|
For those who still think PSA hasn’t moved the goalposts…
Draw your own conclusions….
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WAIZf42GkCo Anyone still think the “registry” is the least bit accurate or relevant? |
I would be interested in seeing what would happen if you re-submit old 8s to PSA in their existing holders for regrading. Would PSA give those cards gentlemen 8s in order to preserve the narrative, or would they come back with 6s?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I would be very vary of reholdering these days. |
Quote:
|
You can still reholder a card without getting it regraded as long as the slab hasn’t been cracked you shouldn’t have an issue.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...0a7a5618d8.jpg Geoff Bedine Premier Card Collectors Since 1977 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
If you use the reholder service, do they give you a new serial number, and decommission the old serial number? Or do they just use the old serial number, and u just get a shiny new slab?
|
For those who still think PSA hasn’t moved the goalposts…
They use the original serial number and you get a new slab.
Geoff Bedine Premier Card Collectors Since 1977 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Anyone that has graded cards "back in the day" versus now I think can honestly say the standards have indeed changed. To be honest, I am okay with being more strict - my problem has been when you don't bother to change your definition of each grade on your website, yet you grade it harsh there is a disconnect. I have more than a few cards that you can put two of the same card next to each other with the same grade, yet the cards themselves are very different condition-wise. When you have humans doing the job there will always be issues.
|
Could also be that PSA has always been very inconsistent. I have been grading for a long time and have received highly over graded cards, highly under graded cards, and some are even graded correctly. My guess/opinion is most of the older card everyone is calling over graded was over graded back then. Heck several times a year we have members posting they are worried if they get their highly over graded card reholdered it might actually get the correct grade.:rolleyes:
|
Quote:
Before: https://i.ibb.co/39QrmHzZ/8638766.jpg https://i.ibb.co/YFV2SLgF/Ruth-edited.jpg After: https://i.ibb.co/0RxHWvpG/1921-Exhibits-Ruth-Front.jpg |
There was a thread on this within the last couple of years, and someone posted info directly from someone at PSA stating that, despite their written policy, they can and sometimes do change the grade on reholder submissions. So yes, the goalposts not only move, they are on wheels.
|
Quote:
To me, not worth the risk. |
I have sent over 50 for Reholder and never had a grade change and they explicitly state on their website that you will receive the same grade.
Maybe they sent for “review” instead of “Reholder” which could end up getting a different lower grade. Geoff Bedine Premier Card Collectors Since 1977 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Quote:
Have sent in over 200 cards for reholder and the above is true. |
For the heck of it I just sent PSA an email to clarify that nothing has changed and this was their response. Rest assured they will not regrade the card unless there is a crack in the holder that has damaged the card provided it’s submitted as a Reholder.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...833153a265.jpg Geoff Bedine Premier Card Collectors Since 1977 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Trust me, they have also moved the goalposts on that crack terminology.
|
I just wish someone would be as diligent in writing them about their grading standards 10 years ago vs. today. Of course they will lie to our faces, but it might be worth a laugh just to see how disingenuously they respond. :rolleyes:
|
Great video!
Of all of his cards, not a single one came back better! Over 90% came back lower I totally agree with his take on new cards and vintage cards should be graded differently Unpopular opinions: What should we expect from a company founded on a lie? (trimmed card) Any cards with the PSA on the bottom right are worth significantly less than the grade Quote of the video: "Take it or leave it, is their attitude." Why people keep "taking it" is beyond me! The registry has now been made obsolete, and it was always just a money maker. Its always been a pecker measuring contest for rich people It will not stope until people stop sending them cards and making them rich |
Agreed. Their grading standards have made it very difficult to get a strong grade on any vintage cards. The video at the top of this thread is dead on.
Geoff Bedine Premier Card Collectors Since 1977 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Quote:
For me, even a slight possibility makes it not worth the risk, as Drew said. |
Does anyone think maybe this is being done to protect keep the populations low on key vintage cards thus ensuring their long term value and potential gain in wealth down the road?
|
I applaud you for reaching out and getting an answer.
Yet, I think a translation of their response is: "Please send in your cards we graded before, along with more of your hard-earned money, and if we don't see any issues at all (which standards on the case have also changed without explanation) we will put it in a new holder. Thanks for your business and unwavering loyalty, even though we're screwing you by doing this." Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Grade Gate-Keeping "POP CONTROL".
They have been doing it for years on certain cards (see 1980 Rickey Henderson) and are just doing it across the board now. The 1980 Henderson just defies logic when looking at the "Gem Rate" versus every other 1980 Topps card. |
Perfect timing for this post. I watched the video this morning.
I can count on one hand the number of times I've submitted to PSA. Months ago, I submitted 11 MSA-related discs from the 1970s that I have been picking up over the years for my Kingman Master Set. I just got the results back tonight and they are all 7's-8's with one 9. No 10's. I looked these discs over very carefully before submitting. In past submissions, I almost always got 10's on these discs with the occasional 9. Head scratching for sure. |
Here's the quote I was referencing earier—from a 2023 thread called "PSA reholder issues - warning to submitters" (emphasis mine):
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
PSA’s re-holder policy is consistent with what CGC has been doing with comic books for the past 25 years… No Grade Change, item not reviewed for grade (only inspected to ensure the slab has not been tampered with). Exceptions to this policy are rare and far between.
So today at the West Coast Card show, I spoke with many vintage dealers about old grading standards, and not just PSA (SGC too). Universally, every single person was onboard regarding the goalposts having been moved. Indeed, I received nice discount offers on several of the old, obviously overgraded cards (by today’s standards). Not one vendor was willing to defend PSA’s grading over time. |
PSA moving the goal posts
If you cracked Marshall Fogel's PSA 10 Mantle and resubmitted it, would it still get a 10?
|
First ever submission to PSA. I sent a SGC 9 in holder purchased via eBay PSA Vault (a few months ago before recent news).
