<< <i>After someone spends $2k, $5k, $10k, $20k, or $100+k on their set...the $30.00 retail grading cost is not the point for most of us...its the principle of "brand loyalty" that we are concerned about...such a loyalty that should be celebrated at 75% with no stipulations or fine print.
John >>
This probably sums it up best. I think the WORST thing a company can do is offer an incentive/bonus, have people work to achieve that goal, and then pull the rug out. Let's face facts:
1) People who have sets registered on the registry are HARD CORE PSA collectors/dealers/supporters.
2) Similarly, if you look at most larger sets - even say 75-100 cards or so (which is relatively small) for a relatively "cheap" set like a Kelloggs issue (no offense guys, I'm just making a point) - and do it in "low grade" of say 8 condition - that's still someone who's bought 50+ PSA cards, AS A COLLECTOR. And, the collector is probably not going to stop collecting when he's done with a relatively modest such set.
Now, would it hurt PSA to throw these guys a bone? How many people do you think will redeem their free grading. And even if someone fills out a set, ONLY TO GET THE FREE GRADING - isn't that just fine for PSA?
3) Out of those with 5 free comps, how many are only going to send in the comp cards? I know even for my tendencies, I like to group larger lots together. Granted, my concept of "large" is different than most, but the point remains that I've had comp lots of 100-200 cards and send them in with other stuff to make it worthwhile...
This just seems to be a case of penny wise and pound foolish...the other thing is that isn't it amazing how much money a company will spend to get new customers (which is exactly what they're trying to do with this program), but ignore the customers they already have? That's probably been the biggest marketing blunders most businesses have made...I know I've done it at times...
Why do I get the feeling, that some cards are worth money, while others are not?
To pour gasoline on the fire folks, remember that the "hard cost" of those gradings can't possibly exceed $3 apiece or $15 total. Very likely it is less as the card gradings are PSA's highest profit margin service outside of an online-only subscription to SMR.
Amazing...what possibly could be the "bottom line" cost of 5 measly gradings when compared to the revenue, brand loyalty, word of mouth advertising & goodwill generated by someone attempting to achieve 75% completion on a 700 card set. In addition...I wonder how many PSA employees have ever tried such a venture. I would hope they realize it takes an amazing amount of time and money to achieve that level of completion in nearly any set.
psa please look at at this this way,how many sets are at 75% now i am not going to bother looking it up but on a high end guess say a couple hundred at reg prices your talking 8000 thats 5 free grades at 8.00 value each times 200 sets if there was 200 and every person took advantage of it. well just on my end i have spent that this year alone between my submissions and psa cards i have bought. that either i would not have bought or not have graded if it was not for the set reg. small price to keep the best customers happy. i own a small ad firm i wish i could buy the pr you have got from your set reg. IT WAS A BRAINSTORM !!.on another note when you came out with it sgc i think was closing rank cards were comming close to reaching the same sale prices as psa ,now you have killed them thanks to your marketing and your LOYAL CUSTOMERS sgc cards do not sell at 50% on psa on a common for example reason is the psa cards are being bought strickly for the set reg,on the biuss end of it i would be trying anything i could to make my customers happy.for the are not only making you $ now but if this trend keeps up MY GOODNESS JUST THINK IF PSA GOT BGS/OR SGC SHARE OF THE MARKETPLACE hmm worth a few thousand????????? AS ALWAYS HAIL TO THE REDSKINS
brucemo - All due respect back at you, and certainly I will not call you crazy as you have done to me. Yes, the set registry may have generated more grading. No question. And, it has generated more grading of cards that probably wouldn't have been submitted before. No argument. But I must remind you, and Paul, that even if revenues are up (and I'm not saying that they are) that doesn't mean profits are up as well. Let me remind you that we are in a two year bear market which has a tremendous effect on operational expenses.
Let me pose a rhetorical question to everyone. Would you rather have 5 free grading for sets that reach 75% completion no matter when they are registered and then reduce the set registry specials to offset it? Or would it make more sense to raise the grading fee for certain submission levels? How about layoff a grader and have submissions back up again to 120 days? Obviously, these options may seem far-fetched. But I'm trying to make a point.
crazysc - No one has pulled the rug out although it feels that way to some of you. I certainly understand that completely in light of the "some get it some don't" issue. But I will repeat again. The benefit has not changed.
jay - Joe Orlando is a very straight shooter but it was his decision a couple of weeks ago as well as Rick's and mine to lower the composition requirement but keep the new set requirement in place. In light of what is happening today, the three of us will certainly discuss this again when he returns from the show. As I mentioned earlier, this matter is still on the table.
I'm leaving for the day and will certainly pick up any messages or mail first thing in the morning and will respond to this thread if necessary tomorrow. All I'm trying to do is here is present the PSA side of things... that policy decisions are not always black and white like you think they should be. Some of you know me. Some of you don't. Those who know me know that I always do what I say I am going to do. Therefore, I will repeat again. We will make it right in the best way we can. Your message has been heard loud and clear.
And, Mike, you are right. If we never had free grading, we wouldn't be having this conversation. It's totally my fault for not making sure our staff understood the benefits, and for that, our customers should not have to suffer. I couldn't agree more.
<< <i>crazysc - No one has pulled the rug out although it feels that way to some of you. I certainly understand that completely in light of the "some get it some don't" issue. But I will repeat again. The benefit has not changed. >>
But that's exactly my point. At the very least, the policy was written in an ambiguous fashion. Trust me, you're not going to see me have any sets registered (unless they have a special for most 10s of one card). But clearly it was ambiguous to many...
Why do I get the feeling, that some cards are worth money, while others are not?
<< <i>No one has pulled the rug out although it feels that way to some of you. I certainly understand that completely in light of the "some get it some don't" issue. But I will repeat again. The benefit has not changed. >>
Perception = Reality
<< <i>It's totally my fault for not making sure our staff understood the benefits, and for that, our customers should not have to suffer. >>
What about the fact that most of the customers/set builders didn't understand the benefits? This is a huge part of the issue. The reason customers are suffering is that we FEEL we have LOST something.
Perception = Reality
Is a benefit really a benefit if it alienates your best customers?
Where have you gone Dave Vargha CU turns its lonely eyes to you What's the you say, Mrs Robinson Vargha bucks have left and gone away?
BJ> "Mike - there are two benefits. One is to encourage people to register collections. The other is to offer grading specials to registrants who are building collections."
Yes, I fully understand that the two benefits/incentives are totally seperate, but you still have not answered my question on the point - are they mutually exclusive? i.e. Receiving one benefit means you forego the other (at least until 75% is reached). That's certainly the way I read the language you posted.
I like Vargha and Carlos. Carlos a couple of times received 5 free gradings, after our sets were on the registry for many months. This was in responce to the 90% finished set.
I waited and sent a submission of about 40-50 cards along with my 4 free (CU subscription) pluss the 5 free grades for 90%. BTW I was at 95% when I did this. After the 3 submissions I went to about 99%. The 5 free was nice, that's almost 1% of a 587 card set. Every card added to a set after the 90% mark feels like a great victory.
