I know that I am a newbie to the forum, but I wanted to share my thoughts on this thread. I currently have a little over 100 1970 Topps PSA graded cards (a whopping 14%.) I had the intent of trying to complete this set, and I was getting around to listing on the set registry (my only excuse for not is laziness.) Now I have a reason to wait, but this thread has really given me second thoughts about continuing my quest. I will more than likely continue, but not at the pace at which I was. I will be much more choosey with what I decide to purchase and go forward with. The $30/$50 that I would benefit from the 75% completion is not really the issue. The issue is that if I am going to sink all this money into a graded set, I would like to think that it would hold value and hopefully increase. (If it were purely for pleasure, I would do ungraded only.) I am now concerned that this company is spurning its "regulars", and that scares me. That is not the way to increase market share and overall awareness. I know I do not contribute the dollars that a lot of people on this thread do, but since I am part of the secondary market that keeps these people going I thought I should speak up. I have purchased from some of you in the past and I do not condemn any of you, but PSA is making me think this product could be a worthless venture.
Looking for 77 cloth 9s and 10s. 54 Red Hearts and now 64 Stand ups
i think you guys are wrong on this one. sure, i had to reread the new registry benefits policy several times for it to sink in, but once it did, i realized there was nothing in it for me: like zardoz, i initially registered my main sets months ago when they were just a few percent complete. i'm surprised the advanced collectors of this board didn't realize that there likely was little in the new 75% benefit for them either.
i agree that psa should reward its most dedicated supporters with something beyond the grading specials and should consider a registry policy that awards benefits for completion-percentage milestones, regardless of when and how a set was initially listed. but until that happens, i can accept the fact that the recently enacted policy doesn't really benefit me at all.
I'm quite sure the cost to grade a card is well under $5. Otherwise, they wouldn't offer the $5 grading fee for the 80's registry special. They also wouldn't have offered to grade my 1969 set at $5/card circa 1996 when their volume was much lower than today. It may be $4 but I have a feeling it's lower than that.
Regarding overhead, keep in mind that there's fixed overhead that needs to be spread out over volume. Things like rent, equipment amortization (if any), electricity, insurance, security, interest on loans, etc are not variable costs. You have to pay them whether you grade 1 card or your maximum capacity. Then there's materials such as plastic and labels. The higher volumes you purchase, the lower your price. You can lay off all but one of the graders, customer service, and other support personnel but that only cuts your labor cost down. The fixed overhead still needs to be paid. So eliminating the $6 grading specials wouldn't make sense. They need volume, volume, volume. That's why it's important to take care of the people that are loyally submitting cards and purchasing them on the secondary market which fuels dealer submissions. I hate selling the electronic components my company manufactures for $0.05 each at slim margins but we need to keep the factory full. Once we spread out the fixed overhead (by having a full factory), the costs go way down. If the factory is under utilized, then the cost exceeds the selling price. We could raise the price to maintain the margin, but then our customers would go to our competitors who can still sell at the previous price, causing our volume to go down further...spiraling out of control until the line shuts down as we ask $100 each for our parts.
Wow, crazysc is right this must have struck a nerve. I guess I'm one of the few that doesn't think the wording of the special was that confusing. So is everyone upset that they thought they were going to get free grades because of the wording of the special, or would everyone still be upset even if there was no confusion over the wording.
I understand how people are upset that they didn't offer zardoz the free grades when he misunderstod the policy, but give BJ some slack. She can't just decide on her own to change policy. (and if she gave zardoz the free grades she'd have to give out a lot more, as it seems so many were confused) I see nothing wrong with BJ trying to defend the policy. Yes it seems absurd that PSA won't give 5 free gradings after someone has spent thousands on gradings, but we can't expect BJ to decide to change a policy that could mean giving out 1000's of free gradings a year. Wait until Joe Orlando gets back, I sure he'll address this in a professional maner.
I agree with everyone, I think it would be a good policy to give out a few free gradings when someone hits 75%, but give PSA a little time to decide this. After all this policy could mean giving out 1000's of free gradings. PSA does have to look at it and determine if if it is a good business move.
I agree with you. The wording of the benefit was quite clear in regard to the stipulations involved, once one had taken the time to read it word for word. I was merely acting on what I had read on the boards, namely 5 free gradings once one had reached 75% completion. At the time, I did not pay much attention and it was of no concern to me as I was so far away from that percentage. I still did not give it a second thought in regard to reading the requirements as posted on the PSA website. I merely requested what I thought to be a small token of appreciation from PSA to my dedication and determination to complete my set. Common sense dictates that that would be a nice gesture and a good PR tool. In hindsight, obviously I should have checked prior to initiating any request. Who would have thought that the way the offer is written eliminates 95% of the collectors out there? I certainly did not. Yes, this whole tempest is my fault, and I made that abundantly clear in my initial post which was self-depricating in regard to my reading of the fine print. I also asked for comments from the membership. Well, it certainly appears that I was not the only one who felt that the offer was not overly "collector friendly".
As for BJ referred to as my cynicism, we live in an age of "enlightened consumerism", I like to think of myself as an enlightened consumer and when I see something that I do not believe is a worthwhile deal, I'm going to be vocal about it. I am the customer. A small point, but I am the customer.
I make comments in regard to what I feel is a poor marketing move on the part of PSA and back it up with my own money and others follow suit with money out of their own pockets as part of a collector groundswell of support for the registry. Do you have any idea as to the support that collectors give behind the scenes in getting the word out about the registry and encouraging collectors to join? Do you have any idea as to the number of PSA cards I have sent out to collectors free of charge to get them involved? Do you have any idea as to the number of other collectors that have done similar? Yet BJ accuses me of bashing PSA. I have to tell you, that hurts, that really hurts, especially after some of the wars on this very board.
As for the stockholders comments in one of BJ's original emails, ah yes, I am somewhat familiar with the scenario having been President of a publicly traded company and having had to go through hours of grilling by stockholders in the ballroom of a hotel looking forward to when Q&A was over and I could get to the door prizes and survive the ordeal. Yes, stockholders love profits, but they also look for cash-flow, an increase in subscribers, and growth.
