here is what I am ticked about...
OAKESY25
Posts: 4,726 ✭✭✭
I have 2 subs in house right now.. a bulk and regular.. 70 cards total...
so I am paying a lot of money for cards to be graded on the 1-10 straight scale???
b.s.... you know they arent going to be very aggressive with the grades...
I am guessing everything will be about a grade under what I am expecting..
so I am paying a lot of money for cards to be graded on the 1-10 straight scale???
b.s.... you know they arent going to be very aggressive with the grades...
I am guessing everything will be about a grade under what I am expecting..
0
Comments
the von and I are on the same psychic hotline
notice the time stamp of our posts
we'll see what they say
<< <i>you should be able to STOP the grading process and request them to be held till they start the new system. >>
-Agreed
Hi Joe,
I have the following 50s vintage bulk submission at PSA:
PSA Order Status for Submission # 628549
Date Received: 11/14/2007
Date of Grades Posted: No Date Specified
Date Shipped: No Date Specified
I request that this sub be graded with the new ½ grade system as communicated by PSA yesterday, even if that means that it be delayed until February. I am sure you can understand why I am making this request. Thank you.
My ebay listings
a current order that is awaiting grading, He asked them to hold the order till after 02/01 and
the rep responded that they cannot do that and the order will be graded under the old standards.
and it will not go to psa if that is true
<< <i>Someone was saying in another thread how they just called PSA customer service regarding
a current order that is awaiting grading, He asked them to hold the order till after 02/01 and
the rep responded that they cannot do that and the order will be graded under the old standards. >>
Ouch, that stinks. Don 't wprry, they will be more than happy for the customer to send them back in for a regrade at a small fee...
Ripken in the Minors * Ripken in the Minors Facebook Page
Joe,
how are you.. hope all is well...
I have a couple concerns, I have two orders in house right now...
a 60 card bulk order and a 7-8 card regular order... the regular order was signed for
on the 11th but not logged in yet... but it seems you have been backed up lately so I am not overly concerned... my issue is the new grading scale.. my position is I don't like it.. but my concern is that the cards in house will be graded on the old scale??? I don't want that..
if there is an updated scale... I would like them to be graded accurately the 1st time..
I feel like if my card was considered a "low" 8-9 the grader is going to assign 7-8 knowing it will be resubbed for a 1/2 point bump... obviously no one likes to resub.. it is paying good money for what should be done correctly the first time.. please let me know what I can expect.. thank you
Bob
Good luck with that,If he comes back with sorry can't help you- I think that would
be enough to make me forget PSA all together.
Loves me some shiny!
<< <i>I feel like if my card was considered a "low" 8-9 the grader is going to assign 7-8 knowing it will be resubbed for a 1/2 point bump... >>
So you are accusing PSA of maliciously harsher grading just so the customer will pay additional money for a review.
Don't know how a President of a publicly traded company will respond to that conspiracy.
Before people send Joe an email, I would suggest thinking twice of how you word it. Making accusations is not going to help anyone and is counter productive.
so if something grades a 7.5.. I am not going to get the "benefit of the doubt" and bump it to an 8..
I could care less that it is a publicly traded company...
if they want to stay a publicly traded company I suggest they listen their customers who are all saying the same thing..
is he not a person anymore?? or he is somehow better then other people because of a job title??
I think from my dealings with Joe in the past.. he still has common sense..
I am not accusing them of stealing money.. I just want them to do the right thing.. or risk losing a loyal customer..
I am not paying good money for an outdated grading scale..
my cards are there.. and have not yet been published.. one hasnt even been logged..
it would be common sense that these graders would error on the low side..
and be more conservative.. not malicious... smart
<< <i>Don't know how a President of a publicly traded company will respond to that conspiracy.
is he not a person anymore?? or he is somehow better then other people because of a job title??
I think from my dealings with Joe in the past.. he still has common sense..
I am not accusing them of stealing money.. I just want them to do the right thing.. or risk losing a loyal customer..
I am not paying good money for an outdated grading scale..
my cards are there.. and have not yet been published.. one hasnt even been logged..
it would be common sense that these graders would error on the low side..
and be more conservative.. not malicious... smart >>
I don't follow you.
Now you are saying that their grading between now and the change will be "conservative".
In your email, you accused PSA of malicious (ie knowingly) harsher grading so the customer will resubmit.
<< <i> I feel like if my card was considered a "low" 8-9 the grader is going to assign 7-8 knowing it will be resubbed for a 1/2 point bump... >>
For lack of a better word, it's a conspiracy and isn't the best way to get a response from the President of a publicly traded company. Doesn't matter what you personally think, it just is what it is.
Hence the reason why I suggested for people to think twice how they word emails to Joe.
Sometimes less is more.