BJ, please rethink this NEW 75% 5 day non-deal!
You are taking that 1% (and even less for some of the larger sets) of a great victory, "Feeling" from some of the most dedicated collectors CU has.
The Platnium Collector's Club enrollment includes 8 free gradings and includes some other stuff for $179.
Now. . .the smallest set I collect is 660 cards. 75% completion is 495 cards. Assuming $6 per card the total is $2970 in grading fees.
So. . .I get 8 free gradings when I spend a mere $179 with PSA. But when I spend several thousand dollars, they need to tighten the belt and set trivial rules regarding half that many comp gradings?
When will the frequent PSA submission club start - a PSA rewards program.
There has to be a way to recognize and appreciate the very best customers? A customer service sector company is no different than an airline or hotel chain. Their business is built on repeat customers.
Would this be a reasonable solution? Especially with a few minor modifications to an existing computerized tracking system and database.
over 60 posts already and counting.sure looks like this issue has become a sore spot with a lot of loyal psa guys and gals. can not wait to see the outcome. what does psa think of its best customers??????
I guess that when I read the 5 free grading's offered by psa I did notice the disclaimer and just merely said to myself - this is worthless. The only thing that I can even begin to imagine Psa wanting to accomplish by this is getting some of the large collections out there that have yet to register their sets to go ahead and do so. There are still folks out there with tremendous collections that have a mixture of psa and sgc cards. If they persuade these folks to register their sets and become involved in the registry then they will most likely begin to look for psa graded cards and therefore devalue the competition by taking away their resale market. My first thought when I buy a sgc graded card is that it will cost me $10 to regrade it.
BJ, I believe I understand the intentions but it probably wasn't as well thought out as it should have been. I can't type fast enough to register my 1965 set in 5 days time. I hope that the set registry is mutually beneficial to the collectors and psa and I appreciate it. But sometimes, even if you're offering something for free (such as these free gradings) you still have to think through all of the possible scenarios. It doesn't really bother me on way or the other. I took it as a non-event the moment I read it. I hope it does pull in more collectors to register some of the really nice sets that are out there.
OK, I agree that the free gradings should be available to everyone regardless of when you listed your set, but come on guys, PSA doesn't have to give us free gradings. I think the intent of the free grading was to get people to register their sets, it was never intended to be a reward for people reaching a certian completion %. Because PSA said they'll give five free grading to anyone who registers a set 75% complete everyone thinks they desereve free gradings. It would be nice if PSA rewarded collectors for reaching 75% complete on there sets, but they are in no way obligated to give out any free gradings.
How would everone feel if a buyer came up to you and said "Hey, I bought 100 cards from you, because I have given you so much business, I think you should send me 5 free cards".
Yes it would be a good PR move on PSA part to give out the free gradings, but do the have to? No!
I think you have missed the whole point of this entire thread. I do write often on these threads but i do read them regularly . The first thing im going to tell you about these collectors. They are the most loyal customers you are ever going to see. alot of them including myself are successfull business men so please spare us with the economics 101. The way you spoke of the registry being a free service to us was to basically say we were bored one day so we decided to throw a bunch of money out the window offering this service. WRONG it was marketing and it was the most important marketing that PSA has done in years. Fed up with non customer service. late returns on submissions. alot of collectors where moving to SGC and Beckett. the set registry lured most back with alot of people cracking those SGC's and sending them to PSA. the set registry is a free service and most of us appreciatte the efforts made by you and your staff . But the set registry is not writeoff for PSA. Do you really believe that alot of these people on this board and elsewhere would be sending you guys $1000's every month if it wasnt for the registry. You used a sarcastic response in your comment " Do you want to us to lay off a grader and have 120 day turnarounds. 120 day turnarounds hurt your business not us (well it aggravates us). Leep taking some of your most loyal customers for granted and you will be laying off more than one grader. The 5 free submissions should honor and recognize an individual for there accomplishments and for spending that much money with your company. its called not taking your customers for granted and it means alot to ANY business. how much would it cost PSA if everyone collector on this board never submitted 1 card for three months or for that matter never purchased a PSA card on ebay . How much would the bear market like that. Maybe some of us were a little fast to crack those SGC's
PSA customer services has been great the past 6 months but this thread plus the 1969 submission thread leads me to believe that PSA maybe falling into old habits and taking customers for granted again
ALF - I think you are missing the point. Of course they don't have to give us anything, but when they stipulate an offer about near completion and Zardoz replied to the offer, he was ousted by a loophole. Would $30.00 of grading fees mean a lot to Zardoz, no! He clearly spent several thousand $ on fees. But the offer was on the table and snatched away as he was ready to grab it.That just leaves a bad taste in our mouths. Virtually everyone is in unison on this topic, which is so rare for these boards..jay
BJ - I don't know you and I am sure you are a good guy; but I just read your replies and I must say I sense a very defensive tone. Even if you're clearly in the right, one should never get defensive with a customer (especially a good one).
Here is an example in business when you could have privately emailed Zardoz and offered him 20 free grades for the confusion and trouble - even if he was wrong. He is a reasonable man and one of your better customers. Furthermore, you could have come onto this board and simply stated that you have offered him double what he expected and your sincerest apologies for the confusion. That sort of "advertising" would have been far more valuable than your winning this debate.
no psa does not have to give out free grades if you read all of the posts i think the issue here is the way it was done was not right,would have been better off with no offer nobody would gripe about that. i think we all feel psa is by far the leader in the hoby when it comes to grading. and we are all thankfull for there efforts to improve the hoby via the set reg (good for us good for them) the issue is i think people feel slighted by the wording ect. PSA IS GREAT I LOVE THERE SERVICE .just a small marketing error here,i trust that if we give them the chance they will resolve the issue,i do not think they had any clue this would turn into the issue it has,we all make errors in judgement i hope they will and think they will correct the matter given the sound buiss practices psa has always had.even the mighty casey struck out once
The PSA set registry has also created a stronger secondary-market support for existing PSA graded commons and stars. It is just not a marketing move that benefits future generation of business. It renewed my interest in graded cards again.
However, both factors strengthen PSA's market share as the industry leader. It is a positive self-supporting circle in PSA's favor.
I will admit, working for a software company, the B J is correct. Most people do not realize the expense in maintaining a database, software and hardware for a company. This is very true if PSA does not have in house developers/programmers - I assume that the contract out for much of the support involved. The specifications will always have to change to reflect the current needs.
Maybe this is just an appreciation issue? I still think that a rewards program is a good idea.
I like your "frequent grader" awards system concept. It would reward the frequent and big submitters and would lessen the impact of unfavorable grades (I emphasize "lessen", not eliminate). This is ridiculous in that significant members of the collecting community are given the song and dance about 5 stinking free grading opportunities. Your reward concept would be a win-win situation for PSA and submitters alike.
Wow, I leave the forums for awhile and come back to this!
I have to agree with the sentiments of previous posts from long time PSA supporters. The fact that PSA is drawing a line in the sand on this issue seems absurd. When you calculate out the number of sets that are at, or will reach 75%, it's a very small number. Many sets will take years to get to that level, if ever. Therefore, the number of free grades they'll have to shell out is minimal.
