Question on "No Spec Info"

dad2cl3

Five cards in one of my submissions got dinged in R&ID for "No Spec Info" Three of them were not a surprise since I had provided a link to an outside source for the checklist and was unable to find others in the sets that had been graded previously. The other two rejected that are part of sets where other cards in the set have been previously been graded by PSA.

Anyone have experience with this scenario? Would it be appropriate for me to call PSA directly to discuss?

Thanks,

Jason

_EagleEyeKid_

Happened to me. It just comes down to laziness on their part. One of my cards came back with no spec while on the same sub I had other cards for that same set that got graded. I didn't catch it but sent it off in a following sub and it got graded. Call them.

JoeBanzai

What were the cards?

secretstash

EagleEyeKid said:
Happened to me. It just comes down to laziness on their part. One of my cards came back with no spec while on the same sub I had other cards for that same set that got graded. I didn't catch it but sent it off in a following sub and it got graded. Call them.

Call who? The regular rep on the customer service or who can you have a constructive call with that handles grading aspects?

AFLfan

EagleEyeKid said:
It just comes down to laziness on their part.

That's an awfully bold statement considering how little you know of the situation. The amount of research that goes on would blow your mind. All of the rare vintage that has been produced over the years, in addition to the thousands of sets from all different genres that are issued each year... Those people have a ton of work on their plates and i can assure you they are not lazy.

Horse

I prefer consuming Mich Ultra and opening cards up over being lazy any day of the week.

JoeBanzai

@AFLfan said:

EagleEyeKid said:
It just comes down to laziness on their part.

That's an awfully bold statement considering how little you know of the situation. The amount of research that goes on would blow your mind. All of the rare vintage that has been produced over the years, in addition to the thousands of sets from all different genres that are issued each year... Those people have a ton of work on their plates and i can assure you they are not lazy.

Exactly correct Todd. I have had some "issues" with PSA as I added quite a few cards to the Killebrew Master set over the years. I did not always agree with the decisions, but I wouldn't accuse anyone of "laziness".

To the OP;

If you actually expect a good answer, your going to need to be a little more specific. Outside sources must be "legitimate" publications and even then PSA might disagree.

For example; I sent in a Killebrew Washington Senators Team Issue 4x5 for grading and possible future addition to the Master set. The "Big Book" listed the set and year (1958?) as the chcklist being incomplete and possibly having additional players. In my opinion, Killebrew would have been in the set because he was a hot new young player. Since he was not listed, my request was denied. Frustrating, but understandable.

You stated that "other cards in the set have been previously been graded by PSA" in that case (since you didn't tell us what they were) you may need to call PSA for an answer, sometimes they decide to quit grading certain issues, sometimes they make mistakes, especially if you are submitting obscure(?) cards.

Cossetta and Gayle (hope I spelled their names correctly) have always been very helpful when I have contacted them NEVER lazy!

Good luck with your submissions in the future.

_EagleEyeKid_

@AFLfan said:

EagleEyeKid said:
It just comes down to laziness on their part.

That's an awfully bold statement considering how little you know of the situation. The amount of research that goes on would blow your mind. All of the rare vintage that has been produced over the years, in addition to the thousands of sets from all different genres that are issued each year... Those people have a ton of work on their plates and i can assure you they are not lazy.

So Todd, I sent 4 cards from the 2016 Ultimate Collection hockey set. 3 of those cards had spec numbers and one did not, and the card number itself was 2 or 3 away from each other. So the one that didn't have a spec number was just never graded before. Oversight or laziness? I choose the latter. Granted I didn't get charged, and sent the no spec again and it got graded. A population of 1 now.

dad2cl3

For some reason, I can't post. Says my response needs to be approved.

AFLfan

EagleEyeKid said:

@AFLfan said:

EagleEyeKid said:
It just comes down to laziness on their part.

That's an awfully bold statement considering how little you know of the situation. The amount of research that goes on would blow your mind. All of the rare vintage that has been produced over the years, in addition to the thousands of sets from all different genres that are issued each year... Those people have a ton of work on their plates and i can assure you they are not lazy.

So Todd, I sent 4 cards from the 2016 Ultimate Collection hockey set. 3 of those cards had spec numbers and one did not, and the card number itself was 2 or 3 away from each other. So the one that didn't have a spec number was just never graded before. Oversight or laziness? I choose the latter. Granted I didn't get charged, and sent the no spec again and it got graded. A population of 1 now.

I cannot provide an answer to your specific situation for many reasons - I don't collect hockey and am unfamiliar with the set, I did not see your submission, I don't work in that department, etc. But there are likely possibilities that are neither oversight or laziness.