It would be nice if people had this much passion for serious problems in our communities and country.
Ron
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
did I??? did I say maliciously?? maliciously means i think they are intentionaly out to hurt someone..
to screw there customers.. I think you are absolutely naive to think the grades wont error on the lowside..
a pretty strong 7.. will not wind up in an 8 holder like we have always seen... it will be a 7...
my request to the president was.. do the right thing..
I dont care they are changing it.. so be it.. the bigger issue is the money I am spending.. I will only do it once..
<< <i>In your email, you accused PSA of malicious (ie knowingly) harsher grading so the customer will resubmit
did I??? did I say maliciously?? maliciously means i think they are intentionaly out to hurt someone..
to screw there customers.. I think you are absolutely naive to think the grades wont error on the lowside..
a pretty strong 7.. will not wind up in an 8 holder like we have always seen... it will be a 7...
my request to the president was.. do the right thing..
I dont care they are changing it.. so be it.. the bigger issue is the money I am spending.. I will only do it once.. >>
If you still can't see that in your own words, then I don't know what to tell you.
"I feel like if my card was considered a "low" 8-9 the grader is going to assign 7-8 knowing it will be resubbed for a 1/2 point bump.."
actually stop replying to my posts in general..
because you know it all...
it is natural.. when you know these changes are going to be made..
to grade conservative.. if you were grading you would do the same..
if you were grading and you have a card that is almost a 8 you will give it a 7
knowing that it would fit perfectly in the 7.5 category.. but since that isnt an option yet
I get a 7... I am asking to wait until it is in place.. or I am giving my blessing to use the updated scale
ahead of there schedule.. saying I am on board with it..
knowingly doing something.. and maliciously.. are totally different
Heck, they cant even get it right on what they have been taught in the first place!
<< <i>THIS WAS MY EMAIL TO JOE..
Joe,
how are you.. hope all is well...
I have a couple concerns, I have two orders in house right now...
a 60 card bulk order and a 7-8 card regular order... the regular order was signed for
on the 11th but not logged in yet... but it seems you have been backed up lately so I am not overly concerned... my issue is the new grading scale.. my position is I don't like it.. but my concern is that the cards in house will be graded on the old scale??? I don't want that..
if there is an updated scale... I would like them to be graded accurately the 1st time..
I feel like if my card was considered a "low" 8-9 the grader is going to assign 7-8 knowing it will be resubbed for a 1/2 point bump... obviously no one likes to resub.. it is paying good money for what should be done correctly the first time.. please let me know what I can expect.. thank you
Bob >>
Send them a letter certified mail. ask them to return your oder ungraded if they can't hold unitl 2/1 for the new .5 scale system. if they don't then file a chargeback on your credit card.
<< <i>I think people need to calm down, period.
It would be nice if people had this much passion for serious problems in our communities and country.
Ron >>
Here, here.
ebay i.d. clydecoolidge - Lots of vintage stars and HOFers, raw, condition fully disclosed.
<< <i>
<< <i>I think people need to calm down, period.
It would be nice if people had this much passion for serious problems in our communities and country.
Ron >>
coming from the person who has many threads 'outing national dealers'. also more important things to worry about than that
You can agrue the semantics until the cows come home.
It doesn't change the fact that your email was counter-productive and it wouldn't surprise me if it goes ignored.
That is all.
and when you are done.. go get a thesaurus..
a grader will grade it according to the new scale... period.. even though that scale is not yet "started"
because he cannot give it the 7.5 he will just give it 7.. and I can resub for a bump.... and if you think they wont..
you are the craziest person around.. they are in business to make money.. that is what this is all about...
and I am fine with it..
if they are going to be using a new scale... why the heck would feb 1st mean anything... use the scale.. lets do this...
but dont jack my sub around with an old process.. I paid good money for the accurate service..
if my 7 is a 7.5 now.. lets do it..
I think it would show a lack of integrity for the grader to know this new scale will be inforce in 2 weeks and slab a card he believes is a 7.5
in an 8 holder... I don't see the "sent it in thinking 7.. hoping for an 8" scanario playing out..
the 7's are 7's.. the strong 7's will be 7's.. if it qualified for an 8.. they will give it that...
malicious would be.. knowing a card qualified at an 8 and giving it a 7... the grader can't give it the proper grade and he wont
give a bump.. no one would..
<< <i>ok stown.. school is in session.. sit down..
and when you are done.. go get a thesaurus..
a grader will grade it according to the new scale... period.. even though that scale is not yet "started"
because he cannot give it the 7.5 he will just give it 7.. and I can resub for a bump.... and if you think they wont..
you are the craziest person around.. they are in business to make money.. that is what this is all about...
and I am fine with it..
if they are going to be using a new scale... why the heck would feb 1st mean anything... use the scale.. lets do this...
but dont jack my sub around with an old process.. I paid good money for the accurate service..
if my 7 is a 7.5 now.. lets do it..