Take for example my 1969 set. If I paid $6 per card to grade out the set, that's just shy of $4k in grading fees. But wait, I started grading this set back in 1998 and spent $15 each to grade many of the star cards. I'm sure I'll have well over $4k in grading fees when I'm done. But for argument's sake, we'll say $4k. If I were to get 5 free grades (which I no longer qualify for under the new system), that would equal 0.75% of the total amount spent to grade the set. Factor in only PSA's cost (maybe $3?), and it's 0.38% of the total cost to grade. Now if we figure they make $2 of gross margin on the 664 cards I will have graded by the time the set is completed, it turns out to be $1328 for that set. I would invest $15 to get $1328 of margin any day of the week. Even if you count the fraction of the cost of the set registry allocated to support my set, it's still greatly profitable.
Regarding the costs to run the set registry, I am also appreciative of this "free" service. But I also agree with everyone that this service is really saving PSA at this point. I doubt dealers are still submitting 1000 count lots of Griffeys and McGwires. The modern grading has very likely fallen on hard times in the past few years. Also, many of the high grade vintage star cards have already been graded. That segment too must be in a slow decline. Part of the volume making up this shortfall is vintage commons. And that volume can be directly attributed to the set registry. When I started grading with PSA, my plan was to only grade out the star cards in my sets. When the registry came along, I started grading out select commons and soon decided to complete my 1969 set in graded form. Go into eBay sometime and pick a vintage year to search for BGS, GAI, SGC, PRO or any other grading company. Take a look at how many commons are graded. Virtually none! The main reason is the set registry. PSA was first on board with that service and therefore own the market. While many dealers have scaled back their submissions, advanced collectors like the ones on these forums have actually accelerated our submissions.
It's still early, so I'm not going to put too much concern on this issue but I hope PSA will do the right thing. I say give them a bit of time to discuss this internally and decide if it makes sense to make the small investment to change the offer back to its original concept, i.e., without the timelimit requirement. Oh, and I would agree that it should be limited to larger sets (sorry to the kellogg and 64 Giants collectors). Otherwise, you could apply it to player sets, team sets, 68 Topps 3D, etc. I don't think that would be fair to CU either.
Oops, if I calculated a $3 CU cost to grade a card, the gross margin would be $3 per card. So the profit is even higher! Anyway, you'all get the point.
On my 30 minute commute home, I tried to think about this situation from my perspective at work. Here is the response I would hope one of my employees would have given...
"Paul, sorry we couldn't work this out over email. I will be in touch via phone to discuss further.
The purpose of the 5 free gradings was to stimulate more sets to be registered. We even lowered the target from 90% to 75%. However, 2 things could have been done better -- the rules were ambiguous resulting in confusion and the promotion appears to not reward those loyal customers that have been with the registry since 0.01%. I don't know the right answer right now, but we will address this issue quickly. Please continue to give feedback, we will listen, and revise the policy to make sense for everyone. Our goal is to make the registry better and better. That includes bringing in new members while also improving our existing customers' experience."
If this response was given, I think this thread becomes a productive conversation rather than a witch hunt... And knowing the guys on this board, I'd much rather have their creative efforts trying to help me rather than working against me. And in the business world, I'd much rather have my customers feeling part of the solution rather than feeling part of the problem.
Just my 3 cents...
Where have you gone Dave Vargha CU turns its lonely eyes to you What's the you say, Mrs Robinson Vargha bucks have left and gone away?
Am i reading this thread right? PSA wont give zardoz five free grades and he's 75% complete. How is it going to hurt a company to give a guy $35 worth of free grading when he has already spent $7000.00 in grading fee's in the last six months!!! PSA should step up to the plate and take care of this with the five free grades! Lets see, if psa doesn't give paul the five free grades and he gets mad and doesn't spend $7000.00 in the next six months psa would be saving $35 in grading fee's but loosing $7000 worth of income, now it make sence to me. What a bunch of BS!
Was the policy with 90% also "if your set is at 90% within five days of being registered". A friend of mine has a set that recently hit the 90% criteria -- and because he does not monitor the day-to-day ongoings of the PSA Set Registry, he was not aware that the requirement was shifted down to 75%. Seeing that he had 90%, he wanted to pursue the five free grading he thought afforded to him.
Are you telling me that the policy before the recent change was that a collector had to have 90% of a set complete before (or within 5 days) registering with PSA in order to get the Free Gradings?
If that is not the case (and it does not seem entirely reasonable to me that it would be the case) -- then shouldn't there be *something* out there to compensate those that were over 75% but not yet at 90%? Five free gradings perhaps?
It just doesn't seem to make sense to me that the spirit of the original promotion was to require a collector to have hundreds upon hundreds of PSA graded cards before being eligible for the five free gradings.
I know that there have been a lot of messages on this topic so far, but I do not think that this particular has been discussed. Are you saying that the only part of the rule that has changed is the 90% to the 75% criteria? E.G., Was the 5 business days time limitation in there from the beginning of this promotion?
I am actively buying MIKE SCHMIDT gem mint baseball cards. Also looking for any 19th century cabinets of Philadephia Nationals. Please PM with additional details.
<< <i>Was the policy with 90% also "if your set is at 90% within five days of being registered"? >>
BJ states on his first post here that is was. Here is what he said: The only part of the free grading benefit that has changed is the fact that now the completion requirement is 75% as opposed to 90%.
So because you haven't read the "fine print" as you say, that gives you reason to bash PSA on these boards? Apparently so. I have to say, I'm very disappointed in what I'm reading in this forum.
Forgive me for butting in. I have passively watched many intelligent threads throughout this forum. Some to my amusement, many for my education. I have bought from many of you, and sold to some of you. I have certainly spent enough money with PSA. The only emotions I have right now are simply shock and disgust, and am ashamed to even be remotely affiliated with PSA. The only icon I could have possibly chosen was the bong, because that is clearly what they are using in Southern California (not that there is anything wrong with that).
The responses from B.J. overwhelm me. As many people have already said, all that had to be (and should have been) done was, "Zardoz, dude, we're really sorry about the miscommunication. Of course we'll honor your five free submissions. By the way, we REALLY appreciate your business." Instead, there is a clear arrogance (is this a British company?) and defensiveness about what truly amounts to an insignificant proposition. Here's a company that has grading and authentication revenues declining from $5.9 million to $4.8 million quarter on quarter, trading at ninety-one cents a share, has equal assets and liabilities (in other words, ain't got nuthin'), and has the same customer service attitude as a rental-car company. This is NOT a company that can afford to piss people off, especially with what I would easily assume is their top 20% customer base.
At this stage of the cycle, this is nothing more than a commodity business where market share is the name of the game. Your only goal is to dominate the market so the likes of BGS, SGC and others cannot afford to be in it - THAT is when you see the reward. PSA hit on something huge with the registry, but the next great thing is always just around the corner. Should BGS or another come up with something equally innovative and with superior customer service, this entire community will encounter a shift that will be too difficult for PSA to rebound from. Sorry for the Business 101 lecture (I very much want to ramble on to 102, 103, etc) - I know it's redundant for many of you. However, it does appear that some need a refresher course!
