To Joe Orlando. The big 3 questions what people want an answer for ?

ezyshooter

1 - Are the flips changing?
2 - If no, then will there be a zero after a whole grade? EX. 8.0 instead of 8
3 - Why no 9.5 grade ? This does not make sence to most of us. Especially newer cards after 1972.

If you are going to have half grades that is fine with me. I was in favour for them years ago. But to say no 9.5 grade just does not add up.
What's next ? 5 years from now PSA decides to introduce the 9.5 grade. Well i can see this coming a mile away because you know and i know that eventually you will have to introduce it because all the other descent grading company's are offering it. Especially for the newer cards.
Just had to throw in my 2 cents in there.
Thanks, Steve

gumbyfan

Give him a call.

fandango

<< <i>1 - Are the flips changing?
2 - If no, then will there be a zero after a whole grade? EX. 8.0 instead of 8
3 - Why no 9.5 grade ? This does not make sence to most of us. Especially newer cards after 1972.

If you are going to have half grades that is fine with me. I was in favour for them years ago. But to say no 9.5 grade just does not add up.
What's next ? 5 years from now PSA decides to introduce the 9.5 grade. Well i can see this coming a mile away because you know and i know that eventually you will have to introduce it because all the other descent grading company's are offering it. Especially for the newer cards.
Just had to throw in my 2 cents in there.
Thanks, Steve >>



i will answer them

1. no changes to flips except .5 added to those cards that are bumped....

2. no zero after whole grades as this could devalue (place negative connotation) on a card since it wasnt worthy of a bump.

3. no need for 9.5 because there is no room for a 9.5 grade...look at the same card PSA 9 and PSA 10...you tell me where a 9.5 would fall....its too difficult to make this determination, if the card has a small white spot on corner, its a 9....if it is perfect its a 10....

any other overasked questions?

swartz1

Yes - call him and tell us what he says please - because given the fact that I have no idea who you are I will believe whatever you tell us he said !

jaxxr

"3. no need for 9.5 because there is no room for a 9.5 grade...look at the same card PSA 9 and PSA 10...you tell me where a 9.5 would fall....its too difficult to make this determination, if the card has a small white spot on corner, its a 9....if it is perfect its a 10...."


Why not look at the same card in PSA 8 and PSA 9, there is a way to tell the difference easy ?
Why do only the first eight ranks of quality have room for possible above average/typical condition ?
All PSA 9s ever graded are similar, or identical, or 100% correct on the money ?

There are no small differences in centering, register, any of the four corners, brightness, reverse side, Etc., to posssibly get a slight difference in the PSA 9s ?
Its too difficult for PSA 9s, but a plausible job for PSA 6s ???

Beckett, SGC, GAI, and other companies, are capable of determining a normal midpoint or average condition for a 9, and thus can tell which ones are above the typical, however not quite "perfect" as which the 10 should actually be.
Somehow PSA graders are not good enough to do the same ??

DrJ

<< <i>Beckett, SGC, GAI, and other companies, are capable of determining a normal midpoint or average condition for a 9, and thus can tell which ones are above the typical, however not quite "perfect" as which the 10 should actually be.
Somehow PSA graders are not good enough to do the same ?? >>



In a word, YES. With the crack and resubmit games that go on here it is obvious the PSA graders have trouble finding consistency with whole number grading. Adding the 0.5 modifier is just going to make the entire process even more random and unpredictable.

Fortunately for me, I usually do not buy high end cards but instead focus on PSA 4 thru 7 for pre 1975 to get the best bang for my buck. For those with registry sets, this is a whole can of worms.

J

SDavid

Beckett, SGC, GAI, and other companies, are capable of determining a normal midpoint or average condition for a 9, and thus can tell which ones are above the typical, however not quite "perfect" as which the 10 should actually be.

None of those companies have a grade between Mint and Gem Mint. They simply added another grade (Pristine or Perfect) past the Gem Mint grade. If PSA copied them, they'd have to change the meaning of "10," and doing so at this stage of the game would be suicide.

Those companies also haven't been able to distinguish between Gem Mint and their Pristine or Perfect grade. BGS 10's are often 9.5's that were bumped up courtesy of their stupid sub bump system and SGC just avoids the issue by almost never issuing a 10, which is even lamer than what Beckett does.

gumbyfan

<< <i>Yes - call him and tell us what he says please - because given the fact that I have no idea who you are I will believe whatever you tell us he said !


>>



So you don't have a phone?

JasP24

<< <i>

Why not look at the same card in PSA 8 and PSA 9, there is a way to tell the difference easy ?
>>



ABSOLUTELY. The difference between a PSA 8 and a PSA 9 is much greater than the difference between a PSA 9 and a PSA 10. As others have stated, PSA 10 by definition equals a BGS or SGC 9.5. Grab 50 PSA 8's, 50 PSA 9s and 50 PSA 10s. Grab a 10x loupe and sit under a nice bright light. If you can't see the differences get out of the graded card hobby.

