What is your take on this PSA experience?
1420sports
Posts: 3,473 ✭✭✭
I purchased a 1921 American Caramel Walter Johnson on Saturday 12/7/02 at the Ft. Washington show. This purchase was based entirely on the statement made by a PSA grader that, after reviewing the card, it would grade a PSA 5 or 6, maybe a PSA 4 due to one corner. He said others would have to look, but that it would definitely grade. This was after viewing the card with a loupe, and under some type of light, and OH YES - MEASURING THE CARD!
I then submitted the card for the $33.00 based on the two-day grading fee and the return s/h.
The card was graded as trimmed, and I would not have bought the card had Brian told me that it was trimmed. Or that he could not tell if the card was trimmed at the show, or that he would have to see when he gets back to PSA. Based on the attributes of the raw card, I agreed to consider purchase because it appeared to be a PSA 5 or 6. When the PSA grader confirmed my opinion, I decided to have it graded and purchase the card. Anything short of a definite yes to the "will the card grade?" question and I would not have purchased the card.
I talked to PSA about this, and they said that Byron is a modern grader (was I suppose to know this?) and that he should not have said that the card would grade. I was also told that he denies saying the card would grade.
I do not expect PSA to compensate me for the card purchase, even though I feel that if it was not for "expert opinion", I would not have bought a raw card -- I would have spent my hard earned money on a PSA card. The dealer said I can get a refund - he remembers my concerns over the card as I am not familiar at all with 21 American Caramels.
I do not have a gripe with the grading process. If I submitted this card w/o asking first, I would not have a gripe about the grade. But I did ask and left feeling great about adding a 1921 Walter Johnson PSA 4 (at least) to my HOF registry by the end of the week!
I have made only two or three raw card purchases (over 5 bucks) and those were at shows where PSA was - they have some great people who looked at the cards and told me yay or nay.
I will let you know what PSA does.
I then submitted the card for the $33.00 based on the two-day grading fee and the return s/h.
The card was graded as trimmed, and I would not have bought the card had Brian told me that it was trimmed. Or that he could not tell if the card was trimmed at the show, or that he would have to see when he gets back to PSA. Based on the attributes of the raw card, I agreed to consider purchase because it appeared to be a PSA 5 or 6. When the PSA grader confirmed my opinion, I decided to have it graded and purchase the card. Anything short of a definite yes to the "will the card grade?" question and I would not have purchased the card.
I talked to PSA about this, and they said that Byron is a modern grader (was I suppose to know this?) and that he should not have said that the card would grade. I was also told that he denies saying the card would grade.
I do not expect PSA to compensate me for the card purchase, even though I feel that if it was not for "expert opinion", I would not have bought a raw card -- I would have spent my hard earned money on a PSA card. The dealer said I can get a refund - he remembers my concerns over the card as I am not familiar at all with 21 American Caramels.
I do not have a gripe with the grading process. If I submitted this card w/o asking first, I would not have a gripe about the grade. But I did ask and left feeling great about adding a 1921 Walter Johnson PSA 4 (at least) to my HOF registry by the end of the week!
I have made only two or three raw card purchases (over 5 bucks) and those were at shows where PSA was - they have some great people who looked at the cards and told me yay or nay.
I will let you know what PSA does.
collecting various PSA and SGC cards
0
Comments
My thoughts are that everyone makes mistakes.
In my mind, it is like this...
PSA grades about a BaZillion cards a day
and 50 BaZillion cards a month, and yet we only
manage to find about 3 or 4 real "errors" out of
these many many cards to complain about
(and even then, they are very Quick to correct them
and will likely do the same in this case.)
So that means I am very happy with PSA and will
continue to love working with them and support them.
Period.
~jeff
I'd never take a grader's opinion upon a first examination. I like PSA's policy of having several graders examine a card.
The "expert opinon" you received, unfortunately, was from just one grader. The "expert opinion" that PSA offers, and we PAY for, is that of several graders when a card is submitted.
