Something is about to happen in the market
jrdolan
Posts: 2,549 ✭✭
Over the weekend I spoke to a BMP dealer that I knew back in the day (before anybody even thought of PSA). I hadn't spoken to him in a couple of decades. He said some things that confirmed what I and others have been saying about Beckett all summer. What he and some of his peers are doing as fast as they can is cracking open BGS 9's and PSA 9's and sending them in raw to Beckett for BGS 9.5 grades, then unloading just as quickly.
He said, "If it's only 20% successful it's worth it, but it's more like 40 or 50%, even higher if you're selective on what you try to upgrade. This is unreal and it can't last, but we're crazy if we don't run with it."
I just did a search for "BGS 9.5" on eBay and got 2,218 hits. The last time I did it a couple weeks ago it was 1,800 or so. A few weeks before that it was about 1,500. Board members here who went to the National said they were shocked at the abundance of formerly scarce and elite BGS 9.5's on the tables this year.
Something is about to happen, folks. Seriously. Flame away if you want -- and I expect some visitors from the Beckett forum will do just that -- but also consider taking some action if you're sitting on 9.5's as an investment. Most of Beckett-Land is in the dark about this, I believe, but that too can't last much longer.
I don't know how this wil affect PSA cards, but my gut tells me it will be beneficial. Those BGS collectors who don't get disgusted and drop out will be looking for a grading service. It will be almost entirely modern, of course, so maybe not much impact on PSA vintage.
He said, "If it's only 20% successful it's worth it, but it's more like 40 or 50%, even higher if you're selective on what you try to upgrade. This is unreal and it can't last, but we're crazy if we don't run with it."
I just did a search for "BGS 9.5" on eBay and got 2,218 hits. The last time I did it a couple weeks ago it was 1,800 or so. A few weeks before that it was about 1,500. Board members here who went to the National said they were shocked at the abundance of formerly scarce and elite BGS 9.5's on the tables this year.
Something is about to happen, folks. Seriously. Flame away if you want -- and I expect some visitors from the Beckett forum will do just that -- but also consider taking some action if you're sitting on 9.5's as an investment. Most of Beckett-Land is in the dark about this, I believe, but that too can't last much longer.
I don't know how this wil affect PSA cards, but my gut tells me it will be beneficial. Those BGS collectors who don't get disgusted and drop out will be looking for a grading service. It will be almost entirely modern, of course, so maybe not much impact on PSA vintage.
0
Comments
Minnie Minoso Master and Basic
1967 Topps PSA 8+
1960's Topps run Mega Set
"For me, playing baseball has been like a war and I was defending the uniform I wore, Every time I put on the uniform I respected it like the American flag. I wore it like I was representing every Latin country."--Minnie Minoso
Andrew
regards
John
HOF SIGNED FOOTBALL RCS
Andrew
what??
hmm lets see..send to psa get a 9 sell for 50 bucks, or send to BGS get a 9.5 and sell for 200 bucks..ahhhhh
think again....the only thing that people care about on a graded card is the little number on the front! It has taken people
years and hundreds of thosands of gradings to figure out that there is much fraud and inaccuracy in the graded market..its
going to take many more years for people to catch on that beckett is whoreing themselves out in order to make money!
JS
A cursory glance at recently graded sets from both companies shows that they're pretty much in line. I'll post some numbers below from their pop reports, with the number of gems or better above the amount graded. On a few sets I had to add up beckett's pops from different subsets where they were included with psa's so that I was comparing apples to apples.
2005 football
Score
psa 355/355 (100% 10's)
bgs (137/137) (100% gems)
Topps
psa 259/264
bgs 838/841
topps draft fb
psa 10/15
bgs 64/87
2005 baseball
bowman
psa 24/26
bgs 74/89
Topps Chrome
psa 50/122 (41% 10's)
bgs 71/181 (39% gem or better)
2004 Football
spx
psa 25/92 (27%)
bgs 48/203 (23%)
bowman chrome
psa 177/445 (40%)
bgs 255/564 (45%)
finest
psa 304/440 (69%)
bgs 617/987 (63%)
sp game used
psa 214/307 (70%) (I wonder how many of these were from khw???)
bgs 125/267 (47%)
That's all I've got time for, but the results pretty much speak for themselves. As far as my own experiences the last few months, I've cracked out 5 psa 9's and received one 9.5, one 9, and three 8.5's, but these were all from older tougher sets. If I had picked newer, less condition sensitive sets, the numbers pretty well demonstrate that my odds of getting a bump to a gem mint grade would be very high with either company.