One possibility is that in dealing with newer cards especially, the exact and appropriate title of a card is important. Switching around the order of just a couple of words can result in completely different identification experiences. It may be that the manner in which you listed the set on your submission form did not make immediate sense and caused the spec number not to be found. I'm just spit-balling with that idea, but it is certainly possible. I know that I have personally researched some modern cards that were given to me with names out of order and I looked for a long time to find them. Then when I realized the order of words in the title was incorrect, I was able to find the item very quickly.

Like I said, I do not know exactly why your cards were not initially graded. But what I can say is that it wasn't laziness.

JoeBanzai

Looks like there's 10 different 2016 "Ultimate" hockey sets. Could that be a part of the problem?

Also, I don't know the exact process, but your cards may have been looked at by more than 2 different graders, so the grader may not have been able to find the card with no spec number.

Sounds like the card should have been graded the first time, but people do make mistakes. I have gotten cards rejected for being miscut and sent them in again and they got a grade. Stuff happens.

In the end it got graded and you have a pop 1.

Coarsegold

@AFLfan said:

EagleEyeKid said:
It just comes down to laziness on their part.

That's an awfully bold statement considering how little you know of the situation. The amount of research that goes on would blow your mind. All of the rare vintage that has been produced over the years, in addition to the thousands of sets from all different genres that are issued each year... Those people have a ton of work on their plates and i can assure you they are not lazy.

Cards have become so complicated. Things where so much easier pre-1981.

shagrotn77

Whenever I send a card in that PSA hasn't been graded yet, I always provide all of the background info. that's available. Pictures, links, scans from the Standard Catalogs, etc. It's usually overkill. Still, I've still had many cards returned No Spec Info. It's very frustrating. I've sent a few of them in again and they've been slabbed the second time around, so that's an option.

1951WheatiesPremium

I will chime in to add this:

If you are the impatient type, and there’s never been one graded and no spec, send it alone. It will likely save you some heartache and definitely save you time.

eagles33

I think it’s laziness. I’ve had many instances where I gathered information, got checklists published online, sent scans of the front and back and scans of albums..... basically did all of the research and spoon fed it to their specs department. I get an email confirmation that it’s approved for grading. I print the approval email and all of the back up and attach it to the order form.... even write “see attached please call if you need any further information “ on the order form next to the line item in question. Even after all of that I still get n9. Usually I catch it in time and call to have them hold the order.. then magically it’s graded in a day. I’ve probably gotten 15-25 sets approved for grading. It’s frustrating but I used to really enjoy it.

thehallmark

AFLfan - If the submitter knows ahead of time the card is likely to be troublesome for PSA, couldn't we have a system to flag it for special attention and maybe even a scheduled callback for a spec conversation? Doesn't seem unreasonable to add some protocol/webform for that situation, especially since it would help all involved. Even if this cost me an extra buck or two, I'd probably pay it for the added convenience.

dad2cl3

Wanted to update this thread.

I spoke with a customer service rep at PSA. The rep placed the order on ship hold and has promised to talk with the R&ID group after the order is ready to be shipped in order to possibly get the "No Spec Info" cards graded.

Currently, the balance of the order minus the "No Spec Info" cards have made it through grading and are awaiting Assembly. I'll update as the order proceeds.

Thanks,

Jason

jeffv96masters

I spoke with Steve Sloan directly about several peoples "observations" . Here's what he said

""" The reality is that we are just incredibly oversubscribed with demand, and so the queues are excessive. We’re adding training for efficiency and adding more staff to catch up. We have conceptualized remote work for Research and need to build the system. This is on our roadmap currently """"

Believe they know about the headaches people are describing and are working towards fixes that at least make it quicker and more efficient. Change of course doesn't happen overnight- never does it as fast as we'd personally like it.

Will it ever work the way everyone on the planet wants ?
Doubt it- too many roadblocks to perfect it. But should at the very least get smoother down the road.

Jason glad to hear they helped you out .

Jeff

dad2cl3

Hello QA Check 1! My excitement builds!

dad2cl3

A week or so in QA Check 2 so hopefully some news soon!

jradke4

@jeffv96masters said:
I spoke with Steve Sloan directly about several peoples "observations" . Here's what he said

""" The reality is that we are just incredibly oversubscribed with demand, and so the queues are excessive. We’re adding training for efficiency and adding more staff to catch up. We have conceptualized remote work for Research and need to build the system. This is on our roadmap currently """"

Believe they know about the headaches people are describing and are working towards fixes that at least make it quicker and more efficient. Change of course doesn't happen overnight- never does it as fast as we'd personally like it.

Will it ever work the way everyone on the planet wants ?
Doubt it- too many roadblocks to perfect it. But should at the very least get smoother down the road.

Jason glad to hear they helped you out .

Jeff

What might be the most helpful would be to include some of the collectors as research assistance. PSA would probably only need to provide high resolution scans of the front and back of most cards and those that are major collectors of either a particular set or player would probably be able to help out with the few cards the in house research group are unsure of. Just a thought....you have customers that are experts in at least what the cards are...we might not be expert graders.