B.J., you're right. As you say, things aren't always "black and white." Start seeing the gray and do what is right instead of hiding behind some pathetic policy rhetoric. One small comment has exploded into what seems to be a record amount of responses! There is obviously some pent up emotion from the very people that contribute to your paycheck! Somebody at PSA with customer service skills step up to the plate NOW!!!!! I will be in Chicago for the show, and can foresee all the Competitor's employees having a field day grading cards while PSA is doing nothing other than watching a mile-long line waiting to speak to Joe!
Just to show you how dumb I am , I thought the past thread on the 5 free submissions was a joke among the collectors. I never knew there really was some offer. I feel very blonde.
TO BJ: It is I who "hit and ran" on your voice mail today, although you make it sound like a drive by shooting. Please. I spelled out my name and my handle on the message board and the registry. You had just emailed me last week to tell me my second 1967 set had to be "edited" because of the rule against anything related to trading cards in the title or set description. If you wanted my home or work number, you certainly could've found it and called me if you wanted to discuss it. As I said in my phone message, I do not hold you or any individual responsible--it's a business decision. The idea that a set must be input from 0 to 75% in 5 business days (a big break down from 90%) to earn 5 free gradings is outrageous, and certainly was not spelled out clearly.
As many posters much more articulate and intelligent than I have written, that is not what seemed to be the intent of the registry--to have everybody bolt on the scene with 75%. As a relative newcomer to grading, I jumped in wholeheartedly and, although not as active a poster as many here, am just as passionnate about PSA's product and status with friends and other collectors. This definitely sours the relationship a bit and is disappointing to say the least.
Zardoz or Jay or whomever is organizing the $30 giveaways--put me down as a donor. That will be money that would have gone to get cards graded, but will now go to a fellow collector.
BJ--Again, my message only expressed my shock and disbelief at what I had read, because I too, was fooled. I was looking forward to those 5 freebies and now they have evaporated (like my IRA account). Obviously the $ value of the gradings is much smaller of a "loss" than the smack in the face that has been delivered.
Eric
"...life is but a dream."
Used to working on HOF SS Baseballs--Now just '67 Sox Stickers and anything Boston related.
First of all, to read 80+ posts takes a heck of a long time.
Second of all, this is not to bash anyone, nor is it to defend PSA services/promotions. I would like to look at this as PSA "the business".
I worked in the retail environment for a period for a national electronics retailer (narrows it down, huh). I'm sure most of you have been in this type of store buying a computer, TV, stereo, etc., and have become annoyed with that salesman who is on the phone, and paying no attention to you. Well, those salesmen are trained to ALWAYS answer the phone first, because those are the "potential" buyers the company is trying to get into the store. They figure, you are already in the store, and will most likely buy something anyway, even if the service is not top-notch. Not all, but most. They want those people who have not already invested the time in driving to the store to do so. Therefore, gettting your business, and the callers business.
Now, in terms of PSA, we are the loyal customers already in the store, and we will continue submitting cards, because we have invested the time in the set registry, and taken the time necessary to buy, grade, and type the cert. numbers. Not all, but most. This promotion is for the caller on the phone, who is not already a loyal customer, but may become one through promotions, small as they may be. (Hey, I have a neighbor who takes her own bags to the grocery store, because she gets 4 cents off each bag she uses!)Therefore, PSA gets our business, and the people who may still be on the fence.
Also, if new sets start popping up at 75%, let's say for late-vintage, modern sets in high grade, this may fuel the competitive juices in the guys already registered, because they may not have a top 3 set anymore, and want to get back to the top tier.
Just trying to reason this whole thing out.
Bernie
Bernie Carlen
Currently collecting.....your guess is as good as mine.
The one thing to remember is that Grading is 100% a service. We are paying to put a card in a $.50 piece of plastic and have an opinion rendered on it, and paying $5-20+ for the privledge.
From the perspective of a very large submitter, I've certainly been impressed by some of the changes PSA has made recently. However, I worry that many times they compare their service to "what was" and think how good it is, instead of comparing it to "what could be."
One of my favorite funniest moments was getting a bite to eat with Steve in Boston, when I was still submitting a TON of cards. He told me "Solomon, unfortunately we can't offer you 10 day turnaround (my "deal" with them) anymore, we can only offer 20 day turnaround because we're so busy." My reply: "Steve, that's great! Now my stuff will only be 20 days late instead of 30 days late!" While I certainly had some sarcasm mixed with humor in the comment, the market was so strong and so easy to make money that you just kinda grinned and beared it. When the market fell off, customer service became a LOT more important, and at that time (end of 2000, beginning of 2001), PSA was the worst in the business from my perspective.
It's changed, and I think especially to the public, as there are no more three month waits etc., but just think of how much better things could be....instead of how bad things were...
Why do I get the feeling, that some cards are worth money, while others are not?
Even though I'm upset at PSA right now, I have to agree with what BJ is saying when it comes to operating costs. YES it might not seem like alot of HARD money it costs to do the free gradings, it does cost money. I know alot of the people on this thread are businessmen some might agree with my comments and some may not, BUT. If PSA gave say 8000 free submissions I saw someone say would be issued for sets at 75% and it did cost them $3 to grade the card at there cost, (which I doubt, its probrably more like $4-$5) based on typical company projected profit to cost minus T and I. PLUS the cost of lost revenue that that grader would produce had he not been doing free gradings, can seriously hurt a bottom line. Someone said they did somewhere around $5M per quarter well if a good company does 10% after T&I they did well well thats $500000 per quarter, if the costs are $4 per card x 8000=$32000- what the grader loses in lost revenue it could come to upwards of 10% or better of the bottom line for that quarter. I couldnt agree to lose or give away that money. The owner of my company would find someone else to do my job. I apologize to everyone for the business disertation.
But gaspipe, the whole point and only questions is will these free grades generate more revenue for PSA? Considering on a 700 card set, you need to get 500+ cards graded to qualify, I think it'll provide better than a 1% return on the additional gradings received...
Why do I get the feeling, that some cards are worth money, while others are not?
Lets assume each set averages 500 cards. That means 8000/5 or 1600 sets times 375 cards or 600,000 cards have been registered. Thats 3,000,000 minimum in revenue, plus that is 600,000 cards NOT graded/bought in a competing slab. If the opportunity cost of slabbing 8000 cards is 3 a card or 24,000 but that 24,000 generates 3,000,000 in revenue -- seems like a no brainer to me. Not to mention the goodwill, customer loyalty, and market share considerations...
Regardless of the economics behind the situation, these are the facts --
*the promotion is poorly worded *it alienates those building sets that are already registered *poorly worded responses have fed the frenzy
Many people have mentioned this, but if PSA had NO PROMOTION it would be better than what is currently happening. But if you are going to have a promotion, it may be a good idea that the promotion not alienate your best customers...
Where have you gone Dave Vargha CU turns its lonely eyes to you What's the you say, Mrs Robinson Vargha bucks have left and gone away?
