Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

Craigslist post about PSA overcharging $5000 for Fleer Jordan rookie deemed not authentic

JolleyWrencherJolleyWrencher Posts: 596 ✭✭✭
edited December 22, 2023 10:47AM in Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

I left it general so you can draw your own conclusions. I don't know this person but time is money and clearly this person is investing their time to seek resolution on what they believe is a mistake by PSA.

https://chicago.craigslist.org/chc/cbd/d/skokie-fleer-psa-jordan-rookie-card-card/7695187337.html

«13

Comments

  • 82FootballWaxMemorys82FootballWaxMemorys Posts: 1,267 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 21, 2023 11:02AM

    Not sure we are getting anywhere near the full story but the Card Issuer will certainly conduct a mandated investigation.

    I worked for a large Card Issuer (Bank) for 10 year you can be sure they will take the dispute seriously.

    The reasons the Card Issuer performs Proper Due Diligence and PSA does not:
    1) They are not a virtual monopoly (like PSA or CGC for Comics)
    2) Regulated Industry.

    Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.

  • What happens when the card issuer is no longer in business?

    I figured this dispute was over the claimed excess grading fees.

  • RufussCkingstonRufussCkingston Posts: 1,448 ✭✭✭✭

    @JolleyWrencher said:
    What happens when the card issuer is no longer in business?

    Banks never really go out of business, they just get taken over by regulators and then "sold" to or absorbed by another solvent bank...

  • @JolleyWrencher said:
    I left it general so you can draw your own conclusions. I don't know this person but time is money and clearly this person is investing their time to seek resolution on what they believe is a mistake by PSA.

    https://chicago.craigslist.org/chc/cbd/d/skokie-fleer-psa-jordan-rookie-card-card/7695187337.html

    He's correct about PSA not answering phones which escalated his sour grapes about the non-grade and $ he's out but I think he should send it to SGC or another grading company for 2nd or 3rd opinion. If the result is the same then let it go. If it comes back with an actual grade it might help his case.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,206 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I’m not really sure what the problem is here other than with the submitter, who clearly didn’t understand how things work. Just based on the wording and story and attached pictures, this is a rookie who made a rookie mistake, albeit an expensive one.

    The guy sent a fake Jordan to be graded at the $5,000 level and subsequently found out it is not an authentic card.

    However, the card was evaluated, time was spent and an opinion was rendered - same as if it was deemed legit and assigned/received a numeric grade. However, PSA does not encapsulate bogus cards so it is returned the same way it was sent in.

    Similar to when a card is sent for review: you pay whether it’s bumped or not because the evaluation has taken place.

    Bottom line, ignorance is never an excuse. My heart goes out to the guy, of course, but he’s blaming the wrong people.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • McvillagehtxMcvillagehtx Posts: 103 ✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I’m not really sure what the problem is here other than with the submitter, who clearly didn’t understand how things work. Just based on the wording and story and attached pictures, this is a rookie who made a rookie mistake, albeit an expensive one.

    The guy sent a fake Jordan to be graded at the $5,000 level and subsequently found out it is not an authentic card.

    However, the card was evaluated, time was spent and an opinion was rendered - same as if it was deemed legit and assigned/received a numeric grade. However, PSA does not encapsulate bogus cards so it is returned the same way it was sent in.

    Similar to when a card is sent for review: you pay whether it’s bumped or not because the evaluation has taken place.

    Bottom line, ignorance is never an excuse. My heart goes out to the guy, of course, but he’s blaming the wrong people.

    Completely different than a review.
    The reason the card costs $5,000 to grade is because it's a jordan that will be worth much more than that once graded. They should charge some nominal fee like CGC does when you do a prescreen on the magazines.
    If we step away from this a bit and look at it ...this guy obviously should not owe $5,000 in this scenario.

  • RufussCkingstonRufussCkingston Posts: 1,448 ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 21, 2023 4:58PM

    If we step away from this a bit and look at it ...this guy obviously should not owe $5,000 in this scenario.

    part of the service you pay for is how fast they get to and return the card. His card basically went to the front of the line and he has to pay for that...... so no refund!

    Plus the guy is an idiot because he thought his card was worth over $99k..... He should have "only" paid $1000 since a PSA 9 is worth "only" $14k! That centering already disqualified it from being a PSA 10!

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,206 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 21, 2023 6:20PM

    @Mcvillagehtx said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I’m not really sure what the problem is here other than with the submitter, who clearly didn’t understand how things work. Just based on the wording and story and attached pictures, this is a rookie who made a rookie mistake, albeit an expensive one.

    The guy sent a fake Jordan to be graded at the $5,000 level and subsequently found out it is not an authentic card.

    However, the card was evaluated, time was spent and an opinion was rendered - same as if it was deemed legit and assigned/received a numeric grade. However, PSA does not encapsulate bogus cards so it is returned the same way it was sent in.

    Similar to when a card is sent for review: you pay whether it’s bumped or not because the evaluation has taken place.

    Bottom line, ignorance is never an excuse. My heart goes out to the guy, of course, but he’s blaming the wrong people.

    Completely different than a review.
    The reason the card costs $5,000 to grade is because it's a jordan that will be worth much more than that once graded. They should charge some nominal fee like CGC does when you do a prescreen on the magazines.
    If we step away from this a bit and look at it ...this guy obviously should not owe $5,000 in this scenario.

    This is the system that is in place and has been for years. People always think the system should change for them. Always have, always will.

    PSA is a business that spells out the service they provide VERY CLEARLY. This person should have read it when they submitted the card. They didn’t.

