Options
What if qualifiers went away?
curmudgeon
Posts: 178 ✭
Let me start by saying I prefer SGC to PSA, although I own about as much of one as the other. If I take a swipe or two at PSA, please don't take it personally.
I hate qualifiers!!!! I do not believe they do anything to advance the hobby, and feel they should go away. They may have served a purpose when many cards were bought sight unseen, but no longer. I would love to see PSA abolish them, and perhaps offer a re-grading special to anyone who wants to resubmit.
Let's face it, many of you buy the holder, not the card (no value judgment, just an observation). I see so many threads about resubmitting borderline cards in hopes the "stain" will be overlooked as minor, the centering will be re-evaluated, the print defect will go unnoticed or be seen as insignificant. The card doesn't change and the defects don't go away-- it's only the holder and its dreaded qualifier that you seek to eliminate. I also see threads about submitting cards with specific requests that they be "straight-graded", which is an acknowledgment that the card will be bumped down a grade or two, all because you too hate the look of those two letters below the number on the PSA holder. You're not alone.
Why not do away with them altogether? Surely those who focus on 9s and 10s needn't worry-- a card with deficient centering, print defects, focus and stain problems would never slip through with such a high grade. If a 9oc is really the same as an 8 or 7, depending upon how bad the centering is, why not just give it the latter grade? Seems to me that everyone would be happy, and more stability would follow.
Seems like this is a timely issue, because I strongly believe that PSA will be changing its holders and/or labels in the not-so-distant future, so it should be a little easier to make other changes at the same time.
In sum, does anyone think that qualifiers should stay-- if so, why? Any thoughts appreciated................Todd
I hate qualifiers!!!! I do not believe they do anything to advance the hobby, and feel they should go away. They may have served a purpose when many cards were bought sight unseen, but no longer. I would love to see PSA abolish them, and perhaps offer a re-grading special to anyone who wants to resubmit.
Let's face it, many of you buy the holder, not the card (no value judgment, just an observation). I see so many threads about resubmitting borderline cards in hopes the "stain" will be overlooked as minor, the centering will be re-evaluated, the print defect will go unnoticed or be seen as insignificant. The card doesn't change and the defects don't go away-- it's only the holder and its dreaded qualifier that you seek to eliminate. I also see threads about submitting cards with specific requests that they be "straight-graded", which is an acknowledgment that the card will be bumped down a grade or two, all because you too hate the look of those two letters below the number on the PSA holder. You're not alone.
Why not do away with them altogether? Surely those who focus on 9s and 10s needn't worry-- a card with deficient centering, print defects, focus and stain problems would never slip through with such a high grade. If a 9oc is really the same as an 8 or 7, depending upon how bad the centering is, why not just give it the latter grade? Seems to me that everyone would be happy, and more stability would follow.
Seems like this is a timely issue, because I strongly believe that PSA will be changing its holders and/or labels in the not-so-distant future, so it should be a little easier to make other changes at the same time.
In sum, does anyone think that qualifiers should stay-- if so, why? Any thoughts appreciated................Todd
Todd Schultz (taslegal@hotmail.com)
ebay id: nolemmings
ebay id: nolemmings
0
Comments
The 1954 Wilson Franks cards look absolutely beatiful in PSA 9 o/c condition. I would take a PSA 9 o/c over a PSA 7 or 8 from the set in a heartbeat. Just me, though.
The 1955 Bowman set is also another good example. I much prefer a PSA 9 o/c card with no border chips and sharp borders to a better centered PSA 8 that has a border chip or any white showing along the border. Personal preference -- sure, but frankly there are too many cards from that set that will never PSA 9 -- so finding a 9 o/c is quite the accomplishment.
Totally agree with you on this. When a card presents as a PSA 9, but has a stain or centering issues, I would prefer the qualifier for the Wilson set. It bothers me more when I see a straight PSa 8 with horrible centering issues and it is comprable to my PSa 8oc. I think PSA needs to have the qualifiers to give the buyer an honest opinion of that grade. With SGC graded cards I can buy an 88 or an 86 and it be horribly off centered. A SGC graded card does not tell me anything about centering issues.
