Not fun to wait 2.5 months for these results!

Dboneesq

No, they are not mine and I don't know whose they are.

Line # Item # Cert # Grade Description Type Country
1 1 16391531 MG: MINIMUM GRADE 1989 UPPER DECK 1 KEN GRIFFEY JR. STAR ROOKIE Card US
2 1 16391532 MG: MINIMUM GRADE 1975 TOPPS 223 ROBIN YOUNT Card US
3 1 16391533 MG: MINIMUM GRADE 1978 TOPPS 36 EDDIE MURRAY Card US
4 1 16391534 MG: MINIMUM GRADE 1991 STADIUM CLUB 388 JEFF BAGWELL Card US
5 1 16391535 MG: MINIMUM GRADE 1989 UPPER DECK 25 RANDY JOHNSON STAR ROOKIE Card US
6 1 16391536 MG: MINIMUM GRADE 2005 TOPPS PRISTINE 145 LANCE BERKMAN JERSEY Card US
7 1 16391537 MG: MINIMUM GRADE 1990 LEAF 300 FRANK THOMAS Card US
8 1 16391538 MG: MINIMUM GRADE 2006 TOPPS TEAM SET SAINTS NO11 REGGIE BUSH SAINTS Card US
9 1 16391539 MG: MINIMUM GRADE 2006 UPPER DECK ROOKIE PREMIERE 2 REGGIE BUSH Card US
10 1 16391540 MG: MINIMUM GRADE 1991 UPPER DECK 755 JEFF BAGWELL Card US
11 1 16391541 MG: MINIMUM GRADE 1989 UPPER DECK 273 CRAIG BIGGIO Card US
Total Items: 11
Date Received: 12/21/2009
Date Shipped: 2/9/2010
Order Status: Shipped

itzagoner

consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds

billwaltonsbeard

is this what happens when a submitter sets an expected grade for the cards, and the cards don't meet that grade?

JHS5120

They were probably PRO 9's and 10's and he wanted 9's and 10's

SDavid

I saw a few of those crossover special subs where the submitter completely struck out. Maybe they shouldn't offer that special anymore?

otwcards

<< <i>I saw a few of those crossover special subs where the submitter completely struck out. Maybe they shouldn't offer that special anymore? >>



Maybe the submitters need to wise up and either:

a) learn how to better prescreen their cards
b) stop subbing with crossed fingers
c) learn how to crack out and resubmit
d) send me their cards to prescreen for half the price and twice the positive results (a joke, folks -- although it would be the truth)
e) quit the hobby...

Cracking and resubbing is still the best avenue. I recently cracked 3 1948 Leaf cards that appeared undergraded. Two high number commons in PSA 4's and a Conerly in an SGC 60 (5). Just got the poppage and the two PSA 4's are now PSA 5 and PSA 5.5 and the Conerly is a PSA 6 (a little surprised, but extremely happy) although I was expecting a PSA 5 due to centering (although the card exhibits PSA 8+ corners and surface) as you can see below:

SDavid

I can't remember now if the special was for crossovers or reviews, but if it was the former then the cards should have already been prescreened by a professional. (Most of those cards would no longer be subbed to a gem/pro outfit).

otwcards

<< <i>I can't remember now if the special was for crossovers or reviews, but if it was the former then the cards should have already been prescreened by a professional. (Most of those cards would no longer be subbed to a gem/pro outfit). >>



I understand EXACTLY what you're saying, but you and I both know that apples are not always apples. It is one of the inherent flaws of TPG and the human element.

Dboneesq

I agree with a lot of what Scott stated in his post. I think a lot of people don't take the time to examine the card and just think that it looks nice, so back in it goes for review. If it's a crossover, sometimes they put down an unreasonable minimum grade, especially when trying to crossover cards from one of those less than desirable 3rd party grading companies.

otwcards

<< <i>I agree with a lot of what Scott stated in his post. I think a lot of people don't take the time to examine the card and just think that it looks nice, so back in it goes for review. If it's a crossover, sometimes they put down an unreasonable minimum grade, especially when trying to crossover cards from one of those less than desirable 3rd party grading companies. >>



It's not so much the fault of the TPG's, but the fault of many submitters unrealistic expectations. I cannot count how many times I've seen people post cards to these boards asking for grade evaluations and read them argue when others provide realistic expectations. These same folks rarely post the results that would confirm the opinion of the group. Also, too many on these boards really don't have a grasp of the grading process and post completely inaccurate assessments. No wonder so many are disappointed when they get their cards back.