I always remember putting on a dog and pony show for Goldman Sachs, who were doing their due diligence prior to underwriting a secondary offering in order to raise double digit millions as expansion capital for the company. Their number one question to me was "How do you intend to retain your existing customers?" My response was simple. "Whatever I have to". They underwrote the offering.
As BJ stated "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."
The point is that PSA might as well close their doors if they returned to their old ways. As for raising the grading fee, sure, shoot yourselves in the foot while your at it. The reason that there is so much competition in the marketplace is because PSA was rarely proactive, merely reactive. The other major grading companies that came into being did so as a result of the poor business practices of PSA and flourished as a result. Does anyone really believe that BGS and SCG would have gained a foothold, let alone a fair percentage of the market had PSA been on the ball?
Well, the new and improved PSA is a far cry from the PSA from days of old. There is always room for improvement and hopefully these improvements will continue.
Now that all has been said and done, on recollection, I wish that I had never posted my original topic thread. I am sure that it will have affected my relations with a couple of people at PSA whose friendship I value highly. I am, after all, a cynical basher.
Since you have only 5 days to request your free gradings -- you are basically targeting people with completely (or near-completely) graded sets who have not yet registered them. If I post my 1969 Topps Four-On-One set tomorrow (100% graded), do I still qualify for the five free gradings? After all, my set is complete -- so I wouldn't need the gradings for that set. It seems like taking the five free gradings for another set would also be against the spirit of the offer.
I would be interested to know how many people have taken advantage of the 5-free gradings offer that have qualified for it under the guidelines that currently exist, as pontificated by BJ.
Additionally -- as for the cost, let me just say Boo Ha ha. I am a novice collector who submits a few hundred cards per year. I have been given more free gradings by PSA because of their late shipment/grading of my cards (and this has happened in each of the last three years -- so it is not an isolated incident) than I would ever qualify for under this PSA Set Registry Five Free Gradings specials.
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.
Crazysc, Unfortunatley I will disagre with your analysis. If they charge $6 there total costs will not be half($3). Its going to be much higher, the numbers dont lie. Second they probrably did the 80's special to get people hooked in then they make there money abeit at a lower percetage. I dont know if I agree with that thinking though. Remember I'm only talking about #'s here, percentages. In my industry 15% after taxes is king, maybe it isnt in this one. Also in my industry I dont work for each individual home owner. We work for an entity say Washington Gas, or Keyspan Energy, NJ Natural, if I did work for free they would give me more work. They service a area with upwards of a million customers each. The work and the footage never ends. When your done installing the new its time to replace the old. So the odds or getting the customer to install more gas lines is a certainty. I hope I gave you some insight to an industy other that what you may be used to working with or in. I dont claim to be an expert on finances, I'm FAR from it, but I do know that the bottom line is the bottom line, we as the consumer may not like it, BUT its the way it is. IF I project 10% as a CEO and I get 8% someone better explain where the 2% went. I do have 3 more comments. Free gradings would be nice but, if you decide to invest in a 600+ card set, are those free gradings really going to be the deciding factor on whether or not you attempt the set? The second is Collectors Universe is a publicly traded company. We could speculate forever on what they make or dont make, but there financials are public knowledge arent they. That should tell the whole story. Third, would we want to get the free gradings and have them raise there prices so it costs us more in the long run? I appreciated reading the comments on the board. There are quite a few real good points made by alot or the posts. These type of conversations are what I like. We all may not agree but the posts where very good. Thanks for reading and I'm sorry if I may have bored you. If you havent guessed I'm a bean counter. We bore most people.
Maybe PSA is worried about people registering a "Player Set" or something that only has 10 cards in it ... such that 75% complete would not be such a big deal and the 5 free submissions would be a "loser" for PSA??
I think they should QUALIFY the promotion by requiring that sets be a certain size (50? 100?) before you can get the 5 free submissions at 75% completion.
If someone has a set of 100+ cards and has paid PSA to grade 75 or more of them... then that person deserves 5 free gradings regardless of when it happened.
vargha - Yes, but think of the possibilities. Register a Reggie set - get 5 free grades. Send in 5 Reggies. Register another Reggie set, have 2 left over, and get 5 free Reggies. Send in 5 Reggies, and then have get 7 free Reggies. Register 2 more sets, 1 left over, and have 11 free Reggies. Register 3 sets, 2 left over, and have 17 free Reggies. Register 5 sets, have 27 free Reggies. Register 9 sets, get free 45 Reggies. You're now up to 21 registered Reggie sets with 45 more free Reggie gradings in hand. All this for your original investment on the grading of 3 Reggies. Now register 15 more Reggie sets........
<< <i>I guess I'm one of the few that doesn't think the wording of the special was that confusing. >>
ALF - If the wording isn't that confusing, why is it that VARGHA, SKINS, CARKIM (perhaps others) rec'd free grades or the go-ahead for free grades, when all didn't follow the rules to the letter? Perhaps the confusion of this special crossed over to the employees at PSA as well as the customer base...jay
BJ- Even though many of us are upset with the "small changes" that PSA has done. I recognize your efforts and attitude. I thank you for the hard work you have given all of us to brag about our collections. I just don't understand PSA sometimes with how they run their business. You have some really nice people at the customer service for PSA (Stacy, Peter, and Matt), however these people are just "yes sir" people. They really are not servicing the customer like they should. They have no pull and no control over what goes right or wrong. In my business I have two customer service reps. One that is a yes sir lady and one that runs my business. I want her in control when I am out. I have had many of problems with PSA over the past six months, and I should not have to call Joe Orlando to handle what customer service should be doing. On a seperate note, PSA is still the best (not service) but with integrity. Be careful not to destroy others view of PSA just because you did not get six PSA 10 last month or because they changed a rule. We all have too much at stake here financially. The five free grades is no skin off of your profit BJ. There are 42 sets registered under 1975 Topps baseball. Only 3 have more than 60%. Anyone with over 90% or even 75% deserve respect from PSA.
