Options
How Accurate is the PSA Population Report?
CardboardClassicsLLC
Posts: 139
I know I have opened up a "can of worms" but I do believe that this is a major issue in the hobby today. Enhancing this issue is the new half-grading which may have encouraged more crack and submits as has been previously done in years past.
I believe the greatest threat to the accuracy of the population report is the crack and submit method of sending cards in for regrading. The risk is that the card is being broken out of the PSA holder, but the holder is not being sent into PSA to subtract that card from the population report. With this, I believe the highest risk is with high-end cards that have low populations. How many high value, high end PSA 9's (or 8's) are continuously sent into PSA via the crack and submit method? This may cause a card that is truely a 1 of 1 PSA 9 to read as a 1 of 4 PSA nine if it were submitted 3 times in hopes of getting a PSA 10 (assuming the same grade comes back). Of course this result is hurting the person (and a big risk) that initially does the crack and submits, but when that card is sold, that new collector will never know that the card is actually a 1 of 1 instead of a 1 of 4. (Of course they got it at a lower price, but still this is not the "truth" of that card to the hobby!).
Does anyone else share this same concern?
As 3rd party grading becomes more mature, do you think this is going to hurt the hobby more in the future? Will we see less 1 of 1's? How can PSA address this issue?
I am not against cracking and submitting if you feel the card deserves a higher grade, however not sending in the original holder so it can be subtracted off the population report may cause large inaccuracies within the population report, thus altering the "truth" about that individual card.
Thank you for your time.
I believe the greatest threat to the accuracy of the population report is the crack and submit method of sending cards in for regrading. The risk is that the card is being broken out of the PSA holder, but the holder is not being sent into PSA to subtract that card from the population report. With this, I believe the highest risk is with high-end cards that have low populations. How many high value, high end PSA 9's (or 8's) are continuously sent into PSA via the crack and submit method? This may cause a card that is truely a 1 of 1 PSA 9 to read as a 1 of 4 PSA nine if it were submitted 3 times in hopes of getting a PSA 10 (assuming the same grade comes back). Of course this result is hurting the person (and a big risk) that initially does the crack and submits, but when that card is sold, that new collector will never know that the card is actually a 1 of 1 instead of a 1 of 4. (Of course they got it at a lower price, but still this is not the "truth" of that card to the hobby!).
Does anyone else share this same concern?
As 3rd party grading becomes more mature, do you think this is going to hurt the hobby more in the future? Will we see less 1 of 1's? How can PSA address this issue?
I am not against cracking and submitting if you feel the card deserves a higher grade, however not sending in the original holder so it can be subtracted off the population report may cause large inaccuracies within the population report, thus altering the "truth" about that individual card.
Thank you for your time.
0
Comments
And with the new "review" service, that would even further cut down the issue you are forecasting. I think PSA is making ALL of the right moves now.
Where you guys been??? I was resubbing in the 90's...And that 68' Mantle is gonna get a 9 one of the freekin days if it kills me!!! I won't mention how many times so far it has come back an 8....
<< <i>I think PSA is making ALL of the right moves now. >>
Thanks Homer!