PSA-A Cautionary Tale!

[MBMiller25]

I wanted to share a recent experience with PSA. I am not posting this to start a debate on who was right or who was wrong, etc, etc. I just wanted you all to get an idea of the company that PSA is, and give you a peak behind the curtain so to speak.

In early September I decided to use my 15 free vouchers that I had from renewing my membership with PSA in August at the National on 8 cards I wanted graded and I used the the seven remaining on cards I wanted to be reviewed. I contacted Joe Orlando in advance of sending the review in, as I was sending some very high end cards, that were worth substantial dollars. He indicated that I should send the card in to his attention and that he would oversee PSA doing a "crack and review" of these cards to give the graders the absolute best look at these cards during the review process. I agreed and off the cards went. Within 5 days the 8 cards I sent in to be graded popped. About a week and a half later I finally saw where my 7 cards that were being reviewed popped as well. Each of the 7 cards stayed in the same grade as they were when I sent them in, is what the online submission check indicated. I immediately reached out to Joe via email asking for an explanation on a couple of the cards, as I was really perplexed as to what was holding a couple cards back. The submission popped and my email to Joe was sent on Tuesday October 1st, 2013. Joe immediately emailed me back indicating he would get back to me. Tuesday goes by and I don't hear from anyone. Wednesday goes by and I don't hear from anyone. On Thursday, I for some reason am driven to go back into the PSA site and check my grades again. That's when I see that one of my cards is no longer the same grade as it was initially. A 1960 Topps Hank Aaron PSA 8.5 (Pop 2) is now listed as a PSA 7. Upon seeing this, I send Joe an quick email that read "Joe, Should I be concerned that my 1960 Aaron PSA 8.5 is now showing up as a PSA 7 on the submission page"? He promptly emails me back and says he will call me in 10 minutes.

Thirty minutes later my phone rings and Joe is on the other line. He starts by saying in his 14 years of working at PSA that this has never happened (Total BS and I know so! In fact a collecting friend had a reviewed card damage while in the care of PSA). Despite starting the conversation with a lie, I didn't react, but listened to him explain that PSA dinged the corner of my card cracking the card out and putting it in a CS1, that PSA would reimburse me for what I paid for the card, and that they were really sorry.

Me: Damn Joe, its not so much about the money, its the fact that I can't go out and just replace this card. This is a POP 2 card (Now 1) and a PSA 9 in this card is a $13-$15K card.

Joe: I know Matt, we are very sorry, this has never happened before, but let me know what you paid for the card, and I will get you a check.

Me: Explain to me why my grades popped the Aaron was listed as a PSA 8.5

Joe: Explained that they wanted to call me before I saw my grades, so they could explain that the 60 Aaron was damaged, so they put the card in the system as a 8.5, but then changed it.

( I didnt understand his explanation, so I asked him to explain the above again, to which his voice then completely changed, like I was putting him out over this. So I get a very stern explanation as written above).

Me: I pause for a second and then say, Man I really kind of sick over this.

Joe: Your sick over a baseball card. There just baseball cards, Give me a break! (This is where things went south in a hurry)

Me: (I am pissed over the comment he just made and am now speaking very sternly) Yes Joe, I am sick over a baseball card. This is not a business to me, its a hobby and I collect high end cards that I can't go out and just replace. Send me back my cards immediately, and after I speak with my council, I will give you a number on the Hank Aaron card.

Joe: Don't ever call me threatening me again (Hangs Up on Me).

I was subsequently immediately banned from the CU Message Boards, I had a second submission that was logged with PSA, unlogged and sent back to me RAW. I was informed that I can no longer do business with PSA in any capacity.



I knew exactly what I was saying when I made the comment to Joe about speaking with my council, and I also knew exactly how he would take my comment. Never was I intending to contact my lawyer over a baseball card. I really just wanted to speak with a couple people I know in the hobby that I trust, one of which was my buddy that had the same thing happen to. So with that being said, I take some of the blame for this, but understand that I am not sensationalizing anything you've read above. I am still to this day shocked that the president of PSA would comment to anyone "There just baseball cards, Give me a break"!