1954
Looking for high grade rookie cards and unopened boxes/cases
Exactly, and when Zardoz went up for his award, he was shot down. He questioned it and the new? rules were explained to him. He questioned it again. At this point, personally, I would have given him the free grades. I would have assumed that he was not alone in his confusion, and then would take a look at how this rule was going to affect the people currently on the set registry. I would then take steps to make sure the rules worked for every set scenario, change them if needed, and then take steps to ensure that everybody involved in the registry knew what the rules really were, and compensate those people on the registry who got left out because of the new enforcement of the rule. The 5 day rule is nuts. Once you hit 75% you deserve the grades. Just because it wasn't a one shot 75% doesn't make sense. the only thing PSA has to do is remove things like player sets, HOF subsets from a particular issue, and other small type of sets where 75% isn't even a small quantity of cards. Perhaps the regular issue main sets of say 100 cards or more. Of the top of my head, a set like 48 basketball, or National Chicle wouldn't qualify but should. So maybe you get rid of the arbitrary 100 type of number and simply put an asterisk next to any sets that don't apply to the free grading incentive.
BJ stated in her post to not read into the rules to much, even though it clearly states what the rules are. Therefore, they may or may not use their judgement on these rules. Either it is all BLACK & WHITE or ALL GRAY. (I LIKE GRAY).
There also was a post, that I started about Benefits Update, and Marc (MIKESCHMIDT) showed concerns about the 5 day rule and PSA never responded at that time.
I will hold further comments for now, however I believe (in this case) PSA should should honor zardoz's 5 free grades.
If nothing else, I think the fact that people/graders/administrators at PSA have let others like Vargha get their 5 Free Gradings in the past, after the 5-day deadline would have expired, clearly indicates to me that the policy was either a) set up the way many of us thought it was or b) so confusing that not even the people who are responsible for the rules knew clearly what to do.
It doesn't seem like any of the people at PSA were confused about the rules before -- if so, I would imagine they would have questioned management, and it would have come to a head at that point. It didn't, which indicates to me that even they thought that as soon as someone hit 75% (or then, 90%), they got five free grades, independent of when the set was initially registered.
I would still like to know how many people have actually qualified and/or redeemed their five free gradings within five days, as indicated by the new rules.
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.
zardoz, I completly understand your point of view. If I had put as much work and money into my sets as you have yours, and I didn't get a few free gradings that I thought I was going to get, I'd be pissed too. I just don't think PSA handled this situation as bad as everyone thinks. If BJ gave you the free gradings, she'd have to give out free gradings to everyone who understood the policy the way you did. Zardoz, you clearly deserve the free gradings, but if everone with small sets started requesting free gradings, it could turn out to be very costly for PSA. I do hape PSA changes the policy, and gives zardoz the free grades, but limits it to only the large sets.
Jay, Your right the confusion of this special seems to have crossed over to the employees at PSA as well as the customer base, but it seems like its because people (including some PSA employees) didn't read it (or read it completly), and not because the wording was bad.
Hal and Waitil, You both make excellent points. If PSA starts giving away the free grades to for reaching 75% complete, small sets should not be included in the policy.
Your right the confusion of this special seems to have crossed over to the employees at PSA as well as the customer base, but it seems like its because people (including some PSA employees) didn't read it (or read it completly), and not because the wording was bad.
I can't imagine implementing a new policy without writing it out and going over it verbally before its implementation.
I would say that many of the employees thought the policy was set up the way many on this board thought it was, but that doesn't mean it was meant to be set up that way.
If that is the case, wouldn't it be appropriate for PSA to acknowledge that its policy was confusing, offer Zardoz his five free gradings, and go about their day with a new policy that is easy to understand and enforce?
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.
Time for my two cents. I have three major sets listed. The oldest is at 99+%. The other two are active only when I feel like listing the cards. I will eventually do that and one of the sets will triple in size from 20% to 65% when I get around to it. Getting freebies has nothing to do with how I register my sets.
All sides are arguing about a giveaway whose original intention was supposed to help both the customer and the business. Like many proposals, rules, laws, etc. there were unintended consequences. The main problem here lies with PSA, not only because they botched it, but because it was not initially well constructed, and they continue to defend it. Major set builders were not rewarded and minor set builders cashed and loopholes were found either intentionally or unintentionally. Too many problems.
I humbly suggest a solution. Let's get it right if it means starting all over. Both sides should be willing to put aside their differences. I suggest that a set percentage and time period for registration be completely abandoned. A new program like this could replace it. Remember, I said "like this." I'm sure some of you out there can come up with better ideas. Since PSA seemed to want to reward loyalty, it might do it this way. Offer ten free gradings for each thousand submissions (including specials) within a specified period of time. Make the submitter responsible for keeping track of his submissions (invoices) and claiming his reward. This could be done by listing invoice numbers on the free grading invoice so noted by the submitter. PSA would corroborate the info and strike the invoice numbers so they can't be used for future giveaways, and grade the ten cards submitted gratis.
I don't want to hear how this benefits only large submitters and not the little guy. Too bad. This is not a welfare operation. PSA is in business to make money. Rewarding their best customers is in everyone's best interests.
Dom
If I'm buying it's PRICELESS. If I'm selling, it's WORTHLESS.
Looking for 1984 Donruss - #238 Keith Hernandez PSA 10 -----------------and #637 Omar Moreno PSA 9 or 10.
