Can you get a lower grade on a review? -- YES!

MULLINS5

Just curious if PSA would slab a grade lower if I send some in for review along with a sub. I did a search first with no results.

Thanks in advance!

otwcards

<< <i>Just curious if PSA would slab a grade lower if I send some in for review along with a sub. I did a search first with no results.

Thanks in advance! >>



The answer is no, but for you, I hope they'll make an exception.

MULLINS5

<< <i>

<< <i>Just curious if PSA would slab a grade lower if I send some in for review along with a sub. I did a search first with no results.

Thanks in advance! >>



The answer is no, but for you, I hope they'll make an exception. >>



don't hate.

otwcards

Perhaps if you thought for a moment before you posted (try it once, for a change), you'd understand the stupidity of the question.

Why would ANYONE send ANY card in for review for a bump if they thought it might get lowered? Such thought would suggest that such a card OBVIOUSLY wouldn't be worthy of a bump and it seems like a foolish thing to do.

MULLINS5

I don't see anything wrong with the question.

Say a card were sent in for review and had an obvious crease that PSA found upon that review...would PSA feel that they should lower it? I asked the question because I have never sent a card in for review. I thought I read somewhere once that PSA would refund the difference in SMR to the customer.

otwcards

<< <i>I don't see anything wrong with the question.

Say a card were sent in for review and had an obvious crease that PSA found upon that review...would PSA feel that they should lower it? I asked the question because I have never sent a card in for review. I thought I read somewhere once that PSA would refund the difference in SMR to the customer. >>



If it's an obvious crease, then shouldn't you catch it BEFORE you send it back in? The goal when sending cards in for review is to send cards that are worthy of a bump. If you're too blind to see an "obvious" crease, perhaps its time to start collecting Pez dispensers.

diamondman

I don't see any footballs, but those chocolate eggs are jumping all over the screen. guess I better send myself in for a review.

akuracy503

I just sent in my 1951 Bowman Whitey Ford PSA 5 for review with the expectation that PSA will do the right thing and lower it

I had a thread about this last week, I'll follow up with the results/response from PSA.

Griffins

I sent in a '15 CJ Lajoie for reholder, they bent it taking it out and downgraded it from a 4 to a 3. I was pissed, but it didn't make a difference. Not even a free grading coupon for the few hundred $$$'s I lost.
Now if the holder gets cracked I leave it that way.

akuracy503

<< <i>I sent in a '15 CJ Lajoie for reholder, they bent it taking it out and downgraded it from a 4 to a 3. I was pissed, but it didn't make a difference. Not even a free grading coupon for the few hundred $$$'s I lost.
Now if the holder gets cracked I leave it that way. >>



That is a scary thought and one of the worst scenarios I can think of, dissapointing to hear that PSA did not do anything about it.

cardbender

Twice I've given PSA 9 cards to PSA to have them reholdered.
Both times they put those same cards in PSA 7 holders without
contacting me.

One was done under the Rocchi regeime, the other was done recently.
In both cases, we worked it out.

paleocards

On one of my review orders last year I got a call from PSA telling me that they determined that my '64 Koufax PSA 8 had "bleached borders" that they had missed when it was first encapsulated. They told me they were keeping the card and taking it out of the pop report. They offered me vouchers or a cash refund in return. I took the cash which was my declared value on the sub ($235 - SMR for the card). Fine by me, I had ~$165 into the card. The lesson I learned is that you declare full-replacement value on the sub to protect your investment in case something like this happens.

72skywalker

<< <i>Perhaps if you thought for a moment before you posted (try it once, for a change), you'd understand the stupidity of the question.

Why would ANYONE send ANY card in for review for a bump if they thought it might get lowered? Such thought would suggest that such a card OBVIOUSLY wouldn't be worthy of a bump and it seems like a foolish thing to do. >>



I see nothing wrong with the question either. PSA might of missed something the first time they graded it, caught it the second time and gave it the appropriate lower grade. He just wanted to know if they would actually lower the grade or leave it as is.

Sometimes even Jedi Masters can misread the original question.

onebamafan

I do not think a grade should ever be lowered upon review.................they graded the card previously and assigned their grade, it may not get bumped up, but should not be lowered. This only serves to challenge their competency as graders. IMO

RipublicaninMass

no, they wont lower the grade, PSA will buy it at 125% SMR if they think it was overgraded the first time


sheesh

storm888

"...I do not think a grade should ever be lowered upon review.................they graded the card previously and assigned their grade, it may not get bumped up, but should not be lowered. This only serves to challenge their competency as graders. IMO ..."


///////////////////////////////////////////////////


IF the grade should "never be lowered," THEN the grade should "never be raised."

Graders make errors; correcting errors does not challenge their competence.
It is supporting evidence of their integrity.

MULLINS5

For what it is worth, I called PSA a few minutes ago and the woman said that cards can get a lower grade upon review, but is unlikely and will be refunded the difference in money or vouchers.

onebamafan

If this practice became common it would make me wonder why ANYONE would knowingly risk the possiblity of receiving a lesser grade on a review? It just seems like it would be good business to never lower an already assigned grade.

divecchia

I was wondering this myself, thanks for the replies...

Donato

WalterSobchak

How did Hawk Harrelson get access to MULLINS5's computer and edit his thread title?

WinPitcher

Patrick

You could also get hit by a car crossing the street.


Steve

ShawnyD

do they do reviews on counterfeit Gretzkys?

otwcards

This just in . . . Mullins is still a dolt and typically asks silly questions and makes wild accusations followed by editing the post to cover his trail.

To his credit, he PM'd me offering to bury the hatchet. I could've taken the high road and agreed, but I chose not to. I still think he's a dolt. However, I'm not obsessed with following him from thread to thread like some of the cretins that are now frequenting these boards.

CDsNuts

+1 for keeping hatchets unburied

WinPitcher

I'm a cretin?


Steve

otwcards

<< <i>I'm a cretin?


Steve >>



Steve:

What's your pointy little hat say on it?

hammered

To say a card can receive a lower grade on review is not entirely correct.
I think what the PSA rep meant is that, if there's a significant problem with a card they missed the first time (like the bleached borders example), they'd crack the slab and call it altered. Or if they missed something like a crease the first time around, they'll downgrade it. But we're talking only serious problems here.
If a card is currently an 8, and it's anywhere near the ballpark of an 8, they'll leave it alone. They're not gonna bump it down to a 7.5 or even a 7. They just won't. They might put a sticky note on the slab asking you why the hell you thought this card would bump, but they won't downgrade it in the absence of a serious problem.

TomGshotput

<< <i>and will be refunded the difference in money or vouchers. >>



So they have strong incentives not to lower it even if it was graded incorrectly

diamondman

They might put a sticky note on the slab asking you why the hell you thought this card would bump, but they won't downgrade it in the absence of a serious problem. >>

swartz1

<< <i>"...I do not think a grade should ever be lowered upon review.................they graded the card previously and assigned their grade, it may not get bumped up, but should not be lowered. This only serves to challenge their competency as graders. IMO ..."


///////////////////////////////////////////////////


IF the grade should "never be lowered," THEN the grade should "never be raised."

Graders make errors; correcting errors does not challenge their competence.
It is supporting evidence of their integrity. >>



I think this logic is correct, prior to the .5 bump...

mike22y2k

When I got my recent reviews back I was thrilled with the bumps but the best part of the review process was the sticky notes on the cards that didn't bump. It's helped me understand how they grade this year that I collect. Thanks to PSA for the schooling.