Home PSA Set Registry Forum

Grades finally posted - very disappointed

You may look at the grades and ask why I'm disappointed, and I'd like to explain. First, the number of PSA 10 Marino cards is well below my norm, even though 60 to 75% of the Marino cards I sent in were GEM MINT. Second, the 314/315 grader refuses to grade a 10 on any vintage football (All hit 9's except the Norm Evans that was a 5 - I must have missed a surface crease???) plus the grader refuses to grade a 1985 football card over a PSA 8. At least one Moon and one Clayton were solid 9's recently pulled from a wax box. On top of that, the grader mislabeled at least 10 Marino cards - blatently missing the variations that I PAINSTAKINGLY detailed out on my submission form. Every order the grader misses between 2 and 4 which is somewhat understandable but 10+ out of 45 to 50? That's inexcusable and doesn't say much for his/her ability to read the submission form. It's looks like I'll have the have them fixed at the upcoming Sportfest in June - because I REFUSE to spend additional money mailing the cards back. Sorry for the rant, but I'm not happy.

Greg M.


LINE # CERT # CARD CARD CO. CARD # CARD NAME VARIETY GRADE
1 31514352 2002 FLEER THROWBACKS BOB GRIESE GREATS OF GAME AUTOGRAPH 9
2 31514353 2002 FLEER THROWBACKS TONY DORSETT GREATS OF GAME AUTOGRAPH 9
3 31514354 2002 FLEER THROWBACKS JOE GREENE GREATS OF GAME AUTOGRAPH 9
4 31514355 2002 FLEER THROWBACKS HOWIE LONG GREATS OF GAME AUTOGRAPH 10
5 31514356 2000 FLEER GREATS MIKE DITKA AUTOGRAPHS 7
6 31514357 2000 FLEER GREATS FRANCO HARRIS AUTOGRAPHS 8
7 31514358 2000 FLEER GREATS MEL RENFRO AUTOGRAPHS 8
8 31514359 1999 UD CENTURY LEGEND DF DAN FOUTS EPIC SIGNATURES 8
9 31514360 1999 UD CENTURY LEGEND PW PAUL WARFIELD EPIC SIGNATURES 10
10 31514361 1999 UD CENTURY LEGEND LD LEN DAWSON EPIC SIGNATURES 9
11 31514362 1999 UD CENTURY LEGEND ON OZZIE NEWSOME EPIC SIGNATURES 9
12 31514363 1999 SP SIGNATURE CP MIKE SINGLETARY AUTOGRAPHED 10
13 31514364 1999 SP SIGNATURE SW JOHN STALLWORTH AUTOGRAPHED 8
14 31514365 1999 SP SIGNATURE JH JACK HAM AUTOGRAPHED 8
15 31514366 1999 SP SIGNATURE CT CHARLEY TAYLOR AUTOGRAPHED 10
16 31514367 1999 SP SIGNATURE KW KELLEN WINSLOW AUTOGRAPHED 9
17 31514368 1999 SP SIGNATURE ML MEL BLOUNT AUTOGRAPHED 9
18 31514369 1999 SP SIGNATURE RY RAYMOND BERRY AUTOGRAPHED 10
19 31514370 1999 SP SIGNATURE JL JAMES LOFTON AUTOGRAPHED 8
20 31514371 1999 SP SIGNATURE PK PAUL KRAUSE AUTOGRAPHED 10
21 31514372 1999 SP SIGNATURE LS LEE ROY SELMON AUTOGRAPHED 8
22 31514373 1999 SP SIGNATURE CJ CHARLIE JOINER AUTOGRAPHED 8
23 31514374 1999 SP SIGNATURE OZ OZZIE NEWSOME AUTOGRAPHED 10
24 31514375 1999 SP SIGNATURE JY JACK YOUNGBLOOD AUTOGRAPHED 10
25 31514376 1999 SP SIGNATURE J9A JOE MONTANA GREAT PERF.-AUTOGRAPH 9
26 31514377 1999 SPORTS ILL. TED HENDRICKS AUTOGRAPH COLLECTION 8
27 31514378 1999 SPORTS ILL. KENNY HOUSTON AUTOGRAPH COLLECTION 8
28 31514379 1999 SPORTS ILL. LENNY MOORE AUTOGRAPH COLLECTION 9
29 31514380 1999 SPORTS ILL. BOBBY MITCHELL AUTOGRAPH COLLECTION 8
30 31514381 1999 SPORTS ILL. ANTHONY MUNOZ AUTOGRAPH COLLECTION 10
31 31514382 1999 SPORTS ILL. BOBBY BELL AUTOGRAPH COLLECTION 9
32 31514383 1999 SPORTS ILL. JOHN MACKEY AUTOGRAPH COLLECTION 9
33 31514384 2004 TOPPS ALL-TIME HM HUGH McELHENNY FAN FAVORITES AUTOGRAPH 8
34 31514385 2004 TOPPS ALL-TIME JH JOHN HANNAH FAN FAVORITES AUTOGRAPH 8
35 31514386 2004 TOPPS ALL-TIME AP ALAN PAGE FAN FAVORITES AUTOGRAPH 8
36 31514387 2004 TOPPS ALL-TIME JD JOE DeLAMIELLEURE FAN FAVORITES AUTOGRAPH 8
37 31514388 2004 TOPPS ALL-TIME DH DAN HAMPTON FAN FAVORITES AUTOGRAPH 8
38 31514389 2005 U.D. LEGENDS LS-OM OLLIE MATSON LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 10
39 31514390 2005 U.D. LEGENDS LS-BG BUD GRANT LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 10
40 31514391 2005 U.D. LEGENDS LS-DD DAN DIERDORF LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 10
41 31514392 2005 U.D. LEGENDS LS-BB BOB BROWN LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 10
42 31514393 2005 U.D. LEGENDS LS-HA HERB ADDERLEY LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 6
43 31514394 1998 TOPPS A11 DWIGHT STEPHENSON HALL OF FAME-AUTOGRAPH 9
44 31514395 1999 TOPPS HOF4 TOM MACK HALL OF FAME CLASS 1999 8
45 31514396 2001 U.D. LEGENDS TB TERRY BRADSHAW AUTOGRAPH 8
46 31514397 2001 SP AUTHENTIC JR JOHN RIGGINS SIGN OF TIMES-'02 HAWAII 9
47 31514398 2004 U.D. LEGENDS LS-DA DOUG ATKINS LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
48 31514399 2001 TOPPS TEAM TOPPS TTF4 TOMMY McDONALD LEGENDS AUTOGRAPH 8
49 31514400 2001 TOPPS ARCHIVES AA-RB ROOSEVELT BROWN ROOKIE REPRINT AUTOGRAPH 10
50 31514401 2001 TOPPS ARCHIVES AA-DJ DAVE JONES ROOKIE REPRINT AUTOGRAPH 8
51 31514402 2001 TOPPS ARCHIVES AACBE CHUCK BEDNARIK ROOKIE REPRINT AUTOGRAPH 10
