Better 1977 OPC could not be produced if we ran the original line and process today. None of these getting a PSA 10 is a joke. Compare any of these to the previously discussed PSA 10s of the 1979 Eck or 1981 Gibson and these are visibly superior 100% of the time. If PSA doesn’t get this fixed, it risks devaluing their brand and undoing the standard of the hobby. PSA needs to do better. Consistency is everything for an ‘unbiased’ third party service.
These are beautiful cards. I do not think these are accurately graded. PSA has swung too far to the "strict" side of the pendulum. I am not sure if it is pop control or the desire for resubs, but those should be in 10 holders.
there is no such thing as a "perfect" card, and the PSA 10 guidelines do not require "perfect" to assign the grade.
Simply amazing cards and the fact that none of those graded a 10. I know we can't see the surface but jeez. I'm guessing maybe touches of ink or very slight snow on the surfaces? I mean on almost all of those corners, you can throw at someone and cut them with it.
Maybe a new vintage grader not familiar with OPC? I just looked at the backs of some of the Ryan Record Breakers and they look perfect. I cant see anything wrong with the centering, corners or edges.
@jordangretzkyfan said:
Better 1977 OPC could not be produced if we ran the original line and process today. None of these getting a PSA 10 is a joke. Compare any of these to the previously discussed PSA 10s of the 1979 Eck or 1981 Gibson and these are visibly superior 100% of the time. If PSA doesn’t get this fixed, it risks devaluing their brand and undoing the standard of the hobby. PSA needs to do better. Consistency is everything for an ‘unbiased’ third party service.
and the cards are OPC...by far those are the nicest 1977 OPC baseball cards on the planet #1 UNO!!! here is the psychology behind the 10 grade take let's say 10 1985 Topps PSA 10 clemens rookies...crack all them out and send them all back in "Together" and might be lucky to get back 2 10's...this is the reality of vintage grading it would seem...take HUGE PRIDE in owning those OPC cards for sure...
I haven't collected vintage in 3 years or 4 years, ever since PSA changed and tightened their grading standards.
I realize during the collecting boom they could not keep up with demand so they started using AI within the process and it has ruined the hobby for me. IMHO they need to scrap whatever AI they are using, hire more graders, and go back to the old standards.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
All these grades do is confirm that PSA needs some serious competition on their grading service or they're going to lose all respect and their reputation as fair graders.
What some of you are considering a bug, an issue with PSA grading, ownership would consider a feature. The OP would have already paid a premium to sub these on a quick turn, and will now send back in the best ones. A few will bump, will get hit with huge surcharges. The remaining will be subbed over and over until they bump, by OP or next owner.
And PSA will realize 100-200 per card lifetime value on this group. Amazing considering you used to be able to sub for 6 bucks.
And nothing will ever change, why would it? Protecting pops keeps the gambling nature of card grading firmly intact. Which is the way most new collectors want it - high risk, high reward.
Don’t like it, don’t grade. But we are never going back to equitable grading, there is too much money to be printed. This sub is exactly how the model works.
I had them reviewed before they left the building. 4 upgrades.
While I have not seen all 16 of the 1977 OPC Reggie Jackson PSA 9's, my guess there's not a better 1 out there.
Same can be said on the 21 PSA 9 Ryan cards. I know several of the PSA 9 Ryans are miscut on back, my card
is not.
@80sOPC said:
What some of you are considering a bug, an issue with PSA grading, ownership would consider a feature. The OP would have already paid a premium to sub these on a quick turn, and will now send back in the best ones. A few will bump, will get hit with huge surcharges. The remaining will be subbed over and over until they bump, by OP or next owner.
And PSA will realize 100-200 per card lifetime value on this group. Amazing considering you used to be able to sub for 6 bucks.
And nothing will ever change, why would it? Protecting pops keeps the gambling nature of card grading firmly intact. Which is the way most new collectors want it - high risk, high reward.
Don’t like it, don’t grade. But we are never going back to equitable grading, there is too much money to be printed. This sub is exactly how the model works.
Man, that's a completely cynical way of thinking about their business practice.
And also probably 100% correct. Unfortunately and sadly.
@RufussCkingston said:
Curious how you got them reviewed before they "left the building"...
Same here.
Happy to hear of the bumps though. Hope they didn’t hammer you with up charges, since you’re paying unnecessary (I presume) grading fees a second time.
@RufussCkingston said:
Curious how you got them reviewed before they "left the building"...
Same here.
Happy to hear of the bumps though. Hope they didn’t hammer you with up charges, since you’re paying unnecessary (I presume) grading fees a second time.
