4 years ago Joe wrote this: "Anyone who knows me realizes that I am fully aware of PSA's customer base. As a collector of high-end vintage cards before I came to work here, I was one of PSA's first customers in 1991. I fully understand that it's THE COLLECTORS who control the market. Dealers sell what you want to buy. When I was collecting (before PSA became popular) it took a group of collectors like me to stand together and say,"I will not buy that card without PSA's approval." That is when it all changed.
That's why we put so much effort into the Registry - you guys make PSA go."
I know a few hundred collectors, and they seem to all be collectively PO'd about this. This should be reconsidered, and it should be reconsidered right away. In the meantime they are rejoicing in Parsippany.
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
<< <i>In the meantime they are rejoicing in Parsippany. >>
Yes they are. On one hand, I'm as frustrated as everybody else about this short-sighted decision; but on the other, I don't care too much since my last few PSA-graded cards are already in Jersey.
It does heighten the anxiety a bit, though. These last few PSA holdouts are some of my top cards so I'm obviously hoping for a perfect crossover rate. If they don't cross, they're goners, as I now have absolutely no desire to have any PSA slabs in my collection. (Not that I had much before.) I realize it's all about the old cardboard, not the surrounding plastic or label, but this move just completely solidifies my view that a PSA holder detracts from my appreciation of the card itself.
i think it sucks, i only have one set-50 bowman fb # 7 on registry-what about the guys that have half the sets on the registry like 48-72 fb at 100% like davallio????sounds like a kick in the balls to me for everybody onthe registry
I think that the half grading policy at PSA is a complete joke.
A lot of us collectors and dealers will now have to spend tens of thousands of dollars in re-grading fees in order to keep up with the market place......great for PSA and Collectors Universe but bad for the consumer.
The end result will be a population report that is extremely in-accurate and a higher cost for the consumer when they want to purchase a card that has been re-graded.
I believe that this new decision will hurt the hobby as a whole and also will help PSA's main competitors increase their market share in the graded card business, expecially the boys in New Jersey.
Joe Orlando's remarks from a couple of years ago about his belief in the half grading concept are documented by many here on the board and in person and now he sounds more like a politician than the president of a company that lives and dies with the support of its customers.....IMO.
Buyer and Seller of PSA graded Baseball Cards from 1900-1980.
Check out my ebay auctions listed under seller ID: jeej
Not a good "collector" move. I thought we were the ones that were most important to PSA, but this move proves me wrong. How are the stockholders going to feel when they find that their revamped formula for enticing new submissions just blew off many of their best customers?
Mark (amerbbcards)
"All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
I just grabbed this entry from a Net54 discussion on this:
<< <i>The $64,000 question to me is what is PSA's position if a card is resubmitted and it is discovered to be altered? They have not addressed that (at least not directly).
If their policy will be to return the card in the original graded slab, then will someone please explain to me how that is not fraud. Here you would have the largest card authentication service KNOWINGLY RETURNING TO CIRCULATION a card opined by it to be unaltered THAT THEY NOW KNOW IS ALTERED. Where is the FBI when you need them?!
If their policy will be to return such cards in altered slabs, then the first question I would ask anybody offering to sell me a PSA whole-grade card is whether it was resubmitted for the half-grade increase. If the answer is no, then I would think the market value of the card would plummet because that would signify the card owner most likely has serious concerns the card is altered. Why else would he not have resubmitted it if there was no risk of the card being numerically downgraded? >>
Thank goodness I bought all my cards at shows where I always sought out dead centered cards with strong corners. Here is a lesson learned for all you set builders that relied on E-bay and bought the number not the card and did not care to examine the card in person. It just reared its ugly head and bit you in the a##. Thanks PSA this is the best move you have made in years and those of you that are complaining have those slider 8s and 9s they bought off E-bay.
Wow Slabbed, feeling bitter towards your fellow collectors? I am sure every card you have bought was high end for the grade and under SMR while the rest of us buying off Ebay only purchased sliders over SMR. Have fun paying more grading fees to get your 8.5's only to find out they sell for about the same price as an 8.
Currently completing the following registry sets: Cardinal HOF's, 1961 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1972 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1980 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, Bill Mazeroski Master & Basic Sets, Roberto Clemente Master & Basic Sets, Willie Stargell Master & Basic Sets and Terry Bradshaw Basic Set
Amen morgoth. You're a real genius, Slabbed. I wish all of us stupid collectors would have thought of that.
