PSA-A Cautionary Tale!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Here is my take on this: The grading services started with the mission to grade and authenticate baseball cards. That's a good thing. But a whole other cottage industry has evolved, and that's what most of us call the grading game. There is such an incredible amount of money to be made by simply getting a half grade bump on high grade cards, that there are any number of people whose entire business model is simply looking for cards that are ever so slightly undergrded, since the half grade bump will put perhaps thousands of dollars in their pocket. And since we all agree the difference between say an 8.5 and 9 is virtually imperceptible and entirely arbirtrary, there is a feeling among many that these bumps may be given gratis to their best customers who are simply willing to play the game. It's a system clearly stacked in favor of the big guys, and as many have said TPG are in the business of minting money. This is a really bad sign for the future of this hobby, and with all the attention paid to auction house shilling, I think there is another very big issue that the hobby will soon have to come to terms with. The grading game comes with some serious repercussions.

Better that than a business model based on looking for ex and exmt centered cards that can be improved.

[barrysloate]

Let me put it in perspective Peter: If you had a 52 Topps Mantle graded 8.5, and you had an opportunity to have it bumped to a 9, that label change would put your kid through four years of college. Isn't that a bit of scary thought? Wouldn't you begin to wonder what really might be going on behind the scenes?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Let me put it in perspective Peter: If you had a 52 Topps Mantle graded 8.5, and you had an opportunity to have it bumped to a 9, that label change would put your kid through four years of college. Isn't that a bit of scary thought? Wouldn't you begin to wonder what really might be going on behind the scenes?

If it deserved a 9 and is not altered, no. I am much more concerned about people buying 5s and 6s and manufacturing 8s and 9s.

[jhs5120]

This thread is hilarious.

"Joe Orlando needs to answer my questions!"
"I just spoke to him, he'd like you to call him.. Here's his number."
"I'd rather just complain!"

If you have questions, call the guy. Matt obviously doesn't have a problem with making this issue public, so I don't see a reason for Joe not to discuss this issue over the phone.

"Joe needs to come on the forum and tell his side of the story!"
"Joe would love to discuss this with anyone who calls"
"Does anyone else think it's horrible Joe will discuss a private matter with anyone?"

Hilarious.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

This thread is hilarious.

"Joe Orlando needs to answer my questions!"
"I just spoke to him, he'd like you to call him.. Here's his number."
"I'd rather just complain!"

If you have questions, call the guy. Matt obviously doesn't have a problem with making this issue public, so I don't see a reason for Joe not to discuss this issue over the phone.

"Joe needs to come on the forum and tell his side of the story!"
"Joe would love to discuss this with anyone who calls"
"Does anyone else think it's horrible Joe will discuss a private matter with anyone?"

Hilarious.

True. Plus it's apparent that Joe loves his significant other very much.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

This thread is hilarious.

"Joe Orlando needs to answer my questions!"
"I just spoke to him, he'd like you to call him.. Here's his number."
"I'd rather just complain!"

If you have questions, call the guy. Matt obviously doesn't have a problem with making this issue public, so I don't see a reason for Joe not to discuss this issue over the phone.

"Joe needs to come on the forum and tell his side of the story!"
"Joe would love to discuss this with anyone who calls"
"Does anyone else think it's horrible Joe will discuss a private matter with anyone?"

Hilarious.

That's not how it went down at all. You're putting your words in quotations as if that's what was actually said. Until Kevin mentioned it in post #80 ("I still would like to hear Joe's side of this"), no one even suggested that Joe come here and give his side of the story. It was Kevin that suggested that.

I could care less about Joe's side of the story. Sure, if he wants to come here and tell it, I will certainly listen with an open mind, but I'm darn sure not going to ask him to come here and I don't read in this thread where anybody else asked him to either. So what are you talking about?

Kevin supposedly called him, but can't tell us what he said?!? Come on, isn't that behaving like a third grader playing the 'I know something you don't know' game? Funny, but I think everybody pretty much feels that Joe's side of the story is irrelevant, otherwise somebody would have called him other than Kevin (supposedly).

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

That's not how it went down at all. You're putting your words in quotations as if that's what was actually said. Until Kevin mentioned it in post #80 ("I still would like to hear Joe's side of this"), no one even suggested that Joe come here and give his side of the story. It was Kevin that suggested that.