There's zero factual evidence that one company has been grading cards any more strictly than the other the last 12 months. As far as dealer stories go, I've been told about many a card, including vintage cards, going up two or three grades with every company under the sun, but these stories typically involve things like special paper cutters, distilled water, stacks of books, or sending them off to some guy in California. It's amazing what dealers will tell you when you get them to lighten up a little bit.
be less than 50% mint out of a pack
Kevin
The only time I've seen mass "bumping" is when I sent a bunch of vintage to PSA that was graded by BGS before they came out with BVG. Almost all of those cards gained 1.5-2 grades. The best was a bunch of BGS 6 1971 Football than came back PSA 8.
Since then it's pretty much been in the same range for either company. The reason you are seeing more BGS 9.5/10 is because more cards are coming in and people are smarter on what to submit.
Stingray
<< <i>If you have opened any modern cards in your life you would know that cards don't pull mint....I would say the number would
be less than 50% mint out of a pack
Kevin >>
Are you talking about damaged packs? Or maybe you are talking only about chrome products which are notorious for scratches? I was referring to condition (strictly wear), not characteristics (off center, off-register, etc.). Many 2001+ white-bordered cards should be mint, unless you first treat the pack like a ninja star.
Brands like regular Topps, SP Authentic, SP Game Used, Topps Pristine (How many BGS 10's have you seen of these?) and some others, tend to come out of the pack in Mint 9 or better a very high percentage of the time. You can see that reflected in the prices, especially cards like Topps Pristine achieve on the open market. a 9.5 or psa 10 will garner very little over high book, even BGS 10's don't command much of a premium on Pristine. Same goes for that crappy Skybox Molten Metal cards they put out in 99. If the metal card didn't get a pristine 10 it got half book.
We are seeing an increase in BGS 9.5/10 cards and that number will continue to increase...which means prices should continue to decrease. It took me a long time to concede this and realize that the long term investment potential of modern cards in high grade (regardless of the companies holder) is not the safest of choices.
While I feel that every grading company has their faults, ,and they all have some type of a shady underbelly, BGS is definitely falling in the ranks. They still get more money on the open market, but it certainly can be argued that their own pricing has a direct impact on that. Yes, I do believe they used to be tougher than anyone else but I think their standards have been eased substantially. I cannot begin to tell you how many BGS 9.5 & 10's were coming out at the nationals. BGS is allowing trimmed cards into their holders, no doubt. BGS is giving favorable bumps, no doubt. BGS grades sheet cut cards, they don't care. Apparently fine grit sandpaper is one of the new weapons of choice. I had never heard that one before. <shrug>
Oh and that cute little BGS 10 84 Fleer Update Clemens started out in a BGS 9.5 holder. It got a friendly bump to a 10. It originally was holdered with 10/10/9.5/9.5 and got a friendly .5 bump bringing it up to a 10. The dealer who sold (and originally had it listed on ebay) told me the story and is the one who got it bumped, in the holder. By the way, he got $20k for it. The new owner was listing it at $25k at the nationals.
While I think GAI definitely has some issues, I've always enjoyed talking with them at shows and while I do believe they give certain people "favors" I have had good luck with crossing their cards over (cracked and submitted of course). Which, for me at least, shows they have some consistency and their grades, for the most part, can be counted on. This may not always be the case and your mileage may vary, but I've been impressed. Plus I like their holders. Only problem is, I don't get nearly the same money I do for my PSA graded cards, that's just a fact.
So I went off on a bit of a tangent... I think some of this is left over from a heated debate I've been having on another forum with the most pig-headed BGS lover I may have ever met in my life. BGS must hand out rose-colored glasses or put something in the water for these people.
There's my nickels worth, feel free to give change.
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
No argument from me if there are % numbers that show PSA and BGS are currently running about equal on assigning Gem Mint grades on new issues.
But comparing the % of PSA 10's to the % of BGS 9.5's and 10's issued this summer is missing the point. What needs to be compared is the number of BGS 9.5's and 10's issued this year to the number of BGS 9.5's and 10's issued in 2004 and earlier.