Mark
This is not an average grading mistake. This was a purchase made because of a PSA grader. If PSA was not at the show, I would not have even looked at it. The only raw cards I have purchased are the 5 bucks or less cards -- mostly because there aren't any graded examples yet.
I was told that THE CARD WILL GRADE. Forget what the grade I told was, it was going to slabbed. If it was a PSA 3 - fine. Once again, I do not have a problem with the grading process. I accept the grades I get.
Except this one.
Mark
Well in that case, PSA should send more than one grader. Are you telling me that it takes more than one grader to measure a card? Specs are specs aren't they? Do they phsically change on an airplane back to Newport Beach?
That is the chance you take when you ask a PSA representative to look at the card without submitting an official submission. The wrong guy looked at it. When a card is submitted to PSA through their channels (ie. paid for), they make sure you get the best customer service by putting the people THEY think are best to grade your card.
By doing it off the cuff like you did with a pre screen (which is a service they don't offer, this grader was just trying to give you some service to get you to submit the card), you run the chance of not getting the quality of service that you'd get if you had submitted the card straight out.
It sucks. The guy should not have said it would definitely grade, even after measuring it. But you have no recourse because you did not pay for this service and it's not a service they offer (the pre-screening). He was just being customer friendly.
Mark
<< <i>Well in that case, PSA should send more than one grader. >>
But they weren't grading on site at Ft Washington!
It's tough to have your cake & eat it too - I understand your disappointment that the initial opinion didn't match the final result, but ultimately there's a reason the advise is free...it's not the service PSA is gauranteeing.
<< <i>
But they weren't grading on site at Ft Washington!
It's tough to have your cake & eat it too - I understand your disappointment that the initial opinion didn't match the final result, but ultimately there's a reason the advise is free...it's not the service PSA is gauranteeing. >>
Exactly. This was the point I was trying to get across.
Mark
PSA, when they attend shows and *DO NOT* offer on-site grading, they will absolutely, positively not offer any opinions on raw cards. From a purely legal perspective -- the grader should not have made any such assertions, but, then again, PSA was not offering on-site grading.
I think this is a problem -- people want free advice, and, in the absence of on-site grading as an option, PSA may feel obligated to offer an opinion on the card.
Neal -- have you contacted the seller to see if you could return the card? I think that that may be an avenue to pursue. I am sure that PSA may offer you a free grading for this anomaly (independent of assigning any "fault" or "blame" in the situation). From PSA's perspective -- in the future, if they do not offer on-site grading, perhaps they should ensure that their representatives do not make any assertions that they are not qualified to make.
If the grader told you that he thought that the card would grade, but someone else would have to look at it, and then the card didn't grade, you'd have nothing.
If he told you that he thought that the card would grade, and then it didn't grade, you'd have a right to be bothered.
It sounds like you encountered the first problem, and ordinarily I'd say you were stuck, because he told you that what he said was subject to someone else's opinion.
But you are also contending that the grader says that he never said that he thought that the card would grade, regardless of whether you'd be stuck or not. If you are right, and he is lying, that's is *very* bad.
To make sure we have this straight, your story is:
1) He told you that the card would grade, or that he thought the card would grade.
2) Now he claims that he said no such thing.
Since you are probably talking to someone who is talking to the grader, it is possible that there is a communication problem regarding this second point. It is hard to know exactly what the PSA person asked him, and it's hard to know exactly what he said to the PSA person. The PSA person may have confronted him with a nastier case, and he may have denied that, and the PSA person thinks the nastier case is equal to your case, so he says you are wrong.
I'm sorry if that's confusing, but if you can understand what I said, perhaps you'll see that you could be right but PSA might not be evil.
If this happened the way you said it did, and the grader flat out denied that he told me anything, I would be a very angry person. If that's true, then that grader should not be working at PSA, because he won't confess to something because he doesn't want to get in trouble. I don't want people handling my cards if they are going to screw up and then deny that they screwed up.