I have gotten the card and my other cards back. I just got a check for what I paid for the Aaron, so in their eyes they have made me whole.

Be careful who your doing business with, as this showed me alot about the kind of company PSA is, or better yet who they aren't! I won't spend another cent with that company, and clearly by Joe's comments, he doesnt give a shit about the collector. This is just a business to them, and although I should have known better, I guess because I still view this as the hobby I've done since I was a kid, thought differently about PSA.

[ullmandds]

sorry to hear about your experience...BUT I am in now way surprised at all by this either!

[vintagetoppsguy]

Sorry this happened to you, Matt.

Mistakes happen - that's part of life. How you handle those mistakes says a lot about you (or your company). They definitely didn't handle this well.

Do you have a scan of the 7. I would like to see how bad the ding is.

[MBMiller25]

I will scan it when I get a few minutes and post it, but I think the 7 is an overreaction, it looks like a 8 to me.

[ullmandds]

Conor...while I kinda, somewhat agree with what your sayin'...PSA "created" this whole "game" and now people are coming to them with fistfuls of cash...wanting to "play"...and PSA is telling them to go suck an egg...great business model!!!

[MBMiller25]

Fair question Conor, it's certainly about the money regarding the value of my cards. When I said it wasn't about the money, that was more in regards to reimbursing me for the card based on what I paid. At that point the money didn't mean anything to me, I wanted the card. That's a beautiful card, and at that point I just wanted that card back.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by MBMiller25

I was subsequently immediately banned from the CU Message Boards, I had a second submission that was logged with PSA, unlogged and sent back to me RAW. I was informed that I can no longer do business with PSA in any capacity.

Matt,

Welcome to the PSA "persona non grata" club and please wear your banishment as a badge of honor.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by MBMiller25

Fair question Conor, it's certainly about the money regarding the value of my cards. When I said it wasn't about the money, that was more in regards to reimbursing me for the card based on what I paid. At that point the money didn't mean anything to me, I wanted the card. That's a beautiful card, and at that point I just wanted that card back.

Fair enough, Matt, but my point was, if you're not looking to sell the card, why even send it in looking for an "upgrade" in the first place? Would you have liked it more if it was a 9? This is the part of the slabby mindset that I'm still trying to understand.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Jeesh! Sounds like J O handled it in a piss poor way. Dave.

[h2oya311]

I originally thought this was going to be a "feel good" story....after all the attention Joe paid to your "free" submission. Aside from the banishment from the boards and suspension from PSA membership, what else should he have been expected to do???

I half expected this to end w/ them putting your now NM card back into a PSA 8.5 holder to make things better!!

Certainly the response to you was poor, but put yourself in his shoes. He got $0 from you, spent lots of his time (at least more than a commoner), and now he needs to cut you a big check to make you whole. Not a good day for him. The threat of lawyers now getting involved would be the icing on the cake if I were him!

Matt, I would hate to be in your position too and would likely have responded in a similar fashion!!

FWIW, I have never submitted anything to PSA and don't know anyone who works there.

[npa589]

The "free" submission isn't all that free. First, it is essentially what you're paying for with your Collector's Club membership ($130 or $190), and one does have to pay for shipping there and back. The way they are advertising it is that it is just like any other submission, and is a "Thank you" to the consumer for signing up for direct grading privileges.

Oh, and Derek: beautiful Helmar stamps...heck of a collection there! I especially enjoy that Evers was the cover photo

Originally Posted by h2oya311

I originally thought this was going to be a "feel good" story....after all the attention Joe paid to your "free" submission. Aside from the banishment from the boards and suspension from PSA membership, what else should he have been expected to do???

I half expected this to end w/ them putting your now NM card back into a PSA 8.5 holder to make things better!!

Certainly the response to you was poor, but put yourself in his shoes. He got $0 from you, spent lots of his time (at least more than a commoner), and now he needs to cut you a big check to make you whole. Not a good day for him. The threat of lawyers now getting involved would be the icing on the cake if I were him!