Although I was taught not to ever count on projected or possible project revenues, the basis of what I said is still sound. Also the cost cant be $3 per card , because that would put them in a 50%+ profit area before taxes and if that was the case, you all would get your gradings and the stock wouldnt be 91c a share. I would guess that there costs are in the $4-$5 per card range. Also your statements are correct, it could generate more submissions, but where does it end. Can most of us afford to collect more than 1 set or even 2. Eventually the older sets couldnt be completed in 8 or higher because even if there were more collectors there wouldnt be enough high grade cards to go around. Some where this will level off, it may not be for awhile but it will UNLESS they bring in MORE new collectors and in this market I dont think you'll see that at this time. Like I said its just my opinion, I know I couldnt do 10% or even 5% of the gas lines my company installs for free. Even if it brought me more work. More work means more costs, more overhead, even a poor product if training and the skill people are stretched too thin. Sometimes more is not better. All in all, the wording was poor and was interpreted differently than what was really offered. Your statement are probrably correct when you say that they would be better off if it was never offered.
2 more posts and we hit 100. Come on guys. Its getting late so I'm going to bed. I cant wait to see the lashing I'm going to get when I log on in the morning. Good night , I enjoyed the economics session. Like I said not everyone will agree with what I said but its just my opinion based on what I would do if it was my call, but like I said , I never would of made the offer in the first place, because I'm a Scrooge.
<< <i>Although I was taught not to ever count on projected or possible project revenues, the basis of what I said is still sound. >>
Of course you can't count on projected revenue, but that's the purpose of the offer, to generate additional revenue.
<< <i>Also the cost cant be $3 per card , because that would put them in a 50%+ profit area before taxes and if that was the case, you all would get your gradings and the stock wouldnt be 91c a share. I would guess that there costs are in the $4-$5 per card range. >>
I've got a pretty good handle on costs associated...it depends how you allocate overhead of course, but I think $3/card is a max. Card grading has always been the company's big GP center. CERTAINLY, if you look at marginal cost (i.e. the cost to grade ONE additional card), it's much less. Maybe $1-1.50/card...
<< <i>Also your statements are correct, it could generate more submissions, but where does it end. Can most of us afford to collect more than 1 set or even 2. Eventually the older sets couldnt be completed in 8 or higher because even if there were more collectors there wouldnt be enough high grade cards to go around. Some where this will level off, it may not be for awhile but it will UNLESS they bring in MORE new collectors and in this market I dont think you'll see that at this time. >>
I think you'll see many people work on many more than one set. And, in the numbers we've been talking about, we're assuming someone will grade or purchase 752 cards to complete a 752 card '71 Topps set. This is quite the exception - because anyone completing a higher grade set is only going to be able to use a fraction of the cards submitted in his set. The reason for grading the cards is that you want a "PSA x or better" set - if you're happy with what you have, there's not much reason to submit it! If it's a set that you are happy with 50% of the cards submitted, that means you'll grade 1500 cards for a 752 card set. And many of those cards might not have been otherwise graded...
<< <i>Like I said its just my opinion, I know I couldnt do 10% or even 5% of the gas lines my company installs for free. Even if it brought me more work. More work means more costs, more overhead, even a poor product if training and the skill people are stretched too thin. Sometimes more is not better. All in all, the wording was poor and was interpreted differently than what was really offered. Your statement are probrably correct when you say that they would be better off if it was never offered. >>
But with what you listed, what odds will installing a gas line for free encourage someone to get more gas lines??
PSA has to make a decision if it's worthwhile to offer these deals. I can't tell them yes or no - personally, I DON'T think it's really that beneficial to them. Because simply, people aren't going to grade or buy 75% of a set for a $30-50 comp! But, if they are going to do it, I think it's wrong to stick it to their current customers. It's like AT&T offering 4 cents/minute for LD for new customers, and losing existing customers because they're not going to lower their rates. You kinda expect "most favored trade" status as a good/loyal customer...
Why do I get the feeling, that some cards are worth money, while others are not?
Comments
Website: http://www.qualitycards.com
<< <i>After someone spends $2k, $5k, $10k, $20k, or $100+k on their set...the $30.00 retail grading cost is not the point for most of us...its the principle of "brand loyalty" that we are concerned about...such a loyalty that should be celebrated at 75% with no stipulations or fine print.
John >>
This probably sums it up best. I think the WORST thing a company can do is offer an incentive/bonus, have people work to achieve that goal, and then pull the rug out. Let's face facts:
1) People who have sets registered on the registry are HARD CORE PSA collectors/dealers/supporters.
2) Similarly, if you look at most larger sets - even say 75-100 cards or so (which is relatively small) for a relatively "cheap" set like a Kelloggs issue (no offense guys, I'm just making a point) - and do it in "low grade" of say 8 condition - that's still someone who's bought 50+ PSA cards, AS A COLLECTOR. And, the collector is probably not going to stop collecting when he's done with a relatively modest such set.
Now, would it hurt PSA to throw these guys a bone? How many people do you think will redeem their free grading. And even if someone fills out a set, ONLY TO GET THE FREE GRADING - isn't that just fine for PSA?
3) Out of those with 5 free comps, how many are only going to send in the comp cards? I know even for my tendencies, I like to group larger lots together. Granted, my concept of "large" is different than most, but the point remains that I've had comp lots of 100-200 cards and send them in with other stuff to make it worthwhile...
This just seems to be a case of penny wise and pound foolish...the other thing is that isn't it amazing how much money a company will spend to get new customers (which is exactly what they're trying to do with this program), but ignore the customers they already have? That's probably been the biggest marketing blunders most businesses have made...I know I've done it at times...
Amazing...what possibly could be the "bottom line" cost of 5 measly gradings when compared to the revenue, brand loyalty, word of mouth advertising & goodwill generated by someone attempting to achieve 75% completion on a 700 card set. In addition...I wonder how many PSA employees have ever tried such a venture. I would hope they realize it takes an amazing amount of time and money to achieve that level of completion in nearly any set.
John B.
Let me pose a rhetorical question to everyone. Would you rather have 5 free grading for sets that reach 75% completion no matter when they are registered and then reduce the set registry specials to offset it? Or would it make more sense to raise the grading fee for certain submission levels? How about layoff a grader and have submissions back up again to 120 days? Obviously, these options may seem far-fetched. But I'm trying to make a point.
crazysc - No one has pulled the rug out although it feels that way to some of you. I certainly understand that completely in light of the "some get it some don't" issue. But I will repeat again. The benefit has not changed.
jay - Joe Orlando is a very straight shooter but it was his decision a couple of weeks ago as well as Rick's and mine to lower the composition requirement but keep the new set requirement in place. In light of what is happening today, the three of us will certainly discuss this again when he returns from the show. As I mentioned earlier, this matter is still on the table.