Grading is not that difficult, but it seems too many people submit with "hopes" rather than accepting the reality. A card is what it is and will be graded as such virtually every time. The grader isn't going to miss a corner crease or a wrinkle just because the rest of the card looks MINT and you're hoping for a gift.. Hoping for such a result will lead to disappointment and frustration and is usually followed by comments like, "So and so gets better grades because they submit in bulk." Comments like these are sour grapes. Sure, a few cards will be misgraded on submissions by the bulk dealers (both to the good and to the bad), but in comparison to the volume that they do, I would suggest that the "overgrades" are on par with what you would expect from the same volume of a sampling of regular submitters. It's just easier for folks to justify their inadequacies by pointing fingers at others...

vladguerrero

SSSSSSSSSSPANKED!

I also suspect they were a crossover.

SDavid

<< <i>

<< <i>I agree with a lot of what Scott stated in his post. I think a lot of people don't take the time to examine the card and just think that it looks nice, so back in it goes for review. If it's a crossover, sometimes they put down an unreasonable minimum grade, especially when trying to crossover cards from one of those less than desirable 3rd party grading companies. >>



It's not so much the fault of the TPG's, but the fault of many submitters unrealistic expectations. I cannot count how many times I've seen people post cards to these boards asking for grade evaluations and read them argue when others provide realistic expectations. These same folks rarely post the results that would confirm the opinion of the group. Also, too many on these boards really don't have a grasp of the grading process and post completely inaccurate assessments. No wonder so many are disappointed when they get their cards back.

Grading is not that difficult, but it seems too many people submit with "hopes" rather than accepting the reality. A card is what it is and will be graded as such virtually every time. The grader isn't going to miss a corner crease or a wrinkle just because the rest of the card looks MINT and you're hoping for a gift.. Hoping for such a result will lead to disappointment and frustration and is usually followed by comments like, "So and so gets better grades because they submit in bulk." Comments like these are sour grapes. Sure, a few cards will be misgraded on submissions by the bulk dealers (both to the good and to the bad), but in comparison to the volume that they do, I would suggest that the "overgrades" are on par with what you would expect from the same volume of a sampling of regular submitters. It's just easier for folks to justify their inadequacies by pointing fingers at others... >>



You guys are essentially talking about the fairness of it. The crossover service (which I've barely used) may be perfectly fair, and the shared subs that I've seen may be outliers. However, if the common result is customers paying to and fro shipping, waiting several weeks, and walking away with no tangible benefit, then that can't be good for business. Now clearly, a TPG can't give away grades or cross over cards not worthy, but if it's that difficult for cards from SGC/BGS/GAI to cross over then they can provide that information to the customer up front. Either that, or allow customers to sub crossovers with raw cards so that they're walking away with something added.

otwcards

<< <i>You guys are essentially talking about the fairness of it. The crossover service (which I've barely used) may be perfectly fair, and the shared subs that I've seen may be outliers. However, if the common result is customers paying to and fro shipping, waiting several weeks, and walking away with no tangible benefit, then that can't be good for business. Now clearly, a TPG can't give away grades or cross over cards not worthy, but if it's that difficult for cards from SGC/BGS/GAI to cross over then they can provide that information to the customer up front. Either that, or allow customers to sub crossovers with raw cards so that they're walking away with something added. >>



From my experience, the crossover programs (I initiated the Crossover Review Program when I was at SGC and it was later adopted by PSA) are less successful than cracking and resubmitting the same cards. The reason some submitters prefer the crossover is that there is no downside with regard to the card getting lowered or rejected when it is already in a holder. The negative is that most TPG's will be conservative in crossing over ANY card as there is always a risk of finding a flaw or alteration once the card is cracked out. Typically, a crossover, to be successful, has to be a no-brainer. And in this guise, wouldn't it make sense to crack it out and submit it raw?

The crossover programs are a nice source of revenue for the TPG's and they offer little risk for the TPG. If there's any question, they just label it "Did Not Meet Minimum Grade." It doesn't mean the card WOULDN'T grade at the minimum were it raw, but there is a question or risk, so the TPG refuses to assume the risk. The TPG still gets paid and the submitter is back to square one minus the shipping and submission expenses.