    When it doesn’t work out, the people who didn’t bother to read the rules of submission cry ‘scam!’ However, they should be crying ‘I should have educated myself better before I submitted the card’ but we all agree that that just doesn’t have the same ring to it. 🤣

    This board is littered with stories exactly like this going back literally 20 years.

    @Mcvillagehtx

    If you submit your 1952 Topps Mantle PSA 5 for a review and it doesn’t bump, it will get charged the fee at the tier. Same tier, same fee.

    Charged and card returned. Might be more than 5K, depending on the cards condition.

    Again, I might sound heartless but I’m actually just trying to be helpful here:

    Know what you are paying for before you submit.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • MantleFan23MantleFan23 Posts: 685 ✭✭✭✭

    PSA performed the service that HE requested. He submitted the card at the wrong service level and didn't do his homework about the card or what the appropriate service level should have been. I dont have any sympathy for him. Do your homework next time. A costly lesson.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 10,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    the bulk of that $5k goes toward the guarantee, not the actual process of grading. there is nothing to guarantee here, as the card is deemed fake. customer should not owe 5k. should be charged the nominal grading fee only.

    George Brett, Bobby Orr and Terry Bradshaw.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,206 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @craig44 said:
    the bulk of that $5k goes toward the guarantee, not the actual process of grading. there is nothing to guarantee here, as the card is deemed fake. customer should not owe 5k. should be charged the nominal grading fee only.

    Maybe.

    I think PSA leaves itself open to people trying to slip fakes into holders if they don’t charge the full price for the service either way.

    And, on some level, this policy acts as a general deterrent to the submission of bogus cards.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • AANVAANV Posts: 323 ✭✭✭
    edited December 21, 2023 9:59PM

    I would like to know the story about how he acquired this card. Not that it changes the outcome in any way, but I could sympathize with him a little more, if the acquisition weren't a too-good-to-be-true scenario.

    But that's a huge roll of the dice going into any grade expecting a 10. Yikes!

  • RufussCkingstonRufussCkingston Posts: 1,448 ✭✭✭✭

    @craig44 said:
    the bulk of that $5k goes toward the guarantee, not the actual process of grading. there is nothing to guarantee here, as the card is deemed fake. customer should not owe 5k. should be charged the nominal grading fee only.

    So what should the "nominal fee" be for 1 day service and probably having to take time away from PSA's top grader??

  • @RufussCkingston said:

    @craig44 said:
    the bulk of that $5k goes toward the guarantee, not the actual process of grading. there is nothing to guarantee here, as the card is deemed fake. customer should not owe 5k. should be charged the nominal grading fee only.

    So what should the "nominal fee" be for 1 day service and probably having to take time away from PSA's top grader??

    Great question. If it happened to me, the first time, because I fell for a fake then I'd hope for some grace. A repeat offender needs taxed some vut $5k is excessive. If I was making counterfeits and trying to get them graded then I could understand the penalty.

    I also would like to know more about the acquisition of the card.

    The customer service side of things seems concerning. Is it a legitimate claim that a particular customer phone line places you in hold indefinitely? I could see if thos were the case for non-members to have a call-back option but members should be able to reach a live person with a reasonable time-frame (48-72 hours) or less. I get impatient when I'm on hold or in line, like every human being, so I can't imagine this would be the experience they expect we receive; unless they don't give a hoot.

  • stevekstevek Posts: 27,472 ✭✭✭✭✭

    There is a letter from PSA posted by him on the Craigslist link.

    Click the right side arrow next to the pic of the card, until you get to image 5.

    Even though he made it a public letter, I would suggest not posting it here.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 10,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I read the letter. Here are my thoughts. If I were to submit a 1986 fleer jordan rookie under the $499 60 day level of service and it came back a PSA 10, PSA would have no problem up charging me to the proper service, because I obviously either knowingly or unknowingly subbed under the wrong service level.

    In this case, the submitter also subbed under the wrong service level. the card is essentially worthless, so why would PSA not do the exact same thing they would do under the first scenario? I have zero problems with PSA up charging. none at all. I understand the extra $ goes toward the guarantee, which no other service offers. If there is nothing to guarantee, why the full charge?

    fair is fair, right?

    George Brett, Bobby Orr and Terry Bradshaw.

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,137 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Fair?
    Charging $5,000.00 to look at a card and say it's "questionable" and not tell you why it's not authentic?
    Doesn't sound fair to me.

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • craig44craig44 Posts: 10,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @JoeBanzai said:
    Fair?
    Charging $5,000.00 to look at a card and say it's "questionable" and not tell you why it's not authentic?
    Doesn't sound fair to me.

    that is what i am saying, it is not fair to charge the $5k for that card. no more than it is not fair to expect PSA to allow someone to submit an authentic jordan 10 under the $499 level.

    George Brett, Bobby Orr and Terry Bradshaw.

  • What am I missing here?

    The submitter willingly sent their card to PSA and agreed to all of the clearly defined fees / terms before they did.

    Nowhere in the terms / conditions does it say anything about not charging and / or refunding part of the submission fee if the card is deemed not authentic. So, why would anyone assume different?

    Being ignorant / incompetent when willingly agreeing to terms of a transaction that you request is not a valid reason to get out of the agreed upon terms,

    It is 100% Fair - the submitter had the opportunity to do their due-diligence to know all of the fees, terms, and risks before submitting.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,206 ✭✭✭✭✭

    PSA is a for profit business. They evaluate, appraise and encapsulate the legitimate cards sent to them. I would say literally half of the responsibility they have is separate legitimate from bogus - it’s their core service and (maybe even) the main reason for their experience.