I'm leaving for the day and will certainly pick up any messages or mail first thing in the morning and will respond to this thread if necessary tomorrow. All I'm trying to do is here is present the PSA side of things... that policy decisions are not always black and white like you think they should be. Some of you know me. Some of you don't. Those who know me know that I always do what I say I am going to do. Therefore, I will repeat again. We will make it right in the best way we can. Your message has been heard loud and clear.
bsearls@collectors.com
Set Registry & Special Projects Director
PCGS (coins) www.pcgs.com
PSA (cards & tickets) www.psacard.com
bsearls@collectors.com
Set Registry & Special Projects Director
PCGS (coins) www.pcgs.com
PSA (cards & tickets) www.psacard.com
<< <i>crazysc - No one has pulled the rug out although it feels that way to some of you. I certainly understand that completely in light of the "some get it some don't" issue. But I will repeat again. The benefit has not changed. >>
But that's exactly my point. At the very least, the policy was written in an ambiguous fashion. Trust me, you're not going to see me have any sets registered (unless they have a special for most 10s of one card). But clearly it was ambiguous to many...
<< <i>No one has pulled the rug out although it feels that way to some of you. I certainly understand that completely in light of the "some get it some don't" issue. But I will repeat again. The benefit has not changed. >>
Perception = Reality
<< <i>It's totally my fault for not making sure our staff understood the benefits, and for that, our customers should not have to suffer. >>
What about the fact that most of the customers/set builders didn't understand the benefits? This is a huge part of the issue. The reason customers are suffering is that we FEEL we have LOST something.
Perception = Reality
Is a benefit really a benefit if it alienates your best customers?
CU turns its lonely eyes to you
What's the you say, Mrs Robinson
Vargha bucks have left and gone away?
hey hey hey
hey hey hey
Yes, I fully understand that the two benefits/incentives are totally seperate, but you still have not answered my question on the point - are they mutually exclusive? i.e. Receiving one benefit means you forego the other (at least until 75% is reached). That's certainly the way I read the language you posted.
Mike
Brain freeze after reading this entire thread...
I like Vargha and Carlos. Carlos a couple of times received 5 free gradings, after our sets were on the registry for many months. This was in responce to the 90% finished set.
I waited and sent a submission of about 40-50 cards along with my 4 free (CU subscription) pluss the
5 free grades for 90%. BTW I was at 95% when I did this. After the 3 submissions I went to about 99%.
The 5 free was nice, that's almost 1% of a 587 card set. Every card added to a set after the 90% mark
feels like a great victory.
BJ, please rethink this NEW 75% 5 day non-deal!
You are taking that 1% (and even less for some of the larger sets) of a great victory, "Feeling" from some of the most dedicated collectors CU has.
John M. Linnens-jml517 ebay
1961 topps 100%
1963 51%
1970 topps 10%
Soon about 50% 1954 topps...
______________
1961 topps 100%
The Platnium Collector's Club enrollment includes 8 free gradings and includes some other stuff for $179.
Now. . .the smallest set I collect is 660 cards. 75% completion is 495 cards. Assuming $6 per card the total is $2970 in grading fees.
So. . .I get 8 free gradings when I spend a mere $179 with PSA. But when I spend several thousand dollars, they need to tighten the belt and set trivial rules regarding half that many comp gradings?
Am I missing something?
Mike
There has to be a way to recognize and appreciate the very best customers? A customer service sector company is no different than an airline or hotel chain. Their business is built on repeat customers.
Would this be a reasonable solution? Especially with a few minor modifications to an existing computerized tracking system and database.
BJ, I believe I understand the intentions but it probably wasn't as well thought out as it should have been. I can't type fast enough to register my 1965 set in 5 days time. I hope that the set registry is mutually beneficial to the collectors and psa and I appreciate it. But sometimes, even if you're offering something for free (such as these free gradings) you still have to think through all of the possible scenarios. It doesn't really bother me on way or the other. I took it as a non-event the moment I read it. I hope it does pull in more collectors to register some of the really nice sets that are out there.
Wayne
How would everone feel if a buyer came up to you and said "Hey, I bought 100 cards from you, because I have given you so much business, I think you should send me 5 free cards".
Yes it would be a good PR move on PSA part to give out the free gradings, but do the have to? No!
I think you have missed the whole point of this entire thread. I do write often on these threads but i do read them regularly . The first thing im going to tell you about these collectors. They are the most loyal customers you are ever going to see. alot of them including myself are successfull business men so please spare us with the economics 101. The way you spoke of the registry being a free service to us was to basically say we were bored one day so we decided to throw a bunch of money out the window offering this service. WRONG it was marketing and it was the most important marketing that PSA has done in years. Fed up with non customer service. late returns on submissions. alot of collectors where moving to SGC and Beckett. the set registry lured most back with alot of people cracking those SGC's and sending them to PSA. the set registry is a free service and most of us appreciatte the efforts made by you and your staff . But the set registry is not writeoff for PSA. Do you really believe that alot of these people on this board and elsewhere would be sending you guys $1000's every month if it wasnt for the registry. You used a sarcastic response in your comment " Do you want to us to lay off a grader and have 120 day turnarounds. 120 day turnarounds hurt your business not us (well it aggravates us). Leep taking some of your most loyal customers for granted and you will be laying off more than one grader. The 5 free submissions should honor and recognize an individual for there accomplishments and for spending that much money with your company. its called not taking your customers for granted and it means alot to ANY business. how much would it cost PSA if everyone collector on this board never submitted 1 card for three months or for that matter never purchased a PSA card on ebay . How much would the bear market like that. Maybe some of us were a little fast to crack those SGC's
PSA customer services has been great the past 6 months but this thread plus the 1969 submission thread leads me to believe that PSA maybe falling into old habits and taking customers for granted again
Don
Website: http://www.qualitycards.com
Here is an example in business when you could have privately emailed Zardoz and offered him 20 free grades for the confusion and trouble - even if he was wrong. He is a reasonable man and one of your better customers. Furthermore, you could have come onto this board and simply stated that you have offered him double what he expected and your sincerest apologies for the confusion. That sort of "advertising" would have been far more valuable than your winning this debate.
BUSINESS 101. The customer is always right.
Thanks,
Wayne
Ta HEE HEE HEE!
BOB
BJ is a "she".
(just kidding BJ)
wayne
However, both factors strengthen PSA's market share as the industry leader. It is a positive self-supporting circle in PSA's favor.
I will admit, working for a software company, the B J is correct. Most people do not realize the expense in maintaining a database, software and hardware for a company. This is very true if PSA does not have in house developers/programmers - I assume that the contract out for much of the support involved. The specifications will always have to change to reflect the current needs.
Maybe this is just an appreciation issue? I still think that a rewards program is a good idea.
<< <i>Most people do not realize the expense in maintaining a database, software and hardware for a company. >>
And most companies don't "grow" something unless it has a positive ROI.
CU turns its lonely eyes to you
What's the you say, Mrs Robinson
Vargha bucks have left and gone away?
hey hey hey
hey hey hey
I like your "frequent grader" awards system concept. It would reward the frequent and big submitters and would lessen the impact of unfavorable grades (I emphasize "lessen", not eliminate). This is ridiculous in that significant members of the collecting community are given the song and dance about 5 stinking free grading opportunities. Your reward concept would be a win-win situation for PSA and submitters alike.
