What would you do?

GoSoxBoSox

Background Information

edited to say: tough one, huh? shady, yet not that shady

CON40

I think re-submitting everything under PSA 5 is the way to go... but you would consider putting them back into the original slabs with the original flips? Just how would you do that? If you told me, would you then have to kill me?

GoSoxBoSox

<< <i>I think re-submitting everything under PSA 5 is the way to go... but you would consider putting them back into the original slabs with the original flips? Just how would you do that? If you told me, would you then have to kill me? >>



The flips are clean. The labels are clean. A little krazy glue would do the trick I guess. I don't know? I never did it before but it's fun to consider.

Virtualizard

Tom,

I think you forgot one option: resubmit all 5 again and see what happens the next time around. That would really tell a lot about consistency in grading!

JEB.

GoSoxBoSox

<< <i>Tom,

I think you forgot one option: resubmit all 5 again and see what happens the next time around. That would really tell a lot about consistency in grading!

JEB. >>




Stop it JEB. I aggrevate myself enough on my own. Please don't push me down this road any further


edtied to say: I'm very surprised at the results so far. I though more people would go for option #4 considering you would be putting the same cards you took out of the holder right back in. Go figure.

Putty

Option 6 Submit them to GAI and let us know the results..

Vargha

JEB is a pot-stirrer. I advocate the "peace and harmony" approach, myself.

Virtualizard

<< <i>JEB is a pot-stirrer. I advocate the "peace and harmony" approach, myself. >>




I've never "stirred pot" in my life. I swear, I only ladled a cupful, and I didn't even swallow it!


JEB.

Vargha

I've never "stirred pot" in my life. I swear, I only ladled a cupful, and I didn't even swallow it!

Uh-huh. That probably explains the spot on the dress then.

Virtualizard

<< <i>Uh-huh. That probably explains the spot on the dress then. >>



Uh, what are you insinuating? I haven't worn a dress in years!

JEB.

redsfan

Just wondering... what if PSA modified their crossover service. Maybe charged twice as much, but provided some additional security as well as a legitimate shot at the grade a collector feels it's worth. Seems like a lot of us are concerned about the graders being swayed by seeing the card in the holder and not giving it a fair chance to grade higher. So, why not have a trusted, third-party that would receive the slabbed cards, bust them out and submit them to PSA. If they come back with the same or higher grade, then return them to the customer, but if they somehow are deemed "evidence of trimming" or "undersized", the third party could re-submit the raw card with the original flip and it could be re-holdered.

Probably never happen, but interesting to think about...

KalineFan

I wanted to address something about the idea of submitting cards (cracking out) and
people who try crossovers.

First, I have been a Rare Coin Dealer for over 25 years. PCGS (which is CU's coin
Grading service) utilizes the following in the "re-submission" process. I have
actually been in the grading room at PCGS and asked these same questions!

If you submit a coin in a PCGS holder to get "re-graded", it gets checked in with
all the pertinent information. Then it is given an internal number. From there,
it goes down to the "SAW ROOM". That's exactly what I said-meaning a
BAND SAW cuts the PCGS coin out of the holder and the coin is then sent to the grading
room as a "RAW" coin. The graders do not know what the coin was previously
graded when it comes through. Yes, many Coin Dealers "crack em out" instead
of doing this, but many send the coin back in the holder it is for the process as
described. In my experience, I have found in the few times I have submitted
cards for upgrades, the card comes back still in the original holder it was submitted
in-in other words, they do NOT perform the "sawing" action on cards the way
that they do coins. The Crossover service on coins is basically the same process,
but, they obviously don't cut the coin out. The grade on the other service holder,
whether ANACS, NGC, SEGS, ICG, even "IN-ACCUGRADE" is covered up so the
grader does NOT know what the current grade is. For your further information,
PCGS claims to cross somewhere between 25 and 33% of the coins they receive
for crossover, which to me is actually quite amazing. It is only human nature that
you look at a competitors coin (or card) and become a little more CONSERVATIVE
when you grade it. Hope this maybe helps in one way or another to understand
one of the process' of grading-Who knows if they will ever adopt this style with
the grading of cards, autographs, memorabilia or whatever sports items they
get for "CROSSOVER" or regrade.




graded

KalineFan

Almost forgot to mention one important thing!

When the coin is cracked out, they will upgrade it,
but, they will NOT, downgrade it. Even if the graders
think it is lower, by submitting to them IN the holder
and having them cut it out, and they grade it lower,
they still honor the original grade and still put it
back in a new holder with the same grade they retained
on the original holder on the coin If they do downgrade
the coin, they actually pay you the market difference in the
coin.....I.E. If the coin was an MS63 and they regrade
it an MS62 and put it in an MS62 when returning it to you,
they pay you the "FAIR MARKET" difference
in the two grades.

GoSoxBoSox

Thanks for that information KalineFan. That's a very interesting approach for "review" that I've never thought of. I can see how this process would be much more objective than the current process.

Although I'm sure it's safe, I cringe at the thought of sending a card to a "saw room"