    No one is ever required to use their service. It’s a choice.

    That said, the only thing we have that’s concrete based on the story? The Jordan is bogus in PSA’s opinion. We can extrapolate that the person who sent it in could not tell that it was a bogus card in the first place (problem #2) and then spent 5K to send it in (problem #3) The only way that makes any sense is because the person acquired it at a very low cost from someone selling fake Jordan’s (problem #1).

    Does it suck? Yes, from soup to nuts, it’s a suckfest. That said, he’s ‘shooting the messenger’ and that’s probably because the original seller is in the wind. I’d also guess that, since it’s a fairly popular scam, that the guy who sold it was ‘selling it cheap because I can’t afford the grading fees but you should totally send it to PSA and with a good grade you’ll make a fortune with it…’. And? If you’re sending the card in at the 5K level, you’re unfamiliar with PSA’s submission system.

    So, a scam took place but it’s not PSA who perpetrated it.

    In reality, this is also not that different than the first time submitter who pulls a card from a pack, sends it to PSA and cries foul when it comes home in a holder that isn’t PSA 10.

    “But it came right from the pack! I don’t understand!”

    We can and should empathize and sympathize with the poor guy (and I do) but, again, there’s a lot of mistakes made along the way and PSA is a for profit business.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,206 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Typo in first paragraph above:

    ‘experience’ should be ‘existence’

    (Didn’t want the post eaten)

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 10,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    PSA is a for profit business. They evaluate, appraise and encapsulate the legitimate cards sent to them. I would say literally half of the responsibility they have is separate legitimate from bogus - it’s their core service and (maybe even) the main reason for their experience.

    No one is ever required to use their service. It’s a choice.

    That said, the only thing we have that’s concrete based on the story? The Jordan is bogus in PSA’s opinion. We can extrapolate that the person who sent it in could not tell that it was a bogus card in the first place (problem #2) and then spent 5K to send it in (problem #3) The only way that makes any sense is because the person acquired it at a very low cost from someone selling fake Jordan’s (problem #1).

    Does it suck? Yes, from soup to nuts, it’s a suckfest. That said, he’s ‘shooting the messenger’ and that’s probably because the original seller is in the wind. I’d also guess that, since it’s a fairly popular scam, that the guy who sold it was ‘selling it cheap because I can’t afford the grading fees but you should totally send it to PSA and with a good grade you’ll make a fortune with it…’. And? If you’re sending the card in at the 5K level, you’re unfamiliar with PSA’s submission system.

    So, a scam took place but it’s not PSA who perpetrated it.

    In reality, this is also not that different than the first time submitter who pulls a card from a pack, sends it to PSA and cries foul when it comes home in a holder that isn’t PSA 10.

    “But it came right from the pack! I don’t understand!”

    We can and should empathize and sympathize with the poor guy (and I do) but, again, there’s a lot of mistakes made along the way and PSA is a for profit business.

    Tell me what PSA would do in this scenario. I submit a 93 sp jeter under the regular service level of 10 days max value of 1499 for $75. I am assuming the card will get an 8. the card ends up getting a PSA 10. What does PSA do now? well, obviously my "estimated" value and original service level were incorrect. they will rightly up charge me to the appropriate service level after grading my card.

    in this case, exactly as in the last case, the submitter obviously entered the incorrect "estimated" value of his card, as he thought it would grade a 10. well, it didnt grade a 10, it wasnt even authentic. why should PSA not change the service level to accurately meet the true valuation of the card after grading? just like they did in the previous scenario.

    I think, to be consistent, PSA should adjust service levels in both directions. you know, to be fair.

    George Brett, Bobby Orr and Terry Bradshaw.

  • stevekstevek Posts: 27,472 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I just bought the original Mona Lisa painting. The guy who sold it to me, said that the one hanging in the Louvre is a fake. The guy gave me a great deal on it.

    I just sent it out to an art authentication company that charges $5,000 for their services whether the painting is real or not. I figure for a $5,000 fee, they are always going to label it as authentic.

    I can't wait to get it back, sell it, and make a humongous score. I've been looking at yacht brochures all day today. I'll be buying a 70 footer and throwing a lavish boat warming party.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,206 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @craig44 said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    PSA is a for profit business. They evaluate, appraise and encapsulate the legitimate cards sent to them. I would say literally half of the responsibility they have is separate legitimate from bogus - it’s their core service and (maybe even) the main reason for their experience.

    No one is ever required to use their service. It’s a choice.

    That said, the only thing we have that’s concrete based on the story? The Jordan is bogus in PSA’s opinion. We can extrapolate that the person who sent it in could not tell that it was a bogus card in the first place (problem #2) and then spent 5K to send it in (problem #3) The only way that makes any sense is because the person acquired it at a very low cost from someone selling fake Jordan’s (problem #1).

    Does it suck? Yes, from soup to nuts, it’s a suckfest. That said, he’s ‘shooting the messenger’ and that’s probably because the original seller is in the wind. I’d also guess that, since it’s a fairly popular scam, that the guy who sold it was ‘selling it cheap because I can’t afford the grading fees but you should totally send it to PSA and with a good grade you’ll make a fortune with it…’. And? If you’re sending the card in at the 5K level, you’re unfamiliar with PSA’s submission system.

    So, a scam took place but it’s not PSA who perpetrated it.

    In reality, this is also not that different than the first time submitter who pulls a card from a pack, sends it to PSA and cries foul when it comes home in a holder that isn’t PSA 10.

    “But it came right from the pack! I don’t understand!”