Leo
The nice thing about PSA is that they let the customer choose. You can request NO QUALIFIERS on your submissions. If you see a card out there that suits your tastes...it can be reholdered into a NQ slab.
Will SGC allow you to request cards with qualifiers for those who prefer them?
Regards,
Alan
Suppose you get that PSA 9oc card, and you resubmit it because it's borderline off center. It comes back PSA 8, no qualifier. Are you happier?
Same question, but you know its off center. Still, you want and request a straight grade--it comes back PSA 7.
The card hasn't changed, but doesn't it seem more uniform in your registered set? Or would you rather have the higher number? I don't necessarily have a line-in-the-sand position, and am just asking.
I just don't like the potential inconsistency and confusion in allowing both straight grades and qualifiers. Maybe if the label would indicate that the card has been straight graded, even unobtrusively on the back. As it is now, however, if I see a scan of a card that looks perfect to me but for centering and is labeled PSA 7, I don't know if it's really an 8 or 9 with sharp corners that got bumped down for centering, or a "normal" 7 with corner wear that I can't see that is borderline on centering but did not get bumped down for it. In my book, PSA should make up its mind one way or the other, or, if people really want two separate types of grading, indicate on the label or holder whether straight grading was used.
My two cents.
regards.............Todd
ebay id: nolemmings
The reason that qualifiers are used is to reward a nice card which might happen to be too off center for its grade or the grade just below it. It is my understanding that a PSA 9 OC card does not qualify for PSA 8 standards of centering, but as a PSA 7 or lower. Everything else like corners, coloring, edges, surface all meet PSA 9 standards. So instead of giving a MINT card a NearMint or lower grade, they choose to give the qualifiers. In that sense it's good.
On the other hand, when I look at a card that is PSA 9 OC, I'm looking to pay PSA 7 price or lower. So it's kinda like the guy who sets his watch 10 minutes fast, but subtracts 10 minutes every time he checks it. Which looks worse, the 2 letters under a PSA 9 grade, or getting a PSA 7 grade on a card that looks MINT except for the centering.
A card with a Q can usually be had at a significant discount. They are good for collectors who use them as fillers until something better comes along and also for guys like me without unlimited checkbooks.
JasP24
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I guess my biggest gripe with PSA comes from its decision to assign a straight grade if requested, because it leads to uncertainty. I am a corner freak, and they are usually difficult to judge in scans. If I see a PSA7 that looks off center to me, I wonder if it's truly an 8 or 9 on corners, gloss, etc, and was knocked down for centering, or is it borderline acceptable to PSA on centering, with touches to the corners >>
I agree and try to take full advantage. I just received a 1986 Jordan sticker in the mail I won on ebay. It was graded PSA 7, and showed centering not quite good enough for an 8, but good enough for me. The ONLY problem I can see with the card now that it's in hand is the centering. I'm sure this card was submitted with the NQ request, as the corners and edges are 9-10 quality. In short, I'm extreeeeeemly pleased. I'm not advocating purchasing PSA 7's in hopes of 9-10 corners, but it is a pleasant surprise when it happens.
<It bothers me more when I see a straight PSa 8 with horrible centering issues and it is comprable to my PSa 8oc.>
First, how could a PSA 8 card with "horrible centering issues" ever garner an 8? If an otherwise perfect card gets downgraded to 8 because it is somewhat beyond tolerance on centering, how is it comparable to your PSA 8 OC? Would it not look nicer?
Alan, I'm not sure if I have ever heard someone wish that they could request a qualifier. Also, the very thing that you like, i.e., the customer's ability to choose, is what I don't like as a potential buyer because I'm uncertain and perhaps confused by which grading standards were used.
Thanks for the divergent opinions on this topic!!!
ebay id: nolemmings
It would be great for PSA consumer confidence if you could submit the same card twice and get the same grade both times. Unfortunately, the grades change, for better or for worse, more often than they should on a re-grade.