"I want to remind you that the PSA Set Registry is a service that is offered FREE to all of you. But what some of you fail to understand is that it is not free for PSA to offer this service to you. Far from it. There are two full time and one part-time employee dedicated to the registry. There is considerable amount of time spent programming the registry. Programmers are not cheap. There are marketing expenses. Marketing is not cheap. There's Joe Orlando, Evan Thompson and others in customer service who dedicate time to the registry. The bottom line is that PSA is not a non-profit company. And to those recognize the fact that we are trying to run a business, thank you." BJ
This response by BJ aggravated me more than Zardoz being denied the free gradings. It basically implied that all the people who use the registry are basicaly free loaders who are living off the fruits of PSA. i dont know about you but every month when i send gradings to PSA it doesnt seem free. I think that was an insult to all loyal customers
I dont want to speak for another member of this board ! But i will bet im right on this point. I think what frustrated Zardoz more than being denied the free gradings was the way he was treated in the response by PSA. His offer to send $30. worth of gradings to other collectors is proof of that. After reading these boards for the last 7 months i can attest that Zardoz is a loyal customer of PSA and has on many occasions promoted them on these boards. So when a loyal customer gets slammed by BJ i can understand being angry.
to BJ >>> i think you have done an outstanding job on these boards and in the registry in the past. but your responses yesterday were disgusting. Everyone has bad days and i hope that they can be attested to that because i would hate to think that after 6 months of major success with the Registry you guys are already started to take loyal customers for granted
has there ever been a post before that grew so fast? sounds like it has just got worse since yesterday( psa yesterday all my troubles seemed so far away) anyway bj or joe someone please step up and deal with this issue . bottom line no one cares about 5 stinking free grades THEY CARE ABOUT HOW THEY ARE TREATED OR MISTREATED!! all it will take i think is a simple we are SORRY we made a bad call problem goes away, i hate to bring this point up but with a bb strike looming that i am sure will affect submissions of newer cards not a good time to tinker with your loyal cutomer base with trivial issues like this, psa is on a roll with the set reg take a step forward ,not two steps back. as forrest gump would say THATS ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT
It occurred to me that stating that the Set Registry Specials are available only to people who registered their sets at some completion level doesn't matter at all for people whose sets of choice haven't been subject to a set registry special. If you collect 1950s cards or older (or 1990s or newer), you have no Set Registry Special to take advantage of and if you listed any of your cards, the free gradings offer doesn't apply to you. It appears PSA did not judge how insulting the details of their offer would be perceived as by collectors.
Rescind all free grading rewards after taking care of any current obligations. No program will make everyone of the wolves happy. I fthere is no program there is no room for misinterpretation on either side. Be thankful for the registry, the great card forums, and the set registry specials that allow the average collectors to get everything out of this great hobby of ours. Thank you BJ for everything. I dont need my free lunch. Just keep the rest of the good stuff coming. And yes I am an average collector, married with children whose wallet is empty Thursday of each week as I wait for my piece of the paycheck to reload for a new week of cards. RayB69Topps
1) The grading specials require the submitter to register at least some portion of a set to take advantage of the special, thus encouraging new collectors to participate the registry program.
2) The five free grades are designed to encourage new collectors to post their already heavily graded sets, therefore encouraging new collectors to participate in the registry program.
Participating in #1 (unless you submit 75% in one wack), precludes you from participating in offer #2. So it looks like you have your choice (if you are focusing on a particular issue). You can forfeit special #2 so you can participate in #1 or you can forfeit #1 so you can participate in #2. I don't know too many people who would go with option #2 since you are getting $30 worth of free grades vs $2 off each card over a several hundred card set to get to 75% completion %.
It seems that special #2 is not really feasible. Both programs are primarily targeted at getting new members, not rewarding long term members. Long term members can take advantage of the grading specials but, as stated in the past, the main objective of the grading specials was to encourage new members to start posting on the registry.
One compromise from this quagmire could be to grandfather in the sets that are currently registered. That is, any set registered prior to this thread posting is eligable for the 5 free grades, regardless of how long ago they were posted. Any new sets registered after the posting of this thread would be bound by the timelimit rule. Only a small percentage of the 2000+ sets currently registered will reach 75%. That would limit the amount of free grades that will be rewarded. It will also allow us long time collectors to withold registering new sets until we are 75% completed (which still makes no sense to me).
I will happily send anybody who wants one a certificate for 5 free grades. Your request must be sent by U.S. Mail. It must be postmarked no later than July 17, 2002. Only one per person or household please.
Where is a rep from PSA ? Why have'nt we heard a response? I expected to hear one by now to clarify the concerns and questions that were mentioned. I am PSA loyal. I am sending in a submission in a few days ( If I ever get my 84 DR DK I bought ! ) I don't think it is wise to ignore this. Even a simple reply from ...Steve is it? Were looking into to it...hold you pants we get back to you soon. I bet the people here that responded submit...hmmmm a few hundred to a few thousand cards a month. They might not be stock holders but they have "bought into"the company.
69topps> "Participating in #1 (unless you submit 75% in one wack), precludes you from participating in offer #2. So it looks like you have your choice (if you are focusing on a particular issue). "
Twice now in this thread I have asked BJ for a clarification on this exact point. Her initial response ignored the question completely so I asked again. I look forward to an answer from her on this the next time she posts.
After reading all 130+ posts about this topic I’ve come to one conclusion. PSA made a Public Relations blunder. If PSA wants to give us collectors the impression that we were getting something (Free grades for a lower completion percentage) because they were taking something away (The pedigree service) then that is their prerogative.
I personally benefited from the 5 free grading on 4 different occasions. The first time I took advantage of this offer, Charlie (Customer Service Manager) explained to me on the telephone how to redeem my free gradings. NEVER did he mention or ask if my set qualified in the past 5 days. I found out about the free gradings by reading the “BENEFITS” tab on PSA’s web site. Although I can’t remember how it use to read word for word, not once during this past 12 months did I think the set MUST be NEW. Maybe Charlie read it the same way? Who knows?
I think we all agree that PSA is in business to turn a profit, and I hope that they do. They also need to constantly make business decisions to satisfy their shareholders. I believe we are asking that PSA notifies, and sympathies with their stakeholders…us!!!
I can’t begin to tell you how many times I sent a card back in because of a mechanical error and asked for NO monetary refund. PSA has also missed turnaround times and on some occasions I did NOT pursue free gradings. Sometimes cards were not slabbed and I never received a credit voucher. Sometimes I would call Charlie and say, “I don’t want the credit voucher…just do me a favor and check my cards before they are mailed back to me.” (I had a problem with TRADED cards not being labeled correctly or cards graded with qualifiers when I wrote NO QUALIFIERS on the invoice.) To me it was a good business trade-off. I didn’t feel like a thorn in their side and then save some money because I didn’t nail them to the wall every time something went wrong.