    We can and should empathize and sympathize with the poor guy (and I do) but, again, there’s a lot of mistakes made along the way and PSA is a for profit business.

    Tell me what PSA would do in this scenario. I submit a 93 sp jeter under the regular service level of 10 days max value of 1499 for $75. I am assuming the card will get an 8. the card ends up getting a PSA 10. What does PSA do now? well, obviously my "estimated" value and original service level were incorrect. they will rightly up charge me to the appropriate service level after grading my card.

    in this case, exactly as in the last case, the submitter obviously entered the incorrect "estimated" value of his card, as he thought it would grade a 10. well, it didnt grade a 10, it wasnt even authentic. why should PSA not change the service level to accurately meet the true valuation of the card after grading? just like they did in the previous scenario.

    I think, to be consistent, PSA should adjust service levels in both directions. you know, to be fair.

    Saying something is exactly the same doesn’t make it so, even if you type it in bold. In your scenario, the card is legitimate. From the jump, the comparison is over and it is certainly not exactly the same. In fact, it’s not even similar. You didn’t submit a fake Jeter card and assume it was a ten.

    In your scenario, you followed proper protocol as an educated person should and received an upcharge notification. From you, that makes sense - you are a highly educated and experienced submitter.

    You also seem hung up on this concept of what’s ‘fair’ which is why we’re probably just going to have to agree to disagree. Businesses can’t run on sympathy and what you are asking is to have PSA looking for ways to give away their profits because of the mistakes and ignorance of the customer (and then create additional internal delays to it, further adding to the cost of the process of the bogus card while lowering what it cost to provide the service.)

    Obviously when you view it exclusively through the customer lens, it seems unfair - point conceded.

    However, from the business perspective, it’s cut and dry.

    Did PSA provide the service they stated they would?

    Yes.

    Did the customer choose the service level (and price)?

    Yes.

    Was the outcome disappointing?

    Yes.

    Is this PSA’s problem?

    No.

    @craig44

    I always enjoy the back and forth on the boards and I hope I’ve maintained a respectful tone with you. This is just matter of fact stuff and I hope anyone reading along understands that. There’s how things should be and how things are.

    My responses are so more people realize the latter so they don’t get burned.

    Happy Holidays, my good man.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • @craig44 said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    PSA is a for profit business. They evaluate, appraise and encapsulate the legitimate cards sent to them. I would say literally half of the responsibility they have is separate legitimate from bogus - it’s their core service and (maybe even) the main reason for their experience.

    No one is ever required to use their service. It’s a choice.

    That said, the only thing we have that’s concrete based on the story? The Jordan is bogus in PSA’s opinion. We can extrapolate that the person who sent it in could not tell that it was a bogus card in the first place (problem #2) and then spent 5K to send it in (problem #3) The only way that makes any sense is because the person acquired it at a very low cost from someone selling fake Jordan’s (problem #1).

    Does it suck? Yes, from soup to nuts, it’s a suckfest. That said, he’s ‘shooting the messenger’ and that’s probably because the original seller is in the wind. I’d also guess that, since it’s a fairly popular scam, that the guy who sold it was ‘selling it cheap because I can’t afford the grading fees but you should totally send it to PSA and with a good grade you’ll make a fortune with it…’. And? If you’re sending the card in at the 5K level, you’re unfamiliar with PSA’s submission system.

    So, a scam took place but it’s not PSA who perpetrated it.

    In reality, this is also not that different than the first time submitter who pulls a card from a pack, sends it to PSA and cries foul when it comes home in a holder that isn’t PSA 10.

    “But it came right from the pack! I don’t understand!”

    We can and should empathize and sympathize with the poor guy (and I do) but, again, there’s a lot of mistakes made along the way and PSA is a for profit business.

    Tell me what PSA would do in this scenario. I submit a 93 sp jeter under the regular service level of 10 days max value of 1499 for $75. I am assuming the card will get an 8. the card ends up getting a PSA 10. What does PSA do now? well, obviously my "estimated" value and original service level were incorrect. they will rightly up charge me to the appropriate service level after grading my card.

    in this case, exactly as in the last case, the submitter obviously entered the incorrect "estimated" value of his card, as he thought it would grade a 10. well, it didnt grade a 10, it wasnt even authentic. why should PSA not change the service level to accurately meet the true valuation of the card after grading? just like they did in the previous scenario.

    I think, to be consistent, PSA should adjust service levels in both directions. you know, to be fair.

    There is a big difference.

    You can't request and agree to pay for an expedited higher-level service, have the company perform the expedited service, then think you're going to get a refund because you actually didn't need the expedited higher-level service.

    If PSA's policy was to refund the service fee overpaid based on their perspective of value - what would stop everyone from just submitting at the $5,000 service level?

  • 82FootballWaxMemorys82FootballWaxMemorys Posts: 1,267 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 22, 2023 8:34AM

    If the submitter got the service they requested then it sucks but I've no issue.

    If the charge is disputed, the onus will be on PSA to prove to the Card Issuer the requested Service was provided. Which they have! Regardless of the dispute ruling the cost of the dispute investigation is paid by the merchant (PSA)

    and yeah the submitter was foolish...

    Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.

  • erikthredderikthredd Posts: 7,911 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 22, 2023 8:38AM

    Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here but doesn't PSA make you submit cards valued at different pricing separately on different service levels orders?
    Meaning if he submitted a bunch of random lower valued cards (which he certainly did judging by the two images of his grading order) on a much cheaper service level than that Jordan (he obviously didn't sub all of those other cards at a service level that charged 5K for each card.)
    How is it that he was able to sub that Jordan at that $5k premium level on the very same submission order as those other cards? I literally just tried doing the same on PSA's submission center and it wasn't allowed.