If you can get your money back, the harm done is minimal, but this still might be worth investigating.
bruce
Website: http://www.brucemo.com
Email: brucemo@seanet.com
Bruce - I agree. One big thing is the fact that the grader denied saying it. If I was told that "yes, he did say the card would grade but he is not familiar with vintage issues so he should not have said that" is one thing - mistakes happen. When I called PSA and told them what happened, they looked into it. When Charlie said that both he and Joe feel the grader is telling the truth and did not give any opinion (if saying a card WILL DEFINITELY BE SLABBED is an opnion) - I was mad. I felt like that all of sudden, I was being viewed as a liar or some guy who was pissed off that his card was graded as trimmed.
I do not view PSA as evil. I like PSA and the people I have met who work there. This whole thing shpuld have been handled a lot better on their end.
To make sure we have this straight, your story is:
1) He told you that the card would grade, or that he thought the card would grade.
2) Now he claims that he said no such thing.
sort of ....
1) He told me the card would grade, just was not sure if it was a PSA 4, 5 or 6
2)Correct. He denies saying that - according to Charlie
While all of us have 9's in 8 holders, 8's in 7 holders, and a few 7's in 8 holders, I'm not sure it isn't still the best of all situations. Hang in there buddy!
EJ
Used to working on HOF SS Baseballs--Now just '67 Sox Stickers and anything Boston related.
If you're not empowered to take a position -- DON"T...If you're not doing on-site grading -- DON'T...If you don't do pre-screens -- DON'T. It just isn't worth the flack that flies in cases like this.
The silver lining is that the dealer is making good on the transaction -- that is good news indeed.
Scott
I would not resubmit this card even if the dealer was not going to give me a refund. I would never want to buy a trimmed card that was slabbed. After all, they are experts. Unbeknownst to me, modern grader was at the show and giving opinion. Specs do not change.
Plus, this card has probably been flagged anyway
Neal... I feel the pain with you.
You say that you are still waiting for another responce from PSA?
Lets hear what they have to say...
Larry.
email....emards4457@msn.com
CHEERS!!
Used to working on HOF SS Baseballs--Now just '67 Sox Stickers and anything Boston related.
Also, they should render no opinion at all if not prepared to back it up. The fact that the advice was free is essentially irrelevant, and any "you get what you pay for" response would make me even madder. Given the care you took in the transaction, I'm certain you would have doled out the few bucks for pre-screening fees on this card had that been the issue. If they are not prescreening because their rep is not qualified, then decline examination and GIVE NO OPINION.
In the world of pre-war vintage, a psa or sgc grade is not nearly as important as it is for you folks on the registry. It is impossible, in my view literally, to complete a set from that era in PSA 9, unless the set size is extremely low like '33 Delong and some pristine hoard is found. The same can likely be said for 8s as well, and even a set in 7 would take years and enormous resources to complete (price guides be damned). Thus, the stories about being burned on 8s that should be 9s and purchased 10s that are really 9s have little place in what occurred here, where the opinion sought is on authenticity and alteration! As a vintage type collector, I'm completely in tune with 1420sports is saying. I look for the unusual and am likely going to be unfamiliar with many issues, so a so-called expert's opinion on authenticity and non-alteration is important. I wouldn't care much if at all that PSA graded the card 4, 5 or 6-- I would simply want assurance that it's real and not trimmed, bleached, etc. If the PSA rep is unqualified to tell me that, fine, tell me you're unqualified, tell me you would need to examine the card with equipment not available to you at the time or that you would need to confer with others. But don't tell me the card will grade if you are not willing to stand behind that. Period.
Regards..................Todd
ebay id: nolemmings
I would have shook his hand and returned the card to the dealer I bought it from. And then bought another PSA card.
I am anxious to see what happens ... I am confident PSA will make this experience better.
