PSA Grade N6 – Should I Try Again?
 

Greetings. First, I am far from a card expert. I inherited a collection and am looking to sell it and do the best I can financially. I have learned enough to know that some of the cards are worth the time and expense to get graded. I recently sent in my first group of cards to be graded to PSA. They all were graded fine but one of them (1981 Topps Joe Montana rookie) came back with a…

N6: MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT

I can guarantee that the card was never trimmed as the set it was part of was purchased in 1981 and has never left the house where it was stored since. In my research, I see where sometimes cards are cut smaller than they should be by the factory. I’m assuming this is the case here.

My question is, is it worth my time to send this card back to PSA to be re-graded? Send it to another grading service? Or just sell it raw as is? I would like to send it back to PSA if there’s a decent chance it’ll get graded this time but I don’t know how that works?? I have not received the card back yet so cannot measure it to see what the exact measurements are. Otherwise the card was in very nice condition. I’ll have $29 into PSA already for the insured shipping to return it to me.

Any advice would be much appreciated. Thank you!!

I have a Gretzky rookie graded the same. i submitted it a second time with the same result. I sent it to SGC......same thing. I do not know how that can happen from a card I opened from a pack. Good Luck if you do.
Bob

I’ve had cards come back as MSR that got graded a second time around. I would say, measure it against your other ‘81s when you get it back. If it’s not far off, give it another shot. PSA does scrutinize high profile cards like these a little more, but it’s worth a shot. Good luck!

They're not saying it's trimmed. They're saying it's cut too small from the factory. There has been a HUGE uptick in these from PSA which leads me to believe they are using computers to measure cards now. Resubmitting the same card to PSA used to work because of the human element. I suspect it's a waste of money now. Possibly sending it to a different company would work, but I doubt they are far behind.

Thanks for all the responses. I received the card back today. It measures exactly 2-1/2" wide by 3-1/2" high. I'm not sure what those numbers even mean as far as sizing requirements?? I'll have to look into PSA requirements. I can get some photos of the card and try to post.

At $29/chance, I'm not sure if it's even worth it to resubmit it for a re-grade??

Here's some photos of the card...

Did you measure it against the other ‘81 cards in your set?

Not yet. I'll do that this week and will post update. Thanks.

Nice Joe!

I would would try another company. I think you will be spinning your wheels with PSA as the card is probably marked with their new A1 Technology moving forward. Just my opinion.

Good luck!

Hard to tell with the white background but the card looks shorter than 3.5 inch on your pic. It does not take much to be undercut or long for that matter. Careful measurement with a dial caliper will tell you size to .001 and you can make your determination of what to do from there.
The nice thing about size is that it is objective. It measures to tollarance or it does not. No subjective "eye appeal" crap involved. Of course the grader may not be able to measure correctly but that is a different issue.
If you are certain that the size is good you could send it back. If it is factory short, maybe the card is better suited staying raw as part of a complete set. Good luck with it, nice looking card :)

This is one of those BS nuances that makes many old school collectors hate professional grading. In short, whether they are digitally measuring, hand measuring, or not measuring - this is part of the ebb and flow of grading - and especially with PSA. It's not uncommon for the same card to be sent in 3 times and be called trimmed once, an N6 Min Size no holder once, and then to be slabbed a PSA 6. I've seen it happen with my own eyes. PSA claiming any kind of consistency competence with this kind of thing (I have not seen where they do...) would be utterly laughable.

If you have a card in your collection that you've either had since it was in a pack, or came from a source where you know beyond the shadow of a doubt it was not trimmed or altered, then I don't see why that provenance is not at least as good as PSA's slipshod judgment when it comes to what is or is not "Min Size". There was no "Min Size" with vintage cards back in the day; the concept did not exist. It's just a fallacy that PSA invented to throw another twist into the murky and sometimes ill-defined world of "professional" grading. SGC from what I can tell is at least marginally more lenient in this area. Size differences, especially of 1/32 of an inch or less on vintage cards - are incredibly common if you are paying attention. How PSA treats these at least in some circumstances doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Re-grades, reviews, x-overs are a fool's bet and only for the well heeled. PSA certainly doesn't need your charitable donations to stay in biz. Save your money and avoid the further aggravation at $29 a pop. And, avoid this nonsense by sticking to PSA graded offerings, not raw.

I have sent numerous cards in as part of larger PSA submissions (so there is no fee if the cards aren't graded and the shipping fees are absorbed by the entire lot) and I have had success many times on as many as 3rd or 4th tries, including a Ryan rookie recently.

I have also had plenty of success with reviews by choosing the cards wisely and understanding the increase in value if only a few cards bump up by a half or full grade (in the case of PSA 9 to PSA 10 bumps).

Huh?
 

For myself, nothing could be farther from the truth. At least as far as reviews are concerned. I have made a small fortune in increased value with about 25 PSA 9's that bumped to Gem Mint 10 with my '55 All-Americans. Just a guess, put with today's values that could amount to about a $50 to $75K collective increase in value.

If you have quality cards, and you send in a moderate size grouping of reviews (25+), I have found their bump rate to be 5 to 8%.....

So you're sending them in still in the holder and getting bumps? What about cracking them out? Are they now being marked with the A1 Technology and PSA won't regrade them? The reason I ask is because I have a card I'd like to resubmit. But I wouldn't bother if they are going to read the mark and give the card the same grade.