Matt, I would hate to be in your position too and would likely have responded in a similar fashion!!

FWIW, I have never submitted anything to PSA and don't know anyone who works there.

[conor912]

I'm confused. As a collector who doesnt care so much about the money, you care enough about what PSA thinks to send in an 8.5 looking for a 9? Last I checked a bump up on a flip doesn't actually make the card any nicer. That card looks (or looked) pretty damn perfect to me, and I don't even need to look at the flip to come to that conclusion. I don't mean to sound insensitive, and it sucks that your experience went down like that, but you (and many others) bring this on yourselves.

[CMIZ5290]

Wow, not trying to take sides by any means, but this does not sound like the Joe Orlando I know....Matt, again, not trying to take sides and I'm sorry for your incident....

[glchen]

Matt,

I feel for you, but how were you able to a card of this value under the CC voucher? Typically, the max declared value for this submission is only $500, so if PSA went by their typical policy, they would have only reimbursed you the declared value that you put on the PSA submission form, and the max value would only be $500. In addition, you typically can't split a review and grading submission in the same voucher. It has to be all review or all grading. Trust me, I'm in the same dilemma as I have a 15 card voucher and only around 8-9 cards to submit in standard size.

I know you feel bad for losing your card, but PSA did reimburse you for the cost of your card, and it looks like they even sent back your damaged card back to you. Hopefully, some day, you'll be able to replace it again, and just think of this as one of those unfortunate events in a life that had a lot more better days in it.

[g_vezina_c55]

Verry bad story.

[MBMiller25]

I will try to answer a few questions. I had probably more of a relationship with Joe than most people do. We exchanged emails on several occasions, he and I used to speak quite frequently at the National's, so some of the out of the norm treatment I am sure came from this relationship we had. So please keep the above in mind regarding why I was allowed to send in two submissions on renewal vouchers, why I was able to send in cards greater than $500 in value and why a crack and review strategy took place versus a typical review in the holder. I was told that the crack and review method gave the graders the best view of the card in a review scenerio, so I went with it! Maybe I was naive throughout this, but I trusted Joe to take care of it, and never gave any thought to my card being damaged in the process. Again, this is my opinion as to why I was allowed to do the above, I frankly didn't realize this was out of the norm behavior, and was available to anyone that asked.

I completely understand that I am somewhat at fault for the way things transpired between PSA(particularly Joe) and myself. They made me whole on the card, (based on what I paid for it), which is the silver lining in this whole ordeal. I will never be able to go out and replace this card though, for what I had into it originally. As others have mentioned, it's the way Joe handled the whole ordeal that really has me up in arms. I was shocked that Joe commented like he did to me. His response caused my response, which is what ultimately caused the hang-up and subsequent banning that took place. I frankly had no intention to air out my dirty laundry in the public on this board or CU until PSA proactively banned me from their message boards and subsequently sent my submission back to me informing me that my business was no longer wanted.

I am not looking for pity, and don't expect everyone to agree with me, as to how this was handled. Hell, I am sure some of you are thinking that I got exactly what I deserved trying to bump the card in the first place rather than being happy with what I already had. I don't fault anyone for having an opinion on the matter, I think differing opinions are what makes for a solid community such as we have here on Net 54.

At the end of the day, I just wanted to share my experience.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by MBMiller25

I will try to answer a few questions. I had probably more of a relationship with Joe than most people do. We exchanged emails on several occasions, he and I used to speak quite frequently at the National's, so some of the out of the norm treatment I am sure came from this relationship we had. So please keep the above in mind regarding why I was allowed to send in two submissions on renewal vouchers, why I was able to send in cards greater than $500 in value and why a crack and review strategy took place versus a typical review in the holder. I was told that the crack and review method gave the graders the best view of the card in a review scenerio, so I went with it! Maybe I was naive throughout this, but I trusted Joe to take care of it, and never gave any thought to my card being damaged in the process. Again, this is my opinion as to why I was allowed to do the above, I frankly didn't realize this was out of the norm behavior, and was available to anyone that asked.