    Here's his pics from his submission:


    It keeps getting mentioned above that this guy subbed his Jordan at the 5K premium Service Level which I'm assuming is a 3day turnaround, If he really used that service level then it couldn't have been part of that same order that contained:
    Spiderman Lunchables Decoder cards(? no clue what these are,) Topps Marvel Legends, a Marvel Universe Hologram
    and some Pokemon cards.

    That PSA 6 Marvel Universe Hologram Ghost Rider card sells for under $20 (PSA 8's are selling at $20) and he certainly didn't submit that at a 5k/day turnaround.

    Again,someone please correct me if I'm wrong but this submitter either had to sub ALL of those cards at the 5K service level or his Jordan was subbed at a much cheaper level and was then placed in that 3day turnaround 5k service level by PSA, especially if valued at 200K. There's no way that should have been possible when using PSA's submit dropdown menu.

  • 82FootballWaxMemorys82FootballWaxMemorys Posts: 1,267 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 22, 2023 8:38AM

    @erikthredd said:
    Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here but doesn't PSA make you submit cards valued at different pricing separately on different service levels?
    Meaning if he submitted a bunch of random lower valued cards (which he certainly did judging by the two images of his grading order) on a much cheaper service level than that Jordan (he obviously didn't sub all of those other cards at a service level that charged 5K for each card.)
    How is it that he was able to sub that Jordan at that $5k premium level on the very same submission order as those other cards? I literally just tried doing the same on PSA's submission center and it wasn't allowed.

    To highly speculate, the submitter may have known the card was a fake and figured submitting in at higher level might allow it to speed through tollgates. To PSA's credit this time they spotted it. Good for them and good for the hobby.

    Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.

  • erikthredderikthredd Posts: 7,911 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 22, 2023 8:55AM

    @82FootballWaxMemorys said:

    @erikthredd said:
    Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here but doesn't PSA make you submit cards valued at different pricing separately on different service levels?
    Meaning if he submitted a bunch of random lower valued cards (which he certainly did judging by the two images of his grading order) on a much cheaper service level than that Jordan (he obviously didn't sub all of those other cards at a service level that charged 5K for each card.)
    How is it that he was able to sub that Jordan at that $5k premium level on the very same submission order as those other cards? I literally just tried doing the same on PSA's submission center and it wasn't allowed.

    To highly speculate, the submitter may have known the card was a fake and figured submitting in at higher level might allow it to speed through tollgates. To PSA's credit this time they spotted it. Good for them and good for the hobby.

    If that were the case then how does that explain his No Grade Jordan card sitting in between those Pokemon and Marvel cards in those pics. The Jordan would have had to have been a separate submission and separate order all by itself.

    I literally just tried starting a $499DV/$25 submission on PSA's website with that Ghost Rider Card valued at a $100 and an '86 Fleer Jordan valued at 200k and I wasn't allowed to include the Jordan. a red lettered pop-up box states that The per-item declared value of $200,000 is over the max value of the selected Service Level ($499).

    For that jordan to be included in the very same submission order as those Marvel/Pokemon cards it means he either spent 5K on each card to be graded OR PSA removed the card from his order and charged him at a separate service level.

    Anyone can go in their own PSA order history and click to see their grades on any particular order and you won't find a card that had to have been subbed on its own separate service level due to a having a much higher declared value, sitting smack dub in the middle of a bunch of cheapers cards like in those pics. And this isn't an upcharge due to the grade being higher when it was deemed questionable. This doesn't make sense from a PSA perspective.

  • BBBrkrrBBBrkrr Posts: 910 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @SmithAuctionCo said:

    @craig44 said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    PSA is a for profit business. They evaluate, appraise and encapsulate the legitimate cards sent to them. I would say literally half of the responsibility they have is separate legitimate from bogus - it’s their core service and (maybe even) the main reason for their experience.

    No one is ever required to use their service. It’s a choice.

    That said, the only thing we have that’s concrete based on the story? The Jordan is bogus in PSA’s opinion. We can extrapolate that the person who sent it in could not tell that it was a bogus card in the first place (problem #2) and then spent 5K to send it in (problem #3) The only way that makes any sense is because the person acquired it at a very low cost from someone selling fake Jordan’s (problem #1).

    Does it suck? Yes, from soup to nuts, it’s a suckfest. That said, he’s ‘shooting the messenger’ and that’s probably because the original seller is in the wind. I’d also guess that, since it’s a fairly popular scam, that the guy who sold it was ‘selling it cheap because I can’t afford the grading fees but you should totally send it to PSA and with a good grade you’ll make a fortune with it…’. And? If you’re sending the card in at the 5K level, you’re unfamiliar with PSA’s submission system.

    So, a scam took place but it’s not PSA who perpetrated it.

    In reality, this is also not that different than the first time submitter who pulls a card from a pack, sends it to PSA and cries foul when it comes home in a holder that isn’t PSA 10.

    “But it came right from the pack! I don’t understand!”

    We can and should empathize and sympathize with the poor guy (and I do) but, again, there’s a lot of mistakes made along the way and PSA is a for profit business.

    Tell me what PSA would do in this scenario. I submit a 93 sp jeter under the regular service level of 10 days max value of 1499 for $75. I am assuming the card will get an 8. the card ends up getting a PSA 10. What does PSA do now? well, obviously my "estimated" value and original service level were incorrect. they will rightly up charge me to the appropriate service level after grading my card.

    in this case, exactly as in the last case, the submitter obviously entered the incorrect "estimated" value of his card, as he thought it would grade a 10. well, it didnt grade a 10, it wasnt even authentic. why should PSA not change the service level to accurately meet the true valuation of the card after grading? just like they did in the previous scenario.

