Home PSA Set Registry Forum

WOW!!! New grading criteria for PSA

I see now that we have half point grades with PSA. I wonder if they will allow us to submit those that we have already graded for a review and will the cost be acceptable to us that are set registry owners? I would hope the cost would be $4 for a review.

Let's discuss

Shane
Looking for high grade rookie cards and unopened boxes/cases
«13

Comments

  • SOMSOM Posts: 1,555 ✭✭✭
    My knee-jerk reaction: will 50's and 60's PSA 7's become worthless?
  • GriffinsGriffins Posts: 6,076 ✭✭✭
    horrible, horrible thing to do. Looks like SGC just made PSA blink.

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

  • It looks like you will be required to submit each graded card based on it's current SMR value. Lower grades will not be issued according to the new info page.
    #10 PSA Set for Topps Baseball currently on eBay under seller deeppurple1.
  • 19541954 Posts: 2,866 ✭✭✭
    SOM-
    I would think no because PSA 7's are nice quality cards and there will always be a buyer for the mid or in this case middle, mid-grade cards. It will bring more premium for the 7.5 cards for sure. I don't know if this is being done by PSa to have more accurate grading or an increase of submissions for 2008?

    SL
    Looking for high grade rookie cards and unopened boxes/cases
  • Talk about a retarded idea. Hey everyone, let's make all our proud owners scour their collections to see which ones they're willing to send to us so that we can re-do our jobs!
  • grote15grote15 Posts: 29,477 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I don't like it all. Are they looking to generate additional regrading fees? This doesn't make any sense.

    Can you imagine if PCGS created new doubled the number of potential grades for coin grading? No, it'd never happen, but cards seem fair game. Lousy.


    Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
  • marinermariner Posts: 2,580 ✭✭✭✭
    Easily a blatant attempt at increasing their grading revenue.
    Don

    Collect primarily 1959-1963 Topps Baseball
    set registry id Don Johnson Collection
    ebay id truecollector14
  • I absolutely agree with grote & mariner. Now everyone who thinks they have a high-end psa 7, 8 or 9 card will submit it if the potential increase in card value warrants such. Probably hundreds of thousands of psa graded cards fit into this scenerio. Just like with A-ROD....its all about the money and nothing else..... It is possible that psa is anticipating a Recession and making such a chance in response to it?
    "You tell 'em I'm coming...and hell's coming with me"--Wyatt Earp
  • DavemriDavemri Posts: 2,011 ✭✭✭
    Wow....I am so Pisse d off right now because of PSA's new bombshell of half point grading....How do you'll feel? It really sours the hobby for me and I may have to re-think my collection........


    DAve

    FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
    image
  • MantlefanMantlefan Posts: 1,079 ✭✭
    I am a strong Set Registry participant, but I view this as a very bad decision. Take my Mickey Mantle Master set. To stay competitive, I would need to "review" 180 high dollar cards......with the PSA criteria some would be at the $60 level while many would require $100 for review. For just that one set, my "review cost would be over $10K!!

    I am about to become an ex-Registry guy.
    Frank

    Always looking for 1957 Topps BB in PSA 9!
  • RipublicaninMassRipublicaninMass Posts: 10,051 ✭✭✭
    MAntle fan would risk cracking them out? I have da,aged 2 card and wouldnt even think about cracking a high grade mantle!
  • MantlefanMantlefan Posts: 1,079 ✭✭
    Reviewing does not require "cracking" out the card. You send them the card in the holder and pay PSA $100 a card to see if your PSA 8 Mantle can get a half grade bump.
    Frank

    Always looking for 1957 Topps BB in PSA 9!
  • BuccaneerBuccaneer Posts: 1,794 ✭✭
    To defeat the purpose behind this move, no one should resubmit for review. MantleFan's example is probably a good one. Just say no.
  • My initial thoughts are this is a "Bad Idea" on PSA's part! They have all of a sudden made themselves just like SGC! Collectors liked the differences between the two companies and most of the big time collectors liked the straight grade without the half point jumps. What really makes me scratch my head is psa has graded over 10 million cards and is doing great so why change if 95% of the collectors have said they like psa's grading system as it is. Not long ago Joe Orlando wrote that psa wasn't going to change its grading system after hearing what their clients wanted.. I'm wondering what changed his mind? I'm also concerned about the registry and all the sets/cards listed there under the current grading system. Sounds like psa is going to have a mess on their hands!
    Paul
  • yawie99yawie99 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭
    So glad I stopped drinking the Kool Aid about a year and a half ago.
    imageimageimageimageimageimage
  • i have to agree with what everyone else is saying - i dont post that much but i felt i had to add my disappointment to the list of others that also dont like this idea from PSA
    collecting:
    1990 leaf in (10)
    1986 topps mets (10)
    2008 ring kings cut signatures
    any Darryl Strawberry, Dwight Gooden, Keith Hernandez cards in (10)
  • clayshooter22clayshooter22 Posts: 727 ✭✭✭
    Count me in as someone who is not happy about the idea. This undermines every card I own that is "between" grades. This is going to cost people holding high end 8-9-whatever cards money. Either re-grading fees or lose value to 8.5 and 9.5's UGH!