I completely understand that I am somewhat at fault for the way things transpired between PSA(particularly Joe) and myself. They made me whole on the card, (based on what I paid for it), which is the silver lining in this whole ordeal. I will never be able to go out and replace this card though, for what I had into it originally. As others have mentioned, it's the way Joe handled the whole ordeal that really has me up in arms. I was shocked that Joe commented like he did to me. His response caused my response, which is what ultimately caused the hang-up and subsequent banning that took place. I frankly had no intention to air out my dirty laundry in the public on this board or CU until PSA proactively banned me from their message boards and subsequently sent my submission back to me informing me that my business was no longer wanted.

I am not looking for pity, and don't expect everyone to agree with me, as to how this was handled. Hell, I am sure some of you are thinking that I got exactly what I deserved trying to bump the card in the first place rather than being happy with what I already had. I don't fault anyone for having an opinion on the matter, I think differing opinions are what makes for a solid community such as we have here on Net 54.

At the end of the day, I just wanted to share my experience.

Hey Matt
Sorry for your experience. I too have had several long conversations with Joe over the last few years. I have a feeling he felt threatened by your statement and made a comment that was what it was, but maybe it was in the heat of an argument, and not really meant. I think Joe loves the hobby and cards as much as almost anyone. However, it's not "life and death" so maybe that is what he was thinking when he made the statement about it only being a card. It's a shame your card got damaged. There is no sugar coating that part of it. I hope you, Joe and PSA can make amends in the future. I have found Joe to be a very likeable hobbyist.

[MBMiller25]

Originally Posted by Leon

Hey Matt
Sorry for your experience. I too have had several long conversations with Joe over the last few years. I have a feeling he felt threatened by your statement and made a comment that was what it was, but maybe it was in the heat of an argument, and not really meant. I think Joe loves the hobby and cards as much as almost anyone. However, it's not "life and death" so maybe that is what he was thinking when he made the statement about it only being a card. It's a shame your card got damaged. There is no sugar coating that part of it. I hope you, Joe and PSA can make amends in the future. I have found Joe to be a very likeable hobbyist.

I completely agree!

[MattyC]

Ah, the banning of long-standing board members who contribute quality discourse and content for years, merely for having a legitimate and professionally worded reaction to a PSA mistake-- how they love to ban people over there. It is their right, it is their site, and sometimes it is warranted-- but they use that hammer often. However will those of us who've been banned continue on?

From the Wagner to the cellos to the George Bush card to trimmed 1975 minis, PSA rarely gets out in front of a problem with candor and forthrightness. Some mistakes are tolerable in business and life, but it is how a company or person handles them that really counts.

The little dance they did with Miller on the posting of his grades, and the fact that the head of a card grading company would say, 'It's just a card,' is pretty lame. Customer service wins people over and over again.

One has to wonder where-- without people logging in serial numbers of slabbed commons on their site, just to compete over GPAs-- PSA would be.

If someone ever invents a NEW REGISTRY that accommodates cards of ALL GRADING COMPANIES and catches fire-- PSA is in deep trouble.

Because in terms of consistency, holder aesthetics, turnaround times, and customer service, they are simply not the leader. Yet I can see how sellers or submitters have to deal with them and walk on eggshells, the way diamond dealers have to deal with their business' own cartel.

[seablaster]

Originally Posted by MattyC

It seems that PSA does not deal with problems well. Their default practice is to ignore problems, tap dance around them, adopt an overly defensive/combative posture, ban board members, and just wait for the storm to blow over. It is a pretty slimy way to conduct a business.

From the Wagner to the cellos to the George Bush card to trimmed 1975 minis, they rarely get out in front of a problem with candor and forthrightness. Some mistakes are tolerable in business and life, but it is how a company or person handles them that really counts.

The little dance they did with Miller on the posting of his grades, and the fact that the head of a card grading company would say, 'It's just a card,' goes to show how inept their current regime is at dealing with any adversity. Customer service wins people over and over again.

