Question to PSA (Joe Orlando) on Disintegrating Holders
scottsusor
Posts: 1,210
Have you researched the possibility of changing from holders which come apart cleanly when cracked to holders that disintegrate when cracked? If not, why not? If so, why has this change not been made?
Scott
Scott
0
Comments
<< <i>I understand the purpose of having this type of holder but shouldn't we be fearful of damaging our GEMs? >>
That's why PSA offers a Review process, isn't it? Presumably if THEY found the card should be upgraded, and they did the cracking, there would be no damage to the "gem." But I'm not talking about "disintregrating" that would damage the card -- just "disintegrating" such that the holder itself could not be reused.
Scott
About PSA's review process, many like to crack and re-submit rather than use the review process. Thoughts being why would PSA knowingly contradict themselves by changing the grade the second time around? If they did that aren't they admitting they made a mistake? If so, shouldn't the seconding round be free?
<< <i>If it can be done in a way that it will not damage the card and is still cost effective than I'm with ya. Those are two big 'if's'.
About PSA's review process, many like to crack and re-submit rather than use the review process. Thoughts being why would PSA knowingly contradict themselves by changing the grade the second time around? If they did that aren't they admitting they made a mistake? If so, shouldn't the seconding round be free? >>
Cost effective shouldn't be a problem. We're only talking a slight change in scientific material composition here.
As for PSA "admitting they made a mistake" -- Is that really a big deal? Cards are graded by humans and humans do make mistakes. Presumably not many in the relative sense of total cards graded but isn't that why so many people crack the holders and resubmit in the first place? Maybe I'm completely out in left field here but I can see a company like PSA having a vested interest in having a review process (call it an "appeal") that facilitates a higher quality product.
Should such a review be free? No, it shouldn't, simply because then everybody would be submitting cards for review. However, I COULD see a process whereby if PSA did encounter a card that should be upgraded and re-slabbed, then a voucher for a free future submit could be given out.
Still waiting to hear from PSA on this question.
Scott
I have no idea what PSA is doing or not doing in terms of the holders. I don't pretend to and actually, I don't really care. This is a relatively small problem and it is being worked. Good enough for me.
The "small change" that you suggest is probably possible but may not be desired. It would essence require that the material of the holder itself fracture more easily than the weld used to close the holder. The basic nature of plastic welding is never going to leave a strong joint especially when manufacturing variation comes in to the game. That would make the holder itself relatively, if not very, fragile. Now I don't go whipping my holders around the room for fun, I do things like, drop them, knowck them over onto the floor, bump them, ship them and other harsh things. I have broken only a couple and I consider myself careful. If the holder material were more fragile, breakage would go up and I suspect by a lot. I think it would be unexcuseable if I dropped a holder, it shattered and dinged a corner on one my cards. Part of the benefit to having the card graded is preservation . I don't think that should be compromised.
Fuzz
And I think that anybody putting money into PSA graded cards SHOULD care. But maybe money isn't that important to you. Of course, that's just my opinion, yours is your own.
Still waiting for PSA's answer here.
Scott
<< <i>Still waiting for PSA's answer here.
Scott >>
Since the answers of board members don't suit you why don't you call or e-mail Joe directly.
<< <i>Since the answers of board members don't suit you why don't you call or e-mail Joe directly. >>
Being a little rude, aren't you? The board members are commenting, not answering. I don't mind them commenting, that's what the board is for. Only PSA can give an ANSWER. If they don't, or prefer not to here, then I'll call. Does that clarify it for you?
Scott
i think your not looking at the big picture. the bottom line is that there is 7,000,000 cards or close to that in psa holders and probably a good 4,000,000 would want to changed to the new holder. i think that yes they should come up with something that would be cost effective and attracive. most people that have massive amounts of cards will not want a difffrent holder from the one they are accustomed to.
i suggest that they find a systen sort of like beckett. some sort of sleeve that is tamper proof. take a look at the beckett holder. if you can actually get into one without damage you still have to take a pair of scissors to the plastic sleeve to get the card out! cost effective looks half way decent and will fit any size card and is just about as much tamper proofing as you can get.
yes i would like thm to find some sort of non wrinckling plastic sleeve but other than that i would say its a good idea.
imho
john
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
Scott
Scott