I would assume it was at a local show that PSA was at.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
@80sOPC said:
What some of you are considering a bug, an issue with PSA grading, ownership would consider a feature. The OP would have already paid a premium to sub these on a quick turn, and will now send back in the best ones. A few will bump, will get hit with huge surcharges. The remaining will be subbed over and over until they bump, by OP or next owner.
And PSA will realize 100-200 per card lifetime value on this group. Amazing considering you used to be able to sub for 6 bucks.
And nothing will ever change, why would it? Protecting pops keeps the gambling nature of card grading firmly intact. Which is the way most new collectors want it - high risk, high reward.
Don’t like it, don’t grade. But we are never going back to equitable grading, there is too much money to be printed. This sub is exactly how the model works.
You made some good points, the 6 buck subs, etc. but IMHO your assumption that the well will never dry up is wrong.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
The cool thing about hitting a PSA 10 Pop 1 is your surcharge will only be the PSA 9 value. With OPC, there may only be a PSA 8 comp out there. Congrats on the bumps! Wishing the best on the Ryan's!
Simply not right. You should have been given at least one 10 out of those.
There were others that got 9's as well. Exactly why I may send back in. Honestly, I doubt there is a nicer Ryan out there.
Yount is known not just for centering but surface snow. Munson is a PITA to find 60/40. I owned the #1 Finest 1977 OPC set in the Registry with well over 100 PSA 10'S. These cards here are nicer than many of the 10's I had
They need to make it right by you. I hope they are reading.
So overall from a scale of 1to10 how happy were you with the grades overall with this sub? Before and after the complaint/bumps.
I am still mainly on the sidelines. My last opc sub of 1980s stuff Ithought were 10s got 6-8s. And These cards were cherry picked from unopened material. Just the rough cut seemed to put it in a 8 case. I just hope the new Grader/AI notes can tell us more.
@handyman said:
So overall from a scale of 1to10 how happy were you with the grades overall with this sub? Before and after the complaint/bumps.
I am still mainly on the sidelines. My last opc sub of 1980s stuff Ithought were 10s got 6-8s. And These cards were cherry picked from unopened material. Just the rough cut seemed to put it in a 8 case. I just hope the new Grader/AI notes can tell us more.
it's almost as if you need to "sprinkle-in" the cherry picked ones with some normal 8-9 cards...i.e. I think is what is happening is that most of the customers can now grade just as well as a grading employee and therefore, frustrates them when it seems so robotic in nature and mind numbing to see the work already done for them when customers send their best cards all lumped together...other thoughts appreciated...
@BBBrkrr said:
So, the takeaway here is that PSA is purposely undergrading so that current/future owners will send in for regrading?!?
Not a sole purpose but a proven repeatable assured revenue stream. It's a business first , foremost and exclusively thus profit over all else
This would apply if they had been struggling, but the reality was that business was booming.
Changing the grading standards that had applied for over 20 years wasn't needed, they just needed to hire more experienced graders.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
I think they did hire experienced graders. Another problem might be they were born in the 90s or early 2000s. They might not have even opened a pack of cards with a piece of gum in it before. Or it’s just all
Ai now which can not even chew it if offered. But can ding a bottom corner! We will probably never know the answer.
@BBBrkrr said:
So, the takeaway here is that PSA is purposely undergrading so that current/future owners will send in for regrading?!?
Not a sole purpose but a proven repeatable assured revenue stream. It's a business first , foremost and exclusively thus profit over all else
This would apply if they had been struggling, but the reality was that business was booming.
Changing the grading standards that had applied for over 20 years wasn't needed, they just needed to hire more experienced graders.
I agree that you never cut off a profitable revenue stream.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
@BBBrkrr said:
So, the takeaway here is that PSA is purposely undergrading so that current/future owners will send in for regrading?!?
Not a sole purpose but a proven repeatable assured revenue stream. It's a business first , foremost and exclusively thus profit over all else
This would apply if they had been struggling, but the reality was that business was booming.
Changing the grading standards that had applied for over 20 years wasn't needed, they just needed to hire more experienced graders.
I agree that you never cut off a profitable revenue stream.
I guess I am confused about the profitable revenue stream comments. I could see the change if they had been hurting for business or anticipated an upcoming decline but that wasn't the case, PSA was booming.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
Tom,
These cards are amazing. If you want to sell your duplicates or under cards, please keep me in mind. How did you get them to review the cards before you got them back? I send in 300 cards every two months and I sometimes question why a couple cards did not get higher. Great results though.