Wait ~~~ let me take one statement back… It wasn’t “a good business trade-off” I believe it was good Public Relations between myself, Charlie, BJ, Gayle, Joe, and the staff at PSA.
Case in point…I asked about this invoice over a month ago Invoice #863749
…And I’m still waiting for an answer. I haven’t been pushy, I’m just waiting.
Let’s all do what is right…Regardless what is in the rulebook. PSA the game isn’t over, so how about a forth quarter comeback for ZARDOZ???
Offer ten free gradings for each thousand submissions (including specials) within a specified period of time.
That's my own quote from page five of this thread. I don't know what I was thinking. I meant to say "each thousand dollars worth of submissions" and of course the "ten free gradings" was simply a number I pulled out of the air. That could be any number PSA chooses.
No wonder David was disappointed that he wasn't going to get his cheese.
*Edit: Couldn't even get it right the second time.
Dom
If I'm buying it's PRICELESS. If I'm selling, it's WORTHLESS.
Looking for 1984 Donruss - #238 Keith Hernandez PSA 10 -----------------and #637 Omar Moreno PSA 9 or 10.
<< <i>Case in point…I asked about this invoice over a month ago Invoice #863749 >>
For an order received on 4/12/02 you waited 2 MONTHS just to Ask where it was?? And then you patiently sit for ANOTHER MONTH without a reply??
YOU ARE NUTS!
You need to get MORE than just an Answer about these cards - YOU NEED TO GET YOUR CARDS! Call Charlie and explain - and I bet the cards are at your house in 10 days - but keep quietly waiting and you will not get Jack!
I'm more confused on the set registry special pertaining to the 50's, 60's, etc... when you receive $2 off each grading. Can you only take advantage of that once? What I'm getting at is: If you take advantage of the $2 off set registry special, then all you need is submit 15 cards when the special is going on and you've got the $30 you would have received in the free submissions. The way it looks to me is that the $2 off is geared towards those who take their time to register their cards as they have them graded, like me and Master Z and the free gradings are for those who register their sets all at once. Maybe I'm missing someting, but if you take advantage of the grading special with the $2 off, you'd get a $50 off submitting the bare minimum of 25 cards, which is much better than getting the free gradings valued at $30. Am I missing something????
Working on 1976 Kellogg's, PSA 9 or 10. Feel free to send mail to My Email with any offers on 76 Kellogg's. Go Washington Redskins, Go Oakland A's!!!!!!!!!
Working on 1976 Kellogg's, PSA 9 or 10. Feel free to send mail to My Email with any offers on 76 Kellogg's. Go Washington Redskins, Go Oakland A's!!!!!!!!!
By missing the guaranteed turnaround time, that invoice you mentioned should be a freebie, you lucky sonofva.....! Congratulations. The only thing I would add is that the day after they missed the guaranteed turnaround time, I would have been all over them to get them graded.
I wish they'd be late on all my submissions so I could get my cards graded from free. What's a guy got to do to get some bad customer service around here?
<< <i>I will happily send anybody who wants one a certificate for 5 free grades. Your request must be sent by U.S. Mail. It must be postmarked no later than July 17, 2002. Only one per person or household please. >>
FYI - where I used to work, we had a postage meter that we used for all outgoing mail. On several occasions (others - never me ) would turn back the date to get a "postmark" on the envelope to show that a bill or entry form, etc was "mailed on time" - IF I still worked there - I would be getting me some FREE grades! ~jeff
Comments
54 Red Hearts
and now 64 Stand ups
i agree that psa should reward its most dedicated supporters with something beyond the grading specials and should consider a registry policy that awards benefits for completion-percentage milestones, regardless of when and how a set was initially listed. but until that happens, i can accept the fact that the recently enacted policy doesn't really benefit me at all.
the sun will still come up tomorrow.
Regarding overhead, keep in mind that there's fixed overhead that needs to be spread out over volume. Things like rent, equipment amortization (if any), electricity, insurance, security, interest on loans, etc are not variable costs. You have to pay them whether you grade 1 card or your maximum capacity. Then there's materials such as plastic and labels. The higher volumes you purchase, the lower your price. You can lay off all but one of the graders, customer service, and other support personnel but that only cuts your labor cost down. The fixed overhead still needs to be paid. So eliminating the $6 grading specials wouldn't make sense. They need volume, volume, volume. That's why it's important to take care of the people that are loyally submitting cards and purchasing them on the secondary market which fuels dealer submissions. I hate selling the electronic components my company manufactures for $0.05 each at slim margins but we need to keep the factory full. Once we spread out the fixed overhead (by having a full factory), the costs go way down. If the factory is under utilized, then the cost exceeds the selling price. We could raise the price to maintain the margin, but then our customers would go to our competitors who can still sell at the previous price, causing our volume to go down further...spiraling out of control until the line shuts down as we ask $100 each for our parts.
Sorry to ramble on.
I understand how people are upset that they didn't offer zardoz the free grades when he misunderstod the policy, but give BJ some slack. She can't just decide on her own to change policy. (and if she gave zardoz the free grades she'd have to give out a lot more, as it seems so many were confused) I see nothing wrong with BJ trying to defend the policy. Yes it seems absurd that PSA won't give 5 free gradings after someone has spent thousands on gradings, but we can't expect BJ to decide to change a policy that could mean giving out 1000's of free gradings a year. Wait until Joe Orlando gets back, I sure he'll address this in a professional maner.
I agree with everyone, I think it would be a good policy to give out a few free gradings when someone hits 75%, but give PSA a little time to decide this. After all this policy could mean giving out 1000's of free gradings. PSA does have to look at it and determine if if it is a good business move.