52 31514403 2002 TOPPS HERITAGE HR-BS BART STARR REAL ONE AUTOGRAPHS 9
53 31514404 2001 DONRUSS CLASSICS 199 SAMMY BAUGH SIGNIFICANT SIGNATURES 7
54 31514405 2001 DONRUSS CLASSICS 181 FRANK GIFFORD SIGNIFICANT SIGNATURES 8
55 31514406 2001 DONRUSS CLASSICS 186 FRED BILETNIKOFF SIGNIFICANT SIGNATURES 8
56 31514407 2001 DONRUSS CLASSICS 179 FRAN TARKENTON SIGNIFICANT SIGNATURES 8
57 31514408 2001 BOWMAN HERITAGE BHARC ROGER CLEMENS AUTOGRAPHS 9
58 31514409 1973 TOPPS 511 PAUL WARFIELD N/A 9
59 31514410 1973 TOPPS 188 NORM EVANS N/A 5
60 31514411 1976 TOPPS 245 JOE GREENE N/A 9
61 31514412 1973 TOPPS 491 LARRY SEIPLE N/A 9
62 31514413 1975 TOPPS 440 DICK ANDERSON N/A 9
63 31514414 1978 TOPPS 425 GARO YEPREMIAN N/A 9
64 31514415 1980 TOPPS 485 LARRY CSONKA N/A 9
65 31514416 1985 TOPPS 251 WARREN MOON N/A 8
66 31514417 1985 TOPPS 251 WARREN MOON N/A 8
67 31514418 1985 TOPPS 308 MARK CLAYTON ALL PRO 8
68 31514419 1985 TOPPS 308 MARK CLAYTON ALL PRO 8
69 31514420 1985 TOPPS TIFFANY 65 BILL BUCKNER N/A 8
70 31514421 1988 HOLSUM DOLPHINS 5 DAN MARINO N/A 7
71 31514422 1988 FLEER TEAM ACTION 15 MIAMI DOLPHINS MIAMI SCORING MACHINE 10
72 31514423 1988 FLEER TEAM ACTION 77 MIAMI DOLPHINS PASSING-DAN MARINO 8
73 31514424 1988 FLEER TEAM ACTION 77 MIAMI DOLPHINS PASSING-DAN MARINO 8
74 31514425 1989 TOPPS BOX BOTTOMS H D.MARINO/C.BANKS HAND CUT 8
75 31514426 1990 PANINI STICKER 115 DAN MARINO N/A 8
76 31514427 1990 TOPPS BOX BOTTOMS J D.MARINO/G.KRAGEN HAND CUT 8
77 31514428 1992 WILDCARD 19 DAN MARINO N/A 9
78 31514429 1992 WILD CARD SS-10 DAN MARINO STAT SMASHERS 9
79 31514430 1992 WILD CARD SS-10 DAN MARINO STAT SMASHERS 9
80 31514431 1992 WILD CARD SS-10 DAN MARINO STAT SMASHERS 9
81 31514432 1992 WILD CARD SS-10 DAN MARINO STAT SMASHERS 9
82 31514433 1993 STADIUM CLUB 60 DAN MARINO MEMBERS ONLY 8
83 31514434 1993 STADIUM CLUB 60 DAN MARINO 1ST DAY ISSUE 8
84 31514435 1994 SPORTFLICS 182 DAN MARINO ARTIST'S PROOF 9
85 31514436 1994 SPORTFLICS HH3 D.MARINO/R.WOODSON HEAD TO HEAD 9
86 31514437 1992 UPPER DECK 10 DAN MARINO NFL EXPERIENCE 8
87 31514438 1992 UPPER DECK 22 DAN MARINO NFL EXPERIENCE 10
88 31514439 1995 SP ALL-PRO AP-13 DAN MARINO GOLD 9
89 31514440 1995 STADIUM CLUB 240 DAN MARINO N/A 8
90 31514441 1996 DOLPHINS 1 DAN MARINO MIAMI SUBS 8
91 31514442 1993 US PLAYING CARDS DAN MARINO DITKA PICKS-ACE OF HEARTS 10
92 31514443 1995 US PLAYING CARDS DAN MARINO DITKA'S PICKS-ACE OF DMD 10
93 31514444 1994 TOPPS 160 DAN MARINO N/A 10
94 31514445 1994 STADIUM CLUB 200 DAN MARINO N/A 9
95 31514446 1996 STADIUM CLUB 260 DAN MARINO N/A 9
96 31514447 1995 ZENITH Z-TEAM ZT1 DAN MARINO N/A 8
97 31514448 NO SPEC INFO. REFUND DO NOT GRADE N/A Not Holdered, No Holder Available
98 31514449 1996 SELECT CERTIFIED 55 DAN MARINO MIRROR RED 9
99 31514450 1995 TOPPS MYST.FINEST DAN MARINO QUARTERBACK-REF. W.COAT. 9
100 31514451 1997 SPx HOLOFAME HF13 DAN MARINO N/A 10
101 31514452 1998 STADIUM CLUB CHR. SCC8 DAN MARINO REFRACTOR 10
102 31514453 1998 STADIUM CLUB 20 DAN MARINO 1ST DAY ISSUE 9
103 31514454 1997 PINNACLE EPIX GAME E17 DAN MARINO ORANGE 5
104 31514455 1999 TOPPS CHROME 40 DAN MARINO REFRACTOR 9
105 31514456 1999 SCORE S-102 DAN MARINO SUPPLEMENTAL 8
106 31514457 1999 SCORE S-97 BRETT FAVRE SUPPLEMENTAL 9
107 31514458 1991 PRO SET 210 DAN MARINO N/A 8
108 31514459 1994 STADIUM CLUB 200 DAN MARINO N/A 9
109 31514460 1994 COLLECTOR'S EDGE 115 DAN MARINO N/A 9
110 31514461 1995 STADIUM CLUB 240 DAN MARINO N/A 9
111 31514462 1996 CLASSIC 10 DAN MARINO NFL EXPERIENCE 10
112 31514463 1997 PAC. PHILADELPHIA 173 DAN MARINO N/A 8
113 31514464 1999 SPx 46 DAN MARINO N/A 9
114 31514465 2002 U.D. GENERATIONS NA-S NATE ARCHIBALD SIGNATURE CLASSICS 10
115 31514466 2000 U.D. LEGENDS PA PAUL ARIZIN LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 10
116 31514467 2000 U.D. LEGENDS WB WALT BELLAMY LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
117 31514468 2004 U.D. LEGENDS LS-DC DAVE CASPER LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 8
118 31514469 2004 ULTIMATE COLL. US-CD CLYDE DREXLER ULTIMATE SIGNATURES 9
119 31514470 2004 SP SIGNATURE SPSWF WALT FRAZIER SP SIGNS 8
120 31514471 2001 FLEER GREATS N. LIEBERMAN-CLINE AUTOGRAPHS 9
121 31514472 2001 FLEER GREATS JERRY LUCAS AUTOGRAPHS 8
122 31514473 2003 U.D. LEGENDS LS-BS BILL SHARMAN LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 10
123 31514474 2005 SP GAME USED SIGLW LENNY WILKENS SIGNIFICANCE 9
124 31514475 2001 DONRUSS CLASSICS 186 FRED BILETNIKOFF SIGNIFICANT SIGNATURES 8
125 31514476 2001 TOPPS TEAM TOPPS TTR15 MIKE SINGLETARY LEGENDS AUTOGRAPH 8
126 31514477 2001 DONRUSS CLASSICS 179 FRAN TARKENTON SIGNIFICANT SIGNATURES 8

Date Received: 02/28/2006
Date of Grades Posted: 04/18/2006
Date Shipped: No Date Specified


Collecting vintage auto'd fb cards and Dan Marino cards!!