The point is that BGS 9.5's have sold for many multiples of PSA 10, never mind PSA 9. They still are in some cases. That situation is untenable, given that hundreds of new 9.5's are pouring onto eBay each week, and that dealers are cracking their 9's and getting a decent return of 9.5's. It's just an impossible situation and must eventually collapse. And that will have an impact on every 9.5 that Beckett has issued previously.
Once this resolves itself, how are you going to convince buyers that your BGS 9.5 is not one of the swarm of 9.5's issued recently? How are you going to prove that yours was graded back when 9.5 was much more difficult and scarce? Once the market corrects and BGS 9.5 and PSA 10 of a particular card both sell for about $100, buyers are not going to care that you paid $500 for that 9.5 in the summer of 2004.
<< <i>Dealers are some of the biggest storytellers in the world ....... The reason you are seeing more BGS 9.5/10 is because more cards are coming in and people are smarter on what to submit. >>
If you believe this is the case, then dismiss this as a bunch of hooey and keep buying BGS 9.5's. Sincerely. We all have to choose what to believe and act accordingly.
That goes for anyone who feels this is all a crock. Do your own research, reach your own conclusions, go with your gut.
Stingray
At the end of the day they both make their money based on trust and confidence. Getting higher grades helps increase submissions, but it also violates trust if done recklessly. I'm sure that Joe and Mark Anderson at Beckett walk the line everyday balancing more submissions and trust, the don't want to kill the Golden Goose.
I think we are niave to think that the true purpose of PSA/BGS is to grade cards as accurate as possible. Their true purpose is to make money off submissions. They will do whatever it takes to increase submissions - lower standards, cut deals with large customers, grade sheet cut cards, etc. The grading companies are dynamic businesses that change over time (remember PSA in the mid-90's?) and some things they do work and other things are questionable.
Maybe so, but have you noticed how little 9's are going for on ebay? You can often sell them for more raw now with most sets. I remember picking up an ult roethlisberger rc psa 9 for $300 when the raw cards were going for $425. I've also sold several bgs/psa 9's for slightly less than their raw ebay value. 10's/9.5's on newer sets will still bring some premium, but nothing like they used to. If the player isn't hot at the time, you could see very little premium. It's just a matter of time before hobbyists start to ask the next logical question (what's the difference b/w a 9 and a 10?"), and then they'll have to invent a new grade just to get the chase going again. (Well, I guess beckett has the edge there since they've got the 'pristine' thing going.)
Grading value is based upon knowing that an older vintage card is authentic, unrestored (most of the time!) and is deemed a certain condition.
This was to combat the multitudes of dishonest dealers who would outrageously self grade their junk.
No intenett, very few good pictures means you had to rely on a few letters in a black and white list of inventory.
I dont get it unless your purely out to fleece number chasers which is just good ol fashioned capatilism.
Loves me some shiny!
with Carew4me. Unless you get a 10 is it really worth it to grade it. How much more is a PSA 9 2001 UD Pujols worth than a raw? Unless it is some high priced autograph, say one of the Ruth, Cobbs or other inserts in order to basically keep it protected in the plastic encasing, why bother?
Stingray
05 Aaron Rodgers Score PSA 10
25
$16.00
each
05 Aaron Rodgers Topps PSA 10
45
$18.00
each
05 Alex Smith Score PSA 10
35
$16.00
each
05 Alex Smith Topps PSA 10
45
$18.00
each
05 Braylon Edwards Score PSA 10
30
$12.50
each
05 Braylon Edwards Topps PSA 10
35
$13.50
each
05 Carnell Cadillac Williams Score PSA 10
40
$12.50
each
05 Cedric Benson Score PSA 10
40
$12.50
each
05 Cedric Benson Topps PSA 10
35
$13.50
each
05 Matt Jones Score PSA 10
20
$12.50
each
05 Matt Jones Topps PSA 10
30
$13.50
each
05 Ronnie Brown Score PSA 10
40
$12.50
each
05 Ronnie Brown Topps PSA 10
30
$13.50
each
Both of these products have been out less than a month. Sure topps is white boarders and easy to grade but score has a colored
boarder..not so easy. I hear the cash registers ringing!
JS
<< <i>
but also consider taking some action if you're sitting on 9.5's as an investment. Most of Beckett-Land is in the dark about this, I believe, but that too can't last much longer. >>
"Investment" and "Beckett" (and 90% of all graded cards) in the same sentence, that's a problem in itself.
mike
Absurd, isn't it?
tell you how many times I have seen a card over 50 years old and someone say "yeah thats nice but its O/C or that has a
print dot. Its freaking 50 years old!