    I think, to be consistent, PSA should adjust service levels in both directions. you know, to be fair.

    There is a big difference.

    You can't request and agree to pay for an expedited higher-level service, have the company perform the expedited service, then think you're going to get a refund because you actually didn't need the expedited higher-level service.

    If PSA's policy was to refund the service fee overpaid based on their perspective of value - what would stop everyone from just submitting at the $5,000 service level?

    Years ago when I first started subbing I had a card I thought would be worth quite a bit when graded at a level I thought would be accurate.

    Luckily, I called PSA to discuss options. They recommended that I sub it at a lower level and let them upcharge me if it did get that grade (it didn't!).

    Thankfully, PSA guided me to the best outcome for me. I think the game is to find the proper pricing level for the submission based on graded value. These days it can be tough, but PSA has always been fair with me on the Graded Value and upcharging me accordingly. Very fair.

  • @erikthredd said:
    Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here but doesn't PSA make you submit cards valued at different pricing separately on different service levels orders?
    Meaning if he submitted a bunch of random lower valued cards (which he certainly did judging by the two images of his grading order) on a much cheaper service level than that Jordan (he obviously didn't sub all of those other cards at a service level that charged 5K for each card.)
    How is it that he was able to sub that Jordan at that $5k premium level on the very same submission order as those other cards? I literally just tried doing the same on PSA's submission center and it wasn't allowed.

    Here's his pics from his submission:


    It keeps getting mentioned above that this guy subbed his Jordan at the 5K premium Service Level which I'm assuming is a 3day turnaround, If he really used that service level then it couldn't have been part of that same order that contained:
    Spiderman Lunchables Decoder cards(? no clue what these are,) Topps Marvel Legends, a Marvel Universe Hologram
    and some Pokemon cards.

    That PSA 6 Marvel Universe Hologram Ghost Rider card sells for under $20 (PSA 8's are selling at $20) and he certainly didn't submit that at a 5k/day turnaround.

    Again,someone please correct me if I'm wrong but this submitter either had to sub ALL of those cards at the 5K service level or his Jordan was subbed at a much cheaper level and was then placed in that 3day turnaround 5k service level by PSA, especially if valued at 200K. There's no way that should have been possible when using PSA's submit dropdown menu.

    I don't think the Craigslist poster is showing the correct submission in the photos - not surprising since they don't seem to fully understand the PSA process.

    That submission shows an N9 designation - that is just for a card that PSA does not grade and does not charge for.

    The correct submission would show an N4 designation for counterfeit. And the PSA emails in the Craigslist post state that the submission included only 1 card.

  • erikthredderikthredd Posts: 7,911 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That does make sense and I doubt that we'd ever get the full story from the Craigslist guy,its not like he posted the story here.

    edit: I just noticed that he added this photo of what seems to be another order that wasn't there yesterday.

    Both orders have an N9 but different descriptions:
    the original order had N9 No Spec,No Info, No Charge
    then
    the Brady order had an N9 Not Licensed Unauthorized,No Grade, No Charge

    No matter what, this guy isn't helping his argument by making it all more confusing. 🤷‍♂️

  • The reason I brought this post here is because PSA can't defend their position outside of these forums very well. If I ran a business and complaints were surfacing then I would prefer an opportunity to hear the complaints and respond if necessary.

    I improperly titled this post as a scam when it isn’t. I will rename it since it is misleading and unfair.

    I do like the discussion because a similar situation could unfold for others. It would be good for the terms of service agreement to have this scenario covered because I think many of us assume a rejected fake isn't going to cost us the same as a graded legit card. The steps of encapsulation, the labeling, and the second round of quality assurance didn't take place I imagine.

    For me, despite what the terms of service say, I would expect some relief if this were a one time ordeal. If this happened before to me then I wouldn't roll the dice and expect relief a second time but would still think full price isn’t warranted because all the steps didn't need to occur.

    PSA may have more information on the submitter, or this issue, but we likely won't get the information because companies shouldn't divulge specifics. I messaged the person on Craigslist with a link to my post incase they want to clarify anything. No idea if they joined the forum but I think this is best discussed here where both parties can be represented.

    To date, PSA has never messed up any of my submissions and they corrected one of my submissions where I forgot to include a card, and my personal rumblings have all been around grades I believed were slightly too low while admitting I have received a couple where I believed the grade was too high.

  • For all I know, there is an operation PSA figured out and they slapped it to them for being a repeat offender.

    This is the reason I've never bought the 86 fleer Jordan. I wouldn't pay top dollar and I would probably be the first to get offered some new reprint that passes my 86 Fleer Jordan sniff test.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,206 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 24, 2023 1:19AM

    @JolleyWrencher

    I think the important thing here is that the word is out and it’s clear as day:

    You won’t get a pass.

    PSA doesn’t owe you, me or anyone else anything and it’s straight up dangerous, financially, for people to think otherwise.

    We are all just a number to the corporate entities of the world. Customer service at a mom and pop walk up must be and is dramatically different than a large multi national, (mostly online) corporation with a figurative line out the door*. And what I’m saying is, though it sucks, expect to be treated that way and you’ll be much better off. Expectations are everything.

    And I mainly post this stuff because I learned this stuff here. From both still active and long gone posters, over a period of years, I educated myself both about my hobby and the grading process. And, quite frankly, I’m still learning all the time.

