What improvements do you want to see on the Set Registry

FavreFan1971

I have some ideas to the Set Registry that I would like to see.

My improvements are more technical and can be done on the data base and creating more tables/fields. What did I miss that you would like to see added or removed

1. When clicking the "Registrant's other set" button show the Current AND All Time rank, not just All Time
2. Allow a thumbnail photo of each card, not the ugly camera icon
3. Export option into CSV format for all or individual sets (owner only)
4. Allow custom views for the registry.
- Add colums that users can show or hide
- All time
- Current
- Run a population report on this card
- % completed
- Rating
- Owners comments
- Email address
- show pics of cards
- ????????
- SMR

Lets keep this professional and only to the set registry.

JasP24

I'd love to see a more streamlined and defined process for adding new cards to the Key Card sets. Some cards get polls via e-mail, others don't. Some players get multiple card options, others don't. I'd really like PSA to define the standards and then stick to them.

I actually like the idea of polling set registrants, but would much rather have it as an online poll that maybe populates on the main set page for that set. So when you go to the set, you see the poll and vote under your user id. Once you vote, it could give you the running results which would tell us how many collectors are voting. It also shouldn't take a month+ to get a card added. Run the poll for a week, maybe 2, if at least 50% of the registrants on that set don't vote then the requester should be given the option of choosing the card.

This type poll is VERY easy to set up and run. They do it here on the message board, why not on the registry itself?

Jason

bobsbbcards

I'd like them to change it so when you add a scan to a registry set with the same file name as a previous scan, it will overwrite the old one. Currently, it simply keeps both around and continues to show the first one scanned. I tried deleting the original image file, but it still wouldn't go away. Eventually, I discovered that the only way to make this work was to rename the original image file. The interface to do this is truly miserable (one file at a time).

Please PSA, make this easier!!

To recap:
1 - Allow overwrite of image files
2 - Truly remove image files when deleted. Better yet, if an image file is no longer attached to a card in any registered set, remove it!
3 - Improve interface for renaming/deleting image files.

Thanks in advance!

GDM67

<< <i>I have some ideas to the Set Registry that I would like to see.

1. When clicking the "Registrant's other set" button show the Current AND All Time rank, not just All Time >>



All of your suggestions are sound, but I really like that one.

SinibobCards

<< <i><< I have some ideas to the Set Registry that I would like to see.

1. When clicking the "Registrant's other set" button show the Current AND All Time rank, not just All Time >>


All of your suggestions are sound, but I really like that one. >>




DITTO to that.

It gets tiring seeing the same sets at the top under different names.

-Mike

cravetopps

. Export option into CSV format for all or individual sets (owner only)

great idea, all of them are great ideas in fact.

- too bad they don't have a reliable pricing link (VCP) based on the card's grade so you could see your total set value
- they should allow links to images outside the registry so you don't have to resize photos
- links to current auctions for cards you don't have in your set
- show pending card additions for cards you tried to add to your set registry but the card is not part of the set yet

Griffins

My wish list-

-Remove commercial listings from the all time list-eg Mastro Fall '08, Memory Lane June '06. Just advertising, and the rules specifically prohibit that. Enforce them.

- If you have your set hidden you can't access the pop data on that set. Correct that so that the owner can see the data. Just because you hide your set to avoid being run up unnecessarily doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to access the pops.

- Fix sets like "The Ultimate PSA Sampler" that only has spotty representation of type sets that PSA grades, and fix the BS on player master sets that has caused a lot of registrants to bail out on the registry (and in some cases PSA) completely.

twiley

I would like to see lowering the % complete for an award on modern player sets. IE the Derek Jeter Master Set is over 4000 cards and after 2007 is added. LOL. Especially with all those topps Moments and Milestones and different variation refractor cards out there. not to mention the hundreds if not thousands of cards printed 1/1 that are out there. For me to complete or even come to 90% on Jeter Master set will be impossible...

Alfiewt

<< <i>I would like to see lowering the % complete for an award on modern player sets. IE the Derek Jeter Master Set is over 4000 cards and after 2007 is added. LOL. Especially with all those topps Moments and Milestones and different variation refractor cards out there. not to mention the hundreds if not thousands of cards printed 1/1 that are out there. For me to complete or even come to 90% on Jeter Master set will be impossible... >>



You do not need to have 90% complete for large player sets. Any set with over 1000 cards registered is eligible.

rbeaton

I would like to see a counter so that it will tell you there are 25 PSA-7s, 42 PSA-8s, 11 PSA-9s, etc. I would also like them to notify you if they add a card to a set. I was browsing one of my sets recently and noticed that it was no longer at 100%. I assume someone else requested an additional card and it was added, but no one told me about it.

Robert

Alfiewt

One thing I would like to see is in cases of ties, open sets should be ranked higher then closed sets, and sets with scans should be ranked higher then sets without scans.

Or, they should force complete PSA 10 sets to be open. Why do you need to keep a compete PSA 10 set closed?