Looking for high grade rookie cards and unopened boxes/cases
@handyman said:
I think they did hire experienced graders. Another problem might be they were born in the 90s or early 2000s. They might not have even opened a pack of cards with a piece of gum in it before. Or it’s just all
Ai now which can not even chew it if offered. But can ding a bottom corner! We will probably never know the answer.
Experienced graders? No, they hired regular people and trained them the way they wanted to.
Seems obvious to me they want out of the vintage market and only grade modern.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@BBBrkrr said:
So, the takeaway here is that PSA is purposely undergrading so that current/future owners will send in for regrading?!?
Not a sole purpose but a proven repeatable assured revenue stream. It's a business first , foremost and exclusively thus profit over all else
Absolutely!
Usually, when you point out that a business has made an error, they fix it at no additional cost.
PSA costs sellers money when they undergrade and then continues to profit from reviews. Submitters that understand grading are virtually forced to resubmit cards or lose money.
It's good to be king.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@BBBrkrr said:
So, the takeaway here is that PSA is purposely undergrading so that current/future owners will send in for regrading?!?
Not a sole purpose but a proven repeatable assured revenue stream. It's a business first , foremost and exclusively thus profit over all else
Absolutely!
Usually, when you point out that a business has made an error, they fix it at no additional cost.
PSA costs sellers money when they undergrade and then continues to profit from reviews. Submitters that understand grading are virtually forced to resubmit cards or lose money.
It's good to be king.
I don't think that is a viable long-term strategy. It may work for a few more years, but, eventually, if your costumers repeatedly feel they're being taken advantage of, they will lose those customers.
The population reports should be irrelevant to PSA. They should only reflect reality. Consistently accurate grading, authentication and, to a lesser extent, attractive, secure holders is what PSA is selling. If they can't do that, customers will find someone who does or decide to stop grading altogether.
I hope PSA reads these pages because as far as I know, flux capacitors and quantum tunnels don't exist yet. Consequently, the likelihood that a 2030 PSA employee, assuming there any, will come back to 2024 to warn them, is remote.
Exactly the reason I have almost stopped sending in anything to grade. Once I'm done with the ones I have stacked on the side then I'm done. I also no longer buy to crack/regrade either.
Honestly, since I just do the vintage I don't think they really care for my business anyway. Their standards are all geared to make the modern collector happy and, based on their numbers, that seems to be working perfectly. I'm just no longer interested in being treated like mine don't matter.
You dont have to stop sending in cards. There are other good grading companies that will give the right grade. I just send in tickets now. Its a lot less stress.
@BBBrkrr said:
So, the takeaway here is that PSA is purposely undergrading so that current/future owners will send in for regrading?!?
Not a sole purpose but a proven repeatable assured revenue stream. It's a business first , foremost and exclusively thus profit over all else
Absolutely!
Usually, when you point out that a business has made an error, they fix it at no additional cost.
PSA costs sellers money when they undergrade and then continues to profit from reviews. Submitters that understand grading are virtually forced to resubmit cards or lose money.
It's good to be king.
I don't think that is a viable long-term strategy. It may work for a few more years, but, eventually, if your costumers repeatedly feel they're being taken advantage of, they will lose those customers.
The population reports should be irrelevant to PSA. They should only reflect reality. Consistently accurate grading, authentication and, to a lesser extent, attractive, secure holders is what PSA is selling. If they can't do that, customers will find someone who does or decide to stop grading altogether.
I hope PSA reads these pages because as far as I know, flux capacitors and quantum tunnels don't exist yet. Consequently, the likelihood that a 2030 PSA employee, assuming there any, will come back to 2024 to warn them, is remote.
Have you been in sales lately?
NO ONE has a "long term strategy" anymore, it's a thing of the past.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@handyman said:
So overall from a scale of 1to10 how happy were you with the grades overall with this sub? Before and after the complaint/bumps.
I am still mainly on the sidelines. My last opc sub of 1980s stuff Ithought were 10s got 6-8s. And These cards were cherry picked from unopened material. Just the rough cut seemed to put it in a 8 case. I just hope the new Grader/AI notes can tell us more.
it's almost as if you need to "sprinkle-in" the cherry picked ones with some normal 8-9 cards...i.e. I think is what is happening is that most of the customers can now grade just as well as a grading employee and therefore, frustrates them when it seems so robotic in nature and mind numbing to see the work already done for them when customers send their best cards all lumped together...other thoughts appreciated...
I defintely send in off center cards hoping for a PSA 9. Also, I send in cards with a dinged corner hoping for the same.