As far as modern, wise collectors know what cards are condition tough and what cards are made to put in holders. I might
mention a few of the tough ones..
2004 bowman's best BB...I opened an entire box, all twelve autos were chipped. Some of these are the best RC of guys. Sure
there are nicer rookie cards out there, but none come close to how condition sensitive these are.
2004 contenders FB...foil is still tough even today..add in stickers that usually aren't mint and you have a tough one to grade...besides
maybe SPA, is any set hotter than this one?
So what might be the most important # on the front of a beckett graded card.....not the grade..but maybe the serial # as people will
soon figure out that cards graded around the year 2000 are now vastly undergraded!! I mean I had a beautiful Josh Beckett rookie
card, straight from UD...the thing was flawless..came back a 5! You think BGS would still give the surface grade a 4.5 today for one
wrinkle??
JS
The best deals are the vintage in BGS holders, there are a few out there still. I usually find mine at small local shows. They easily get a 1-2 grade bump.
cracking??
JS
<< <i>I didn't think about vintage. My dad has a BVG 56 Mays graded 7.5..... he had it graded a year or so ago..you think that is worth
cracking??
JS >>
It depends on why it was downgraded. If it's because of toning or print dots then I would say no. But if it otherwise looks NM then I would probably give it a shot.
Is this part of some effort b/w the manufacturers and the grading companies to make mint and gem mint cards more scarce? Is it that tough to cut cardboard precisely?
<< <i>Grading value is based upon knowing that an older vintage card is authentic, unrestored (most of the time!) and is deemed a certain condition. >>
<< <i>This was to combat the multitudes of dishonest dealers who would outrageously self grade their junk. >>
carew4me,
One of the most brilliant coments made on this subject. The last quote above is exactly what spawned the idea of third-party grading.
As to the business side...
Unfortunately the bottomline has its way of dictating the nature of any business. Most importantly, if it's public!
my 2 cents,
Adam
As a former professional grader, can you maybe explain the mindset or thought processes a grader goes through when he gets a modern submission where a large percentage of the cards are trimmed or otherwise altered? You gotta figure that if it's modern cards and 33% of them are clearly trimmed, then the submitter is most likely a card doctor (or employs one), right? So why not reject the whole thing or at least enough to where the dealer could barely profit from it after the grading fees?
This hasn't been discussed in this thread very much, but one thing that really hurt the modern graded card market in the not too distant past was that a lot of the tougher gem mint cards were routinely submitted and sold by the same group of dealers...and there were (and still are) always a ton of 0.0's or evid of trimming in their submissions. This was really true a year or two ago where virtually every high dollar gem mint spx card came from a core group of dealers. There were a ton of threads posted on this subject at the time, mostly by posters no longer here.
<< <i>Adam -
As a former professional grader, can you maybe explain the mindset or thought processes a grader goes through when he gets a modern submission where a large percentage of the cards are trimmed or otherwise altered? You gotta figure that if it's modern cards and 33% of them are clearly trimmed, then the submitter is most likely a card doctor (or employs one), right? So why not reject the whole thing or at least enough to where the dealer could barely profit from it after the grading fees?
This hasn't been discussed in this thread very much, but one thing that really hurt the modern graded card market in the not too distant past was that a lot of the tougher gem mint cards were routinely submitted and sold by the same group of dealers...and there were (and still are) always a ton of 0.0's or evid of trimming in their submissions. This was really true a year or two ago where virtually every high dollar gem mint spx card came from a core group of dealers. There were a ton of threads posted on this subject at the time, mostly by posters no longer here. >>
Sorry David
Us graders gots a code we live by - never divulge trade secrets and always tell the truth - even when lying!
So what are the pop reports from pogo stick grading looking like these days? You're not selling out, are ya?
<< <i>Us graders gots a code we live by - never divulge trade secrets and always tell the truth - even when lying! >>
Stone
Are you implying I'm lying about something??
Adam
<< <i>
<< <i>Us graders gots a code we live by - never divulge trade secrets and always tell the truth - even when lying! >>
Stone
Are you implying I'm lying about something??
Adam >>
Adam
Ya gotta come around more often - I was goofin on David.