Here is the reason I would like to see this. Seven complete PSA 10 sets are closed and the person with an open set isn't even listed on the first page of the all-time finest list. I would love to see someone be able to take the time to add scans to their set and knock those that don't share their sets out of first.

sonoranmonsoon

I will be satisfied when they change it to the PCGS format. That is all I am asking Santa for this Christmas.

ezyshooter

I'd like to see all sets adjusted with the proper GPA. Alot of sets still give cards a value of 1 for each card when cards that sell for 5X more have the same GPA. I don't mean SP's either.
Example is the 1978 Topps hockey set. All cards have a GPA of 1 ?? Mike Bossy rookie should be a at least a 8 etc...
JMHO
Steve

Davemri

Falling upon Deaf ears......

RipublicaninMass

<< <i>I would like to see a counter so that it will tell you there are 25 PSA-7s, 42 PSA-8s, 11 PSA-9s, etc. I would also like them to notify you if they add a card to a set. I was browsing one of my sets recently and noticed that it was no longer at 100%. I assume someone else requested an additional card and it was added, but no one told me about it.

Robert >>



i like that plus a number of registered/total cards of the set

ie 200/206 the % complete makes me nuts!

gemint

Where's the pack registry?

BillsGridironGreats

It would be nice if they listed the holder size that the set is in. Never fails when the run a special I have to figure out what is in a T# and what is in a tallboy.

This is probably falling on deaf ears, but it is a good idea.

On another note, we all would like to see FIFO (First IN First Out) for orders of the same level. It will never happen, but it would be nice. Then they could post on the site the day that the graders were up to and we wouldn't call them all the time.

TheVon

I would like PSA to streamline the process for adding new cards to master player registries. There shouldn't be a long delay or authorization process for master set additions . . . if PSA grades it, it should be allowed in the set. The only holdup should be whether the suggested weight of the card is appropriate.

I figure this change would benefit all parties involved. For me, as the collector, it would increase my satisfaction with having purchased cards that weren't previously a part of the set, it would benefit dealers because people like me would be more apt to purchase graded cards if we knew it wasn't going to take 3 or 4 months to have them added to our registry, and it would benefit PSA because it would increase the number and variety of modern cards (especially modern) being sent in for grading.

For example, I have about 500 Craig Biggio cards that I'd like to have graded, but there are only about 200 different cards in the master set composition. Why spend $2500+ to get cards graded when it's going to take forever to have them added to the registry? I'll just submit the cards already in the set and sit on the rest until someone else goes to the trouble of having them added first.

I like the idea of being notified via e-mail when someone else has added a card to a registry I'm working on too. Right now I just periodically scan the set compositions to see if anything is new. It's not a huge problem, but it would be more user friendly if you didn't have to do that.

detroitfan2

My thoughts:

The 1-10 per card weight grading needs to be changed to 1-100 (at least). For example, a 1952 Topps Mantle has a weight of 10, but it is worth at least 100 times more than pretty much every 1952 Topps card with a weight of 1.

I'd also like to see the weightings make use of the SMR and population reports.

For example, take 2 1955 Topps partial sets, one with 100 commons graded PSA 8 and another set with the same 100 cards, but 50 graded PSA 7 and 50 graded PSA 9.

According to SMR, the one with the 7's and 9's would have an SMR value of over $20,000, while the one with 100 8's would have an SMR of $8000, but both sets would be tied with an average grade of 8.00. I've never understood that.

FB

I recently received an email for "request to remove an item from a set" and as usual sent a note back stating "Nope - still have that one". So I mentioned to BJ that I'd love to see an upgrade to the system where when you've plugged in a cert number and it comes back as "currently registered in another set" that it should instead spit back more information... like so...

If I think that I'm trying to add "11611598" it currently tells me that its registered and a note goes out to the person whose set its registered in. But, if it came back as "11611598 1971 TOPPS CLARENCE GASTON 25" is currently registered in another set and then offered a choice "Do you want to continue? Yes or No - it would then force me to check out my typing better and realize that I was REALLY trying to input 11811598 1971 TOPPS MOE DRABOWSKY 685 before anyone else (other set owner or Set Registry people) had to get involved. So, in this case, I'd hit NO and then reenter the correct cert #.

Right now, it involves other people too quickly.

Frank B

GDM67

<< <i>I would like PSA to streamline the process for adding new cards to master player registries. >>



I didn't want to quote it all, but every word in this post is gold

CreeperKat

Would being able to see who owns a particular certification number be useful? For example, key in a certification number of a card you previously owned just to see where it is now. Maybe kind of like a Where's George thing where you can track how the card has changed hands?