Jason

yawie99

I think most of us could separate the 8's from the 9's, but in my limited experience of submitting modern cards and receiving a handful of 10's along the way, the assignment of the Gem Mint grade seemed only marginally more systematic than randomly conferring the coveted grade to a few 9's.

I'm not bright enough to analyze the possible economic impact of this change, but the bottom line for me is that there's something fundamentally wrong about changing the rules of the game so long after it's started. Well, that and the fact that there's not enough consistency with just 10 grades. How on earth can PSA trumpet the precision of the new grading model?

BobaFett72

"Why not look at the same card in PSA 8 and PSA 9, there is a way to tell the difference easy ?
Why do only the first eight ranks of quality have room for possible above average/typical condition ?
All PSA 9s ever graded are similar, or identical, or 100% correct on the money ?

There are no small differences in centering, register, any of the four corners, brightness, reverse side, Etc., to posssibly get a slight difference in the PSA 9s ?
Its too difficult for PSA 9s, but a plausible job for PSA 6s ???"

WELL STATED JAXXR.

bigdcards

I think the real problem is that most of the 10s should be 9.5. Unless they go to a 10+ or a 10.5, then the 9.5 just doesn't work. People would be sending in their cards that would have previously been 10s to receive a 9.5 that will be worth less than the 10s. That would reduce submissions and increase the value of current 10s. They want it to go the other way.

What I don't quite understand is why they didn't go to a 10+. It seems like all the 10s would go back in for submissions as well with the hope of equaling the value of an SGC 100. Maybe that will be next February.

JasP24

<< <i>I think the real problem is that most of the 10s should be 9.5. Unless they go to a 10+ or a 10.5, then the 9.5 just doesn't work. People would be sending in their cards that would have previously been 10s to receive a 9.5 that will be worth less than the 10s. That would reduce submissions and increase the value of current 10s. They want it to go the other way.

What I don't quite understand is why they didn't go to a 10+. It seems like all the 10s would go back in for submissions as well with the hope of equaling the value of an SGC 100. Maybe that will be next February. >>



100% agree with this.

vintagetoppsguy

<< <i>no need for 9.5 because there is no room for a 9.5 grade >>


Here is one for you: If there is no room for a 9.5, then why the need for an 8.5? Look at it this way. We know a 7 is NM and we know a 9 is MINT, right? Okay, so if the grade of NM-MT is in between those, then isn't NM-MT ALREADY A HALF GRADE? Forget the numbers - I'm talking GRADES. Why do we need another grade between NM-MT and MINT??? Answer that question!

So, we just established that an NM-MT is already a half grade between NM and MINT. Therefore, if we can have a 8.5 NM-MT+ (which would techincally be a NM and three quarters), why not a MINT+ ???

Seriously ponder that for a few minutes. In the 1980's, there was no NM-MT. There was either NM or MINT. Knowing some cards fall in between those grades, people came up with the term NM-MT to describe cards that were half way (same as half grade) between NM and MINT. So again I ask, if it's alredy a half grade, how can you half it again???

WinPitcher

I'm not bright enough to analyze the possible economic impact of this change



Said by IMO one of the brightest men on this forum.



Steve

cravetopps

just a throery about why no 9.5's....

If you look at the distribution of 9s in the current pop reports, except for post 1972 perhaps, this population is relatively low. I don't know the % of non PSA 9s, but it must be well over 95%.

So, if you had a business model based on getting people to send in cards for re-grading in the hopes of getting a half point bump, where would you focus your energy?

The lack of a 9.5 reflects the low distribution of 9s in the current registry sets and what probably was a compromise (or agreement) between the high profile set registry owners and the major dealers to hold the line at 9 to prevent a lot of reshuffling in the registry rankings.

Although this is just one study, I think it is apparent where the "action is" in the potential upgrade market.


Grading Study

storm888

The absence of a 9.5 has two primary effects:

1. The Registry is not TOTALLY undermined/destroyed by a mid-competition SUPER rule-change.

2. The folks who submit TONS of 9s in search of an upgrade to a 10, will continue to play.

ripkenintheminors

Given the fact that 10 is Gem Mint, I don't see how PSA could've possibly gone with a 9.5. With an 8 a person can argue as to whether it's an 8.5 or possible a 9. If we open a situation where we have Mint and More Mint we're really opening ourselves up to an even larger complication.

tcbphd

Sister Mary Overhead at my high school would never give 100 on a test because "only God is perfect"--maybe all 10s should really be 9.5s since, I suppose, only God's 1952 Topps set is perfect.