I spoke to Neil on the phone and I felt our conversation went very well. I actually think it was pleasant, Neil is a good customer. Here's the one issue that we can't seem to agree on. PSA does NOT pre-grade cards. We do not offer this type of service. The purpose of sending anyone with grading experience to a show is to merely help collectors understand the basic concept of grading - that's all. To hold PSA responsible for raw card purchases is utterly ridiculous. PSA is a company that gets paid to render opnions on cards, autographs, etc.
In this case:
1) PSA was not paid to perform a service
and
2) PSA does not offer a pre-grade or pre-authentication service
3) Our rep at the show denies ever claiming that the card would indeed grade
I don't know what else to say. Neil is a very nice guy and I feel badly that someone sold him a trimmed card (it happened to me years ago too) but the bad guy here is the person who sold him the card, not PSA. PSA has nothig to do with this matter.
Sincerely,
Joe Orlando
PSA President
CEO, Collectors Universe, Inc.
1420 sports,
I agree with bruce that this is a troubling situation and I hope that some positive comes out of this with PSA.We do need to remember that "to err is human" and that if this grader is going to deny that he told you that the card was gradeable,sooner or later his inconsistencies will catch up with him.I would,however like to commend the dealer that offered you a refund on a questionable card.I once had a 57 mantle that I sent in that came back trimmed and then was resubmitted by someone else that came back a PSA 8.Speaking from experience,it is really reassuring to know that your seller as well as mine stood behind their cards and made the deal RIGHT.Who was the seller as he should probably get some positive exposure out of this?Chalk this one up as a deal that worked out okay,although not as gratifying as you would have liked.
Vic
The "bad guy" made good on the transaction, so in my book gets an A+.
Scott
What a pitiful public relations response.
ebay id: nolemmings
wayne
Second, no one is saying that PSA should ever be stuck with a particular grade number that may have been uttered by their rep, when closer examination on submission might reveal additional flaws that would lead to a lesser grade. Again, here we have a question of non-alteration. Every one of their graders ought to be able to spot trimming and authenticity, or say they can't, or say nothing at all.
Third, I disagree that the "free" aspect makes a difference. If you have no duty to speak or act, then you cannot be found liable for failing to speak or act. But if you have no duty to speak or act yet you speak/act anyway, the law in some instances will hold you liable if your opinion/conduct is wrong and damaging. Although this is not a perfect example, I am an attorney, and can tell you that, if you call me for legal advice and I give it, I could easily very well be liable if my advice is wrong and is different from that given by the majority of my profession, regardless if I asked for or recieved a nickel from you. People who hold themselves out as having specialized knowledge have to be careful how and when they dispense it.
ebay id: nolemmings
I thought one of the first and foremost "basic concepts" of grading is if the card is authentic. When the grader confirmed it was, I bought the card. My definition of pre grade is what the card would grade at - a PSA 8, a GAI 6, etc etc. I do not feel that it has anything to do with determining authenticity - which Byron did indeed tell me. Of course he is going to deny saying that Joe ... c'mon now.
To hold PSA responsible for raw card purchases is utterly ridiculous
I hold PSA responsible for this situation. Byron is a grader who measured the card and confirmed authenticity. As long as it was a gradeable card, that was all I cared about.
Basic concepts of grading ..... that is a good one. How bout sending someone there to confirm authenticity in the future. After all, that was what happened to me.
Except send some modern card grader with freedom of opinion to a show and give expert advice on authenticity and then deny having ever said that.
Should I assume this is the response you and PSA promised to deliver on Wednesday? I thought our talk went well too Joe, but your response says otherwise.
In any event, I think that service was fantastic. Also, for what it's worth, I know 1420 to be a stand-up, reputable collector.
I can not recall a time that I've been at a show where I did not show some cards to someone at PSA for a quick opinion. And let me tell, at a few shows that line waiting to speak to one of their reps can be pretty long.
