Yet another mech error on grade portion of label
miwlvrn
Posts: 4,263 ✭✭✭✭✭
Ugh, it is so disappointing to find examples of mech errors on the grade portion of the label by PSA. It happens both ways, where either a card gets a much higher grade than what the grader assigned; or, where a card gets a much lower grade than what the grader assigned, all just because these typos slip through the review stages. Remember this concept when you get a card back in your order that has a much lower grade than you think it deserves: it is not always that the standards of today are higher than they used to be, or that AI finds surface flaws that you can't see, but rather it is just that whomever typed the label made a transcription error relative to the actual intended grade. It's not possible that this met grading standards to be a 9 Mint, so here's another one that passed through the QA/QC without someone catching it. I wonder what the sales price would be now for an actual 9, instead of one where it goes for a fraction of the "value" due to someone buying the holder instead of the card?
Comments
😳
One advantage of this forum. Acts as quality control.
That's the most graded card in the set and it's a population 3 with none higher. Maybe someone swapped the card or got the homie hook-up because there's no flippin way that should be a 9.
Maybe you can pick your own grade based on the submission form actual value and some of us just not in the know.
I think that card may be swapped and put in a fake PSA case.
I don't think cards with cert 5XXXXXXX used that type of mylar insert for smaller cards. I think that is more recent?
Plus there is no "PSA" logo embossed in the case in lower right.
(Just an opinion. I didn't look real hard at other 5XXXXXXX cases for comparisons.)
** Edit: I realized it could be a re-holder but still no PSA logo at the bottom **
I am pretty sure I figured out what happened here. The cert number one higher is a PSA 6 of the same card. I'm willing to bet that during assembly, the cards were switched such that the 9 was placed in a 6 holder and the 6 was placed in a 9 holder. And, the PSA QA/QC personnel completely missed the problem during and after assembly. Then, the owner, seeing the mistake that was made in his favor, sold the 9 holder with the 6 card in it, and will certainly resub the other one either as a review or as a crackout.
The 9 holder w/ 6 card only sold for $600, but that was I'm sure due to the horribly low eye-appeal for that grade, as a real 9 would go for a lot more than that.
So, avoidable mistakes were made by PSA in this situation, but it is also disappointing that the submitter/owner in turn took advantage of the error.
The PSA logo IS there, on both sides....
Oops.
I think I found another example of the cards being switched during assembly for successive cert numbers in the same order. Take a look at this Tretjak RC's corners and edges, especially what is visible on the zoom of the back side. That does not look worthy of an 8. Seems more like a 5, let alone a 7.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/256433660043?itmmeta=01HRFP1D2BBJH6YQ10P58086HW&hash=item3bb4a3208b:g:PncAAOSwcHJly2tN
Now, here is the PSA cert site for this card as well as the one before it. PSA does not have good lighting when they scan items and it is difficult to see details due to the scan quality level, but the 7 in the cert before it sure looks like it has better corners and edges and surface on the back compared to the "8"
https://www.psacard.com/cert/70613005
https://www.psacard.com/cert/70613004