WOW!!! New grading criteria for PSA
1954
Posts: 2,898 ✭✭✭
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
Let's discuss
Shane
Looking for high grade rookie cards and unopened boxes/cases
0
Comments
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
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
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.
Collect primarily 1959-1963 Topps Baseball
set registry id Don Johnson Collection
ebay id truecollector14
DAve
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
I am about to become an ex-Registry guy.
Always looking for 1957 Topps BB in PSA 9!
Always looking for 1957 Topps BB in PSA 9!
Paul
1990 leaf in (10)
1986 topps mets (10)
2008 ring kings cut signatures
any Darryl Strawberry, Dwight Gooden, Keith Hernandez cards in (10)
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
Steve
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.
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.
Im surprised Davallio hasnt posted anything yet. Maybe he did "jump" already. I remember that luncheon, was it Cleveland, or Chicago?
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.
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...
Used to working on HOF SS Baseballs--Now just '67 Sox Stickers and anything Boston related.
Look at the examples of cards in the article. They appear to look the same with the more detailed grade.
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!
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
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.
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.
Shane
Sorry.
Then again nobody collects cardboard as an investment...just pure love...so who cares
Loves me some shiny!
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
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.
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
<< <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.
<< <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
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>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.
TERRBILE MOVE GUYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1/2 GRADES STINKS OF GREED & IGNORANCE!!!!
- Westerberg
<< <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
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
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.
Will 10's value increase and 9's decrease??????
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
- Westerberg
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
<< <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.