One has to wonder where-- without people logging in serial numbers of slabbed commons on their site, just to compete over GPAs-- PSA would be.

If someone ever invents a NEW REGISTRY that accommodates cards of ALL GRADING COMPANIES and catches fire-- PSA is in deep trouble.

Because in terms of consistency, holder aesthetics, turnaround times, and customer service, they are simply not the leader. Yet I can see how sellers or submitters have to deal with them and walk on eggshells, the way diamond dealers have to deal with their business' own cartel.

Very elegantly stated. Well done.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Matt,

I fully understand your frustration. A person in Joe Orlando's position needs to learn to take some criticism graciously and show some empathy towards someone who just learned that he lost a treasured collectible. His behavior reminds me of the "Soup Nazi" episode on Seinfeld with this on-going pattern of instantly banning his customers.

[3-2-count]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

I fully understand your frustration. A person in Joe Orlando's position needs to learn to take some criticism graciously and show some empathy towards someone who just learned that he lost a treasured collectible.

I agree with the above statement 100%.

[wonkaticket]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

Matt,

I fully understand your frustration. A person in Joe Orlando's position needs to learn to take some criticism graciously and show some empathy towards someone who just learned that he lost a treasured collectible. His behavior reminds me of the "Soup Nazi" episode on Seinfeld with this on-going pattern of instantly banning his customers.

+1

[brian1961]

Matt--

Simply, I'm very, very sorry for what happened to you. That Aaron was gorgeous, and probably my favorite-looking card of Hank. The picture was extremely crisp.

Never let it be said, "it's just a baseball card". If they were really only "just", would we have this wonderful Net54baseball board? Would we spend what we have on the cards and now grading? Would we bother reading any books or magazines relating to cards and the players/teams that have captured our fancy?

"Just a baseball card"? Yeah, right. Just as baseball is just a game.

My sincerest wish is that you're able to get past this soon and still enjoy the hobby, and even that card, though the value has plummeted. At least what was printed on the card was unharmed, but I know that's not the point. Hang in there. Please know some of us are hurting with you. -Brian Powell

[bobbyw8469]

Matt, I am truly sorry that your card was damaged. Noone likes to see their $2,200 card turn into a $200 card through no fault of their own. Sounds like PSA made you whole and if they sent you back the card in a PSA 7, then you came out $200 ahead.

That being said, this is what I have an issue with. It is no necessarily about you Matt, just the state of the hobby in general. What would possess someone to crack out a PSA 8.5 in hopes of getting a 9? Obviously, it is the same card - nothing has changed except the flip on the label. It is easy to see why someone would do that. The PSA 8.5 was a $2,200 card. A PSA 9 in that card is a $10,000-$15,000 card. Same card. Basically, PSA and/or Matt was trying to manufacture money. I am not slamming Matt - just making an observation about the hobby that I have always hated. Don't get me wrong, I have cracked out a few cards myself WHEN I FELT THAT PSA GOT THE GRADE BLATANTLY WRONG! I would NEVER crack out a 8.5 hoping to get a '9' grade. Even though the monetary reward is so great, there is technically not much difference between an '8.5' and a '9'. Except in this case, thousands of dollars worth of paper gain for the same card. So basically, cards are no different than buying stocks or gambling. You made a move and you lost. Joe O's actions are inexcusable, however IMHO, you should have never put yourself in that situation to begin with.

[pclpads]

Well stated, Bobby!

[D. Bergin]

Kind of makes me wonder if that card was once an "8", got bumped up to an "8.5" when PSA instituted half grades, and was now attempting a "9".

I'm not a graded card guy, but the variances in grades are so minute I almost find it hard to believe that a card like that can be "cracked" out of a holder like that without some sort of damage, no matter how minute, being a near inevitability.

Back before anybody cared about microscopic defects, I must have nicked the corner of just about every other card I put into a rigid holder, a plastic carrying case, penny sleeve or a screwdown.