I think it would show a lack of integrity for the grader to know this new scale will be inforce in 2 weeks and slab a card he believes is a 7.5
in an 8 holder... I don't see the "sent it in thinking 7.. hoping for an 8" scanario playing out..
the 7's are 7's.. the strong 7's will be 7's.. if it qualified for an 8.. they will give it that...
malicious would be.. knowing a card qualified at an 8 and giving it a 7... the grader can't give it the proper grade and he wont
give a bump.. no one would.. >>
THAT'S WHAT YOU ORIGINALLY SAID!
<< <i>I feel like if my card was considered a "low" 8-9 the grader is going to assign 7-8 knowing it will be resubbed for a 1/2 point bump >>
Keep spinning because it really isn't worth the time.
Go send Joe another email without the accusatory tone and see which one gets a reply.
my guess is.. he is..
<< <i>you guys REALLY over estimate how much PSA cares about what you think >>
My thoughts exactly, most dont understand its all about the OL mighty dollar, well today our dollar isnt all that mighty but you get my drift
-Bill Gates,1981
"With hurricanes,tornados, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another,& with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks,"Are we sure this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?"" Jay Leno 2006
THAT'S WHAT YOU ORIGINALLY SAID!
you continually mis the point...
a low 8-9 means.. a card that they would normally veiw as a 7+ and because it is so nice it is put in an 8 holder...
even though it may not qualify fully for the holder but is too nice to be in a 7...
I think we all have cards like that...
my point was.. that wont happen... so my very strong 7.. has no shot at an 8 right now..
since it is not worth your time.. stop responding.. because you are wrong......everytime..
<< <i>Who is going to teach the graders how to grade on a .5 scale when they have been using a 10 point scale?
Heck, they cant even get it right on what they have been taught in the first place! >>
<APPLAUSE>
That has always been my point, they have never been consistant in what they grade, hence the reason why people crack and resubmit and get a better grade. That should be enough for people to relize that all this grading crap is just that ,CRAP !
-Bill Gates,1981
"With hurricanes,tornados, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another,& with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks,"Are we sure this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?"" Jay Leno 2006
I would imagine Joe has about a trillion emails... right now
and I may not get a response..
why dont you go put on your satin PSA jacket... and stare at yourself in the mirror
<< <i>ARE YOU SLOW WITTED??
I would imagine Joe has about a trillion emails... right now
and I may not get a response..
why dont you go put on your satin PSA jacket... and stare at yourself in the mirror >>
You really aren't making any sense.
I suggest that you walk away from the computer and maybe then, you will see the error of your ways.
<< <i>my point was.. that wont happen... so my very strong 7.. has no shot at an 8 right now.. >>
Don't you think your strong 7.....should ummm....be a 7?
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
<< <i>THIS WAS MY EMAIL TO JOE..
Joe,
how are you.. hope all is well...
I have a couple concerns, I have two orders in house right now...
a 60 card bulk order and a 7-8 card regular order... the regular order was signed for
on the 11th but not logged in yet... but it seems you have been backed up lately so I am not overly concerned... my issue is the new grading scale.. my position is I don't like it.. but my concern is that the cards in house will be graded on the old scale??? I don't want that..
if there is an updated scale... I would like them to be graded accurately the 1st time..
I feel like if my card was considered a "low" 8-9 the grader is going to assign 7-8 knowing it will be resubbed for a 1/2 point bump... obviously no one likes to resub.. it is paying good money for what should be done correctly the first time.. please let me know what I can expect.. thank you
Bob >>
That is a very well thought out and to the point email.
Obviously, it was written with a clear head and zero animosity.
What in the world was I thinking?!?
I'm sure you will eventually get a reply.
My bad, sorry about that.
<< <i>I think people need to calm down, period.
It would be nice if people had this much passion for serious problems in our communities and country.
Ron >>
So true Ron, so true.
I think 7.5's are fair...
I just dont want to pay more to get it when my cards are already there
how does that show animosity.. it shows concern that I will pay twice for the same service...
didnt I tell you to go play in the mirror?? go take a look.. that is the only person that likes you..
<< <i>Obviously, it was written with a clear head and zero animosity.
how does that show animosity.. it shows concern that I will pay twice for the same service...
didnt I tell you to go play in the mirror?? go take a look.. that is the only person that likes you.. >>
Huh? I'm saying that it doesn't and giving you props. It was obvious that you weren't bitter or jaded; hence no animosity.
But again with the semantics, it really doesn't matter because I finally saw the light.
In fact, if you don't mind, I'm going to use your email as a template.
Well done and please keep us posted on the inevitable response.
Thanks!