JasP24
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
-Bill
There are situations when a card is not graded correctly. Do you understand that? Sometimes you will see a straight PSA 8 card that does not warrant the grade. My point is that I would prefer just like Mike Schmidt to have a qualified card in a higher holder than a poorly represented card in a straight holder. Do you understand now?
Leo
Bottom line is that I have never resubmitted any vintage PSA 9 qualified cards. So your situation really doesn't apply to my circumstances. If there is a borderline card -- I can measure very precisely what the centering is -- and if I feel a mistake has been made, I feel comfortable in submitting my care for review. I don't play the break-out game for qualified cards. And -- as to your point of whether the card was graded NQ or not -- it shouldn't matter. Some qualifiers never go away (MK and Stain, I believe don't go away except at the PSA 1 level). Centering I can usually measure precisely in person -- and within 1 or 2 percentage points from 300dpi scans.
Plus -- I'll tell you any day of the week that I, and most other collectors, pay premiums for well-centered cards within a grade. The most obvious example of this is the 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle card. Prices for a PSA 8 example can vary by nearly 70 - 90% from a "barely meets the centering criteria" to a "52/48 or better" centered example.
No I do not understand you, and it is apparent that you took my questions personally. Sorry.
No one likes a misgraded card, but that is not really relevant.
My point is this: Suppose the same mint but off-centered card and is put in either a PSA9 oc holder or a PSA 7 holder. Which do you prefer and why? Which enhances your set registry standing--and if weighted the same, does it matter?
Which do you think will fetch more at re-sale?
My guess from what I'm seeing is that many would prefer to have the 9oc. That's fine. Just asking for opinions, and trying to understand their rationale.
ebay id: nolemmings
Perhaps it is also an age-dependant issue. For example -- Peter Garcia has at least one PSA 9 o/c card in his 1914 Cracker Jack set. I will tell you that that is an absolutely phenomenal card. Any card to survive so long without staining and with sharp corners is an incredibly rare exception. So much more desirable than a PSA 7 in my opinion. But on many modern issues (1960 and after), a qualifier is equivalent to a kiss of death. Different market -- different nuances and different collectors.
Happy collecting!
When PSA looks at a card that is 9 quality and OC, if the centering is in the tolerance range for a straight 8 and the eye appeal is good, then they will put the card in a straight 8 holder instead of a 9 OC. If the centering is not good enough for an 8, then based on your qualifier/no-qualifier request, they will put the highest straight grade they can, or leave it at a 9 OC.
Qualifiers are a big help in grading a card when one major defect(usually caused in the manufacturing process) affects the overall grade in a big way. A grade number needs to best describe what's inside the holder. Using a qualifier best describes what's inside the holder. It's a 9 and it's OC. What's it worth? Well that's the hard part. It's worth whatever a "lower grade" buyer wants to pay. The same as if it was in a 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 9 OC holder.
Here are some examples that I have followed on EBAY for 1961's. These cards are all 9PD and probably bid about 1.5 to 2 times the value of a straight 7.
1961 example 1
1961 EXAMPLE 2
I wonder if these are being acquired to be reholdered into a non qualified grade?
Quite honestly, I like the 9PD cards because they usually have tremendous eye appeal. I will take them all day long over 7's. A 7 by definition can have a few minor imperfections. A 9PD is pretty sollid with only one exception.
Regards,
Alan
Your points are very well taken in describing why the oc qualifiers are helpful; in fact, I may change my position completely on the issue. Still, don't they really apply more to cards that you otherwise can't see- can't I judge centering for myself from a scan?
What if I buy a 7 with no scan, that has been straight-graded. It's mint but for the poor centering--would have fetched a 9oc. Now I expect I know what a seven should look like-- a couple of light touches to the corners, a little edge or surface wear, etc. I get my package and the card is beautiful other than the centering. If I'm a stickler for centering, shouldn't I be po'd? In other words, if the oc qualifier is a helpful piece of information that I should be able to rely upon from PSA as being uniformly applied, isn't it "unhelpful" when I can't get that from PSA because someone has asked that it not be included in the grade?