References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg

Comments

  • JasP24JasP24 Posts: 4,645 ✭✭✭
    Greg, I had the same on a recent submission. with mislabeling cards..The grader???314..

    And the cards weren't any crazy variations either..One was a Peyton Manning Playoff Absolute RC, that actually SAID ABSOLUTE on the front and PSA labeled it Playoff Prestige...

    I dont think they even look at the submission form..Like you I wrote THE EXACT card/number/type on the form...Not sure how or why they messed it up...They are back at PSA now as I sent in my 6 free gradings for the year...Still waiting for the grades (logged on 4/10)...

    Jason
    I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit,
    according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
  • lommerlommer Posts: 160 ✭✭
    My most recent grades (315...) were posted yesterday and I agree with you. My average grade for the submission was a full point less than previous submissions. I'm sorry, but my pre-grading skills have not tanked like that in a couple of months. They also again labeled cards with the wrong variety, which makes it 3 submissions in a row with the same error. That should not happen.


    chad
  • This is exactly the point I was trying to get at in another thread - PSA is really without competition so slabbing mistakes are becoming commonplace and grading standards are inconsistent. There's nothing more frustrating than waiting to get back a submission that has been sitting at PSA for a month or two to find cards with incorrect labels. By the time you resubmit and the errors have been fixed, you're looking at another two weeks before you have the card back. However, what's the alternative? PSA seems to be the lesser of the three evils.

    Also, grading inconsistencies will continue to grow because PSA either has to add new graders with less experience or allow their current graders an even shorter glimpse before making a decision. Using serial numbers, you can actually trace periods when grading standards were looser and other periods when standards were absurdly difficult. Crossing over cards is becoming near impossible. You're almost guaranteed a grade less.

    PSA is really trying to force the purchase of cards in their slabs. Crossing and sending in raw material are graded much more stringently than most of the pre-existing cards in PSA slabs. It's probably a good business practice for PSA. The registry is everything and I believe most collectors are participating in some way. Unfortunately, it makes it very tough to buy the card and not the holder. I've had many instances where I could purchase a higher grade PSA card that was inferior to the same card a grade lower. Frankly, I don't know what to do. You want the registry value, but it hurts to put your hand in your pocket for extra money to own a lesser example at a significant price differential.

    Last, it makes it near impossible to cut into the grading index on the registry if you're coming from behind. It would be interesting to plot the evolution of a PSA 5 card over the years. What was once something without creases has turned into an eye-pleasing card with a minimum of flaws. I don't expect this trend to cease either. PSA is finally able to establish a PSA 5 as a highly graded example of a card. This will push all the grades across the board and protect the elite sitting at top of most of the registry categories.

    Personally, the aforementioned takes a lot of the joy out of baseball card collecting.

    Best,

    JimCo
  • zef204zef204 Posts: 4,742 ✭✭


    << <i>Second, the 314/315 grader refuses to grade a 10 on any vintage football >>



    I know what you mean. These just popped for me:

    1 31586438 1965 TOPPS 463 MANNY MOTA N/A 8
    2 31586439 1968 TOPPS 310 LUIS APARICIO N/A 8
    3 31586440 1968 TOPPS 366 RON SANTO ALL STAR 9
    4 31586441 1968 TOPPS 373 FRANK ROBINSON ALL STAR 7
    5 31586442 1961 FLEER 37 GINO MARCHETTI N/A 8
    6 31586443 1970 TOPPS 7 GINO CAPPELLETTI N/A 8
    7 31586444 1970 TOPPS 19 JIM BEIRNE N/A 8
    8 31586445 1970 TOPPS 40 TOMMY NOBIS N/A 8
    9 31586446 1970 TOPPS 46 ANDY LIVINGSTON N/A 8
    10 31586447 1970 TOPPS 93 CHRIS HANBURGER N/A 9
    11 31586448 1970 TOPPS 98 BEN HAWKINS N/A 8
    12 31586449 1970 TOPPS 103 OTIS TAYLOR N/A 8
    13 31586450 1970 TOPPS 43 ELVIN BETHEA N/A 9OC
    14 31586451 1970 TOPPS 118 RICK REDMAN N/A 8
    15 31586452 1970 TOPPS 113 LANCE RENTZEL RED NAME 8
    16 31586453 1970 TOPPS 145 CHARLIE TAYLOR N/A 8
    17 31586454 1965 PHILADELPHIA 65 EARL MORRALL N/A 9
    18 31586455 1965 PHILADELPHIA 113 NEW YORK GIANTS TEAM CARD 8
    19 31586456 1965 PHILADELPHIA 138 JIM RINGO N/A 8
    20 31586457 1965 PHILADELPHIA 106 PAUL FLATLEY N/A 9
    20 31586458 1965 PHILADELPHIA 106 PAUL FLATLEY N/A 8
    21 31586459 1965 PHILADELPHIA 102 BILL BROWN N/A 8
    22 31586460 1965 PHILADELPHIA 101 HAL BEDSOLE N/A 9
    23 31586461 1965 PHILADELPHIA 96 FRANK VARRICHIONE N/A 8
    24 31586462 1967 PHILADELPHIA 109 NEW YORK GIANTS TEAM CARD 6
    25 31586463 1966 PHILADELPHIA 96 DEACON JONES N/A 8
    26 31586464 1967 PHILADELPHIA 95 CLANCY WILLIAMS N/A 9
    27 31586465 1966 PHILADELPHIA 80 HERB ADDERLY N/A 8
    28 31586466 1967 PHILADELPHIA 90 DEACON JONES N/A 9
    29 31586467 1965 PHILADELPHIA 194 VINCE PROMUTO N/A 9
    30 31586468 1967 PHILADELPHIA 55 BOB LILLY N/A 8
    31 31586469 1967 PHILADELPHIA 38 JOHN BREWER N/A 8
    32 31586470 1967 TOPPS 125 RON MIX N/A 7
    33 31586471 1967 PHILADELPHIA 54 LEE ROY JORDAN N/A 8
    34 31586472 1965 PHILADELPHIA 147 JOHN H. JOHNSON N/A 8
    35 31586473 1967 PHILADELPHIA 133 PHILADELPHIA EAGLES TEAM CARD 9
    36 31586474 1967 PHILADELPHIA 49 DALLAS COWBOYS TEAM CARD 8
    37 31586475 1967 PHILADELPHIA 7 TOMMY NOBIS N/A 8
    38 31586476 1965 PHILADELPHIA 165 DALE MEINERT N/A 8
    39 31586477 1965 PHILADELPHIA 145 ED BROWN N/A 6
    40 31586478 1967 PHILADELPHIA 186 BOBBY MITCHELL N/A 8
    41 31586479 1965 PHILADELPHIA 142 JOHN BAKER N/A 8
    42 31586480 1967 PHILADELPHIA 103 JIM MARSHALL N/A 8
    43 31586481 1965 PHILADELPHIA 69 TOM WATKINS N/A 8
    44 31586482 1967 PHILADELPHIA 109 NEW YORK GIANTS TEAM CARD 8
    45 31586483 1965 PHILADELPHIA 66 NICK PIETROSANTE N/A 9
    46 31586484 1967 PHILADELPHIA 186 BOBBY MITCHELL N/A 8
    47 31586485 1965 PHILADELPHIA 178 ROLAND LAKES N/A 8
    48 31586486 1967 PHILADELPHIA 103 JIM MARSHALL N/A 8
    49 31586487 1969 TOPPS 46 RON ELLIS N/A 8