BrentR
1984 Donruss Basic/Master #1 100% 2008 Modern Set Award Cal Ripken Jr. Rookie Set 100% Ken Griffey Jr. Rookie Set #1T All 10-100% Randy Johnson Rookie Set #1T All 10-100% Frank Thomas Rookie Set #1T All 10-100% Sammy Sosa Rookie Set #1T All 10-100% Jeff Bagwell Rookie Set #1 100% 1993 Finest Promos #1T 100%
Comments
"Anyone who knows me realizes that I am fully aware of PSA's customer base. As a collector of high-end vintage cards before I came to work here, I was one of PSA's first customers in 1991. I fully understand that it's THE COLLECTORS who control the market. Dealers sell what you want to buy. When I was collecting (before PSA became popular) it took a group of collectors like me to stand together and say,"I will not buy that card without PSA's approval." That is when it all changed.
That's why we put so much effort into the Registry - you guys make PSA go."
I know a few hundred collectors, and they seem to all be collectively PO'd about this. This should be reconsidered, and it should be reconsidered right away.
In the meantime they are rejoicing in Parsippany.
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
<< <i>In the meantime they are rejoicing in Parsippany. >>
Yes they are. On one hand, I'm as frustrated as everybody else about this short-sighted decision; but on the other, I don't care too much since my last few PSA-graded cards are already in Jersey.
It does heighten the anxiety a bit, though. These last few PSA holdouts are some of my top cards so I'm obviously hoping for a perfect crossover rate. If they don't cross, they're goners, as I now have absolutely no desire to have any PSA slabs in my collection. (Not that I had much before.) I realize it's all about the old cardboard, not the surrounding plastic or label, but this move just completely solidifies my view that a PSA holder detracts from my appreciation of the card itself.
A lot of us collectors and dealers will now have to spend tens of thousands of dollars in re-grading fees in order to keep up with the market place......great for PSA and Collectors Universe but bad for the consumer.
The end result will be a population report that is extremely in-accurate and a higher cost for the consumer when they want to purchase a card that has been re-graded.
I believe that this new decision will hurt the hobby as a whole and also will help PSA's main competitors increase their market share in the graded card business, expecially the boys in New Jersey.
Joe Orlando's remarks from a couple of years ago about his belief in the half grading concept are documented by many here on the board and in person and now he sounds more like a politician than the president of a company that lives and dies with the support of its customers.....IMO.
Check out my ebay auctions listed under seller ID: jeej
Ron
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
MY GOLD TYPE SET https://pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/complete-type-sets/gold-type-set-12-piece-circulation-strikes-1839-1933/publishedset/321940
i dont think i wanna spend another $2500 on regrading my already graded cards to compete in the new grading arena psa has created.
free enterprise system involves mutually beneficial exchange.
that was the case before the grading standard changed, now past customers & current owners of slabbed psa cardboard are paying the price.
literally.
j
RIP GURU
<< <i>If it isn't broke - don't fix it - you know how the saying goes.
Take care,
Joe >> >>
Wow! Way to flip-flop.
Successful transactions with bouwob, lifeshouldbefun, SDSportsFan, Bkritz, tsalems1, kwtoz, johnny1976, Topps29, Calaban7, nascar20, bking, bedellsonics, Beck6, Dialj, Echocanyon, mdkuom, gosteelers, artimus.
"All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
<< <i>The $64,000 question to me is what is PSA's position if a card is resubmitted and it is discovered to be altered? They have not addressed that (at least not directly).
If their policy will be to return the card in the original graded slab, then will someone please explain to me how that is not fraud. Here you would have the largest card authentication service KNOWINGLY RETURNING TO CIRCULATION a card opined by it to be unaltered THAT THEY NOW KNOW IS ALTERED. Where is the FBI when you need them?!
If their policy will be to return such cards in altered slabs, then the first question I would ask anybody offering to sell me a PSA whole-grade card is whether it was resubmitted for the half-grade increase. If the answer is no, then I would think the market value of the card would plummet because that would signify the card owner most likely has serious concerns the card is altered. Why else would he not have resubmitted it if there was no risk of the card being numerically downgraded? >>
Thoughts?
Successful transactions with bouwob, lifeshouldbefun, SDSportsFan, Bkritz, tsalems1, kwtoz, johnny1976, Topps29, Calaban7, nascar20, bking, bedellsonics, Beck6, Dialj, Echocanyon, mdkuom, gosteelers, artimus.
I wonder if Joe still thinks we are only 1%!
Thanks PSA this is the best move you have made in years and those of you that are complaining have those slider 8s and 9s they bought off E-bay.
1984 Donruss Basic/Master #1 100% 2008 Modern Set Award
Cal Ripken Jr. Rookie Set 100%
Ken Griffey Jr. Rookie Set #1T All 10-100%
Randy Johnson Rookie Set #1T All 10-100%
Frank Thomas Rookie Set #1T All 10-100%
Sammy Sosa Rookie Set #1T All 10-100%
Jeff Bagwell Rookie Set #1 100%
1993 Finest Promos #1T 100%
Until they get people that "can" grade, this is a "pointless" conversation.
Men should act like men!
So far all I've heard is a bunch of whiny little girls complaining ...
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
Cancer, nuclear war, the economy, terrorism - OK.