I should start off by saying that I know very little about the card and the 1921 American Caramel set. However, you keep mentioning how the “grader” measured the card and that it was within specification. I think it should be noted: Because a card is within specifications does NOT mean that the card has NOT been trimmed.
Here is an example…crude…but an example nonetheless.
A set that I do know about is the 1974 Topps Baseball set. I have looked at more than 10,000 of these cards over the past two years. Anyone who knows a lot about these cards will tell you that the #550 Sam McDowell card is cut slightly larger then the rest of the cards in the set. If I had two bad corners on the right side of the card, I could essentially TRIM a little off, and the card would still meet the size requirements for that issue. However, the card would still be trimmed. Look at how snug the McDowell card is in its holder compared to the Jorgensen. I even had a PSA 8 card that was too big for the holder so Mylar was use and the inner brackets (if that’s what they are called) were removed from the holder.
As for your verbal conversation with the “grader”, this is a case of He said…He said. I wasn’t there so I have no opinion on that debate.
I wish you well in your quest for cards!!! This was an unfortunate bump in the road but hopefully everything will turn out ok.
Good Luck!!!
Kindest Regards,
Carlos
It seems that getting an "OPINION" from a PSA rep at a major show is a generally popular and useful "FREE" service.
Don't we risk ending this "FREE" "OPINION" service for everyone by going on and on and on about ONE mistake ?
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
Why not crack it out and resubmit it? There have been numerous stories where rejected cards were resubmitted and accepted. I think this is particularly the case with early 20th century cards where the cutting technology was poor in that era and more challenging to distinguish from expert alterations. Some graders are more cautious than others and may tend to overreject rather than risk holdering a card that turns out to be altered.
All in all, I still hope PSA keeps this service. Authentication is part of what PSA charges for. To expect a free authentication and for it to be guaranteed is not right. I think arguing that this free review should somehow guarantee authenticaiton but not a particular grade is bending the argument to suit the needs of your particular situation. I don't mean to sound like I have no empathy for your situation but I want to be sure we don't lose this valuable service.
If PSA is offering free opionions/pre screening (not pre-grade) I will still seek advice. I am a PSA collector and view them as the leaders. Plus, they are great people. Joe, Charlie, Lyle, Matt, BJ, even Byron (the reason this post was made in the first place
I guess the lesson learned here is do not buy raw cards unless there is on-site grading going on. Or ask if the grader is a modern grader -- kidding
After all, this was not your usual "send in a card and hope for the best" submission ...
PSA did offer a response by the way, and it was "Sorry".
To the others who did not see my side - Thanks as well.
I think this type of thing needs to be adressed though.
I consider the determinination of whether a card has been tampered with is why I am paying PSA in the first place. As I see things, there are two options:
1) PSA implement a policy/rule that they will offer no opinions without the card being submitted through normal processes
2) Offer some complimentary opinions at shows and sometimes make a few mistakes.
I think most people would prefer option 2. I would be willing to wager that they've given countless "free opinions" at shows. However, if they get publicly blasted on the boards every time they make a mistake...I don't see this option lasting long.
Don't get me wrong, I see your point...but they're human...and two graders could see things totally differently. I believe the guy at the show gave you bad information...but I doubt it was done intentionally. At this point, the most (if anything) that PSA "owes" you is one free grade.
I am glad that it worked out for you overall.
Regards,
Alan
Joe O says: I want to clarify a few things...I spoke to Neil, he's a nice guy...blah blah blah
I've also spoken to our grader...he's also a nice guy...blah blah blah
What we appear to have is an honest misunderstanding. For the record: we do not offer pre-screening, we do not offer what-ever, the way to get the real answer is to submit a card for grading....I have spoken to the grading team, and we will be much more specific about this in the future....
That being the case, we have given Neil full credit for his submission -- these things happen from time to time, blah blah blah.
CASE CLOSED! No more discussion except about the professional manner in which this situation was handled.
This sort of approach seems like a no brainer -- after all, its about 33 bucks. Did I miss something?