    So, I try to pass on what I’ve learned as means of paying it forward. I’m grateful for this place and so very many of the posters here.

    *I believe the invisible hand that governs e-commerce is not yet fully formed. Presently, many companies on planet earth incur no penalty for lackluster or substandard customer service.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • @stevek said:
    I just bought the original Mona Lisa painting. The guy who sold it to me, said that the one hanging in the Louvre is a fake. The guy gave me a great deal on it.

    I just sent it out to an art authentication company that charges $5,000 for their services whether the painting is real or not. I figure for a $5,000 fee, they are always going to label it as authentic.

    I can't wait to get it back, sell it, and make a humongous score. I've been looking at yacht brochures all day today. I'll be buying a 70 footer and throwing a lavish boat warming party.

    Nice but I have the same original painting and it's autographed by her and Leonardo. Got it at Goodwill for $4.

  • Once they deemed it not authentic, they should have lowered the charge.

  • 82FootballWaxMemorys82FootballWaxMemorys Posts: 1,267 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jraytay said:

    @stevek said:
    I just bought the original Mona Lisa painting. The guy who sold it to me, said that the one hanging in the Louvre is a fake. The guy gave me a great deal on it.

    I just sent it out to an art authentication company that charges $5,000 for their services whether the painting is real or not. I figure for a $5,000 fee, they are always going to label it as authentic.

    I can't wait to get it back, sell it, and make a humongous score. I've been looking at yacht brochures all day today. I'll be buying a 70 footer and throwing a lavish boat warming party.

    Nice but I have the same original painting and it's autographed by her and Leonardo. Got it at Goodwill for $4.

    I've the refractor.

    Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.

  • RufussCkingstonRufussCkingston Posts: 1,448 ✭✭✭✭

    What people in this thread who want a "discount" for fake/altered card keep failing to mention/take into account is that the higher the DV, the more different the service that is received is. When you submit at a tier that has a higher max DV, then the speed at which you are serviced is faster. As well, we could probably assume that the really high DV items go to a person or team of "Higher Level" graders, who are paid to grade more expensive stuff, which in turn generates more revenue for the company. So what these peeps who seem to want exception to the T&C's that they have agreed to for years or for the first time, is to receive lightning fast service (compared to entry level tiers), grading by higher paid/more experienced graders (not that the submitter cares, but PSA has to pay them), for the cost of a value submission if the "grading" doesn't go their way... It is like saying I want a refund if my lawyer loses the case! The icing on the cake is the CL poster is from a pawn shop, just seems very fitting!

  • thedutymon11thedutymon11 Posts: 627 ✭✭✭✭

    @jraytay said:

    @stevek said:
    I just bought the original Mona Lisa painting. The guy who sold it to me, said that the one hanging in the Louvre is a fake. The guy gave me a great deal on it.

    I just sent it out to an art authentication company that charges $5,000 for their services whether the painting is real or not. I figure for a $5,000 fee, they are always going to label it as authentic.

    I can't wait to get it back, sell it, and make a humongous score. I've been looking at yacht brochures all day today. I'll be buying a 70 footer and throwing a lavish boat warming party.

    Nice but I have the same original painting and it's autographed by her and Leonardo. Got it at Goodwill for $4.

    I call BS, I have the painting and am putting it up in my Spring Da Vinci Collection, bidding starts at $5 Million with a Reserve at 100 Million!

    YeeHaw!

    Neil

  • DeutscherGeistDeutscherGeist Posts: 2,990 ✭✭✭✭

    I learned on these boards to submit at the lowest tier level possible and expect an up charge if the card grades higher. Never ever assume a card will be a PSA 10. There is no crime in declaring PSA 9 or PSA 8. The up charge will occur if it gets the higher grade and nothing further. With that said, also do not declare a PSA 1 on something that looks perfect. This could negatively affect insurance claims if a package is lost.

    We will not have the full story of the CL submitter, but the lesson is that one should not submit a card while declaring it as a PSA 10.

    "So many of our DREAMS at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we SUMMON THE WILL they soon become INEVITABLE "- Christopher Reeve

    BST: Tennessebanker, Downtown1974, LarkinCollector, nendee
  • grote15grote15 Posts: 29,439 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I’m not really sure what the problem is here other than with the submitter, who clearly didn’t understand how things work. Just based on the wording and story and attached pictures, this is a rookie who made a rookie mistake, albeit an expensive one.

    The guy sent a fake Jordan to be graded at the $5,000 level and subsequently found out it is not an authentic card.

    However, the card was evaluated, time was spent and an opinion was rendered - same as if it was deemed legit and assigned/received a numeric grade. However, PSA does not encapsulate bogus cards so it is returned the same way it was sent in.

    Similar to when a card is sent for review: you pay whether it’s bumped or not because the evaluation has taken place.

    Bottom line, ignorance is never an excuse. My heart goes out to the guy, of course, but he’s blaming the wrong people.

    Agree completely. The whole thing just reads like typical sour grapes from an unversed submitter.



    Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
  • dan89dan89 Posts: 484 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I’m going to send in 100 questionable Jordan’s at the walk through or expedited levels and expect all my money back when they all fail. Come on man SMH….

  • JolleyWrencherJolleyWrencher Posts: 596 ✭✭✭
    edited December 23, 2023 10:49AM

    @dan89 said:
    I’m going to send in 100 questionable Jordan’s at the walk through or expedited levels and expect all my money back when they all fail. Come on man SMH….

    That's a far bit extreme from the situation as it has been described but I get your point.