Todd
ebay id: nolemmings
shows how slow a typist I am that two more posts have popped up since I tried to answer the last one.
Don't even get me started on the PD qualifiers. The scans you posted are of my favorite and most heavily collected set. I didn't spend a lot of time looking at the PDs, but didn't even notice one on the Richardson (usually has snow in the black background). The Curry is typical of the issue, and has so little detraction to me that I wouldn't hesitate bidding it up. The Fernandez looks a little more problematic, that mark on the bottom looks more like a stain to me, which I would not want. Personally, I differentiate between light gum (factory) stains and other, "man-made" stains, although '61 collectors know that several come with a black tar-like looking smear that probably left the factory that way and that looks bad.
Not to open a whole 'nother can of worms, but does PSA drop the PD qualifier also if requested?
Kid4HOF03
You hit it right on the head!!!
Todd
ebay id: nolemmings
What's funny is that I could easily see these cards having an endless cycle of breakouts/submissions back and forth from PSA to SGC. I would be willing to bet that these 9PD's would probably get 88's or 92's with SGC...
Regards,
Alan
Perfectly said Kid4hof03! Qualifiers are characteristics of the card that PSA should indicate regardless of the grade assigned. Qualifiers are a standard that separate PSA from the rest. It's a major reason I love PSA. So, as a standard they should have been treated consistently! As an example, I would be very upset to receive a PSA 4 NQ with a big old stain on the reverse (not visible in most auction scans).
-Mark
Denver, CO.
RustyWilly's HOF Portrait Collection
and
Cards for Sale
I can't recall seeing a lower grade (PSA 5 or below) card with qualifiers.
Furthermore, I really don't see that much of a difference in whether PSA put the qualifier on or not. Nobody seems to be complaining when they get an unqualified 7...but technically an off centered or PD 8 or 9 could be classified as a 7. PSA publishes the standards. Link to standards
Based on your specified example, you would have the right to be upset if your card had a big old stain on the reverse because it is out of line with the published standard. The card would fall in line with the published standard for a PSA 2 or PSA 3 (depending on severity)
<VG 3: Very Good.
A PSA VG 3 card reveals some rounding of the corners, though not extreme. Some surface wear will be apparent, along with possible light scuffing or light scratches. Focus may be somewhat off-register and edges may exhibit noticeable wear. Much, but not all, of the card's original gloss will be lost. Borders may be somewhat yellowed and/or discolored. A crease may be visible. Printing defects are possible. Slight stain may show on obverse and wax staining on reverse may be more prominent. Centering must be 90/10 or better on the front and back.
GOOD 2: Good.
A PSA Good 2 card's corners show accelerated rounding and surface wear is starting to become obvious. A good card may have scratching, scuffing, light staining, or chipping of enamel on obverse. There may be several creases. Original gloss may be completely absent. Card may show considerable discoloration. Centering must be 90/10 or better on the front and back.>
If you are picky about certain defects that fall within the published specs (like centering, back of card issues, etc), a simple email should do the trick.
Regards,
Alan
There are many PSA-graded T206 cards that have received the "MK" qualifier. As it was an organizational tool back in the day (to the horror of modern day collectors), many collectors from 40 to 50 years ago would affix an ink stamp, pencil-written initials, etc. to the reverse of a T-206 card in order to help organize/database their collections. As many of these cards circulate in the market today -- and there is no real good way to remove this marking, when these cards are graded by PSA, they receive the "MK" qualifier. I have seen it on quite a few PSA 2, 3 and 4s.
aconte
That's good to note...I don't collect those pre war issues so I didn't know that was the case. I don't think PSA let's people "opt out" of MK issues by accepting a lower grade. I would assume that if they did ...the cards would get a PSA 1.
BTW - Since it appears that most people prefer the qualifiers...maybe PSA should adopt the Beckett subgrades as well?