[Leon]

Until folks realize that the Registry is it's own competition and collecting niche, and really doesn't have as much to do with cards as it does flips, then folks will continue to have some angst towards it. Think of it as collecting bottle caps. Whoever gets the most, wins. IN a registry set, whoever gets the highest numbers on their pieces of paper, collectively, wins. It's not collecting cards. It's competing against friends to get the highest numbers on pieces of paper. If you look at it like that then it makes sense. I love the registry guys and the way they collect. They leave the type cards I collect alone. Bless their hearts.

[RobertGT]

On thing you can always count on in this board is the constant drumbeat of criticism of collecting styles that are different from our own. You name it: registry collectors, 1980s wax boxes, shiny stuff, high-end rookie cards, those who collect only graded cards, those who collect only PSA, 1950s-60s cards (too common I guess) those who collect only 10s, etc.

With the current state of the hobby - rife with fraud and despicable characters masquerading as dealers - I think we should be happy people collect anything at all. And if they do, just let them be.

I may be a collector of worthless peanut shells. That is my right.

There is no right or wrong, so just let it be and be happy that people are providing business that at one time or another has benefited every single person on this board.

[whitehse]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

Matt, I am truly sorry that your card was damaged. Noone likes to see their $2,200 card turn into a $200 card through no fault of their own. Sounds like PSA made you whole and if they sent you back the card in a PSA 7, then you came out $200 ahead.

That being said, this is what I have an issue with. It is no necessarily about you Matt, just the state of the hobby in general. What would possess someone to crack out a PSA 8.5 in hopes of getting a 9? Obviously, it is the same card - nothing has changed except the flip on the label. It is easy to see why someone would do that. The PSA 8.5 was a $2,200 card. A PSA 9 in that card is a $10,000-$15,000 card. Same card. Basically, PSA and/or Matt was trying to manufacture money. I am not slamming Matt - just making an observation about the hobby that I have always hated. Don't get me wrong, I have cracked out a few cards myself WHEN I FELT THAT PSA GOT THE GRADE BLATANTLY WRONG! I would NEVER crack out a 8.5 hoping to get a '9' grade. Even though the monetary reward is so great, there is technically not much difference between an '8.5' and a '9'. Except in this case, thousands of dollars worth of paper gain for the same card. So basically, cards are no different than buying stocks or gambling. You made a move and you lost. Joe O's actions are inexcusable, however IMHO, you should have never put yourself in that situation to begin with.

If you have to ask why someone who thinks they have a card that is bumpable (if thats a word) and could potentially move the value of that card from, in your words, "The PSA 8.5 was a $2,200 card. A PSA 9 in that card is a $10,000-$15,000 card" then you really are out of touch Bobby.

Don't fault Matt, fault the system and the endless supply of registry owners who have more cash then sense who are always trying to one up their fellow registry owners. Yes, it was a gamble to have his Aaron bumped but that gamble should not have resulted in a card of impeccable quality being lowered to an average card all the while having the President of the company act like this was not a big deal. I would have EXPECTED Matt to be livid and I think each and every one of us would have done/felt the same thing.

And before someone else says it...the registry is a powerful drug.

[bobbyw8469]

"The PSA 8.5 was a $2,200 card. A PSA 9 in that card is a $10,000-$15,000 card" then you really are out of touch Bobby.

I think you missed the point of my post. I DO understand why he did it! He wanted to turn $2,200 into $15,000. Who wouldn't want to do that!! The card should have never been cracked out to begin with, unless their was a GUARANTEE that it would have gotten a '9'. Hell, once the card is cracked out, there is no guarantee he would have gotten it back into the same '8.5' holder that it was in. My point is this, if you play the stock market, and get burned, you have noone to blame but yourself. Matt could/should have done the review WITHOUT cracking the card out. That being said, I blame Joe Orlando for putting it in Matt's head that is was cool to crack the card out in hopes of getting a 1/2 point bump. If it wasn't the lure of $10,000 profit, Matt would have never did it.