    There should have been a bunch more 9's and possibly a 10 or 2. I know these cards, and I know when they are undergraded. I tool 10 of these out for regrading and I already have 20 for regrading from my last submission. I am certain that of those 30 cards, at least half will get a bump. They have to get some more consistency over there on the grades, flip errors and the customer service wich is atrocious.
    EAMUS CATULI!

    My Auctions
  • yawie99yawie99 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Personally, the aforementioned takes a lot of the joy out of baseball card collecting. >>



    I've been thinking about a lot of those very issues recently and came to the above conclusion as well. It's funny because when I got my first-ever invoice back in either '99 or '00, I was struck by two things: the grades were, of course, lower than expected, which is probably a rite of passage on that maiden invoice; and, perhaps more importantly, my beloved '56 Topps Hall of Famers no longer seemed like treasured connections to the game's and hobby's past but seemed more like mere commodities.

    Nonetheless, I continued buying grading cards and submitting cards to PSA basically up until the present time. PSA does a fabulous job of tapping into collectors' inherent neuroticism, and I was certainly no exception. But over time, it seemed like the premiums paid for PSA X's relative to PSA X-1's just weren't worth it, given the often negligible difference in true condition between the cards. That realization pretty much spelled the end of high-grade collecting, but even collecting low- to mid-grade PSA stuff has become less satisfying. Besides the terribly frustrating inconsistency in grading and the shoddy quality control when it comes to labeling, it dawned on me the other day that my graded cards more or less sit in a box and don't often see the light of day. I don't have a huge collection so they don't take up much room, but it's simply not as easy to view and enjoy graded cards as it is cards in binders or toploaders. In one of my more jaded moments, I basically felt like a scan and cert number collector - not a card collector.

    To make an increasingly long, rambling story short, within the last 24 hours I've delisted all but one of my sets, which I figure I may grandfather in, so to speak, because it's still #1 and has a decent number of highest graded examples. As for my other stuff, I'll probably sell a lot of the cards on which I'd lose a lot of "value" by cracking them out, but once I figure out how I'm going to store stuff and pick up the needed supplies, I'm joining the Slab Liberation Army and going back to raw cards. I do like the checklist-like aspect of the Registry as well as the image hosting capabilities, but I figure I can do those things a lot more cheaply with Excel and a site like imagevent.com.
    imageimageimageimageimageimage
  • I agree. I recently opened a box of 1977 Topps cloth stickers and sent the 30 best cards in. I only sent 55-45 centering or better and I checked all the corners with a 5x... I got 5 PSA 9's, 24 PSA 8's and 1 PSA 7! All started with 314.... My 8's look better than the PSA 9's I've been buying from the favored submitters.
  • BoopottsBoopotts Posts: 6,784 ✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>Personally, the aforementioned takes a lot of the joy out of baseball card collecting. >>



    I've been thinking about a lot of those very issues recently and came to the above conclusion as well. It's funny because when I got my first-ever invoice back in either '99 or '00, I was struck by two things: the grades were, of course, lower than expected, which is probably a rite of passage on that maiden invoice; and, perhaps more importantly, my beloved '56 Topps Hall of Famers no longer seemed like treasured connections to the game's and hobby's past but seemed more like mere commodities.

    Nonetheless, I continued buying grading cards and submitting cards to PSA basically up until the present time. PSA does a fabulous job of tapping into collectors' inherent neuroticism, and I was certainly no exception. But over time, it seemed like the premiums paid for PSA X's relative to PSA X-1's just weren't worth it, given the often negligible difference in true condition between the cards. That realization pretty much spelled the end of high-grade collecting, but even collecting low- to mid-grade PSA stuff has become less satisfying. Besides the terribly frustrating inconsistency in grading and the shoddy quality control when it comes to labeling, it dawned on me the other day that my graded cards more or less sit in a box and don't often see the light of day. I don't have a huge collection so they don't take up much room, but it's simply not as easy to view and enjoy graded cards as it is cards in binders or toploaders. In one of my more jaded moments, I basically felt like a scan and cert number collector - not a card collector.

    To make an increasingly long, rambling story short, within the last 24 hours I've delisted all but one of my sets, which I figure I may grandfather in, so to speak, because it's still #1 and has a decent number of highest graded examples. As for my other stuff, I'll probably sell a lot of the cards on which I'd lose a lot of "value" by cracking them out, but once I figure out how I'm going to store stuff and pick up the needed supplies, I'm joining the Slab Liberation Army and going back to raw cards. I do like the checklist-like aspect of the Registry as well as the image hosting capabilities, but I figure I can do those things a lot more cheaply with Excel and a site like imagevent.com. >>




    The PSA registry phenomenon is a cliniic in price targeting. Let's face it--- save for a few very finicky collectors (DGF springs to mind, although there are probably others) none of us really give a damn about the difference between the average 8 and a 10; and probably don't care about the difference between a 7 and a 10 if we chose to be honest with ourselves. I mean, I look at the average PSA 7 and you know what I think? I think "That's good enough". It was good enough before third party grading anyway, and there's no reason it shouldn't be the same now. People have bought into the idea that there's actually a meaningful difference between these grades, and for most of us there really isn't.

    Here's an example I brought up some time ago, and I'll use it again. Take yourself back to the days before third party grading. Now say you were at a show and looking to buy a 1971 Munson. A dealer had two of them. One had a minute chip on the lower right corner, and was centered 60/40, and the other was dead centered and had no corner damage. You inquire as to the price, and the dealer says 'Well, the one with the small corner chip is yours for $400, but I'll need at least $5500 for the perfect one'. Now honestly, what would any of us have done? We'd have taken the dinged one and told the dealer that there's no way in hell's half acre he'll ever get $5500 for the other one.