Comments
they want you you to review them. all about the coin.
Your Fisk is better than my 9. Beautiful cards which we already knew.
While the Yount has a slight tilt - I think Brad31's is slightly nicer - I don't know what would now qualify as a 10.
Almost all seem to meet the stated criteria. No obvious print marks, no focus issues, sharp corners and virtually perfect centering.
🤦♂️
Better 1977 OPC could not be produced if we ran the original line and process today. None of these getting a PSA 10 is a joke. Compare any of these to the previously discussed PSA 10s of the 1979 Eck or 1981 Gibson and these are visibly superior 100% of the time. If PSA doesn’t get this fixed, it risks devaluing their brand and undoing the standard of the hobby. PSA needs to do better. Consistency is everything for an ‘unbiased’ third party service.
The Yount is slightly tilted in the holder. The card itself is not tilted
These are beautiful cards. I do not think these are accurately graded. PSA has swung too far to the "strict" side of the pendulum. I am not sure if it is pop control or the desire for resubs, but those should be in 10 holders.
there is no such thing as a "perfect" card, and the PSA 10 guidelines do not require "perfect" to assign the grade.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Simply amazing cards and the fact that none of those graded a 10. I know we can't see the surface but jeez. I'm guessing maybe touches of ink or very slight snow on the surfaces? I mean on almost all of those corners, you can throw at someone and cut them with it.
Maybe a new vintage grader not familiar with OPC? I just looked at the backs of some of the Ryan Record Breakers and they look perfect. I cant see anything wrong with the centering, corners or edges.
Definitely need review upgrades
and the cards are OPC...by far those are the nicest 1977 OPC baseball cards on the planet #1 UNO!!! here is the psychology behind the 10 grade take let's say 10 1985 Topps PSA 10 clemens rookies...crack all them out and send them all back in "Together" and might be lucky to get back 2 10's...this is the reality of vintage grading it would seem...take HUGE PRIDE in owning those OPC cards for sure...
I refuse to take a shower until every one of those 9s gets bumped to a 10.
Gobble.
I haven't collected vintage in 3 years or 4 years, ever since PSA changed and tightened their grading standards.
I realize during the collecting boom they could not keep up with demand so they started using AI within the process and it has ruined the hobby for me. IMHO they need to scrap whatever AI they are using, hire more graders, and go back to the old standards.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
All these grades do is confirm that PSA needs some serious competition on their grading service or they're going to lose all respect and their reputation as fair graders.
What some of you are considering a bug, an issue with PSA grading, ownership would consider a feature. The OP would have already paid a premium to sub these on a quick turn, and will now send back in the best ones. A few will bump, will get hit with huge surcharges. The remaining will be subbed over and over until they bump, by OP or next owner.
And PSA will realize 100-200 per card lifetime value on this group. Amazing considering you used to be able to sub for 6 bucks.
And nothing will ever change, why would it? Protecting pops keeps the gambling nature of card grading firmly intact. Which is the way most new collectors want it - high risk, high reward.
Don’t like it, don’t grade. But we are never going back to equitable grading, there is too much money to be printed. This sub is exactly how the model works.
I had them reviewed before they left the building. 4 upgrades.
While I have not seen all 16 of the 1977 OPC Reggie Jackson PSA 9's, my guess there's not a better 1 out there.
Same can be said on the 21 PSA 9 Ryan cards. I know several of the PSA 9 Ryans are miscut on back, my card
is not.
Holy smokes the Munson. Congrats Tom!!!
Wait a second on that Munson! It's definitely off-center and should have gotten a 7.
(just kidding)
That is a beautiful a card as anyone has anywhere. Awesome.
Man, that's a completely cynical way of thinking about their business practice.
And also probably 100% correct. Unfortunately and sadly.
Ok, a few good pricey bumps. I shall have a sponge bath.
Gobble.
Not cynical at all, it was playing out while I posted. Before even returning the cards PSA realized more margin on the deal.
Congrats on the bumps. Well deserved.
Here are a couple of Reggies I seen online. Boy have times changed
Curious how you got them reviewed before they "left the building"...
That's a great business plan if you can get it!
Same here.
Happy to hear of the bumps though. Hope they didn’t hammer you with up charges, since you’re paying unnecessary (I presume) grading fees a second time.