I agree with you. The wording of the benefit was quite clear in regard to the stipulations involved, once one had taken the time to read it word for word. I was merely acting on what I had read on the boards, namely 5 free gradings once one had reached 75% completion. At the time, I did not pay much attention and it was of no concern to me as I was so far away from that percentage. I still did not give it a second thought in regard to reading the requirements as posted on the PSA website. I merely requested what I thought to be a small token of appreciation from PSA to my dedication and determination to complete my set. Common sense dictates that that would be a nice gesture and a good PR tool. In hindsight, obviously I should have checked prior to initiating any request. Who would have thought that the way the offer is written eliminates 95% of the collectors out there? I certainly did not. Yes, this whole tempest is my fault, and I made that abundantly clear in my initial post which was self-depricating in regard to my reading of the fine print. I also asked for comments from the membership. Well, it certainly appears that I was not the only one who felt that the offer was not overly "collector friendly".
As for BJ referred to as my cynicism, we live in an age of "enlightened consumerism", I like to think of myself as an enlightened consumer and when I see something that I do not believe is a worthwhile deal, I'm going to be vocal about it. I am the customer. A small point, but I am the customer.
I make comments in regard to what I feel is a poor marketing move on the part of PSA and back it up with my own money and others follow suit with money out of their own pockets as part of a collector groundswell of support for the registry. Do you have any idea as to the support that collectors give behind the scenes in getting the word out about the registry and encouraging collectors to join? Do you have any idea as to the number of PSA cards I have sent out to collectors free of charge to get them involved? Do you have any idea as to the number of other collectors that have done similar? Yet BJ accuses me of bashing PSA. I have to tell you, that hurts, that really hurts, especially after some of the wars on this very board.
As for the stockholders comments in one of BJ's original emails, ah yes, I am somewhat familiar with the scenario having been President of a publicly traded company and having had to go through hours of grilling by stockholders in the ballroom of a hotel looking forward to when Q&A was over and I could get to the door prizes and survive the ordeal. Yes, stockholders love profits, but they also look for cash-flow, an increase in subscribers, and growth.
I always remember putting on a dog and pony show for Goldman Sachs, who were doing their due diligence prior to underwriting a secondary offering in order to raise double digit millions as expansion capital for the company. Their number one question to me was "How do you intend to retain your existing customers?" My response was simple. "Whatever I have to". They underwrote the offering.
As BJ stated "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."
The point is that PSA might as well close their doors if they returned to their old ways. As for raising the grading fee, sure, shoot yourselves in the foot while your at it. The reason that there is so much competition in the marketplace is because PSA was rarely proactive, merely reactive. The other major grading companies that came into being did so as a result of the poor business practices of PSA and flourished as a result. Does anyone really believe that BGS and SCG would have gained a foothold, let alone a fair percentage of the market had PSA been on the ball?
Well, the new and improved PSA is a far cry from the PSA from days of old. There is always room for improvement and hopefully these improvements will continue.
Now that all has been said and done, on recollection, I wish that I had never posted my original topic thread. I am sure that it will have affected my relations with a couple of people at PSA whose friendship I value highly. I am, after all, a cynical basher.
Since you have only 5 days to request your free gradings -- you are basically targeting people with completely (or near-completely) graded sets who have not yet registered them. If I post my 1969 Topps Four-On-One set tomorrow (100% graded), do I still qualify for the five free gradings? After all, my set is complete -- so I wouldn't need the gradings for that set. It seems like taking the five free gradings for another set would also be against the spirit of the offer.
I would be interested to know how many people have taken advantage of the 5-free gradings offer that have qualified for it under the guidelines that currently exist, as pontificated by BJ.
Additionally -- as for the cost, let me just say Boo Ha ha. I am a novice collector who submits a few hundred cards per year. I have been given more free gradings by PSA because of their late shipment/grading of my cards (and this has happened in each of the last three years -- so it is not an isolated incident) than I would ever qualify for under this PSA Set Registry Five Free Gradings specials.
Unfortunatley I will disagre with your analysis. If they charge $6 there total costs will not be half($3). Its going to be much higher, the numbers dont lie. Second they probrably did the 80's special to get people hooked in then they make there money abeit at a lower percetage. I dont know if I agree with that thinking though. Remember I'm only talking about #'s here, percentages. In my industry 15% after taxes is king, maybe it isnt in this one. Also in my industry I dont work for each individual home owner. We work for an entity say Washington Gas, or Keyspan Energy, NJ Natural, if I did work for free they would give me more work. They service a area with upwards of a million customers each. The work and the footage never ends. When your done installing the new its time to replace the old. So the odds or getting the customer to install more gas lines is a certainty. I hope I gave you some insight to an industy other that what you may be used to working with or in. I dont claim to be an expert on finances, I'm FAR from it, but I do know that the bottom line is the bottom line, we as the consumer may not like it, BUT its the way it is. IF I project 10% as a CEO and I get 8% someone better explain where the 2% went.
I do have 3 more comments. Free gradings would be nice but, if you decide to invest in a 600+ card set, are those free gradings really going to be the deciding factor on whether or not you attempt the set? The second is Collectors Universe is a publicly traded company. We could speculate forever on what they make or dont make, but there financials are public knowledge arent they. That should tell the whole story. Third, would we want to get the free gradings and have them raise there prices so it costs us more in the long run?
I appreciated reading the comments on the board. There are quite a few real good points made by alot or the posts. These type of conversations are what I like. We all may not agree but the posts where very good. Thanks for reading and I'm sorry if I may have bored you. If you havent guessed I'm a bean counter. We bore most people.
I think they should QUALIFY the promotion by requiring that sets be a certain size (50? 100?) before you can get the 5 free submissions at 75% completion.
If someone has a set of 100+ cards and has paid PSA to grade 75 or more of them... then that person deserves 5 free gradings regardless of when it happened.
10 Day regular Grading service......$15
Keeping loyal supporters like Zardoz and the rest of us happy....Priceless!
Always looking for 1957 Topps BB in PSA 9!