I have absolutely no knowledge of graders, grades, grading companies....
mike
<< <i>Stone -
So what are the pop reports from pogo stick grading looking like these days? You're not selling out, are ya? >>
David
We guarantee all our pops are 1/1's!
the maniger
Guess I haven't watched enough to know.
Just getting back into it to see whats going on.
I've always had a love for the market and what's happening!
Adam
<< <i>I've always had a love for the market and what's happening! >>
Adam
I would too but I got all my money tied up in cash!
Nope. I don't like what they are doing to the market, but I don't hate them.
>>Beckett has eased their standards since they started, that is very clear.
Yup. And for those who paid 5x PSA 10 value for any BGS 9.5 in the last few years, this is more than an inconvenience.
>>I don't think anything Beckett has done is any worse the favorable treatment large submitters get at PSA, it's just business.
I disagree that the favorable treatment (if any) is a deliberate PSA decision like the easy 9.5's at Beckett. I believe it is a natural tendency of a grader to stop bearing down so hard after looking at 36 perfect 1990 Sammy Sosas in a row, and that mega-submitters know this so they slip their "sliders" into the bottom of the 50-card stack.
>>Getting higher grades helps increase submissions, but it also violates trust if done recklessly.
Yup. Yup. And if you paid 5x PSA 10 value for a BGS 9.5, you should consider yourself violated.
>>I'm sure that Joe and Mark Anderson at Beckett walk the line everyday balancing more submissions and trust, the don't want to kill the Golden Goose.
That line they walk every day shifted about the time the company changed hands. I think "more submissions" won the argument in the board room.
>>I think we are niave to think that the true purpose of PSA/BGS is to grade cards as accurate as possible. Their true purpose is to make money off submissions. They will do whatever it takes to increase submissions - lower standards, cut deals with large customers, grade sheet cut cards, etc.
I agree Beckett has made this decision. I disagree that PSA has. So if I'm naive, I'm only half naive.
When all is said and done, you (meaning anybody) either agree that what is happening will cause BGS 9.5's to lose value, or you don't. Time will tell what those megabucks BGS 9.5's of 2004 sell for in 2006. I will not mind at all if someone resurrects this thread next spring and is able to say, "Ha! JR, you're a moron."
Some things it's actually good to be wrong about.
altered?????
This hasn't been the case for over 6 years now! The day that PSA and BGS started grading a bunch of football cards that were right
off the press and marking them all 9's or better, was the day it was about money. Lets not pretend here. I don't know when
PSA started but I can bet you that very quickly the bottom line became the most important line.
2000 Collector's Edge PSA football ring any bells??
its funny, the card companies print up all this stuff..products every two weeks..flood of numbered inserts, GU and autos..every year the
bar goes up...better autos, better cuts..outrageous pack prices...suddenly the card companies arn't making any money..uh oh...better
revamp the hobby..can't we go back to the simple times....all base cards..maybe keep the pack price at 4.99 a pack but no
more high end stuff..hey isn't it about the kids..yeah kids, kids, exqusite 500/pack *cough* kids kids kids...
grading is the same way..they pimped themself for several years on all this modern right off the press stuff and now they want to
come back to when it was just a hobby.....ahhh..no. You can't go back. No part of grading now a days is for authenticity.. Its all about
the $$$$$$$$$$$. Admit it and move on.
and while we have a real grader here can he explain why there are at least 3 Pujols Bowman chrome rookies all numbered 5/500 in
graded card cases?? Its only the most important card of the 21st century!! If you can't stop guys writing on cards, how can you catch
what people on here seem to think is soooo important like trimming??? It doesn't take a doctorate from Harvard in grading to notice
when two cards come in hand numbered the same!!
I love talking!! Bring it on!
JS
<< <i>You'd have to go back a long time to find 9.5's that outsold psa 10's by 2, 3, 4 or 5X...long before Beckett media was sold. They've been pretty even for a while now w/ post 2000 cards, with a slight edge going to beckett. I'm not sure what the avg added premium would be, but I think it's overstated in peoples' minds. I know I've outsold bgs 9.5's with psa 10's and vice versa, so sometimes it just depends on the seller/scan/etc. >>
I was just going to say the same thing. Anyone who thinks 9.5's 'routinely' outsell PSA 10's obviously isn't paying attention to the market. Sure, that's still true with a couple issues ('86 FU and TT Bonds, for instance) but it's mostly restricted to '80's issues. It is NOT true for post 2000 issues, where a dilligent search will reveal that PSA 10's often outsell BGS 9.5.
