Options
Joe Orlando's editorial in the December issue about POP reports
MCMLVTopps
Posts: 4,616 ✭✭✭✭✭
I read with great interest Joe Orlando's editorial "Population Reports -What You Need To Know" in the current December issue.
Joe touts the value and importance of the POP report as both a buying and selling tool, which I wholeheartedly agree with. As I read on, I was hoping to read something about the proliferation of crackouts on the POP report statistics and its impact on the validity of the data contained within the POP report. I am of the opinion that when the decision was made to move to the half-point system the horse was approaching the gate and the gate was about to be opened. How so? It is clear that bumping a card up a half-point in most cases results in a monetary increase in the value of the card. Thus, it has become an incentive to owners to crackout cards and send them in, seeking a higher grade. Needless to say, the half-point move was also a financial cash cow for PSA.
Basically, it works like this...an owner cracks out a PSA 7, that he/she thinks might garner a higher grade, anything higher than the existing PSA 7 tag. The card is sent in raw and the owner gets the good news that the card is now graded a PSA 7.5. Presto, misssion accomplished. Now, what has happened to the original PSA 7 cert #? If the owner hasn't sent in the tag (which I doubt many do), the PSA 7 remains in the realm of the "Registry world", and a new PSA 7.5 is created. We now have one card existing as two within the PSA database. If, as Joe states, "From 1998 to present, PSA has graded over 1,000,000 per year". It would not be difficult to think of the massive number of crackouts that may now exist in two different places, but are really only one card. since the inception of the half-point decision.
As a long time collector of 1955 Topps, I can see where crackouts that have been bumped up, could seriously, and in an adverse manner effect the value of cards within the set. My latest copy of the 1955 Topps PSA POP Report is dated 10/14/10, the following numbers were indicated on this report:
PSA 1 = 455; PSA 1.5 = 31
PSA 2 = 72; PSA 2.5 = 69
PSA 3 = 2,164; PSA 3.5 = 83
PSA 4 = 5,763; PSA 4.5 = 246
PSA 5 = 12,902; PSA 5.5 = 379
PSA 6 = 22,701; PSA 6.5 = 766
PSA 7 = 24,147; PSA 7.5 = 573
PSA 8 = 15,267; PSA 8.5 = 356
If my math is correct, as of this POP report, 2,503 half-point cards now exist within the 1955 Topps POP report structure. One can only wonder how many dupes truly exist. AND, this does not take into account crackouts that move a whole grade, surely there are some of those, as this is a subjective process. I really wonder how many of those 356 PSA 8.5s still "exist" as PSA 8s, which actually impact the value of PSA 8s, as their "true" number is articificially inflated.
I have no idea how to resolve this "problem", but it appears the decision to move to the half-point system did not ponder the consequences of how crackouts would impact the validity of the POP report. I would bet my entire collection that the POP report in many, many, many sets is now rife with inaccurate data, and as time passes, it can only get worse. I believe the horse has long ago left the stable, perhaps never to be seen again.
One more quote from Joe's editorial "There are many factors that impact the value of a collectible but its rarity - or population - is one of the most significant."
The burden remains with PSA to provide us with the most accurate and thus beneficial data with which to assist us in our collection decisions. I would ask anyone within the PSA hierarchy to respond to this post and either prove me wrong, or provide some insight as to how this "situation" can be stopped before it really gets to the point where the POP report becomes nothing more than meaningless numbers. You are the premiere publication, you owe it to us to do your dead level best to provide us with accurate data and not sweep this under any rug. It is only going to slowly but surely get worse as time passes.
Joe touts the value and importance of the POP report as both a buying and selling tool, which I wholeheartedly agree with. As I read on, I was hoping to read something about the proliferation of crackouts on the POP report statistics and its impact on the validity of the data contained within the POP report. I am of the opinion that when the decision was made to move to the half-point system the horse was approaching the gate and the gate was about to be opened. How so? It is clear that bumping a card up a half-point in most cases results in a monetary increase in the value of the card. Thus, it has become an incentive to owners to crackout cards and send them in, seeking a higher grade. Needless to say, the half-point move was also a financial cash cow for PSA.