Regards,
Alan
<< <i>BTW - Since it appears that most people prefer the qualifiers...maybe PSA should adopt the Beckett subgrades as well? >>
Alan,
I think you were joking but if not I'll comment. I like things the way they are. I like that Psa has and
Sgc doesn't have the qualifiers. The only thing I wish Psa had would be half grades. I know many
are against that. I like Psa's holder and Sgc's holder. I hate major changes. Therefore, I would
hate the Beckett subgrade. It's too Beckett-like for me.
aconte
I was joking...I am taking the "must have qualifiers" argument to the extreme case. I like the fact that PSA gives you a choice on whether to have qualifiers. My point is: unless a card is a PSA 9 or 10...there's a defect (qualifier) of some sort. The qualifier's sole purpose is to tell the buyer exactly what that defect is. The BGS system is the most "qualifier rich" system on the planet.
Regards,
Alan
Also - Based on your specified example, you would have the right to be upset if your card had a big old stain on the reverse because it is out of line with the published standard. The card would fall in line with the published standard for a PSA 2 or PSA 3 (depending on severity)
There are actually two types of stains - wax and other. The stains mentioned in the grading criteria are your typical wax stain. A PSA 4 grade card can certainly have a wax stain on the back. The degree of "big old" is subjective. In the criteria, a 10 is free of staining, an 8 and 9 can have a very light stain on the reverse, a 7 can have a slight stain, a 6 can have minor stain. Staining isn't mentioned at all in grades 4 and 5, but that doesn't mean the cards can't have them. In a 3, the stain becomes split into the type of stain, with a non-wax stain being slight stain, and a wax stain can be more prominent. So a 4 and 5 grade card has a wax stain somewhere between more prominent and minor. This is subjective, but if it matters to Rustywilly if there is a stain and how bad the stain is, he's needs to be asking if the card has a stain and an opinion on the severity. Because a PSA 4 in my opinion can have big old wax stain on the back.
Let's face it - cards require descriptions above and beyond a simple grade for the most part - everyone wants to know if it's high end, has a little wrinkle, etc. I think "PSA 8 oc" told someone a lot more about the card than "PSA 4" did.
<and say 3 for centering, based on my understanding, the highest grade it could get would be a 4.>
I wonder what a "BGS 3" centered card looks like? Even under PSA guidelines a PSA 4 or 5 must have 85/15 centering...so assuming that a BGS 3 is horrendous(85/15 to 90/10)...both PSA & BGS might be fairly consistent on unqualified grades. What I didn't realize is that even a PSA 1 card has centering requirements of 90/10. I assumed anything could go into a 1 holder as long as it's not altered. Maybe thats where the 5% grader discretion comes into play.
Regards,
Alan
I think "PSA 8 oc" told someone a lot more about the card than "PSA 4" did.
I agree with you completely. The more I read and the more I think about, PSA probably has the best system. The qualifiers do tell the "whole truth" about the card. The thing that I am still hung up on is that the card should either be a "PSA 4 or a PSA 8 oc" (to use this particular example) it should not be able to be both. I still believe that the grading system can only be hurt by having two separate possible grades. Either qualifiers or no qualifiers, not your choice on the invoice.
To kinda piggyback Waittil's theory on subgrades, I think this system kills high-grade rarity. With subgrades, a card with 8 quality centering, but other mint or gem mint aspects, can get a 9, whereas by PSA standards it will get a PSA 8 NQ, or PSA 9 OC. Rarity is an important part of collecting, and personally, I wouldn't like a flood of vintage 9's flyin' around.
Although I don't collect 1969 Topps baseball, I've seen alot of posts about a few cards that were very hard to find with PSA 8 quality centering. If these cards were graded with subgrades, many of the NM quality centered cards would get bumped up to PSA 8 because of strong corners, edges, surface, etc..., thus killing the rarity (and of course prices realized) of those elusive cards.
Currently collecting.....your guess is as good as mine.