Also, David, I have no idea why 2003 TC is so stupidly off center, but I've often wondered about it myself.
<< <i>>>jr - You can hate Beckett all you want, I think that is the real reason for your post.
Nope. I don't like what they are doing to the market, but I don't hate them.
>>Beckett has eased their standards since they started, that is very clear.
Yup. And for those who paid 5x PSA 10 value for any BGS 9.5 in the last few years, this is more than an inconvenience.
>>I don't think anything Beckett has done is any worse the favorable treatment large submitters get at PSA, it's just business.
I disagree that the favorable treatment (if any) is a deliberate PSA decision like the easy 9.5's at Beckett. I believe it is a natural tendency of a grader to stop bearing down so hard after looking at 36 perfect 1990 Sammy Sosas in a row, and that mega-submitters know this so they slip their "sliders" into the bottom of the 50-card stack.
>>Getting higher grades helps increase submissions, but it also violates trust if done recklessly.
Yup. Yup. And if you paid 5x PSA 10 value for a BGS 9.5, you should consider yourself violated.
>>I'm sure that Joe and Mark Anderson at Beckett walk the line everyday balancing more submissions and trust, the don't want to kill the Golden Goose.
That line they walk every day shifted about the time the company changed hands. I think "more submissions" won the argument in the board room.
>>I think we are niave to think that the true purpose of PSA/BGS is to grade cards as accurate as possible. Their true purpose is to make money off submissions. They will do whatever it takes to increase submissions - lower standards, cut deals with large customers, grade sheet cut cards, etc.
I agree Beckett has made this decision. I disagree that PSA has. So if I'm naive, I'm only half naive.
When all is said and done, you (meaning anybody) either agree that what is happening will cause BGS 9.5's to lose value, or you don't. Time will tell what those megabucks BGS 9.5's of 2004 sell for in 2006. I will not mind at all if someone resurrects this thread next spring and is able to say, "Ha! JR, you're a moron."
Some things it's actually good to be wrong about. >>
The fact that more BGS 9.5's are appearing on the market is not proof, in and of itself, that Beckett has lowered it's standards. There are other variables-- namely, the superior condition of the raw cards being submitted-- that could account for this. To see if Beckett really has lowered it's standards you would have to access the Beckett pop reports from two or three years ago, see how many of the cards in a given issue were given 9.5's, then look at the pop reports now to see if that % has changed for that issue.
But of course this doesn't happen, because the difference between a 9 and a 9.5 cannot be seen with the naked eye-- if, indeed, a difference exists at all. Yet people pay 10x more for a 10 than a 9 because the 9 has corner damage which can be picked up under magnification.
It's amazing this hobby has stayed afloat as long as it has.
Keep in mind though that this "phenomenon" is certainly not unique to baseball cards. Coins and stamps had been this way long before baseball card grading came about - and before coin and stamp slabbing came about. I have a coin collection but my interest in coins has been dormant for a number of years. But I read a few years ago where a "pristine" 1963 proof Lincoln Penny sold for $13,000 - unbelievable for a coin that in normal proof condition sells for just a few bucks. A small flaw in a diamond can mean many thousands of dollars difference in a multi-carat stone. There are numerous other examples of condition, even under a magnifying glass, being an important element of value in the world of collecting.
Steve
Stingray
---------
>>I think we are niave to think that the true purpose of PSA/BGS is to grade cards as accurate as possible. Their true purpose is to make money off submissions. They will do whatever it takes to increase submissions - lower standards, cut deals with large customers, grade sheet cut cards, etc.
I agree Beckett has made this decision. I disagree that PSA has. So if I'm naive, I'm only half naive.
------------
This one made me laugh. PSA is owned by CU, which is a public company. Beckett is owned by Apprise Media, which is a private company. PSA has to care more about submissions since they have to please Wall Street. Joe O's bosses would be very upset with him if he didn't do everything in his power (within limits) to increase submissions. I'm sure Apprise Media wants Beckett submissions to increase, but they don't have to report it every quarter, they can take longer term view of the business.
It still does in some cases, as we have seen recently. The flood of 9.5's and the remnants of "9.5 mania" have combined to create a window of opportunity, and some folks have jumped in with both feet. "We're crazy if we don't run with it," as my friend said. When does the window close? I dunno, but my gut tells me the two situations cannot co-exist for long.