OPC Team sets

bri2327

Has anyone tried to register an OPC team set ?

I attempted to register a 1972 OPC yankees team set a few days ago and received an email stating they currently dont accept OPC team sets. I was told the set had to be entered into a specialty set class. Has anyone else tried to add an OPC team set ? Anyone have any idea why this would be a problem to just enter into the waiting list of sets ?

packCollector

same happened to me last year , I have a 73 red sox and was told I couldn't get it.

if I want an alex cora player set , no problem ! oh well!!

bri2327

I just cant understand the problem with any set being added. Seriously, PSA folks, if you are listening, what is the problem here ? How tough is it to add a set to a database ?

I even provided a full checklist and weight to the set, as I am sure others do too. Can this whole process really be that difficult ? Im not just talking the OPC sets, but player sets and whatever else too. Every day there seems to be at least 3 or 4 posts regarding the time it is taking for sets to be added and I think at this point a little explanation of the process and delay of process might help ease alot of concerns for us all.

Am I asking too much here ?

FB

Brian,

I agree with you. As one of the few people who collects the 72 OPC set - any team set from that collection should be worthwhile. Its a tough set!

Frank

bri2327

Frank,

I really just began the set. I had the Munson cards, and last week I was able to pick up 6 other Yankees in PSA 8 for less than $5 each...I couldnt believe how cheap I got them for....made me want to dive right in and go for the set. Too bad PSA doesnt share our enthusiasm enough to grant the set for the registry !

five7teen

I had a similar experience when asking about Basic Topps Player Sets - I asked about 3 players and was told that Basic Topps sets weren't currently on the list of eligible sets for the registry. There is in fact a Basic Topps Joe Montana set however, and I used that as the baseline for my requests. It's too bad, and I hope over time these sets, and other sets like the OPC Team Sets, get considered.

Fuzz

While I admit that I have had some of the same frustrations that are posted here, let's remember we are down to complaining about the quality of service that is provided to us for free. If it is not fast enough ... we complain. If it isn't the detail we agree with..... we complain. If they restrict to cut down on the duplication/ number of requests.... we complain. In fact pretty much what ever they do..... we complain. They have at least three very competant full time employees that are doing our work at no cost to us. Now I understand that they get benefits in grading volume from our particiapation, but how much for free do we really expect?
And I thought that I have had bad jobs?
Fuzz

bri2327

<< <i>While I admit that I have had some of the same frustrations that are posted here, let's remember we are down to complaining about the quality of service that is provided to us for free. If it is not fast enough ... we complain. If it isn't the detail we agree with..... we complain. If they restrict to cut down on the duplication/ number of requests.... we complain. In fact pretty much what ever they do..... we complain. They have at least three very competant full time employees that are doing our work at no cost to us. Now I understand that they get benefits in grading volume from our particiapation, but how much for free do we really expect?
And I thought that I have had bad jobs?
Fuzz >>



If not for the set registration that they provide for " free " there wouldnt be 1/10 of the cards graded that are.

phreakydancin

If you look at how the number of team sets has mulitplied over the past two years, it's obvious why they are so backed up in their set requests. Remember that team sets require extra research, as most set checklists do not indicate what team a player is with.

If I was PSA, I'd be more concerned with putting up more modern sets, to try and entice more modern collectors to go with PSA rather than Beckett for their grading, even if no one has requested those sets yet. There are tons of Topps Heritage collectors on this board, but only a scant few Heritage insert sets are registered. They haven't even put up a single base set.

bri2327

<< <i>If you look at how the number of team sets has mulitplied over the past two years, it's obvious why they are so backed up in their set requests. Remember that team sets require extra research, as most set checklists do not indicate what team a player is with.

If I was PSA, I'd be more concerned with putting up more modern sets, to try and entice more modern collectors to go with PSA rather than Beckett for their grading, even if no one has requested those sets yet. There are tons of Topps Heritage collectors on this board, but only a scant few Heritage insert sets are registered. They haven't even put up a single base set. >>



I hear what you're saying about the amount of sets & research involved. To me though it seems like there should, or probably is a database somewhere that lists every card for a particular team each year. I am almost certain I have seen them somewhere. A company like PSA though, you would think it would have been a priority of theirs to compile such a database once, so that research isnt needed every time a request comes in.

We can all help out by providing checklists when sending in requests too. Im sure if everyone did it would speed up the process. I try to provide one, along with suggested weighting with each set I have requested, but that doesnt neccessarily mean its the norm.

Regarding the heritage...are there alot of people looking to get those sets graded ? I know they have a strong following, especially on here, but I didnt know there was interest in grading any of the sets. I bet they look real nice holdered.

phreakydancin

<< <i>Regarding the heritage...are there alot of people looking to get those sets graded ? I know they have a strong following, especially on here, but I didnt know there was interest in grading any of the sets. I bet they look real nice holdered. >>

There may not be much demand to get them graded, but the Registry has an amazing ability to create demand. How many people were getting 70's/80's baseball commons graded until the Registry came along? If PSA wants to grow their market share, especially in the modern arena, where Beckett seems to have the edge, they need to create reasons for people to use their services.

bri2327

<< <i>

<< <i>Regarding the heritage...are there alot of people looking to get those sets graded ? I know they have a strong following, especially on here, but I didnt know there was interest in grading any of the sets. I bet they look real nice holdered. >>

There may not be much demand to get them graded, but the Registry has an amazing ability to create demand. How many people were getting 70's/80's baseball commons graded until the Registry came along? If PSA wants to grow their market share, especially in the modern arena, where Beckett seems to have the edge, they need to create reasons for people to use their services. >>



So you are saying PSA should concentrate their efforts towards sets that havnt even been requested over sets that people HAVE requested and are waiting on to be added ?

My question would be this to you...Do you work for PSA ? I cant possibly see how you can be more concerned with what they can do to make more money for themselves rather than address a current problem they are having with their members.

phreakydancin

No, I'm not saying they shouldn't address the problem at hand. I'm just saying they created the problem in the first place by introducing the team set concept. They opened up far too many possibilities for set requests that require too much effort to compile and post. Your OPC request is a prime example.

Actually I'm a little surprised they are rejecting OPC team sets outright, seeing as they have some '77 Topps Mexican FB team sets posted already, but I guess they had to draw the line somewhere to reduce their backlog.