I could care less about Joe's side of the story. Sure, if he wants to come here and tell it, I will certainly listen with an open mind, but I'm darn sure not going to ask him to come here and I don't read in this thread where anybody else asked him to either. So what are you talking about?

Kevin supposedly called him, but can't tell us what he said?!? Come on, isn't that behaving like a third grader playing the 'I know something you don't know' game? Funny, but I think everybody pretty much feels that Joe's side of the story is irrelevant, otherwise somebody would have called him other than Kevin (supposedly).

You're wasting your time. In every thread which deals with fraud or criticism of a sacred cow in the hobby, there are a bunch of posters who will do all that they can to derail the thread or stop the criticism for reasons which have nothing to do with the truth -- usually it's financial motive. It happened with Mastro, it happened with Memory Lane, it happened with PWCC and it's happened with PSA.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Let us now praise sacred cows...

[glchen]

David, here was your quote from earlier in this thread:

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I agree that Matt shouldn't have expected more than an offer to pay for the card but, in reading his story, I think what really put a bad taste in his mouth was Joe's attitude. When he told Joe he was sick about it, Joe basically told him it's just a bb card and to get over it. A good CSR would have been more empathetic. Had Joe been more understanding about it, I don't believe Matt would have ever posted this story and kept the situation to himself.

Now you're clarifying that with:

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

That's not how it went down at all. You're putting your words in quotations as if that's what was actually said. Until Kevin mentioned it in post #80 ("I still would like to hear Joe's side of this"), no one even suggested that Joe come here and give his side of the story. It was Kevin that suggested that.

I could care less about Joe's side of the story. Sure, if he wants to come here and tell it, I will certainly listen with an open mind, but I'm darn sure not going to ask him to come here and I don't read in this thread where anybody else asked him to either. So what are you talking about?

Kevin supposedly called him, but can't tell us what he said?!? Come on, isn't that behaving like a third grader playing the 'I know something you don't know' game? Funny, but I think everybody pretty much feels that Joe's side of the story is irrelevant, otherwise somebody would have called him other than Kevin (supposedly).

So basically, now most people are saying that they really don't care what Joe's side of the story is, but this thread just gives everybody another opportunity to trash PSA, which many posters, of course, are more than happy to do.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by glchen

So basically, now most people are saying that they really don't care what Joe's side of the story is, but this thread just gives everybody another opportunity to trash PSA, which many posters, of course, are more than happy to do.

With what we know about PSA they deserve some trashing, and it's understandable that it happens on this board because dissension is not allowed on their own forum.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Gary,

I really don't understand what you're saying and why the two quotes. Are you inferring that I contradicted myself? If so, show me where? If not, what is your point? Please clarify.

David

[wonkaticket]

Did anybody catch this part?

"There can be trouble, however, when hobbyists don't understand how context comes into play. For example, you could have 10 different cards and they may all be graded PSA NM-MT 8, but each one of them is different. Some have better corners, while others have better centering. Some have better color, while others have whiter borders and yet others may be well known as trimmed totally. Therefore, there are variances within every grade. You gotta watch those variances, here at PSA it's all about the variances."

This thread deserves an 80's "Pistol Finger" Joe O IMO.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If it deserved a 9 and is not altered, no. I am much more concerned about people buying 5s and 6s and manufacturing 8s and 9s.

No doubt Peter that is a very serious problem too. I was just focusing on one issue that came to mind as I was slogging through this thread. The TPG will have some major issues to deal with down the road.

[barrysloate]

Peter- just to add, if it deserved a 9 then why wasn't it a 9? Where is the accuracy with so much money at stake?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Peter- just to add, if it deserved a 9 then why wasn't it a 9? Where is the accuracy with so much money at stake?

As we know, accuracy in grading is a false precision. I bet I would not grade 100 cards perfectly consistently and neither would you.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As we know, accuracy in grading is a false precision. I bet I would not grade 100 cards perfectly consistently and neither would you.

Exactly Peter. We agree on that. Then why are cards graded using a scale that suggests precision? If you can't tell a 7 from a 7.5, or an 8.5 from a 9 without any discernable objective criteria, then why feign precision? Why not use an adjectival system instead. You wouldn't walk through a museum and say, I give this Picasso a 92 but the Renoir only an 85. That makes absolutely no sense. But given the very subjective system used for grading baseball cards, we have this silly numerical scale. Why?