Basically, it works like this...an owner cracks out a PSA 7, that he/she thinks might garner a higher grade, anything higher than the existing PSA 7 tag. The card is sent in raw and the owner gets the good news that the card is now graded a PSA 7.5. Presto, misssion accomplished. Now, what has happened to the original PSA 7 cert #? If the owner hasn't sent in the tag (which I doubt many do), the PSA 7 remains in the realm of the "Registry world", and a new PSA 7.5 is created. We now have one card existing as two within the PSA database. If, as Joe states, "From 1998 to present, PSA has graded over 1,000,000 per year". It would not be difficult to think of the massive number of crackouts that may now exist in two different places, but are really only one card. since the inception of the half-point decision.
As a long time collector of 1955 Topps, I can see where crackouts that have been bumped up, could seriously, and in an adverse manner effect the value of cards within the set. My latest copy of the 1955 Topps PSA POP Report is dated 10/14/10, the following numbers were indicated on this report:
PSA 1 = 455; PSA 1.5 = 31
PSA 2 = 72; PSA 2.5 = 69
PSA 3 = 2,164; PSA 3.5 = 83
PSA 4 = 5,763; PSA 4.5 = 246
PSA 5 = 12,902; PSA 5.5 = 379
PSA 6 = 22,701; PSA 6.5 = 766
PSA 7 = 24,147; PSA 7.5 = 573
PSA 8 = 15,267; PSA 8.5 = 356
If my math is correct, as of this POP report, 2,503 half-point cards now exist within the 1955 Topps POP report structure. One can only wonder how many dupes truly exist. AND, this does not take into account crackouts that move a whole grade, surely there are some of those, as this is a subjective process. I really wonder how many of those 356 PSA 8.5s still "exist" as PSA 8s, which actually impact the value of PSA 8s, as their "true" number is articificially inflated.
I have no idea how to resolve this "problem", but it appears the decision to move to the half-point system did not ponder the consequences of how crackouts would impact the validity of the POP report. I would bet my entire collection that the POP report in many, many, many sets is now rife with inaccurate data, and as time passes, it can only get worse. I believe the horse has long ago left the stable, perhaps never to be seen again.
One more quote from Joe's editorial "There are many factors that impact the value of a collectible but its rarity - or population - is one of the most significant."
The burden remains with PSA to provide us with the most accurate and thus beneficial data with which to assist us in our collection decisions. I would ask anyone within the PSA hierarchy to respond to this post and either prove me wrong, or provide some insight as to how this "situation" can be stopped before it really gets to the point where the POP report becomes nothing more than meaningless numbers. You are the premiere publication, you owe it to us to do your dead level best to provide us with accurate data and not sweep this under any rug. It is only going to slowly but surely get worse as time passes.
0
Comments
Obviously they don't on crack and resubs, but I would think on cards already slabbed in PSA holders, that if that card warrants a higher grade, then PSA would internally adjust the pop report. That would make sense.
Have you tried calling/emailing Joe about this issue?
Looking for Bob Uecker cards
My Ebay Auctions
<< <i>I agree, but what is PSA to do? You can't make people send in the old cert crackouts. So what then? Make people put the cards on the registry and then register them each year like cars? Can't do that because some people put their collections on hold for several years and keep their stuff in a box somewhere and not registered. I think for the POP reports it is just a best guess. >>
How about offer a discount for those that send in the tag when they crack and resubmit?
Bob
Looking for Bob Uecker cards
My Ebay Auctions
The burden is on the publisher to provide data this is valid. We pay for this service and should expect no less.
I'm not trying to bang on Joe, but the POP report carries a hefty amount of weight in many sets. I can assure you, that inflated POP reports for several cards in the 1955 Topps set, especially in the higher number and a dozen or so commons does have an impact. And we're talking hundreds of dollars, not just a few 20s.
There has never been an admission of this problem. What about a guy that subs and resubs till he gets his grade? Say a guy subs a PSA 7 over and over and over, how many ghost PSA 7s of that card exist? Of course some do come back lower, but the original card never ceases to exist, it only morphs on.
While many crackouts happened prior to the half-point change, the impact was nowhere near what it is with the adoption of the half-point system. Again, the burden is not on the user, the burden lies with management at PSA!
Like Joe says, never get cheated.
<< <i>I agree, but what is PSA to do?