Just got the reveal of grade and received a not meeting minimum size and was charged. Sending back, not sure if it will be in its original holder or not. This is a PC Card as I collected the set but was trying to have it all in same holder and not some play to make money, so just annoyed by the irony that it came from PSA VAULT on eBay. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...84eca1dd4f.jpg Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
There are certain cards flagged in PSA's system (like the Ruth) that have been written about on message boards or tracked in the Altered Card Database that PSA may be aware of, so if those get sent in for reholder or Graded Card Review, they will likely fix the grading mistake at the time.
However, their Grade Guarantee still exists doesn't it? Those worried about sending cards in for reholder would still financially be remunerated if PSA does lower their grade, but I guess only if they were not the original submitter. Some people would rather have their card in a lower grade holder plus cash, although some would not. Depends on the owner's motivation. |
Has anyone encountered similar issues for SGC reholders? I was planning on submitting but this thread is making me think twice.
Adam |
I have sent cards to SGC to get reholdered a few times now, and I have not experienced this issue. Surprisingly, I had a 1960 Topps Carl Yastrzemski get bumped up from an SGC 6 in an old slab to a SGC 6.5 in a new slab. This, however, was before Collectors acquired SGC.
|
2 Attachment(s)
Just thought I would add my own example. The old PSA 4 is not my card, but the newer PSA (Eppa) is mine. It is a great example of how the grading standards have changed.
Attachment 670050 Attachment 670049 |
Do you guys think it’s really think the goal post have been changed being harsher and much lower on grades? Or the fact that they’re grading 39,000 cards a day, they can’t be looking at these that long.
Possibly as a general statement maybe most of these graders are younger and do not know these cards they’re used to looking at 2023 cards and up. So they’re gonna be lower. Idk? A lot of this I feel is luck of the draw which grader do you get? That’s why the crack out and resubmit is so great yet a total lottery ticket each time you play the game. It’s at your own risk/tolerence. To me, it’s all about keeping the previously graded cards in lower pop, vintage strong, and not devaluing them by increasing the pop. |
imho the older graded one is more accurate for a card of this vintage. The moving of the goalposts has just created another revenue stream for the greedballs.
|
For those who still think PSA hasn’t moved the goalposts…
Complaints about PSA's consistency - whether on policies or the actual grading - are nearly as old as PSA itself at this point.
In the past they have seemed to wax and wane between grading too easy and then grading too harshly, but anymore (the last 5 years or so) - all of that seems out the window. A stack of sharp cornered and decently centered postwar vintage free of creases might get some 7's and 8's, but some will also inexplicably get 4's. I've seen it personally. The rub here is of course yes, nobody generally bothers to update old and often very vague written grading standards. What does a "minor" print blemish mean to you, or a "light" scratch or "slight" edge notching? These are all super subjective descriptions, and when applied by humans over decades are going to vary - perhaps significantly. But PSA over time has sold the hobby on the fact that they are the detailed experts, and that this type of thing doesn't or shouldn't happen with their expertise. It's simply not true. I digress. Yes, I have heard the horror stories of PSA reholder-only subs turning into a grade lowering event where the submitter is horrified. I don't sub with PSA but on the few reholders I have ever done with SGC - this was not a problem. I had a decent '61 Mantle once in an ancient - like 25 years old - scratched up holder, but it was intact. They returned it 2 weeks later in a shiny new tux with the same grade. |
I completely agree with Pete. Goalposts have moved tremendously. In my opinion, the older grading system was far more accurate. Now, if you send in a stack of cards that would’ve been somewhere between a six and an eight by the old standards, you would have to expect to get a couple of threes or fours in there and never understand why. Of course, if you resubmit them, you very well may get a better grade and, of course, PSA gets more revenue.
|
Quote:
I have never experienced this with SGC. And have never even heard that it's happened to anyone else. As long as the card has not been damaged, SGC simply re-holders it in the new slab with the same grade. But you'd better act fast, as the PSA/Collectors influence seems to be engulfing SGC like a deadly man-eating virus. If I was looking to re-holder with SGC, I would not hesitate, and do it now. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
What this thread needs is more cowbell!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVsQLlk-T0s . |
Quote:
Though not from PSA's standpoint of course. Hey, if it encourages suckers to send in their cards, great! :rolleyes: |
Quote:
That being said, to be clear, PSA is an absolute sham and have absolutely changed their standards. :o |
Quote:
Regarding moving goal posts, PSA has 100% been tougher on grading Cracker Jacks. So much so that the grades have become almost irrelevant. What was a 5 is now a 2. |
Population and Registry are two of the Largest Money Making Aspects of this Industry.
No other grading company will be able to touch this or be considered meaningful when it comes to population or registry. |
I wonder what the business strategy is of grading cards tougher. One thing I think is that encourages reslabbing. I doubt this was on PSA’s mind when they toughened their standards but I’m more inclined to reslab some of my old flips now. The thing is that most people can recognize the old flips that start with 0 or 1 but there are some less ambiguous flips that start with 3, 4 and 5 I think. I might actually send in some of my nice yazzes and my high grade minis. Up til now it didn’t seem worth the trouble.
I suppose that real reason is they want their cards to be worth more than SGC and the others at the assigned grade. It helps make them the standard but with the acquisition of SGC they have no rival in vintage now. I do think for a while SGC was as tough on vintage as PSA but I doubt that’s the case these days. |
Quote:
I think you’re wrong. SGC or PSA will drop the grade on rare occasion on a re-holder. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
dyslexia is kicking my ass
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:40 AM. |