AGBCWriter

@Coarsegold said:

Cards have become so complicated. Things where so much easier pre-1981.

Boy is that ever the truth. I find myself going to baseballcardpedia all the time to try and understand the variations and inserts in sets over the last 20 years. On some issues it becomes a deterrent to collecting. I can't figure out which card to buy. I've gotten to the point where I just go by aesthetics and hope I choose the card that gains value too.

skrezyna23

@eagles33 said:
I think it’s laziness. I’ve had many instances where I gathered information, got checklists published online, sent scans of the front and back and scans of albums..... basically did all of the research and spoon fed it to their specs department. I get an email confirmation that it’s approved for grading. I print the approval email and all of the back up and attach it to the order form.... even write “see attached please call if you need any further information “ on the order form next to the line item in question. Even after all of that I still get n9. Usually I catch it in time and call to have them hold the order.. then magically it’s graded in a day. I’ve probably gotten 15-25 sets approved for grading. It’s frustrating but I used to really enjoy it.

Not only all of this. I live in Korea and travel to Japan when I have the time. I collect Korean and Japanese cards. I create and upload all Korean (and many Japanese) checklists for these sets to TCDB as well as uploading images if I have them. To my knowledge this is the only place they are "published." This includes brands Epoch, BBM, Bandai, Calbee and Konami. I was part of a sub that has already popped except for my 14 N9s (all Korean/Japanese). I linked 14 of the 17 N9s (that I added sets of on TCDB) in an email to my friend that he forwarded to PSA. Now they have a Japanese researcher looking into it when I have already done all the work.

dad2cl3

Sub popped this morning so I emailed the cs rep who I spoke with at the end of October.

dad2cl3

CS rep responded that she is awaiting "...authorization from management..." on the same day I let her know the sub popped. Not sure what the process is or how long it will take but am hopefully!

Regarding the four cards in questions, I can't figure out how to post links so I'm just going to post pictures.

The first card is from the 1947 Pepys Whist International card game set. PSA has graded other cards in the set so this one was a surprise.

The second card is from the 1950 Clifford Series and has not been previously graded by PSA so wasn't real surprised on the rejection.

The third card is from the 1950 Smashers Sport Photos series and, like it's predecessor in this thread, and has not been previously graded by PSA.

The fourth, and final, card rejected is from the 1953 A & J Donaldson Sport Favourites set. PSA has graded other cards in the set.

DBesse27

My guess is that 2 of the 4 end up in slabs, but I sure hope they all do.

dad2cl3

Been researching that last card above for another sub and I suspect I know why it is not graded. Looks like it might be difficult to correctly identify the set and year as it appears the same checklist was issued in multiple years.

lawyer05

@1951WheatiesPremium said:
I will chime in to add this:

If you are the impatient type, and there’s never been one graded and no spec, send it alone. It will likely save you some heartache and definitely save you time.

@1951WheatiesPremium said:
I will chime in to add this:

If you are the impatient type, and there’s never been one graded and no spec, send it alone. It will likely save you some heartache and definitely save you time.

so sending it alone helps ?

lawyer05

i have a lot of first time graded, (at least 15) you just need to be patient and its better you contact them before you send...

dad2cl3

Thankfully I’m in no hurry at all. Curious though, why is calling in advance better than providing links and evidence in the submission itself?

DBesse27

@dad2cl3 said:
Thankfully I’m in no hurry at all. Curious though, why is calling in advance better than providing links and evidence in the submission itself?

I’m not sure that it is.

dad2cl3

Checked this morning and the five cards now have certs! Looks like all will be slabbed! Great Christmas present to me!

DBesse27

@dad2cl3 said:
Checked this morning and the five cards now have certs! Looks like all will be slabbed! Great Christmas present to me!

Awesome!

daltex

@dad2cl3 said:
Checked this morning and the five cards now have certs! Looks like all will be slabbed! Great Christmas present to me!

I don't understand. I have N9s with cert numbers.

dad2cl3

The cert numbers on the order originally said No Spec Info... They now have a full description of the cards.

lawyer05

@skrezyna23 said:

@eagles33 said:
I think it’s laziness. I’ve had many instances where I gathered information, got checklists published online, sent scans of the front and back and scans of albums..... basically did all of the research and spoon fed it to their specs department. I get an email confirmation that it’s approved for grading. I print the approval email and all of the back up and attach it to the order form.... even write “see attached please call if you need any further information “ on the order form next to the line item in question. Even after all of that I still get n9. Usually I catch it in time and call to have them hold the order.. then magically it’s graded in a day. I’ve probably gotten 15-25 sets approved for grading. It’s frustrating but I used to really enjoy it.