WarHoundR69

Auction houses should not be able to have sets they sell retired and listed in the "All Time Finest Rankings" - the same set could easily wind up being listed several times i.e. Auction House A lists a set and sells it to Collector 1, who then lists the set. In a a year or 2 or 10 he consigns it to Auction House B who list the set and sell it to Collector 2 who proceeds to list the set.
The same set is now listed 4 times. All Time Finest rankings should be reserved for collectors and not auction houses.

mafoliq

<< <i>Auction houses should not be able to have sets they sell retired and listed in the "All Time Finest Rankings" - the same set could easily wind up being listed several times i.e. Auction House A lists a set and sells it to Collector 1, who then lists the set. In a a year or 2 or 10 he consigns it to Auction House B who list the set and sell it to Collector 2 who proceeds to list the set.
The same set is now listed 4 times. All Time Finest rankings should be reserved for collectors and not auction houses. >>

helionaut

The number one problem for me is what it takes to get a card added to a player registry. I've been trying for OVER A YEAR to get a card added to the Bake McBride set. OK, I'm maybe the only one in the world who cares about it, but OVER A YEAR? I don't understand how the set was constructed in the first place. If I was making such a list, I'd pull out of their cert database all cards already graded with the name Bake McBride on it. But somehow that didn't happen. So when I went to add such obscure issues as 1983 Topps to my registry set, I had to make a special supplication. Now that I have 2 or 3 more cards to add, I've been waiting OVER A YEAR to be able to do so. I hardly even look for the cards I'm missing anymore because they aren't in the registry and I assume it'll take OVER A YEAR to get those cards added.

SOM

I know I'm a lone wolf on this one, but:

stop being allowed to register the exact same card across multiple sets.

And I agree wholeheartedly that the Auction Houses should be removed from the ATF and CF lists. PSA could do that tomorrow.

Nick

theczar

there should be only be one time leader (ties are acceptable.) this would stop people from transferring sets and double dipping. if someone sells a complete top set and the new owner upgrades then he has the new all time top set period.

i like the idea of putting information about set pops in the registry.

how about sending out a survey to anyone with 70% or more of a set and ask if they wish to readjust the weighted values. since most people are fighting over the cards on ebay they should know better about what costs more than another. we all know that there are commons that cost a lot more than some of the stars listed in the smr.

finally anyone who refuses to remove their card after polite notes from the new owner or PSA (ahem MOSH) should be boiled in oil or at least kicked off registry as they have no respect for its purpose.

SOM

I agree about that stupid All-time leader sham, czar.

What purpose does it serve if the ATL set has been broken up and sold two years ago? As a matter of fact, there should be only one category, and that is Current Leader.

If the set is broken up and sold, that is its funeral.

theczar

As a matter of fact, there should be only one category, and that is Current Leader.
If the set is broken up and sold, that is its funeral

SOM,
that is an even better idea. if it is been sold and spread out through other collections than it is not a set anymore. the prior owner has enjoyed the benefits ($$$) of the break-up and he doesn't need to have his name up there any longer.

GDM67

<< <i> What purpose does it serve if the ATL set has been broken up and sold two years ago? As a matter of fact, there should be only one category, and that is Current Leader.

If the set is broken up and sold, that is its funeral. >>



As much as I disagree with your idea about one card per set, I'm inclined to agree with this opinion. I could possibly be talked out of it, but at first (and second) glance, it seems emminently logical.

TheVon

<< <i>My thoughts:

The 1-10 per card weight grading needs to be changed to 1-100 (at least). For example, a 1952 Topps Mantle has a weight of 10, but it is worth at least 100 times more than pretty much every 1952 Topps card with a weight of 1.
>>



This problem is especially evident in sets that span several years like the All-Time team sets. For example, on the All-Time Yankees set, a '33 Goudey Ruth is weighted a 10, which makes sense . . . until you consider that a PSA 1 at a price tag of at least $600 it's going to boost the set rating as much as a 1994 Bowman PSA 10 Jorge Posada, with a grade weight of 1, which sells for $10--maybe.

TheVon

I'd like to add to my original comment regarding streamling the master set additions.

When you go to a player's Master Set home page there is the following paragraph:

Reggie Jackson's play years were 1967-1987. Please note that this set is a work in progress. Should you have a PSA-graded card that does not appear in this set composite, click here to submit your request using our online form.

So you click there, type in the cert #, click which set you want it to be added to (Basic, Basic & Collectors, Master) and then suggest a weighting. Easy enough. Accept when you are entering a card that has more than one player on it. For some reason they don't have this set up to communicate to the person updating the database which set you want the card added to. So, two and a half months after you make your request someone from PSA has to e-mail you and ask you which set you wanted that card to be added to.

Seems like it would be easier and faster to have that information automatically included when you make the request through the player's set homepage.

Morgoth

SOM, I argued the same thing about cards being listed in multiple sets. My beef was all the people collecting the whole set was registering every team set for that year as well. It seemed the only reason to do that was to generate either free grades or more certificates from PSA not because they collect that team. If you have the #1 All time set for a year then by default you probably have the #1 team sets for all the teams that year. It just seems odd to reward the same accomplishment 27 times.

I was beat down pretty bad but I still think PSA would make alot more money if they made people register 1 card per set or piss everyone off, 50/50 bet.

TheVon

One more thing I just thought of that would be nice: if there was the option to add a brief biography of yourself as a collector. I was thinking, specifically, that the "Registrant's Others Sets" tab provides you with some insight into what someone collects overall, but it would be interesting to have the biography accompany the set listings similar to the owner's comments area on individual sets.