Ron
I have to agree with the sentiments of previous posts from long time PSA supporters. The fact that PSA is drawing a line in the sand on this issue seems absurd. When you calculate out the number of sets that are at, or will reach 75%, it's a very small number. Many sets will take years to get to that level, if ever. Therefore, the number of free grades they'll have to shell out is minimal.
Take for example my 1969 set. If I paid $6 per card to grade out the set, that's just shy of $4k in grading fees. But wait, I started grading this set back in 1998 and spent $15 each to grade many of the star cards. I'm sure I'll have well over $4k in grading fees when I'm done. But for argument's sake, we'll say $4k. If I were to get 5 free grades (which I no longer qualify for under the new system), that would equal 0.75% of the total amount spent to grade the set. Factor in only PSA's cost (maybe $3?), and it's 0.38% of the total cost to grade. Now if we figure they make $2 of gross margin on the 664 cards I will have graded by the time the set is completed, it turns out to be $1328 for that set. I would invest $15 to get $1328 of margin any day of the week. Even if you count the fraction of the cost of the set registry allocated to support my set, it's still greatly profitable.
Regarding the costs to run the set registry, I am also appreciative of this "free" service. But I also agree with everyone that this service is really saving PSA at this point. I doubt dealers are still submitting 1000 count lots of Griffeys and McGwires. The modern grading has very likely fallen on hard times in the past few years. Also, many of the high grade vintage star cards have already been graded. That segment too must be in a slow decline. Part of the volume making up this shortfall is vintage commons. And that volume can be directly attributed to the set registry. When I started grading with PSA, my plan was to only grade out the star cards in my sets. When the registry came along, I started grading out select commons and soon decided to complete my 1969 set in graded form. Go into eBay sometime and pick a vintage year to search for BGS, GAI, SGC, PRO or any other grading company. Take a look at how many commons are graded. Virtually none! The main reason is the set registry. PSA was first on board with that service and therefore own the market. While many dealers have scaled back their submissions, advanced collectors like the ones on these forums have actually accelerated our submissions.
It's still early, so I'm not going to put too much concern on this issue but I hope PSA will do the right thing. I say give them a bit of time to discuss this internally and decide if it makes sense to make the small investment to change the offer back to its original concept, i.e., without the timelimit requirement. Oh, and I would agree that it should be limited to larger sets (sorry to the kellogg and 64 Giants collectors). Otherwise, you could apply it to player sets, team sets, 68 Topps 3D, etc. I don't think that would be fair to CU either.
"Paul, sorry we couldn't work this out over email. I will be in touch via phone to discuss further.
The purpose of the 5 free gradings was to stimulate more sets to be registered. We even lowered the target from 90% to 75%. However, 2 things could have been done better -- the rules were ambiguous resulting in confusion and the promotion appears to not reward those loyal customers that have been with the registry since 0.01%. I don't know the right answer right now, but we will address this issue quickly. Please continue to give feedback, we will listen, and revise the policy to make sense for everyone. Our goal is to make the registry better and better. That includes bringing in new members while also improving our existing customers' experience."
If this response was given, I think this thread becomes a productive conversation rather than a witch hunt... And knowing the guys on this board, I'd much rather have their creative efforts trying to help me rather than working against me. And in the business world, I'd much rather have my customers feeling part of the solution rather than feeling part of the problem.
Just my 3 cents...
CU turns its lonely eyes to you
What's the you say, Mrs Robinson
Vargha bucks have left and gone away?
hey hey hey
hey hey hey
I think i like SGC more by the day.
My question:
Was the policy with 90% also "if your set is at 90% within five days of being registered". A friend of mine has a set that recently hit the 90% criteria -- and because he does not monitor the day-to-day ongoings of the PSA Set Registry, he was not aware that the requirement was shifted down to 75%. Seeing that he had 90%, he wanted to pursue the five free grading he thought afforded to him.
Are you telling me that the policy before the recent change was that a collector had to have 90% of a set complete before (or within 5 days) registering with PSA in order to get the Free Gradings?
If that is not the case (and it does not seem entirely reasonable to me that it would be the case) -- then shouldn't there be *something* out there to compensate those that were over 75% but not yet at 90%? Five free gradings perhaps?
It just doesn't seem to make sense to me that the spirit of the original promotion was to require a collector to have hundreds upon hundreds of PSA graded cards before being eligible for the five free gradings.
I know that there have been a lot of messages on this topic so far, but I do not think that this particular has been discussed. Are you saying that the only part of the rule that has changed is the 90% to the 75% criteria? E.G., Was the 5 business days time limitation in there from the beginning of this promotion?
<< <i>Was the policy with 90% also "if your set is at 90% within five days of being registered"? >>
BJ states on his first post here that is was. Here is what he said: The only part of the free grading benefit that has changed is the fact that now the completion requirement is 75% as opposed to 90%.
So because you haven't read the "fine print" as you say, that gives you reason to bash PSA on these boards? Apparently so. I have to say, I'm very disappointed in what I'm reading in this forum.
The responses from B.J. overwhelm me. As many people have already said, all that had to be (and should have been) done was, "Zardoz, dude, we're really sorry about the miscommunication. Of course we'll honor your five free submissions. By the way, we REALLY appreciate your business." Instead, there is a clear arrogance (is this a British company?) and defensiveness about what truly amounts to an insignificant proposition. Here's a company that has grading and authentication revenues declining from $5.9 million to $4.8 million quarter on quarter, trading at ninety-one cents a share, has equal assets and liabilities (in other words, ain't got nuthin'), and has the same customer service attitude as a rental-car company. This is NOT a company that can afford to piss people off, especially with what I would easily assume is their top 20% customer base.
At this stage of the cycle, this is nothing more than a commodity business where market share is the name of the game. Your only goal is to dominate the market so the likes of BGS, SGC and others cannot afford to be in it - THAT is when you see the reward. PSA hit on something huge with the registry, but the next great thing is always just around the corner. Should BGS or another come up with something equally innovative and with superior customer service, this entire community will encounter a shift that will be too difficult for PSA to rebound from. Sorry for the Business 101 lecture (I very much want to ramble on to 102, 103, etc) - I know it's redundant for many of you. However, it does appear that some need a refresher course!
B.J., you're right. As you say, things aren't always "black and white." Start seeing the gray and do what is right instead of hiding behind some pathetic policy rhetoric. One small comment has exploded into what seems to be a record amount of responses! There is obviously some pent up emotion from the very people that contribute to your paycheck! Somebody at PSA with customer service skills step up to the plate NOW!!!!! I will be in Chicago for the show, and can foresee all the Competitor's employees having a field day grading cards while PSA is doing nothing other than watching a mile-long line waiting to speak to Joe!
Peace.
A few months ago I asked the question " has any one sent in for the 5 free for over 90%" and how long did the submission take to be graded.
Carlos was first to answer that thread. He stated one of his 5 free was back in about 4 weeks and the other about 6 weeks.
My 5 free took about 5 weeks.
Where is Carlos??? We need you!
Carlos probably knows the original offer verbatim.