<< <i>I guess I'm one of the few that doesn't think the wording of the special was that confusing. >>
ALF - If the wording isn't that confusing, why is it that VARGHA, SKINS, CARKIM (perhaps others) rec'd free grades or the go-ahead for free grades, when all didn't follow the rules to the letter? Perhaps the confusion of this special crossed over to the employees at PSA as well as the customer base...jay
Website: http://www.qualitycards.com
Even though many of us are upset with the "small changes" that PSA has done. I recognize your efforts and attitude. I thank you for the hard work you have given all of us to brag about our collections. I just don't understand PSA sometimes with how they run their business. You have some really nice people at the customer service for PSA (Stacy, Peter, and Matt), however these people are just "yes sir" people. They really are not servicing the customer like they should. They have no pull and no control over what goes right or wrong. In my business I have two customer service reps. One that is a yes sir lady and one that runs my business. I want her in control when I am out. I have had many of problems with PSA over the past six months, and I should not have to call Joe Orlando to handle what customer service should be doing.
On a seperate note, PSA is still the best (not service) but with integrity. Be careful not to destroy others view of PSA just because you did not get six PSA 10 last month or because they changed a rule. We all have too much at stake here financially.
The five free grades is no skin off of your profit BJ. There are 42 sets registered under 1975 Topps baseball. Only 3 have more than 60%. Anyone with over 90% or even 75% deserve respect from PSA.
1954
Case in point, this thread... New Rules about using the registry to sell/advertise cards.
BJ stated in her post to not read into the rules to much, even though it clearly states what the rules are. Therefore, they may or may not use their judgement on these rules. Either it is all BLACK & WHITE or ALL GRAY. (I LIKE GRAY).
There also was a post, that I started about Benefits Update, and Marc (MIKESCHMIDT) showed concerns about the 5 day rule and PSA never responded at that time.
I will hold further comments for now, however I believe (in this case) PSA should should honor zardoz's 5 free grades.
It doesn't seem like any of the people at PSA were confused about the rules before -- if so, I would imagine they would have questioned management, and it would have come to a head at that point. It didn't, which indicates to me that even they thought that as soon as someone hit 75% (or then, 90%), they got five free grades, independent of when the set was initially registered.
I would still like to know how many people have actually qualified and/or redeemed their five free gradings within five days, as indicated by the new rules.
I completly understand your point of view. If I had put as much work and money into my sets as you have yours, and I didn't get a few free gradings that I thought I was going to get, I'd be pissed too. I just don't think PSA handled this situation as bad as everyone thinks. If BJ gave you the free gradings, she'd have to give out free gradings to everyone who understood the policy the way you did. Zardoz, you clearly deserve the free gradings, but if everone with small sets started requesting free gradings, it could turn out to be very costly for PSA. I do hape PSA changes the policy, and gives zardoz the free grades, but limits it to only the large sets.
Jay,
Your right the confusion of this special seems to have crossed over to the employees at PSA as well as the customer base, but it seems like its because people (including some PSA employees) didn't read it (or read it completly), and not because the wording was bad.
Hal and Waitil,
You both make excellent points. If PSA starts giving away the free grades to for reaching 75% complete, small sets should not be included in the policy.
I can't imagine implementing a new policy without writing it out and going over it verbally before its implementation.
I would say that many of the employees thought the policy was set up the way many on this board thought it was, but that doesn't mean it was meant to be set up that way.
If that is the case, wouldn't it be appropriate for PSA to acknowledge that its policy was confusing, offer Zardoz his five free gradings, and go about their day with a new policy that is easy to understand and enforce?
All sides are arguing about a giveaway whose original intention was supposed to help both the customer and the business. Like many proposals, rules, laws, etc. there were unintended consequences. The main problem here lies with PSA, not only because they botched it, but because it was not initially well constructed, and they continue to defend it. Major set builders were not rewarded and minor set builders cashed and loopholes were found either intentionally or unintentionally. Too many problems.
I humbly suggest a solution. Let's get it right if it means starting all over. Both sides should be willing to put aside their differences. I suggest that a set percentage and time period for registration be completely abandoned. A new program like this could replace it. Remember, I said "like this." I'm sure some of you out there can come up with better ideas. Since PSA seemed to want to reward loyalty, it might do it this way. Offer ten free gradings for each thousand submissions (including specials) within a specified period of time. Make the submitter responsible for keeping track of his submissions (invoices) and claiming his reward. This could be done by listing invoice numbers on the free grading invoice so noted by the submitter. PSA would corroborate the info and strike the invoice numbers so they can't be used for future giveaways, and grade the ten cards submitted gratis.
I don't want to hear how this benefits only large submitters and not the little guy. Too bad. This is not a welfare operation. PSA is in business to make money. Rewarding their best customers is in everyone's best interests.
If I'm buying it's PRICELESS. If I'm selling, it's WORTHLESS.
Looking for 1984 Donruss -
#238 Keith Hernandez PSA 10
-----------------and
#637 Omar Moreno PSA 9 or 10.
*****
This response by BJ aggravated me more than Zardoz being denied the free gradings. It basically implied that all the people who use the registry are basicaly free loaders who are living off the fruits of PSA. i dont know about you but every month when i send gradings to PSA it doesnt seem free. I think that was an insult to all loyal customers
I dont want to speak for another member of this board ! But i will bet im right on this point. I think what frustrated Zardoz more than being denied the free gradings was the way he was treated in the response by PSA. His offer to send $30. worth of gradings to other collectors is proof of that. After reading these boards for the last 7 months i can attest that Zardoz is a loyal customer of PSA and has on many occasions promoted them on these boards. So when a loyal customer gets slammed by BJ i can understand being angry.
to BJ >>> i think you have done an outstanding job on these boards and in the registry in the past. but your responses yesterday were disgusting. Everyone has bad days and i hope that they can be attested to that because i would hate to think that after 6 months of major success with the Registry you guys are already started to take loyal customers for granted
Don
That totally crushes my hopes for a free cheese and "grading stamps" program to ever materialize.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
<< <i>This is not a welfare operation.
That totally crushes my hopes for a free cheese and "grading stamps" program to ever materialize. >>
Vargha - that's really funny!