HOF SIGNED FOOTBALL RCS
I would assume it was at a local show that PSA was at.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
You made some good points, the 6 buck subs, etc. but IMHO your assumption that the well will never dry up is wrong.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
The cool thing about hitting a PSA 10 Pop 1 is your surcharge will only be the PSA 9 value. With OPC, there may only be a PSA 8 comp out there. Congrats on the bumps! Wishing the best on the Ryan's!
They need to make it right by you. I hope they are reading.
I'll add to the sentiment. These are incredibly beautiful, not just for OPC, but in general. Most of these should be 10s.
So overall from a scale of 1to10 how happy were you with the grades overall with this sub? Before and after the complaint/bumps.
I am still mainly on the sidelines. My last opc sub of 1980s stuff Ithought were 10s got 6-8s. And These cards were cherry picked from unopened material. Just the rough cut seemed to put it in a 8 case. I just hope the new Grader/AI notes can tell us more.
So, the takeaway here is that PSA is purposely undergrading so that current/future owners will send in for regrading?!?
Not a sole purpose but a proven repeatable assured revenue stream. It's a business first , foremost and exclusively thus profit over all else
it's almost as if you need to "sprinkle-in" the cherry picked ones with some normal 8-9 cards...i.e. I think is what is happening is that most of the customers can now grade just as well as a grading employee and therefore, frustrates them when it seems so robotic in nature and mind numbing to see the work already done for them when customers send their best cards all lumped together...other thoughts appreciated...
If true I would hope they can get past that now that they charge roughly 20.00 a common now.
This would apply if they had been struggling, but the reality was that business was booming.
Changing the grading standards that had applied for over 20 years wasn't needed, they just needed to hire more experienced graders.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
I think they did hire experienced graders. Another problem might be they were born in the 90s or early 2000s. They might not have even opened a pack of cards with a piece of gum in it before. Or it’s just all
Ai now which can not even chew it if offered. But can ding a bottom corner! We will probably never know the answer.
I agree that you never cut off a profitable revenue stream.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
I guess I am confused about the profitable revenue stream comments. I could see the change if they had been hurting for business or anticipated an upcoming decline but that wasn't the case, PSA was booming.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
Tom,
These cards are amazing. If you want to sell your duplicates or under cards, please keep me in mind. How did you get them to review the cards before you got them back? I send in 300 cards every two months and I sometimes question why a couple cards did not get higher. Great results though.
Experienced graders? No, they hired regular people and trained them the way they wanted to.
Seems obvious to me they want out of the vintage market and only grade modern.
Absolutely!
Usually, when you point out that a business has made an error, they fix it at no additional cost.
PSA costs sellers money when they undergrade and then continues to profit from reviews. Submitters that understand grading are virtually forced to resubmit cards or lose money.
It's good to be king.
EXCELLENT POINT JOE.
I don't think that is a viable long-term strategy. It may work for a few more years, but, eventually, if your costumers repeatedly feel they're being taken advantage of, they will lose those customers.
The population reports should be irrelevant to PSA. They should only reflect reality. Consistently accurate grading, authentication and, to a lesser extent, attractive, secure holders is what PSA is selling. If they can't do that, customers will find someone who does or decide to stop grading altogether.
I hope PSA reads these pages because as far as I know, flux capacitors and quantum tunnels don't exist yet. Consequently, the likelihood that a 2030 PSA employee, assuming there any, will come back to 2024 to warn them, is remote.
^^^
Exactly the reason I have almost stopped sending in anything to grade. Once I'm done with the ones I have stacked on the side then I'm done. I also no longer buy to crack/regrade either.
Honestly, since I just do the vintage I don't think they really care for my business anyway. Their standards are all geared to make the modern collector happy and, based on their numbers, that seems to be working perfectly. I'm just no longer interested in being treated like mine don't matter.
You dont have to stop sending in cards. There are other good grading companies that will give the right grade. I just send in tickets now. Its a lot less stress.
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
Long before professional 3rd party grading stole our brains, there was just cards. And a litany of opinions. Viva la shoebox.
Gobble.
Have you been in sales lately?
NO ONE has a "long term strategy" anymore, it's a thing of the past.
Maybe the long-term strategy is to not have a long-term strategy.
if those were 2024 Topps cards you'd have dimes coming out of your ears on the first rodeo
but because they're 77 OPC, prepare to get fleeced, emasculated and disemboweled
and if you're still alive after all that, perhaps you'll be able to enjoy a few of them in their proper homes
vintage cards being graded based on their own merit has all but disappeared from our rearview mirrors and it's disgusting
it's a full-fledged game now and you better be ready to play
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
I defintely send in off center cards hoping for a PSA 9. Also, I send in cards with a dinged corner hoping for the same.