    What card dealers discovered is that there are people out there who will pay, say, ten bucks for a mint 1974 common, and there are other people who will pay $150. So, how do you keep the 10$ crowd as clients while still being able to charge $150 to the other guys? Bingo! You put a silly little number on a flip, stick the card in a sealed slab and tell them that one is in better condition then the other. It's like the price difference between a hot chocolate and a coffee at the Barnes and Noble cafe; they cost the same to make, give or take a couple cents, but one costs 75 cents more. Why? Because some people will pay $2 for a hot drink, and some will pay $2.75, and the secret to effective marketing is being able to sell to each of those people at their accepted price points. This has been going on as long as there's been a free market (anyone really believe it costs $20K more or whatever to build an Escalade over an Explorer?), but they didn't figure out a way to make this work in card collecting untill ten years ago.
  • halosfanhalosfan Posts: 2,634 ✭✭✭✭
    Greg, how did those basketball cards make it into your sub?
    Looking for a Glen Rice Inkredible and Alex Rodriguez cards
  • WabittwaxWabittwax Posts: 1,984 ✭✭✭
    I'll take graded to raw anyday. Most raw floating around nowadays is overgraded junk. With graded cards, you know what your getting. There just isn't truly mint Mickey Mantle's floating around out there that are being sold at full Beckett price like the old days. The card market has evolved. I'm not saying that collecting raw isn't fun. I'm just saying that I would take a 1956 Topps PSA 5 Herman Wehmeier to a raw 1956 Topps Herman Wehmeier in EX condition, anyday of the week.
  • ^^ Those were my hoops autos. I'm working on the Basketball HOF Auto set as well.

    Greg,

    Notice #117 on the submission. That is supposed to be "Dave Cowens" not "Dave Casper". How can you screw that up? What is the process for having PSA correct an error like this?
  • I Was crushed on my last submission as well. The berger and valo i agree with maybe even geronimo. the mattern may be overgraded the rest are low.



    PSA Order Status for Submission # 4295543


    LINE # CERT # CARD CARD CO. CARD # CARD NAME VARIETY GRADE
    1 31567797 1951 BOWMAN 30 DON PAUL N/A 6
    2 31567798 1951 BOWMAN 43 DAN EDWARDS N/A 5
    3 31567799 1952 BOWMAN 75 GEORGE KELL N/A 5
    4 31567800 1952 BOWMAN 123 SID HUDSON N/A 6
    5 31567801 1952 BOWMAN 128 DON NEWCOMBE N/A 6
    6 31567802 1952 BOWMAN 130 ALLIE CLARK N/A 6
    7 31567803 1952 BOWMAN 131 BOB SWIFT N/A 5
    8 31567804 1952 TOPPS 34 ELMER VALO N/A 4
    9 31567805 1953 BROWN & BIGELOW LOU GEHRIG 7 OF HEARTS 9
    10 31567806 1934 BATTER-UP 1 WALLY BERGER N/A 1MK
    11 31567807 1911 AL MATTERN N/A 5
    12 31567808 1933 INDIAN GUM 25 GERONIMO N/A 6

    Date Received: 03/27/2006
    Date of Grades Posted: 04/17/2006
    Date Shipped: 04/18/2006


    i was happy with this order though.

    PSA Order Status for Submission # 4400672


    LINE # CERT # CARD CARD CO. CARD # CARD NAME VARIETY GRADE
    1 31593902 1911 T206 KITTY BRANSFIELD N/A 6
    2 31593903 1911 T206 CLAUDE RITCHEY N/A 6
    3 31593904 1911 T206 DUMMY TAYLOR N/A 6
    4 31593905 1962 TOPPS 50 STAN MUSIAL N/A 8
    5 31593906 1971 TOPPS 752 DICK DRAGO N/A 8

    Date Received: 04/10/2006
    Date of Grades Posted: 04/14/2006
    Date Shipped: 04/14/2006






  • Greg- We've discussed the 314/315 dilema before. It just doesn't seem to be getting any better. As for customer service, I'm really surprised PSA has let this area of their business erode.

    Boopotts- I agree with the first part of your post. You are absolutely correct. Before grading, most cards that were considered Mint were in the 7 maybe 8 range. No one would have dreamed of paying the premiums that we see now for some 9's and 10's. Grading brought to light the true gem cards and the few collectors who coveted them. That's why I feel for many issues that PSA 7's are a temendous value. Depending upon the set, you can pick up 7's for the same price as raw.
    The one point that I don't agree with is the prevailing thought that PSA graded cards are a product. Read the many threads and you constantly hear board members refer to the "PSA product". PSA is a service, not a product. They do not print the cards. The only thing PSA does is give their professional opinion of the grade of a card and than provide the holder to insure that grade. PSA has no contol of what a card would sell for after it's been graded. They only make their money from the grading fee. The previous Barnes and Noble coffee vs. hot chocolate example doesn't apply.
    Blaming PSA for a poor product is like blaming a cleaning service for a poorly built house. The maid only cleans the house, she doesn't build it.
    Baseball is my Pastime, Football is my Passion
  • gregm13gregm13 Posts: 5,798 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Greg, how did those basketball cards make it into your sub? >>



    Good observation. The only non-football card I had graded was the Rodger Clemens bowman heritage auto - which is something that I'll hang onto.

    Regards,

    Greg M.
    Collecting vintage auto'd fb cards and Dan Marino cards!!

    References:
    Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
    E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
  • BoopottsBoopotts Posts: 6,784 ✭✭


    << <i>Greg- We've discussed the 314/315 dilema before. It just doesn't seem to be getting any better. As for customer service, I'm really surprised PSA has let this area of their business erode.

    Boopotts- I agree with the first part of your post. You are absolutely correct. Before grading, most cards that were considered Mint were in the 7 maybe 8 range. No one would have dreamed of paying the premiums that we see now for some 9's and 10's. Grading brought to light the true gem cards and the few collectors who coveted them. That's why I feel for many issues that PSA 7's are a temendous value. Depending upon the set, you can pick up 7's for the same price as raw.
    The one point that I don't agree with is the prevailing thought that PSA graded cards are a product. Read the many threads and you constantly hear board members refer to the "PSA product". PSA is a service, not a product. They do not print the cards. The only thing PSA does is give their professional opinion of the grade of a card and than provide the holder to insure that grade. PSA has no contol of what a card would sell for after it's been graded. They only make their money from the grading fee. The previous Barnes and Noble coffee vs. hot chocolate example doesn't apply.
    Blaming PSA for a poor product is like blaming a cleaning service for a poorly built house. The maid only cleans the house, she doesn't build it. >>




    Hi Frank.

    With all due respect I think the example does apply. A PSA slab is a product; when you buy a PSA graded card you are not just buying the card; you are also buying the grade. If this wasn't the case then a card that had just been cracked from a PSA 10 holder would sell for just as much as if the card were still slabbed.


    Also, I should have been more clear on one thing: PSA does not price target, since obviously they don't sell cards on the secondary market. But their service allows dealers to price target, and that's a large part of the reason why third party grading has been so successful.


  • << <i>Good observation. The only non-football card I had graded was the Rodger Clemens bowman heritage auto - which is something that I'll hang onto. >>



    Hey Greg - Those were my hoops autos. Just don't want you to send them back!!

    By the way, did you see in my other post where I said they mis-labeled my Dave Cowens as Dave CASPER!!! How can you screw up that bad?
  • fiveninerfiveniner Posts: 4,111 ✭✭✭
    I know what you mean. These just popped for me:



    Great Job Zef!!!!!!!
    Tony(AN ANGEL WATCHES OVER ME)
  • Here's one for you, still don't know where they got this:

    PSA Cert #31574090
    1937 KELLOGG'S PEP - LOUGHRAN/ROSS/RICKENBACKER/SHAW

    Its actually just of Red Grange.

