![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Last edited by stlcardsfan; 04-03-2019 at 07:43 AM. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I can provide some insight as I have done this very thing. PSA 10s are available from about 1984 until the mid-2000s at a relatively low cost (with a few exceptions, (91 Griffey, Jeter (exploding), Riveria). Before that they are cost prohibitive (in my view). And after that point the reduced quantities, SP and SSP issues arise which make some of the new ones much more expensive, even for the base cards. I only want HOF RC so I am very limited. On some of the newest cards I have been trying to get a strong BGS 9.5 and converting them -- as the cost savings is worth it if it works. Will report back on my luck on that last one.
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
They've quietly gone to mechanical grading. This saves costs, and makes for more uniformity.
I got a pic of the device smuggled out by an operative who unfortunately ran into a bit of trouble in Florida recently. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Granted I'm pretty new the hobby and have a lot to learn, especially concerning submitting cards for grading. But, there wasn't a single explanation as to why any of my cards received the grade (or lack thereof) they did. I submitted several 2003/2005 rookie cards which came back 8 when I believed they were 9's/maybe 10's and I submitted a 1999 Bowman C.C. Sabathia rookie which I thought was an 8/9 at best due to some very slight roughing at edges, it came back Gem MT 10!! How do you go about getting PSA to quantify/qualify their grades with an explanation? Also, do you recommend a resource that goes into great detail about how to assess cards so I can learn to become a better grader on my own? Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Well, the PSA scale is explained really well here:
https://www.psacard.com/resources/gr...andards/#cards As to ?AUTHCTY, that's their term for "FAKE" and it is likely done to stay on the side of not getting sued if they happen to deem it fake and it is later found to be real. To your other ones, I'd have to see them. But the one with the 4 likely has a light surface crease visible on both sides. Only seen on the front can get a 5, only seen on the back can get a 6. But yes, you can review the card for a higher grade. If it "bumps", they reslab it with a higher grade. If it doesn't, they mark the damaged areas with a sticky note and arrows. Costs the same as a regular submission. Sometimes I'll use my 15 freebies for renewing my subscription to review cards where a bumped grade increases the value well enough. Maybe there is enough interest that the next time the board does a bulk submission, we could also submit PSA graded cards for review as well.
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. |
![]() |
|
|