    I'm not entirely sure what service was received to warrant the charges. I would expect to pay what was expected if it was graded as I assumed it was going to be. Upon learning it wasn't authentic then I assume a different route is taken since the card is not going to have more time invested in it to determine the condition. No time invested to assess the surface, edge, and corner wear. The card is rejected and no further work is involved so I don't understand why some people on this board think it's no different than had the card actually been graded.

    I also don't think people can empathize very well. Experience makes all the difference in this world. People forget what it's like to be wet behind the ears and almost seem to enjoy seeing somebody have a bad experience and chalk it up to the person being an idiot.

    Maybe I need a reality check in 2024. The good old days are gone.
    Excellent customer service- gone
    Lifetime warranties - few and far between
    Employees who know their products or the application - only the old timers at small hardware stores
    Elderly talking and youth listening - it's now the opposite

    It's unfortunate our society accepts the current state of hour long customer service lines, products dead on arrival, and spending multiple thousands per person on a smart device which is replaced every year or two. It's laughable and sad at the same time.

    I have only been around for less than a year as a member and it didn't take long to realize customer service is an issue. Then I realized grading consistency is an issue. People seem happy to keep paying for the service so I don't expect anything to change until business is affected.

    You can please your customers and your investors both, however, you can cut corners and trim away to increase profits like the analogy of putting a frog in water and increasing the heat until it boils and the frog never notices...

    Unlike a frog...many have noticed, have made comments about their observations/experiences, and aren't submitting as they otherwise would.

    Those of us who tell it like it is aren't doing it to be an ass or because we're looking to get a hate crime infraction...it's because we are old school people who shoot straight from the hip with good intentions. We are the ones who tell their boss their fly is open or a booger is in their nose instead of noticing and keeping quiet. We are the ones who tell bad parents that they should lighten up on their infants. We are also the people who stop to help stranded drivers on the side of the road. Hard working, empathetic, and often too trustworthy.

  • firstbase23firstbase23 Posts: 446 ✭✭✭

    If I am reading this right he is complaining because the card was deemed not authentic which I thought was N4. His list shows N9 no grade because they do not grade card and I believe in that instance their card is not charged the fee. If am confused or not following close enough, I apologize in advance.

    Matt

  • RufussCkingstonRufussCkingston Posts: 1,448 ✭✭✭✭

    @firstbase23 said:
    If I am reading this right he is complaining because the card was deemed not authentic which I thought was N4. His list shows N9 no grade because they do not grade card and I believe in that instance their card is not charged the fee. If am confused or not following close enough, I apologize in advance.

    Matt

    That list is bogus, not tied to the card/submission at issue, otherwise he'd be paying $5000 each to submit those other $10 value cards as well.

  • RufussCkingstonRufussCkingston Posts: 1,448 ✭✭✭✭

    @JolleyWrencher said:
    People forget what it's like to be wet behind the ears and almost seem to enjoy seeing somebody have a bad experience >and chalk it up to the person being an idiot.

    Totally agree.... That is why it is standard practice for Vegas casinos to refund all the losing bets of first time gamblers. That is why for first time investors whose first investments became worthless, Goldman Sachs refunds all the money.

    Everyone who is uneducated/inexperienced should totally get a pass in the year 2023!

  • @RufussCkingston said:

    @JolleyWrencher said:
    People forget what it's like to be wet behind the ears and almost seem to enjoy seeing somebody have a bad experience >and chalk it up to the person being an idiot.

    Totally agree.... That is why it is standard practice for Vegas casinos to refund all the losing bets of first time gamblers. That is why for first time investors whose first investments became worthless, Goldman Sachs refunds all the money.

    Everyone who is uneducated/inexperienced should totally get a pass in the year 2023!

    I'm sorry you are failing to understand and spend most of your energy on these amazing zingers that get you a LOL and LIKE constantly. Keep up the great work. I often laugh WITH your response, not at them, and you often make some great contributions in discussions, but sometimes you miss the mark like the rest of us.

    I can break it down 3 more times for you and explain how the card was never graded and his complaint is that he's being charged the price as if it were. Here's to hoping🤞

  • grote15grote15 Posts: 29,439 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @JolleyWrencher said:

    @RufussCkingston said:

    @JolleyWrencher said:
    People forget what it's like to be wet behind the ears and almost seem to enjoy seeing somebody have a bad experience >and chalk it up to the person being an idiot.

    Totally agree.... That is why it is standard practice for Vegas casinos to refund all the losing bets of first time gamblers. That is why for first time investors whose first investments became worthless, Goldman Sachs refunds all the money.

    Everyone who is uneducated/inexperienced should totally get a pass in the year 2023!

    I'm sorry you are failing to understand and spend most of your energy on these amazing zingers that get you a LOL and LIKE constantly. Keep up the great work. I often laugh WITH your response, not at them, and you often make some great contributions in discussions, but sometimes you miss the mark like the rest of us.

    I can break it down 3 more times for you and explain how the card was never graded and his complaint is that he's being charged the price as if it were. Here's to hoping🤞

    You don't get a refund if the card doesn't grade unless it's minsize. Anyone submitting at that level ought to familiarize themselves with the facts of submitting to PSA before doing so.



    Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
  • RufussCkingstonRufussCkingston Posts: 1,448 ✭✭✭✭

    @JolleyWrencher said:

    I can break it down 3 more times for you and explain how the card was never graded and his complaint is that he's being charged the price as if it were. Here's to hoping🤞

    Ahh, ok... Then here's the rub! So let's go to https://www.psacard.com/services/tradingcardgrading

    Please explain your "philosophy" when you take into account what I have highlighted.....

Sign In or Register to comment.