    What's funny is all the others are correct - sub: 591639 Zip: 63011

    I caught it before it shipped and called customer service. The woman on the phone was VERY nice and hopefully they're able to fix 'er and send it right. Probably just an accident, I'm sure they're busting their butts to get things finished after the Chicago show. Better late than later-er-er.

    -Kyle-
  • mealewormmealeworm Posts: 1,269 ✭✭✭
    Greg,
    You should have contacted PSA the minute the grades posted and had them fix the errors before they shipped them out. It might be too late now. I have caught things wrong and they change them on the spot and shipped everything back together. HURRY.

    Dave
    image
    1957 Topps 99% 7.40 GPA
    Hank Aaron Basic PSA 7-8(75%)
  • sixdartsixdart Posts: 821 ✭✭
    ... plus the grader refuses to grade a 1985 football card over a PSA 8. At least one Moon and one Clayton were solid 9's recently pulled from a wax box. ...

    - gregm13


    Greg,

    This is why I stopped recently submitting '85 Topps football for now. The last (4) lots posted here haven't been very successful - PSA 8s galore.
  • yawie99yawie99 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭


    << <i>I'll take graded to raw anyday. Most raw floating around nowadays is overgraded junk. With graded cards, you know what your getting. There just isn't truly mint Mickey Mantle's floating around out there that are being sold at full Beckett price like the old days. The card market has evolved. I'm not saying that collecting raw isn't fun. I'm just saying that I would take a 1956 Topps PSA 5 Herman Wehmeier to a raw 1956 Topps Herman Wehmeier in EX condition, anyday of the week. >>



    I do agree that a typical PSA 8 probably falls within a more narrow range of actual condition than a typical eBay raw card that has been described as near mint-mint. But at the same time, it seems a bit naive to say you know what you're getting with graded cards, given all the discussion of crackouts, crossovers and resubmits that one finds just on this board. Graded or not, buying cards online almost always involves some leap of faith. And for a host of reasons, the distance of that leap seems longer now than it did during the first few years I collected PSA-graded cards.



    Edited to add: Jackpot on the Dummy Taylor!
    imageimageimageimageimageimage
  • First, let me say that it's nice to participate with a group of collectors who have highly articulate views and sophisticated opinions. The level of awareness in all your posts is impressive. I skimmed over these boards a few years ago when people simply engaged in ego battles with one another.

    I think there's another aspect underlying many of these messages - We evaluate cards by comparison to other graded cards. PSA has not been able to make their guidelines stick. In fact, I don't think any of us really ever refer to the guidelines when predicting a grade. We've been through the submission practice numerous times, scouted cards on Ebay & the internet and compared with friends and other hobbyists.

    PSA's grading isn't evolving while we are. PSA does provide a basic service of authentification by giving a grade, but those grades are confusing all of us. The common scenario I see is one of us submitting a card that should be a PSA 6. We're getting them back from grading as PSA 5s. Now, a dealer sends in the same exact card and gets the authorized/smauthorized courtesy bump landing him a PSA 7. The difference is now two grades, not one. I have plenty of PSA 5s that as nice as dealer inventory PSA 7s. The PSA 7 is selling for double what my PSA 5 is going for. Thus, PSA has effectively eliminated the possiblity of upgrading unless I'm willing to spend hard-earned money on nothing more than a slab label.

    I think we've all been through this and it's chipping away at our enthusiasm bit by bit. I don't resubmit because I don't believe it has been cost effective so, instead, I've learned to stomach it because I love the hobby. However, it takes its toll.

    Now, I see others are experiencing the same kind of letdown. Meanwhile, I checked the Registry request list and it's a mile long. There are all kinds of sets being petitioned for entry on the Registry and PSA gains from each one.

    I don't know what the answer is. But, I do know this - Baseball card collectors (non-dealers) want nothing more than the correct grade on their slabs. Undergrades suck and overgrades are detrimental too. What's the point of having a raggedy card in a high grade slab? We're not fooling ourselves. The true collectors are thoughtful and enjoy the camraderie the hobby seems to spawn. However, we're not stupid and we clearly see what is going on with PSA. Reconciling the positives and negatives is of the utmost importance. Our chosen hobby is supposed to be a haven away from office politics and the daily grind. Unfortunately, we're coming home and stepping into a period of card collecting that is highly political. It's difficult to find some refuge of purity these days. The sport of Baseball itself is now tainted by the use of steroids. I guess there's no escaping the notion that honesty and integrity are eroding.

    In the end, I can keep my cards or sell them. It's not going to impact the world on any discernible level. I'm not Fogel, Merkle, Branca or Louchios. By nature, I'm a fighter, but trying to find a way to the people who matter at PSA is akin to fighting City Hall. Thus, grading is now a protective process so the card doesn't deteriorate and validation that some a-hole didn't get scissor happy on a particular card. But, if you spoke to me about the hobby, you wouldn't hear a mention of a grade. You can choose to ignore the labels as I do and just enjoy the core of the hobby, the cards, regardless of what some 25 cent a card grader decides while assigning grades to players he/she had never heard of.

    Two more cents.

    Best to you all,

    JimCo

  • hench1hench1 Posts: 116


    << <i>This is exactly the point I was trying to get at in another thread - PSA is really without competition so slabbing mistakes are becoming commonplace and grading standards are inconsistent. There's nothing more frustrating than waiting to get back a submission that has been sitting at PSA for a month or two to find cards with incorrect labels. By the time you resubmit and the errors have been fixed, you're looking at another two weeks before you have the card back. However, what's the alternative? PSA seems to be the lesser of the three evils.

    Also, grading inconsistencies will continue to grow because PSA either has to add new graders with less experience or allow their current graders an even shorter glimpse before making a decision. Using serial numbers, you can actually trace periods when grading standards were looser and other periods when standards were absurdly difficult. Crossing over cards is becoming near impossible. You're almost guaranteed a grade less.

    PSA is really trying to force the purchase of cards in their slabs. Crossing and sending in raw material are graded much more stringently than most of the pre-existing cards in PSA slabs. It's probably a good business practice for PSA. The registry is everything and I believe most collectors are participating in some way. Unfortunately, it makes it very tough to buy the card and not the holder. I've had many instances where I could purchase a higher grade PSA card that was inferior to the same card a grade lower. Frankly, I don't know what to do. You want the registry value, but it hurts to put your hand in your pocket for extra money to own a lesser example at a significant price differential.

    Last, it makes it near impossible to cut into the grading index on the registry if you're coming from behind. It would be interesting to plot the evolution of a PSA 5 card over the years. What was once something without creases has turned into an eye-pleasing card with a minimum of flaws. I don't expect this trend to cease either. PSA is finally able to establish a PSA 5 as a highly graded example of a card. This will push all the grades across the board and protect the elite sitting at top of most of the registry categories.

    Personally, the aforementioned takes a lot of the joy out of baseball card collecting.

