"No Qualifiers" dis-allowed on PSA subs

[CardPadre]

Here's the whole story....
https://blog.psacard.com/2021/06/24/...lifier-policy/

[bnorth]

That is interesting. This pretty much sums it up if you don't want to follow the link.

The qualifiers will be used infrequently and at the discretion of the grading staff when they feel it’s in the card’s best interest to apply a qualifier.

My opinion is qualifiers are the stupidest thing in grading by a county mile.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by CardPadre

Here's the whole story....
https://blog.psacard.com/2021/06/24/...lifier-policy/

I think this line is adorable. "The qualifiers will be used infrequently and at the discretion of the grading staff when they feel it’s in the card’s best interest to apply a qualifier."

[bobbyw8469]

I think qualifiers are great. If I have an outstanding card that some kid marked up with a pencil, I rather it be 8 (MK) than a PSA 2. Just saying.

[Fred]

Getting back to buy the card, not the flip.

Shouldn't the grade of a card reflect the standards that are published by the TPG? Oh yeah, qualifiers... sheesh. Let's just allow the TPGs to not mean what is published by adding little letters to the flip.

[ledsters]

I think “MK” qualifiers are needed by all grading companies. I’ve bought a few cards graded by SGC in the past, where you cannot see the pen mark on the front or back of the card, because the ink or pencil lead has faded away. The indentation of the writing is there, but, you can’t see it in the scan. When I got the cards in the mail and saw the writing evidence, I was not happy.

[JollyElm]

Allow me to post a perfect example showing how much BS this move by PSA is.

When Bobby's group sub was submitted in 2021, qualifiers were the order of the day. If you didn't want them, you could choose "no qualifiers" and all was peachy, but if you had no problem with them (as I do) they would be applied when necessary. Then a funny thing happened. While PSA held this sub for ransom for a year and a half, they suddenly decided to CHANGE THE RULES OF THE GAME and leave us in the lurch.

For a moment, let's all forget that every time we say what number a card will receive, we are wrong...

I sent in this sharp cornered 1966 Topps #561 Choo Choo Coleman high number, because it is absolutely sweet, but off-centered. I fully expected and wanted it to get a PSA 8 OC (again, assume the grade guessing is correct), but in the interim PSA eliminated qualifiers, so it came back downgraded to a straight PSA 6. And here's the problem. No one will say, "Man, that card is real nice, probably an 8 that got a 6 due to its centering." Nope!! The thought will be, "Gee, that card is a 6 AND it is ALSO off-centered, so it's really nothing but a PSA 4."

That, my friends, is a screw job!!!

1966choochoo561PSA6.jpg

[GasHouseGang]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

And here's the problem. No one will say, "Man, that card is real nice, probably an 8 that got a 6 due to its centering. "Nope!! The thought will be, "Gee, that card is a 6 AND it is ALSO off-centered, so it's really nothing but a PSA 4."

That, my friends, is a screw job!!!

I never thought of that issue. Good point.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by ledsters

I think “MK” qualifiers are needed by all grading companies. I’ve bought a few cards graded by SGC in the past, where you cannot see the pen mark on the front or back of the card, because the ink or pencil lead has faded away. The indentation of the writing is there, but, you can’t see it in the scan. When I got the cards in the mail and saw the writing evidence, I was not happy.

I bought a PSA/DNA Rogers Hornsby cut signature with the worst description that left out the fact that other signatures had been erased. I thought it was going to be a centerpiece of my collection. It showed up and and those ghost signatures bothered me immediately. I thought I'd get over it. A year later I sold it. The MK qualifier should be mandatory.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by todeen

I bought a PSA/DNA Rogers Hornsby cut signature with the worst description that left out the fact that other signatures had been erased. I thought it was going to be a centerpiece of my collection. It showed up and and those ghost signatures bothered me immediately. I thought I'd get over it. A year later I sold it. The MK qualifier should be mandatory.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

At that point, shouldn't it just be considered altered though?

[ALR-bishop]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I think this line is adorable. "The qualifiers will be used infrequently and at the discretion of the grading staff when they feel it’s in the card’s best interest to apply a qualifier."

That's great. If you are disappointed by the grade you can at least be glad it was in the card's best interest

[butchie_t]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I think this line is adorable. "The qualifiers will be used infrequently and at the discretion of the grading staff when they feel it’s in the card’s best interest to apply a qualifier."

A noble cause to have the cards best interest in mind as they grade it. Don't want hurt the cards fee-fee's

[Vintagedeputy]

“Instead of qualifiers, all cards will be issued a participation trophy because they tried”.