Wayne
Be thankful for the registry, the great card forums, and the set registry specials that allow the average collectors to get everything out of this great hobby of ours. Thank you BJ for everything. I dont need my free lunch. Just keep the rest of the good stuff coming.
And yes I am an average collector, married with children whose wallet is empty Thursday of each week as I wait for my piece of the paycheck to reload for a new week of cards.
RayB69Topps
1) The grading specials require the submitter to register at least some portion of a set to take advantage of the special, thus encouraging new collectors to participate the registry program.
2) The five free grades are designed to encourage new collectors to post their already heavily graded sets, therefore encouraging new collectors to participate in the registry program.
Participating in #1 (unless you submit 75% in one wack), precludes you from participating in offer #2. So it looks like you have your choice (if you are focusing on a particular issue). You can forfeit special #2 so you can participate in #1 or you can forfeit #1 so you can participate in #2. I don't know too many people who would go with option #2 since you are getting $30 worth of free grades vs $2 off each card over a several hundred card set to get to 75% completion %.
It seems that special #2 is not really feasible. Both programs are primarily targeted at getting new members, not rewarding long term members. Long term members can take advantage of the grading specials but, as stated in the past, the main objective of the grading specials was to encourage new members to start posting on the registry.
One compromise from this quagmire could be to grandfather in the sets that are currently registered. That is, any set registered prior to this thread posting is eligable for the 5 free grades, regardless of how long ago they were posted. Any new sets registered after the posting of this thread would be bound by the timelimit rule. Only a small percentage of the 2000+ sets currently registered will reach 75%. That would limit the amount of free grades that will be rewarded. It will also allow us long time collectors to withold registering new sets until we are 75% completed (which still makes no sense to me).
What do you think?
Twice now in this thread I have asked BJ for a clarification on this exact point. Her initial response ignored the question completely so I asked again. I look forward to an answer from her on this the next time she posts.
Mike
I think you hit the nail on the head with your last point. I think everyone could agree that PSA should at least do that.
I'm suprised that PSA hasn't responded yet, I expected a responce by PSA by the time I got home.
bruce
Website: http://www.brucemo.com
Email: brucemo@seanet.com
I personally benefited from the 5 free grading on 4 different occasions. The first time I took advantage of this offer, Charlie (Customer Service Manager) explained to me on the telephone how to redeem my free gradings. NEVER did he mention or ask if my set qualified in the past 5 days. I found out about the free gradings by reading the “BENEFITS” tab on PSA’s web site. Although I can’t remember how it use to read word for word, not once during this past 12 months did I think the set MUST be NEW. Maybe Charlie read it the same way? Who knows?
I think we all agree that PSA is in business to turn a profit, and I hope that they do. They also need to constantly make business decisions to satisfy their shareholders. I believe we are asking that PSA notifies, and sympathies with their stakeholders…us!!!
I can’t begin to tell you how many times I sent a card back in because of a mechanical error and asked for NO monetary refund. PSA has also missed turnaround times and on some occasions I did NOT pursue free gradings. Sometimes cards were not slabbed and I never received a credit voucher. Sometimes I would call Charlie and say, “I don’t want the credit voucher…just do me a favor and check my cards before they are mailed back to me.” (I had a problem with TRADED cards not being labeled correctly or cards graded with qualifiers when I wrote NO QUALIFIERS on the invoice.) To me it was a good business trade-off. I didn’t feel like a thorn in their side and then save some money because I didn’t nail them to the wall every time something went wrong.
Wait ~~~ let me take one statement back… It wasn’t “a good business trade-off” I believe it was good Public Relations between myself, Charlie, BJ, Gayle, Joe, and the staff at PSA.
Case in point…I asked about this invoice over a month ago
Invoice #863749
…And I’m still waiting for an answer. I haven’t been pushy, I’m just waiting.
Let’s all do what is right…Regardless what is in the rulebook. PSA the game isn’t over, so how about a forth quarter comeback for ZARDOZ???
I feel better now
Carlos
Ouch...
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
That's my own quote from page five of this thread. I don't know what I was thinking. I meant to say "each thousand dollars worth of submissions" and of course the "ten free gradings" was simply a number I pulled out of the air. That could be any number PSA chooses.
No wonder David was disappointed that he wasn't going to get his cheese.
*Edit: Couldn't even get it right the second time.
If I'm buying it's PRICELESS. If I'm selling, it's WORTHLESS.
Looking for 1984 Donruss -
#238 Keith Hernandez PSA 10
-----------------and
#637 Omar Moreno PSA 9 or 10.
*****
<< <i>Case in point…I asked about this invoice over a month ago
Invoice #863749
>>
For an order received on 4/12/02 you waited 2 MONTHS just to Ask where it was??
And then you patiently sit for ANOTHER MONTH without a reply??
YOU ARE NUTS!
You need to get MORE than just an Answer about these cards - YOU NEED TO GET YOUR CARDS!
Call Charlie and explain - and I bet the cards are at your house in 10 days - but keep quietly waiting and you will not get Jack!
Congrats everyone!!!
Thanks
Dan & Kat
"Just when they think they got all the answers, I change the questions."
-- Roddy Piper
<< <i>not one mention of cheeseburgers >>
We have been In and Out of several topics, but burgers ain't one of 'em...
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
By missing the guaranteed turnaround time, that invoice you mentioned should be a freebie, you lucky sonofva.....! Congratulations. The only thing I would add is that the day after they missed the guaranteed turnaround time, I would have been all over them to get them graded.
I wish they'd be late on all my submissions so I could get my cards graded from free. What's a guy got to do to get some bad customer service around here?
<< <i>I will happily send anybody who wants one a certificate for 5 free grades. Your request must be sent by U.S. Mail. It must be postmarked no later than July 17, 2002. Only one per person or household please.
FYI - where I used to work, we had a postage meter that we used for all outgoing mail. On several occasions (others - never me
~jeff
Good ole Zardoz still stirring the pot after all these years. Always controversial and always bang on the money