If the grade don't fit......

Fuzz

" If the grade don't fit..... you must resubmit " has been stated by a gentlemen from these boards who is much wiser than I (sorry I don't remember who to credit this too). I have heard it from several other s who have had positive experiences.
I culled a group of high end eights recently and found 11 cards that were just too nice to be in "8" holders. I cracked and resubmitted. I got five "9's" and the six "8's". Nice results for the effort and expense. I still do not understand why it wasn't 11 "9's" so I will crack these out and try them again. I have several other groups that this applies to as well and I see the wisdom of the tag line.
The questions for some of you senior submitters are: How many times does one do this before it stops paying off, or do you just keep going until they agree with you? Does a large batch of very high grade stuff hurt the grades? (ie. if you submit say 30 that "should be" or "could be" nines at once are you less or more likely to get better results than say sending them in five at a time?).
Thanks for the thought and insight.
Fuzz

sjjs28

I would be one individual in the "too many nice cards at one time is not always a good thing" camp.

I have been submitting for close to two years now - generally 100 or more cards per submission.
I generally don't submit a common unless it has a legit shot at a 9.
Sure I miss some things and get grades back from 8's all the way down to 5's but its more the percentage of 9's that I get in any given order....

Also for note - these are all vintage cards 1960's

For example: the list below are the percentage of 9's in my 2002/2003 submissions -
9/03 submission = 25% (# of cards =113)
5/03 submission = 36% (# of cards =100)
3/03 submission = 32% (# of cards =113)
12/02 submission = 31% (# of cards =115)
10/02 submission = 54% (# of cards =107) with 7 10's ..... somebody get me that graders name !
8/02 submission = 29% (# of cards =100)
7/02 submission = 28% (# of cards =106)

Lets throw the high and the low # out and the percentage = 31.2%
Lets average all experiences = 33.5%
All things considered - I look for approx 30% 9's on my submissions......

I too will be cracking mucho 8's from 1967 and to a lesser extent 1965 and put the resubmit theory to the test.

GoSoxBoSox

I rarely re-submit when unhappy and I never submit more than twice. It's much too subjective in my eyes (since each grader is different) to keep wasting money just to pull a number.

Collect the card, not the holder.

gemint

Steve,

Let us know how you do on your resubmits. I've got piles of beautiful 8's from invoices that were graded by someone who doesn't know there is such a thing as a 9. I've been tempted to crack some and resubmit and would be interested to see how successful this is.

thegemmintman

<< <i>" If the grade don't fit..... you must resubmit " has been stated by a gentlemen from these boards who is much wiser than I (sorry I don't remember who to credit this too). I have heard it from several other s who have had positive experiences. >>



It was me Fuzz. It's what I think Johnny Cochrane's advice to card collectors would be. Thanks for remembering it! Don't forget to credit my Paypal the royalty fee .

Fuzz

Gemmintman, Thanks for the reminder. I had pretty much forgotten about the Cochran reference in the quote. But it is and always will be a classic.
BoSox, if the purpose of my endevors was to collect cards per se, then you are right. But in my case, I have the raw cards to these sets, often a dozen times over. I am collecting PSA cards to compete. Yes, there is a notion of upgrade but honestly, it is to compete. In that case, much to Gemmintman's disappointment, I need numbers. Why shouldn't some of my really high end 8's be lower end 9's ? I picked up the 8's in question for about $20 each. The 9's from these same guys have gone from $175 to $300 each. Financially, a few rebsubmissions, even at a low upgrade rate, is financially warranted. And worse, why should I pay that much for a 9, when I do have a card that is just as nice. These cards I do believe were "undergraded" by being submitted in a large batch of pack fresh material.
I also have other cards that fit into these groups and will eventually get around to giving some of these a try. I think the 30% 9's is realistic but disappointing. I have a 64 hi # vendor to break up, would hate to have to go through those several times and in many submissions but probably will.
Thanks to all for the thoughts and am interested in any resubmit results.
Fuzz

Wabittwax

I resubmit quite a bit. I recently got a 7 on a 1975 Topps Aaron #660. The card was way too nice for a 7. I resubmitted and it got an 8 and sold for good money. I generally only resubmit once unless the value of the card warrants repeated resubmission. Also make sure to send PSA the old flips to help with the pop report.

I also submit in 100+ batches and I am absolutley convinced in the "Grader of Death" theory. Last year, about 1 in every 6 or 7 submissions were graded way, way to tough. I have noticed though that it has come to a complete halt early this year. That leads me to conclude that the person no longer grades for PSA or the person has changed his/her standards to be consistent with the other graders. Either way, that means that there is literally 10's of thousands of under graded cards just waiting for resubmission. I believe there is a small fortune to be made right now finding the cards that were graded by that person.

I'm just speculating though. This is all based on my own experience in submitting.

PlayBall

<< <i>I am collecting PSA cards to compete. Yes, there is a notion of upgrade but honestly, it is to compete. In that case, much to Gemmintman's disappointment, I need numbers. Why shouldn't some of my really high end 8's be lower end 9's ? >>



Thank you for the honesty Fuzz. It's a breath of fresh air to me.

thegemmintman

Fuzz - I don't understand the "Gemmintman disappointment" thing. What are you saying I would be disappointed about?