    Best,

    JimCo >>




    Very well put, Jim. I have reached a conclusion very similar to yours. I have pretty much decided to give up on PSA and other grading companies because I absolutely believe that the top guys in the Registry are being protected by absurd and inconsistent standards. "Maybe" the big submitters don't get preferential grades, but it sure looks like it walks like a duck to me.

    I collect vintage stuff and the grading on those, IMHO, has been wretched ever since Mike Baker left. I am sick of seeing cards 1-2 grades inferior to mine on the market. Customer service has evaporated, with submitted cards sitting for days without being logged in. Then, getting them back mislabled or poorly graded tops off the irritation.

    I think the whole "review" process borders on being a scam. I refuse to keep repaying grading fees just to get the grades that should have been assigned in the first place, but all too often, that is necessary. I'm tired of playing games.

    The only bright spot in customer service is the Set Registry ladies, Cosetta and B.J. and PSA would do well to implement their pro-customer attitudes throughout the company.

    The lame excuse of "they must be new" has gotten old, too. They should have their people trained from Day One.

    For me, the thrill is gone. I'm tired of fighting with PSA, and I have submitted cards to them since 1994. Their fees are too high for the product they deliver and I'm too small of a fish for them to care.
  • GriffinsGriffins Posts: 6,076 ✭✭✭
    What Jerry said.

    Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's

  • RipkenRipken Posts: 559 ✭✭✭
    The one thing we do have to remember is that grading is always going to be somewhat subjective. It's a human process. The inconsistency that does seem to exist is maddening. However, the only way to really correct that is to start with a core group of graders and keep them there for years at a time until new ones are adequately trained. Apparently that's not happening. I'm not sure how closely PSA monitors it's consistency but there really should be a small group of people who regularly 'cross examine' what graders are doing to try and maintain the standards that are supposed to exist. In the crush of filling the mountain of orders, I doubt that's going on.

    My latest? 15 9's on a 275-card vintage submission. FIFTEEN. I used to be able to figure on at least 35-40. 10s? Forget it! There are a LOT of 8's being dished out--but 9's are rare. Although....get this..... I cracked one card that had come back as a 6..hoping to bump to a 7. I got a 9. That was one bit of good news, but the rest was disappointing and there isn't much you can do about it. Re-submitting just isn't economically feasible. And if they truly are giving better grades to certain dealers, that's just flat wrong. But all it would take is one ex-grader to talk--even anonymously--and they'd have a major PR problem. So far, I believe none have said that. So hopefully it's not happening now.

  • I am not a big fan of 315 myself either. I recently purchased a few 1981 OPC Hockey rack packs and cracked them open and submitted them on two different time frames. One came back with 15 % in PSA 10 45% PSA 9 and the rest 8's not too shabby. Then the next came back from 315 and I got 10% PSA 9 60% PSA 8 25% PSA 7 or worse and 5% dd not meet min size. I know all about OPC cutting, but these were right from a rack pack and the exact same size as any of the others. YUCK!!!!!
  • gregm13gregm13 Posts: 5,798 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Greg,
    You should have contacted PSA the minute the grades posted and had them fix the errors before they shipped them out. It might be too late now. I have caught things wrong and they change them on the spot and shipped everything back together. HURRY.

    Dave >>



    Dave,

    Actually, I did call and a very nice rep named Christy (sp?) pulled the order and ensured the cards were labeled correctly. I would like to offer my sincere thanks to her for her assistance.

    Regards,

    Greg M.
    Collecting vintage auto'd fb cards and Dan Marino cards!!

    References:
    Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
    E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
  • yawie99yawie99 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭
    I doubt there's any conspiracy to suppress the grades of average collectors and/or inflate the grades of high-volume submitters. However, I'm highly skeptical that PSA actually follows their own stated grading process. Does anyone seriously believe these points?
      Grading - In addition, the sheer number of graders assigned to each card can vary depending on the type of card submitted. In all cases, at minimum, two graders are assigned to every card.
      Verification Stage (1) - After the cards have been sealed in the PSA holders, they are then sent to the Grading Verification stage. As mentioned earlier, this is where another grader will check the orders for accuracy and consistency in relation to PSA standards. If the cards appear to meet PSA's guidelines, the order is then sent on to the next step in the process. If any of the cards do not appear to meet the standards, the card is then removed from the holder and re-evaluated by our staff.
      Verification Stage (2) - The cards and holders are examined for defects that may have been overlooked in prior stages such as scratched cases or improper information on the PSA label
    Based on experience and observation, I can't help but think PSA has been doing a fair share of corner cutting in these areas.
    imageimageimageimageimageimage
  • With all due respect I think the example does apply. A PSA slab is a product; when you buy a PSA graded card you are not just buying the card; you are also buying the grade. If this wasn't the case then a card that had just been cracked from a PSA 10 holder would sell for just as much as if the card were still slabbed.

    Thanks for the response Boopotts. I guess there is a fine line as to how someone judges this. When I think of product, I think of something that is created from start to finish. Since PSA is just granting an opinion on an already created item, I see it as a service. When many people complain about or discuss the PSA product, it's from the point that they feel PSA has control over how the cards are printed or cutimage

    It goes back to the old saying "Buy the card, not the holder"
    Baseball is my Pastime, Football is my Passion
  • aconteaconte Posts: 2,053 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Very well put, Jim. I have reached a conclusion very similar to yours. I have pretty much decided to give up on PSA and other grading companies >>



    Hench,

    If this were true you would be buying red man cards in other holders instead of just PSA one's.

    aconte
  • zef204zef204 Posts: 4,742 ✭✭


    << <i>I doubt there's any conspiracy to suppress the grades of average collectors and/or inflate the grades of high-volume submitters. However, I'm highly skeptical that PSA actually follows their own stated grading process. Does anyone seriously believe these points?
      Grading - In addition, the sheer number of graders assigned to each card can vary depending on the type of card submitted. In all cases, at minimum, two graders are assigned to every card.
      Verification Stage (1) - After the cards have been sealed in the PSA holders, they are then sent to the Grading Verification stage. As mentioned earlier, this is where another grader will check the orders for accuracy and consistency in relation to PSA standards. If the cards appear to meet PSA's guidelines, the order is then sent on to the next step in the process. If any of the cards do not appear to meet the standards, the card is then removed from the holder and re-evaluated by our staff.
      Verification Stage (2) - The cards and holders are examined for defects that may have been overlooked in prior stages such as scratched cases or improper information on the PSA label
    Based on experience and observation, I can't help but think PSA has been doing a fair share of corner cutting in these areas. >>

    I agree. I highly doubt that lately, more than one grader reviews each card.
    EAMUS CATULI!

    My Auctions
  • 1966CUDA1966CUDA Posts: 2,001 ✭✭✭✭
    "My latest? 15 9's on a 275-card vintage submission. FIFTEEN. I used to be able to figure on at least 35-40. 10s? Forget it! There are a LOT of 8's being dished out--but 9's are rare. "

    So, does the above statement mean: (a) PSA's grading standards are stricter now...(B) The cards you sent in before were slightly better than the ones you've been submitting lately and therfore warranted the "9" grades .......or (C) PSA is favoring "bigger" submitters with unworthy 9's ???