    It turns my stomach just to think about it.

    Right now I want to dump every PSA 9 I own. I can't even type what i really think as there are kids in the room.

    This is going to sour us registry collectors BIG TIME.

    I have two subs at PSA and two I'm picking up at the PO in the morning but right now I'm so pissed about this I don't think I'll even enjoy opening them.

    Kirby Puckett Master Set
  • WinPitcherWinPitcher Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
    For some reason the descision I made earlier yesterday regarding selling off my PSA cards does not seem so bad now.

    Steve
    Good for you.
  • dudedude Posts: 1,454 ✭✭
    Amazing. Joe Orlando promised at least 150 collectors loud and clear at a registry luncheon several years ago that this will never happen. That in itself is probably grounds for a class action lawsuit by some of the mega-collectors. Our existing registry sets are going to be hurt by this because we have now have the "old holder" unless I'm missing something?

    What's even crazier about all of this is that they seem so back logged on grading as it is and have a shortage of graders, how can they manage to take on a whole massive service of crossing over millions of cards? It's total madness. Heck, if I have to re-submit my entire collection to make it current, I might as well send it to SGC instead of PSA.

    Davalillo must be on suicide watch right now.
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    Mantlefan, I feel for you. And I agree wholeheartedly with the similar posts on this thread. Regrading my 75 Mini set for example would cost me a grip as well. I wrote an extensive opinion on this in its own thread. I'm through with PSA. The Registry just had its floor fall out from under it, far as I'm concerned. Strong 9s get no bump to 9.5-- which I wouldn't want to happen anyway, as it would kill my vintage 10s. Yet strong 8s can be elevated to 8.5s and thus narrow the gap to (what once were) much more expensive 9s?
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    And DUDE,

    I'm of the mind to cut my losses right now, but you're right: there might be a massive selloff in the very short term. Still, I'll be happy to get 80 cents on the dollar right away and be out of the PSA headache once and for all. Their arbitrary weightings on the Registry change all the time and now the grading system itself? This whole affair is fundamentally subjective, so it's extra important to not have a moving target. Yet they can't stay still. They're bargaining everything on the future cards and casting collectors of 70s and earlier in high grade to the curb.
  • I can just see all the new ebay titles changing. "PSA 8, but looks PSA 8.5........."
  • gaspipe26gaspipe26 Posts: 1,614 ✭✭✭
    Mantlefan, your right , forget about the 1969 tough common in 8 looking to go to 8.5. Your high dollar collection was just raped. You lose thousands either way.
  • gaspipe26gaspipe26 Posts: 1,614 ✭✭✭
    Dan,
    Im surprised Davallio hasnt posted anything yet. Maybe he did "jump" already. I remember that luncheon, was it Cleveland, or Chicago?
  • If I wanted partial grades, there are other companies that already offered that.... They have registries as well...

    It seems PSA is going to do this. There concerns about the price differences should be reflected in there policy regarding the review. To eliminate the issues with the great price desparity and not run off the people using their company currently, the policy could refund submissions that are not upgraded. The refund should be in the returned submission, not weeks or months later after you call PSA.

    Otherwise, it sounds like PSA got themselves some consultants who don't know the hobby. My company did this several years ago, switched to SAP and since then, we should change or plant signs to say "A not for profit organization".

    As for the review, PSA has been trying to get more graders for months, I assumed that they wanted to improve the turnaround time (Which would make me want to submit more cards), but obviously there were other reasons driving this need.
  • ejguruejguru Posts: 617 ✭✭✭
    Bob/Gaspipe: It was Atlantic City....and I agree....this is an unmitigated disaster for the real big timers. I did recently (3 months ago) selll 90% of my '67 set. Glad I don't have to go through 500+ cards to see about POSSIBLY getting a 1/2 grade bump. Not sure it would've helped the sale price in my case, but maybe if someone had a more valuable set/collection, I can't see how they can't consider reviewing the possible bumps?

