Do you really still want the card as an 8(MK) plus the cash difference?

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Definitely should have gotten the MK qualifier. Do you really still want the card as an 8(MK) plus the cash difference?

It depends on if they value it as what SMR says a straight '8' is (it is $145). A PSA 8(MK) is around $30. If PSA would be fair about it, I could do that. If I remember right, last time it happened, they tried to screw me around on the values.

[bobbyw8469]

PSA wants me to pay to get it graded again.

[conor912]

I never saw how you could guarantee an opinion. Greatest sham this hobby has ever known.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by conor912

I never saw how you could guarantee an opinion. Greatest sham this hobby has ever known.

https://www.psacard.com/about/financialguarantee

Well...they aren't guaranteeing an opinion. They are guaranteeing that the grade is accurate. I'm trying to take advantage of the guarantee because they obviously missed ink marks on the reverse.

[botn]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

That being said, I was just curious if anyone has used it LATELY, as it has been awhile for me. Just curious as to the ease or hassle involved?
[/IMG]

Robert when you find out you may want to share that info with the person who is going to win this gem in Heritage's latest. Maybe PSA forgot that cards have two sides????

https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...ription-071515

[bobbyw8469]

Nice card....that is normal staining that sometimes appears on the Bowman's. I believe PSA believes those to be acceptable. Missing ink marks are NOT acceptable, but it is my belief that they determine that kid of wax staining that is so prevalent on Bowmans to be A-OK.

[botn]

All wax stains, even on Bowmans, are supposed to get the ST qualifier. They do not make exceptions for such a common occurrence on certain card issues. That was a huge miss. By the way, wax stains are more prevalent on all issues where 1 cent packs were issued.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by botn

All wax stains, even on Bowmans, are supposed to get the ST qualifier. They do not make exceptions for such a common occurrence on certain card issues. That was a huge miss. By the way, wax stains are more prevalent on all issues where 1 cent packs were issued.

With PSA you can have a wax stain on the back and still get an 8 NrMint-Mint without a qualifier. Now my favorite grader SGC kicks your butt for wax stains, a 60/5 EX is the best I have ever got on a card that would otherwise grade much higher.

NM-MT 8 Near Mint-Mint
A PSA NM-MT 8 is a super high-end card that appears Mint 9 at first glance, but upon closer inspection, the card can exhibit the following: a very slight wax stain on reverse, slightest fraying at one or two corners, a minor printing imperfection, and/or slightly off-white borders. Centering must be approximately 65/35 to 70/30 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the reverse.

[bobbyw8469]

the marks on the Aaron should be a cut and dry issue. Regrade the Aaron as PSA 8 (MK) and refund me the difference. However, they want me to ship it on my dime (which I don't mind), pay for grading (which I mind), and pay for return shipping (which I mind). PSA says they will reimburse me for the grading and the return shipping if they determine that they are indeed at fault. A very real possibility however, is that PSA determines that those two ink marks are acceptable for the PSA 8 grade, and I'm out some good money on a card that is not worth that much to begin with at all.

Edited to add:.....Bill Huggins said he will make the transaction right with me. He didn't have to do that, because I totally missed it. However, his auction house just went up even more in my eyes, and I will continue to do business with him in the future. I have been dealing with them since the early 2000's, and I have nothing but good things to say about them.

[botn]

Originally Posted by bnorth

With PSA you can have a wax stain on the back and still get an 8 NrMint-Mint without a qualifier. Now my favorite grader SGC kicks your butt for wax stains, a 60/5 EX is the best I have ever got on a card that would otherwise grade much higher.

NM-MT 8 Near Mint-Mint
A PSA NM-MT 8 is a super high-end card that appears Mint 9 at first glance, but upon closer inspection, the card can exhibit the following: a very slight wax stain on reverse, slightest fraying at one or two corners, a minor printing imperfection, and/or slightly off-white borders. Centering must be approximately 65/35 to 70/30 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the reverse.

Hey Ben,
Not sure how much you submit but I can assure you that this would not be considered a very slight wax stain. Further even the slightest wax stains typically result in an ST qualifier on cards grading over a 7. Been my consistent experience.

Greg

[1952boyntoncollector]

I thought the grade guarantee is when you slip in a little cash (tape it to the back of the holder you use to submit the card in) and you get the grade you wanted...

[Peter_Spaeth]

IMO the Mays should not be an unqualified 8, too obtrusive a stain.

[bobbyw8469]

Peter, what is your opinion on the 1970 Aaron PSA 8 with the ink on the back? Is that acceptable for an '8'?

[swarmee]

The Mays card was graded maybe 20 years ago and just reholdered recently. So it wasn't reviewed and may have not counted against the card at the time. But you're right, it's a definite candidate for a review and downgrade.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

Peter, what is your opinion on the 1970 Aaron PSA 8 with the ink on the back? Is that acceptable for an '8'?

If that's ink it should be qualified IMO.

[Stonepony]

Originally Posted by botn

All wax stains, even on Bowmans, are supposed to get the ST qualifier. They do not make exceptions for such a common occurrence on certain card issues. That was a huge miss. By the way, wax stains are more prevalent on all issues where 1 cent packs were issued.

This