    Just wondering what everyone's opinion is?? I know I submitted a smaller group of '74 baseball that looked like sure 9's to me and ALL came back 8's. I didn't bother to crack and resubmit but guess I should have. -Claude
  • I think the 404 grader was told to cool it with 10's also. My last 50 card auto submission had 21 tens. These just popped on tuesday.

    CARD CARD CO. CARD # CARD NAME VARIETY GRADE
    2003 UD LS-SW SPUD WEBB LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 8
    2003 UD LS-KR KURT RAMBIS LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2003 UD LS-BL BILL LAIMBEER LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2003 UD LS-AG ARTIS GILMORE LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 8
    2005 TOPPS A-JR JOHNNY RODGERS ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 9
    2005 TOPPS A-JMU JOHNNY MUSSO ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-CH CRAIG HEYWARD ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-JDC JOHN CROW ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-DFO DAVE FOLEY ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-RM REGGIE McKENZIE ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-RJ ROLAND JAMES ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-TFR TOMMIE FRAZIER ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 9
    2005 TOPPS A-LW LORENZO WHITE ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-WP WILLIAM PERRY ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-MM MARK MAY ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-SB STEVE BARTKOWSKI ALL AMER.AUTO.-CHROME REF 9
    2005 TOPPS A-AW ANDRE WARE ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 9
    2005 TOPPS A-RW RANDY WHITE ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 9
    2005 TOPPS A-GT GINO TORRETTA ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-MR MEL RENFRO ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-TM TONY MANDARICH ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-DC DAVE CASPER ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 8
    2005 TOPPS A-EMA ED MARINARO ALL AMERICAN AUTOGRAPH 9
    2004 UD LS-GA ROMAN GABRIEL LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 8
    2004 UD LS-ED ERIC DICKERSON LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 8
    2004 UD LS-RB ROBERT BRAZILE LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-JO JOHN TAYLOR LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-CM CRAIG MORTON LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-HT JIM HART LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-SH SAM HUFF LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-ON OZZIE NEWSOME LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-VG VENCIE GLENN LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 8
    2004 UD LS-RC ROGER CRAIG LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 6
    2004 UD LS-SB STEVE BARTKOWSKI LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 8
    2004 UD LS-EJ ED "TOO TALL" JONES LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 8
    2004 UD LS-KI JIM KIICK LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 8
    2004 UD LS-HA CHRIS HANBURGER LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 7
    2004 UD LS-SS STEVE SPURRIER LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-IC ISAAC CURTIS LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 8
    2004 UD LS-BJ BERT JONES LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-CB CLIFF BRANCH LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-RO ROGER WEHRLI LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-RG RANDY GRADISHAR LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-DP DREW PEARSON LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-WM WILBERT MONTGOMERY LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-JY JIM YOUNGBLOOD LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 10
    2004 UD LS-LC L.C. GREENWOOD LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 10
    2004 UD LS-MM MERCURY MORRIS LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-MC MARK CLAYTON LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    2004 UD LS-BY BILLY JOHNSON LEGENDARY SIGNATURES 9
    Currently working on Football HOF Autographs, 1999 SP Signatures and other on the card autograph sets
  • BuccaneerBuccaneer Posts: 1,794 ✭✭
    I have (101) 63s that's been waiting for a $5-6 special and after that, I don't think I will ever need to submit cards to get graded anymore. With grading fees going up (even the specials), there are more and more vintage cards you can get at eBay for about the cost of grading.

    I remember coming to these boards a few years ago and whining about the commodization of cards. While I have mellowed somewhat and only buy graded cards for my collection, I fully agree there are way too many people here collecting certificate numbers and grades instead of cards.
  • marinermariner Posts: 2,602 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I am not a big fan of 315 myself either.Text >>



    For what it is worth, my last 125 vintage card submission of 1961, 1962 and 1963 Topps baseball has cert #'s 3159xxxx. Of the 125 cards graded, one came back indicating the corners were colored on a '62, 22 cards came back PSA 7 and 102 cards came back PSA 8 for a PSA 8 percentage of 82%. My full submission is detailed on another thread I started earlier this week.

    I have had 314/315 several times and I have never felt that the cards were misgraded as a whole. There are always several cards that I disagree with, but that is normal.

    Frankly, I am just a regular collector that submits about a half dozen subs per year and I have never had any problems. The grades are about what I expect with some pleasant surprises and it doesn't matter what the cert #'s are or who the grader is, I still have no complaints. When I have indicated variations, they have gotten all of them correct except one in the last year. My last vintage bulk sub which should have taken a long time was turned around in 3 days.....I was shocked on that one, but very happy.

    Maybe everyone that is complaining on this thread has a legit beef, but I sure don't.
    Don

    Collect primarily 1959-1963 Topps Baseball
    set registry id Don Johnson Collection
    ebay id truecollector14
  • 1966CUDA1966CUDA Posts: 2,001 ✭✭✭✭
    I agree with you on the "314/315" grader. I've pulled some pretty decent grades on vintage stuff from both. AND, I think I have read in other threads that the "314/315" theory of a specific person grading the cards is not correct. If you watch the video on the home page, the serial number is already issued before the card is even graded.


  • << <i>

    << <i>Very well put, Jim. I have reached a conclusion very similar to yours. I have pretty much decided to give up on PSA and other grading companies >>



    Hench,

    If this were true you would be buying red man cards in other holders instead of just PSA one's.

    aconte >>



    Hmmm, sounds like someone hit a sore spot with you.... You couldn't possibly be one of those receiving cherry grades, "courtesy bumps", and getting protected on the Registry, now, could you???

    But thanks for calling me a liar. Your omnisicience is impressive. Too bad your reading comprehension isn't up to the same level. Read the part where YOU quoted me "I have pretty much decided to give up on PSA". That doesn't read "I HAVE given up on PSA". Also, please share with us all the percentage of SGC, GAI, CSA, PRO, ASA, NASA and raw cards I buy. Please break down the percentages by issue.

    For the record, I am almost through SUBMITTING CARDS TO PSA FOR GRADING. I have a few I will submit to complete some sets I have been collecting, then that will be it. Of course I will continue to buy cards in PSA holders when I think I have come across one of their many undergraded cards, Red Man or not. It's called buying value.

    But feel free, aconte, to play along with them. PSA has a good thing going for certain people. I'm just not one of them.

    I was told by the T205 Registry leader that he got courtesy bumps all the time, yet I rarely saw any come my way (I've gotten a grand total of two over the years). I even saw the weighting of the T205 set mysteriously re-weighted which just "co-incidentally" happened to favor the cards the leader had in his set, extending his lead dramatically. But, NO, I'm sure there isn't any protection provided to Registry leaders like yourself, aconte........ And why don't you try refuting any of the valid points made by Jim???


    P.S. The final straw was cracking open a T206 Lajoie in a PSA 7 holder, resubmitting it to get the PSA 8 I was convinced it deserved and getting it back ungraded due to "trimming".
  • zef204zef204 Posts: 4,742 ✭✭

    I don't think the first 3 digits correlates to the grader. I do think that many of the graders at PSA has been tightening their standards as of late.
    EAMUS CATULI!

    My Auctions
Sign In or Register to comment.