    And to think they'll review cards at FULL PRICE? Really? I am done submitting cards. Sticking to Single-signed Hall of Fame Baseballs---which always had 1/2 grades--at least with the combonation of autograph grades and ball grades, it is somewhat understandable.

    Finally, FWIW, I wonder why PSA didn't go all the way and list subgrades (Corneres, Registration, Edges, Centering, whatever)--I've always thought that was important--to see the relative strengths of each characteristic that makes up the grade. Unfortunately, I still think this 1/2 grade is an easy/easier way to reward big time submitters/dealers...


    "...life is but a dream."

    Used to working on HOF SS Baseballs--Now just '67 Sox Stickers and anything Boston related.
  • dudedude Posts: 1,454 ✭✭
    I've read the article, and what is not clear is how they will label the card from this point on that are 10's, 9's, 8's ,7's ,etc.. Will they label them 9.0, 8.0 or 7.0 or just 9, 8 & 7? If they label them 9.0, 8.0, 7.0, then it clearly hurts all cards graded prior to this time. If they keep the same labeling designation as 9, 8 & 7, where newly graded 10's, 9's, 8's ,7's become indistigushable from older ones, then it's probably tolerable.
  • dude,

    Look at the examples of cards in the article. They appear to look the same with the more detailed grade.
  • StingrayStingray Posts: 8,843 ✭✭✭
    Who on this board was surveyed?? Anyone??
  • carew4mecarew4me Posts: 3,462 ✭✭✭✭
    WOW!

    The value of a collection full of PSA 7/8's has just been gutted.

    I have been in the process of selling everything and I this solidifies that move.


    Loves me some shiny!
  • BobSBobS Posts: 1,738 ✭✭
    For all the fire sale folks.

    Please contact me with the following PSA 5 or 6 cards with prices, all 1956 Topps Baseball:

    mays, campanella, robinson, banks, williams and the checklists.

    A PSA 6 was a good card yesterday, still is today IMO.

    BobS

  • A couple other comments/observations:

    1.) I would think that PSA privately sought input from major collectors such as Jim Crandall prior to implementing this change.

    2.) Frankly, I look at this as an opportunity that may enhance the value of my collection. For example, while it does not make sense initially to submit my entire 1962 Topps set for review, I do plan to review the star and low pop cards from all my sets for possible upgrade.

    3.) This may be the one time that I am pleased to see sets such as the 1971 Topps Greatest Moments Set are under-valued in the SMR.

    4.) The roll-out of the new system may explain why the data-base hasn't been updated recently.

    In summary, I want to have a better understanding of the new grading system and see how it shakes out before making any judgement.
  • I think this will help the collectors with the best eye/experience and the ones who have put their collections/submissions together with a heavy dose of discrimination. I myself have solely depended on the just the grade assigned by PSA when buying on ebay. I remember dealing with Neil Downey on the 56 set. He was doing everything in grade 7 but he would ask for detailed scans and reject some based on his own judgment. I bet he will have many 7.5’s vs. my 7.0’s. Basically the veteran collectors will or should win. I do recognize that set registry collectors might be upset. PSA should have some type of “special” for these higher end clients.

    There is no doubt that PSA recognizes the economy is starting to slide. This is what happens when Public Companies answer to share holders first and their clients second. It was a calculated risk for PSA. I think they recognized that their growth was limited, Beckett has a firm grasp on the growth segment of the industry and they were confident that high end collectors were in their camp because of the $’s already committed.

    Just an opinion from someone who has seen enough to understand but has little money committed to the registry right now.
  • 19541954 Posts: 2,866 ✭✭✭
    I think it is an excellent opportunity to make money on cards in addition to increase the value of my sets. I am not looking at this situation as "the glass is half empty." I think those that are going to sell quickly and cheaply should rethink that idea. No cards are going down in value because of this decision. I think it is just the opposite.

    Shane
    Looking for high grade rookie cards and unopened boxes/cases
  • carew4mecarew4me Posts: 3,462 ✭✭✭✭
    There is no way that straight 7-8-9's do not suffer in value.

    Sorry.


    Then again nobody collects cardboard as an investment...just pure love...so who cares image

    Loves me some shiny!
  • 19541954 Posts: 2,866 ✭✭✭
    Carew
    I don't think you need to say sorry to me or anyone. How is the value of a PSa 9 going to be hurt? There can't be an upgrade on PSA 9's as they don't do PSA 9.5's. So your theory on the 9's being affected are incorrect.
    The value of 8,7,6,5's will remain the same because the value of the half grade will be more valuable. Here is an example for you.