The burden is on the publisher to provide data this is valid. We pay for this service and should expect no less.
I'm not trying to bang on Joe, but the POP report carries a hefty amount of weight in many sets. I can assure you, that inflated POP reports for several cards in the 1955 Topps set, especially in the higher number and a dozen or so commons does have an impact. And we're talking hundreds of dollars, not just a few 20s.
There has never been an admission of this problem. What about a guy that subs and resubs till he gets his grade? Say a guy subs a PSA 7 over and over and over, how many ghost PSA 7s of that card exist? Of course some do come back lower, but the original card never ceases to exist, it only morphs on.
While many crackouts happened prior to the half-point change, the impact was nowhere near what it is with the adoption of the half-point system. Again, the burden is not on the user, the burden lies with management at PSA!
Like Joe says, never get cheated. >>
The burden lies with nobody, because obviously there's nothing that can be done about it.
Also, you're assuming the relationship between population increases and card value is linear, when in fact it's not. Once the population reaches a certain point-- it varies from set to set, but all sets have this point-- the marginal effect of adding another card to the pop report becomes negligible. Does is matter if the pop report shows 78 PSA 8's of a particular card, when in fact there are 'really' only 67? This phenomenon has an adverse effect on the prices for low pop cards, but hey-- that's just the price of investing in low pop cards. There is nothing on Earth to be done about it.
<< <i>
<< <i>I agree, but what is PSA to do? You can't make people send in the old cert crackouts. So what then? Make people put the cards on the registry and then register them each year like cars? Can't do that because some people put their collections on hold for several years and keep their stuff in a box somewhere and not registered. I think for the POP reports it is just a best guess. >>
How about offer a discount for those that send in the tag when they crack and resubmit?
Bob >>
Ditto and I thought the did for a period
increased by one in the appropriate .5 slot.
If certs are returned because a slab was cracked for whatever reason we were once told that the pop would be adjusted as well.
Boo is correct, the pop is what it is and will never be 100% correct. The only thing PSA does is update the pop whenever a card is graded period.
It is up to end user to gather what ever useful info they can from it.
Could it be perfect? No, not IMHO.
Steve
<< <i>I agree with Boo as well. The POP report simply shows the count of cards that PSA has graded not the actual population. It's not a census count. Most experienced collectors understand the crackout issue and take it into account. The POP report is not perfect but it has saved me lots and lots of money over the years. >>
No, the term "population report" does imply a count of cards that actually exist. A population is a census count. I'm not really sure how else you can define it.
The easiest fix would be to change the name to "Grading Report" or some such thing.
No doubt the population report is off but I don't attribute that to the half point system, just greed and inconsistancy.
Shane
There was one dealer that turned in a box of over 35,000+ labels from very expensive crack outs. Imagine, just 1 dealer.
There will never be a day where the pop reports are 100% accurate with certain cards, and/or sets.
It is what it is...a basis for an idea of what certain cards are as a population.
Later, Paul.
Later, Paul.
<< <i>I would imagine at least the PSA 10 pop reports are accurate, since it's doubtful anyone would crack and resub a 10. >>
By the same logic I would feel pretty comfortable about the PSA 9's (except possibly for some of the modern cards with very high 9 and 10 pops where it would make less of a difference) - I thinks its the 7's and 8's where there is room for large error. As someone stated previously where the pop hits over a certain number of cards it matters little to the value pop 76 vs pop 67. So with the likelyhood of there being no true practical solution moving backwards (the idea of some type of incentive for turned in "cracked" certs is a good one although financially unlikely for PSA) and also unlikely no long term solution moving forwards - caveat emptor - especially with low pop 7's-8.5's.
-Howard
I'm in agreement with Boo, the pop report is a very, very rough guide.
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
Lou Gehrig Master Set
Non-Registry Collection
Game Used Cards Collection
The problem you CANT mitigate are the people who collect sets in mid grades and are net buyers, and thus indirectly benefit from depressed prices. They will always be incented to boost pop reports for the cards they collect.
-Michael
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
wouldnt giving a $ amount for the flip be asking the original holder to crack out the card instead of PSA with the review?
why would PSA want you to do it?
when the review (if bumped) would fix the pop report...
Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps
- uncut
Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.