Not only all of this. I live in Korea and travel to Japan when I have the time. I collect Korean and Japanese cards. I create and upload all Korean (and many Japanese) checklists for these sets to TCDB as well as uploading images if I have them. To my knowledge this is the only place they are "published." This includes brands Epoch, BBM, Bandai, Calbee and Konami. I was part of a sub that has already popped except for my 14 N9s (all Korean/Japanese). I linked 14 of the 17 N9s (that I added sets of on TCDB) in an email to my friend that he forwarded to PSA. Now they have a Japanese researcher looking into it when I have already done all the work.

you have a japanese reasercher ? wow

lawyer05

@jradke4 said:

@jeffv96masters said:
I spoke with Steve Sloan directly about several peoples "observations" . Here's what he said

""" The reality is that we are just incredibly oversubscribed with demand, and so the queues are excessive. We’re adding training for efficiency and adding more staff to catch up. We have conceptualized remote work for Research and need to build the system. This is on our roadmap currently """"

Believe they know about the headaches people are describing and are working towards fixes that at least make it quicker and more efficient. Change of course doesn't happen overnight- never does it as fast as we'd personally like it.

Will it ever work the way everyone on the planet wants ?
Doubt it- too many roadblocks to perfect it. But should at the very least get smoother down the road.

Jason glad to hear they helped you out .

Jeff

What might be the most helpful would be to include some of the collectors as research assistance. PSA would probably only need to provide high resolution scans of the front and back of most cards and those that are major collectors of either a particular set or player would probably be able to help out with the few cards the in house research group are unsure of. Just a thought....you have customers that are experts in at least what the cards are...we might not be expert graders.

i sent front and back
front and back of the book of standar catalogue
also the Becket online checklist
and nada
i will send again

skrezyna23

@lawyer05 said:

you have a japanese reasercher ? wow

No. PSA apparently does.

wrestlingcardking

Is PSA going to recognize Bandai finally? It makes no sense for them not to.

@skrezyna23 said:

@eagles33 said:
I think it’s laziness. I’ve had many instances where I gathered information, got checklists published online, sent scans of the front and back and scans of albums..... basically did all of the research and spoon fed it to their specs department. I get an email confirmation that it’s approved for grading. I print the approval email and all of the back up and attach it to the order form.... even write “see attached please call if you need any further information “ on the order form next to the line item in question. Even after all of that I still get n9. Usually I catch it in time and call to have them hold the order.. then magically it’s graded in a day. I’ve probably gotten 15-25 sets approved for grading. It’s frustrating but I used to really enjoy it.

Not only all of this. I live in Korea and travel to Japan when I have the time. I collect Korean and Japanese cards. I create and upload all Korean (and many Japanese) checklists for these sets to TCDB as well as uploading images if I have them. To my knowledge this is the only place they are "published." This includes brands Epoch, BBM, Bandai, Calbee and Konami. I was part of a sub that has already popped except for my 14 N9s (all Korean/Japanese). I linked 14 of the 17 N9s (that I added sets of on TCDB) in an email to my friend that he forwarded to PSA. Now they have a Japanese researcher looking into it when I have already done all the work.

skrezyna23

@wrestlingcardking said:
Is PSA going to recognize Bandai finally? It makes no sense for them not to.

wrestlingcardking

They never did with some of the wrestling cards that are out there. Sometimes PSA chooses to grade baseball issues but will not for other sports.

skrezyna23

I sent a Korean Pokemon card but it N9'd. The numbers vary slightly for the Korean sets so that may be why. Maybe if I created a checklist/images on TCDB it could help.

dad2cl3

Called in to PSA this afternoon for an update because the order is on a Ship Hold. Wonderful CS rep told me the last five cards are graded, slabbed, and ready to ship and she plans to get the order through to shipping hopefully today! Patience wins!

eagles33

Nice. Always great to see new sets getting slabbed for the first time

dad2cl3

Grades popped this afternoon. Happy they've all been graded. The grade of 1 on the Clifford Series is likely due to the holes in the card. Unfortunately, the cards were packaged in stapled booklets. Not sure how to address that with PSA though. I'm definitely surprised by the 1 on the last card. Don't recall it being in that bad of shape but I haven't seen it since July so my memory is likely unreliable :-)

EXCELLENT 5 1947 Pepy's Game International Football 9 W.Woodburn
VERY GOOD-EXCELLENT 4 1947 Pepy's Game International Football 9 W.Woodburn
POOR 1 1950 Clifford Series First Edition 4 Willie Woodburn
VERY GOOD+ 3.5 1950 M.M. Frame Sport Photos-"Smashers" 17 Willie Woodburn
POOR 1 1953 A & J Donaldson Ltd. Sport Favourites 70 Willie Woodburn

dad2cl3

Just went back to the reference for the A & J Donaldson card and those were also sold in booklets so staple holes are expected.