    1993 Topps Stadium Brett Favre PSa 8's current population is 833. If half of those get bumped to 8.5, how many PSA 8's are there now? The quality of the PSA 8's stay the same, but the quantity of PSA 8's are reduced by half.

    Shane
    Looking for high grade rookie cards and unopened boxes/cases
  • envoy98envoy98 Posts: 4,000 ✭✭
    ...but, the money spent on 9's could be substantially diminished because the perceived value over an 8.5 of the same card will be diminished. Let's use one of PSA's examples.

    1971 Topps #600 Willie Mays $100 $310 $3,000

    If I can own a PSA 8 for $310, vs paying $3000 for a PSA 9, I'll probably take the 8. The guy with the 9 will have a definite advantage over my registry GPA/Weighting, especially on a heavily weighted card such as this, by having the full grade upgrade. However, if I can buy an 8.5 for say $750-1000 and cut that "lead" in half, for < 1/3 the cost, wouldn't it make sense to do that? I guess de-valued has a few different connotations. The first being de-valued in the sense that some collectors who may have shelled out for a 9 will now take a step back and pay considerably less for an 8.5 so they'll purchase that instead of coughing up the big $$$ for the 9. Thereby dilluting the customer base that would have otherwise existed for the 9. Second, it devalues the 9's importance to the registry as a "10" weighted card, is effectively reduced to a 5 weight card by the introduction of the .5 subgrades.

    I'm not sure how I feel about the whole thing yet. But I can definitely understand how others are PO'd. I keep waiting to see Dav post.
  • WabittwaxWabittwax Posts: 1,984 ✭✭✭
    1954, you know, if you put it that way, imagine how whacked the pop report will be now. If there are 833 Favre PSA 8's, how many get cracked and resubmitted without the flip being sent in? The number of PSA 8's should hit 1000 very quickly although there will only actually be about 600 out there.
  • WabittwaxWabittwax Posts: 1,984 ✭✭✭


    << <i>1971 Topps #600 Willie Mays $100 $310 $3,000 >>



    One thing to keep in mind is that those massive price variations in grades were around long before the Registry. People have always paid big money for big grades, long before they could register them in a set. The main cards that dramatically increased in value due to the Registry were low pop commons.
  • aconteaconte Posts: 2,053 ✭✭✭


    << <i>If they keep the same labeling designation as 9, 8 & 7, where newly graded 10's, 9's, 8's ,7's become indistigushable from older ones, then it's probably tolerable. >>



    Dude,

    I disagree. The value of 8's will go down long term while 8.5's might sell for a premium depending on the card.

    The other problem is that none of the cards that get sent in for regrading can drop a grade which is tough to believe (even with
    the Psa grading scale). I'll assume and others might too that if it is a straight 8 and the card looks weak for the grade that really under the
    new system that card could of been a 7.5 but they left it alone. I had a number of Psa 8's that would not cross to SGC. Sgc considered them
    lower than an 8 grade and I was not willing to accept a reduction so I just sold off the Psa 8. Meanwhile some of my Psa 8's became Sgc
    8.5's and I was definitely willing to cross the card then. Some of my Psa 8's became Sgc 88's too which was fine for me. Now if I see a Psa
    card in say an 8 holder I might be concerned it is a weak 8 - especially if over time many people take advantage of this grading game.

    aconte
  • mikeschmidtmikeschmidt Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭
    Shane-

    I wholeheartedly believe that this decision will have a significant, negative impact on the value of PSA 9s.

    By giving collectors an option to purchase an 8.5 for a fraction of what a 9 would sell for, combined with the fact that there will be a slew of 8.5s as compared to 9s, it suddenly becomes a viable financial alternative for collectors to upgrade their sets by competing less for PSA 9s and more for PSA 8.5's.

    Imagine the scenario where a PSA 8 is an $800 card and a PSA 9 is a $5,000 card. (this happens in many cases, so is not unheard of). Let's further assume that such a card is a Hall of Famer and has a Set Registry weighting of eight.

    Buying the $5,000 PSA 9 will get you a significant upgrade on the Registry. However, if you are able to identify to similar HOFers, upgrade to 8.5s of each for $2,000 each, you have achieved the same result on the Registry for less money. Furthermore, given that this is now an option for you, you will not be bidding on the PSA 9s as frequently, thus causing a decrease in demand for that grade. So the new grading paradigm might have a PSA 8 go for $650, the PSA 8.5 for $2,000 and the PSA 9 for $4,500.

    The decrease will be felt more on the PSA 8s, but I absolutely am convinced that this will have a demand-side impact on the PSA 9s that will be fairly broad, but for a select few collectors.