The word "new" was in the original.
Jm Linnens
jml517-ebay
1961 topps 100%
______________
1961 topps 100%
As many posters much more articulate and intelligent than I have written, that is not what seemed to be the intent of the registry--to have everybody bolt on the scene with 75%. As a relative newcomer to grading, I jumped in wholeheartedly and, although not as active a poster as many here, am just as passionnate about PSA's product and status with friends and other collectors. This definitely sours the relationship a bit and is disappointing to say the least.
Zardoz or Jay or whomever is organizing the $30 giveaways--put me down as a donor. That will be money that would have gone to get cards graded, but will now go to a fellow collector.
BJ--Again, my message only expressed my shock and disbelief at what I had read, because I too, was fooled. I was looking forward to those 5 freebies and now they have evaporated (like my IRA account). Obviously the $ value of the gradings is much smaller of a "loss" than the smack in the face that has been delivered.
Eric
Used to working on HOF SS Baseballs--Now just '67 Sox Stickers and anything Boston related.
First of all, to read 80+ posts takes a heck of a long time.
Second of all, this is not to bash anyone, nor is it to defend PSA services/promotions. I would like to look at this as PSA "the business".
I worked in the retail environment for a period for a national electronics retailer (narrows it down, huh). I'm sure most of you have been in this type of store buying a computer, TV, stereo, etc., and have become annoyed with that salesman who is on the phone, and paying no attention to you. Well, those salesmen are trained to ALWAYS answer the phone first, because those are the "potential" buyers the company is trying to get into the store. They figure, you are already in the store, and will most likely buy something anyway, even if the service is not top-notch. Not all, but most. They want those people who have not already invested the time in driving to the store to do so. Therefore, gettting your business, and the callers business.
Now, in terms of PSA, we are the loyal customers already in the store, and we will continue submitting cards, because we have invested the time in the set registry, and taken the time necessary to buy, grade, and type the cert. numbers. Not all, but most. This promotion is for the caller on the phone, who is not already a loyal customer, but may become one through promotions, small as they may be. (Hey, I have a neighbor who takes her own bags to the grocery store, because she gets 4 cents off each bag she uses!)Therefore, PSA gets our business, and the people who may still be on the fence.
Also, if new sets start popping up at 75%, let's say for late-vintage, modern sets in high grade, this may fuel the competitive juices in the guys already registered, because they may not have a top 3 set anymore, and want to get back to the top tier.
Just trying to reason this whole thing out.
Bernie
Currently collecting.....your guess is as good as mine.
From the perspective of a very large submitter, I've certainly been impressed by some of the changes PSA has made recently. However, I worry that many times they compare their service to "what was" and think how good it is, instead of comparing it to "what could be."
One of my favorite funniest moments was getting a bite to eat with Steve in Boston, when I was still submitting a TON of cards. He told me "Solomon, unfortunately we can't offer you 10 day turnaround (my "deal" with them) anymore, we can only offer 20 day turnaround because we're so busy." My reply: "Steve, that's great! Now my stuff will only be 20 days late instead of 30 days late!" While I certainly had some sarcasm mixed with humor in the comment, the market was so strong and so easy to make money that you just kinda grinned and beared it. When the market fell off, customer service became a LOT more important, and at that time (end of 2000, beginning of 2001), PSA was the worst in the business from my perspective.
It's changed, and I think especially to the public, as there are no more three month waits etc., but just think of how much better things could be....instead of how bad things were...
<< <i>If PSA gave say 8000 free submissions >>
Lets assume each set averages 500 cards. That means 8000/5 or 1600 sets times 375 cards or 600,000 cards have been registered. Thats 3,000,000 minimum in revenue, plus that is 600,000 cards NOT graded/bought in a competing slab. If the opportunity cost of slabbing 8000 cards is 3 a card or 24,000 but that 24,000 generates 3,000,000 in revenue -- seems like a no brainer to me. Not to mention the goodwill, customer loyalty, and market share considerations...
Regardless of the economics behind the situation, these are the facts --
*the promotion is poorly worded
*it alienates those building sets that are already registered
*poorly worded responses have fed the frenzy
Many people have mentioned this, but if PSA had NO PROMOTION it would be better than what is currently happening. But if you are going to have a promotion, it may be a good idea that the promotion not alienate your best customers...
CU turns its lonely eyes to you
What's the you say, Mrs Robinson
Vargha bucks have left and gone away?
hey hey hey
hey hey hey
CU turns its lonely eyes to you
What's the you say, Mrs Robinson
Vargha bucks have left and gone away?
hey hey hey
hey hey hey
<< <i>Although I was taught not to ever count on projected or possible project revenues, the basis of what I said is still sound. >>
Of course you can't count on projected revenue, but that's the purpose of the offer, to generate additional revenue.
<< <i>Also the cost cant be $3 per card , because that would put them in a 50%+ profit area before taxes and if that was the case, you all would get your gradings and the stock wouldnt be 91c a share. I would guess that there costs are in the $4-$5 per card range. >>
I've got a pretty good handle on costs associated...it depends how you allocate overhead of course, but I think $3/card is a max. Card grading has always been the company's big GP center. CERTAINLY, if you look at marginal cost (i.e. the cost to grade ONE additional card), it's much less. Maybe $1-1.50/card...
<< <i>Also your statements are correct, it could generate more submissions, but where does it end. Can most of us afford to collect more than 1 set or even 2. Eventually the older sets couldnt be completed in 8 or higher because even if there were more collectors there wouldnt be enough high grade cards to go around. Some where this will level off, it may not be for awhile but it will UNLESS they bring in MORE new collectors and in this market I dont think you'll see that at this time. >>
I think you'll see many people work on many more than one set. And, in the numbers we've been talking about, we're assuming someone will grade or purchase 752 cards to complete a 752 card '71 Topps set. This is quite the exception - because anyone completing a higher grade set is only going to be able to use a fraction of the cards submitted in his set. The reason for grading the cards is that you want a "PSA x or better" set - if you're happy with what you have, there's not much reason to submit it! If it's a set that you are happy with 50% of the cards submitted, that means you'll grade 1500 cards for a 752 card set. And many of those cards might not have been otherwise graded...
<< <i>Like I said its just my opinion, I know I couldnt do 10% or even 5% of the gas lines my company installs for free. Even if it brought me more work. More work means more costs, more overhead, even a poor product if training and the skill people are stretched too thin. Sometimes more is not better. All in all, the wording was poor and was interpreted differently than what was really offered. Your statement are probrably correct when you say that they would be better off if it was never offered. >>
But with what you listed, what odds will installing a gas line for free encourage someone to get more gas lines??
PSA has to make a decision if it's worthwhile to offer these deals. I can't tell them yes or no - personally, I DON'T think it's really that beneficial to them. Because simply, people aren't going to grade or buy 75% of a set for a $30-50 comp! But, if they are going to do it, I think it's wrong to stick it to their current customers. It's like AT&T offering 4 cents/minute for LD for new customers, and losing existing customers because they're not going to lower their rates. You kinda expect "most favored trade" status as a good/loyal customer...