    Marc
    I am actively buying MIKE SCHMIDT gem mint baseball cards. Also looking for any 19th century cabinets of Philadephia Nationals. Please PM with additional details.


  • << <i>So glad I stopped drinking the Kool Aid about a year and a half ago. >>



    Me too.

    But unfortunately when i quite the registry game over a year ago ....and even stopped submitting to PSA I didn't sell the thousands of PSA slabs I have. I stand to lose a large chunk of money should I ever sell them (and I just listed 700 eBay auctions for the special ...beofre I heard this news). Luckily they weren't very expensive cards.

    I also stand to waste a good bit of money if I pick slabs out searching for bumps. I can only says that any bump searching I choose to do will not be with PSA.
    There is a fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness"
  • I have only posted a few times, but I couldnt pass on this.....WOW! This is terrible! I'm with the majority of you, had I wanted 1/2 grades I would have went through that other place.....this has made me question everything with PSA. I am so ticked right now I cant even eat my lunch. I feel like someone just kicked my dog!!!!!

    TERRBILE MOVE GUYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1/2 GRADES STINKS OF GREED & IGNORANCE!!!!
    "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting drunk..."

    - Westerberg
  • JasP24JasP24 Posts: 4,645 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Shane-

    I wholeheartedly believe that this decision will have a significant, negative impact on the value of PSA 9s.

    By giving collectors an option to purchase an 8.5 for a fraction of what a 9 would sell for, combined with the fact that there will be a slew of 8.5s as compared to 9s, it suddenly becomes a viable financial alternative for collectors to upgrade their sets by competing less for PSA 9s and more for PSA 8.5's.

    Imagine the scenario where a PSA 8 is an $800 card and a PSA 9 is a $5,000 card. (this happens in many cases, so is not unheard of). Let's further assume that such a card is a Hall of Famer and has a Set Registry weighting of eight.

    So the new grading paradigm might have a PSA 8 go for $650, the PSA 8.5 for $2,000 and the PSA 9 for $4,500.

    Marc >>



    This is probably the most accurate assessment of future values that I've seen, Marc thanks for sharing.

    Looking at the bright side MANY of us who have attempted to purchase "high end" cards for the grade in the past will see a SIGNIFICANT INCREASE in the value of our collections. Based on this outlook, it's very possible I purchased an $800 card that will now become a $2,000 card simply by spending the $35 (or less, I'm certain PSA will have upgrade/review specials along the way) to send it in for an upgrade. That's huge, especially if you have a mid-large sized number of possible upgrades.

    Just an alternative outlook I suppose,
    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.
  • 1420sports1420sports Posts: 3,473 ✭✭✭
    The value of 8's will go down long term

    possibly, but I see that as a stretch.

    Because PSA will not differentiate between "eras", many collector may gamble on getting an "old 8" that could be a "new 8.5". Plus, it is still an 8, which most likely will get 8 prices.

    while 8.5's might sell for a premium depending on the card

    these will sell for a slight premium at the very least.
    collecting various PSA and SGC cards
  • Glad I collect Hockey Cards and Modern 1971- 1988 for that matter. I can't imagine dealing with all of this.
  • my quesion is, how will this affect 10's and 9's?

    Will 10's value increase and 9's decrease??????

    Anyone have any thoughts on this?
    "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting drunk..."

    - Westerberg
  • MattyCMattyC Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
    These 8.5s in effect become the "poor man's 9." The guy sitting on 9s can take them nowhere since there is (thankfully) no 9.5 (which would undermine the 10s). But if you are sitting on a pile of nice 8s, you basically just made money. Fair to those 9 owners? Not really. If you own primarily 9s you (A) lose ground in the Registry, (B) cannot gain ground, (C) lose the average buyer for your cards who can now better afford the 8.5, (D) get really salted and angry. If you own nice high end 8s that are expensive vintage cards you can also look forward to paying HIGH REGRADE FEES based on stated value. That PSA wouldn't give a very reduced price for these regrades is tantamount to robbery and a slap in the customer's face.
  • 19541954 Posts: 2,866 ✭✭✭
    Steve,
    If PSA upgrades a PSA 8 to an 8.5, the population will automatically change. Yes, the pop. report will change up and down, but the number of graded cards will stay the same. I would at least hope that is how they will handle that.

    SL
    Looking for high grade rookie cards and unopened boxes/cases
  • ctsoxfanctsoxfan Posts: 6,246 ✭✭


    << <i> Heck, if I have to re-submit my entire collection to make it current, I might as well send it to SGC instead of PSA. >>



    Seems like a lot of people are feeling that way.
    image
Sign In or Register to comment.