Failure to Bump
gemint
Posts: 6,130 ✭✭✭✭✭
I posted another 'whinefest' post where I complained about the low bump % on my November review submission. What do you think?
0
Comments
<< <i>BTW, a few were cracked out and reslabbed in the original grade. I guess they had second thoughts to bumping them. They were all originally in pre-0.5 holders with the grade next to the condition. Yet some came back reholdered with the original grade, yet with the new label (numerical grade below the stated condition). >>
Scans are not big enough to tell -- but they all seem to have great characteristics of an 8. Any desire to gamble slightly more and crack them out entirely and submit for grading? There are two or three that it is hard to gauge the precise top/bottom centerings. That said, they all seem to be really strong for their grade.
M
Gemmint,
I do have to ask a question????
Why are you reviewing a few of those cards? What is the possible upside on a couple of the 69 commons? I would not waste my money with low dollar reviews. Big money or nothing.
Just to add...they look nicely colored and centered. They were probably out of coffee in the break area that day and the smoking section was closed due to a fire inspection--You know all the graders smoke cigarettes///they took it out on your cards.
If the cards in question do not increase fairly significantly in price with a .5 or 1 point jump, then disregard.
Centering has very little to do with 8.5's outside of it has to be good enough for a 9. Perfectly centered cards don't get a "bonus" for their centering. In fact you have a MUCH MUCH MUCH better chance of getting a 0.5 bump with a slightly OC card with perfect corners.
http://www.unisquare.com/store/brick/
Ralph
I completely agree with everything you stated. Corners are the biggest factor by far. They are tough on print also.
i think he's wise enough to know that.
<< <i>
<< <i>BTW, a few were cracked out and reslabbed in the original grade. I guess they had second thoughts to bumping them. They were all originally in pre-0.5 holders with the grade next to the condition. Yet some came back reholdered with the original grade, yet with the new label (numerical grade below the stated condition). >>
Scans are not big enough to tell -- but they all seem to have great characteristics of an 8. Any desire to gamble slightly more and crack them out entirely and submit for grading? There are two or three that it is hard to gauge the precise top/bottom centerings. That said, they all seem to be really strong for their grade.
M >>
Sorry I've posted bigger scans. The thing that worries me about cracking and resubbing is my last raw card sub had a few strong 8s that actually came back as 7s. It's like they throw darts at a board to determine if they're going to grade harsh or easy.
<< <i>Quite honestly, when centering comes into the equation with reviews I have to laugh....It's centered enough for a 9; but not perfectly centered so therefore no 8.5. What kind of crap thinking is that.
Gemmint,
I do have to ask a question????
Why are you reviewing a few of those cards? What is the possible upside on a couple of the 69 commons? I would not waste my money with low dollar reviews. Big money or nothing.
Just to add...they look nicely colored and centered. They were probably out of coffee in the break area that day and the smoking section was closed due to a fire inspection--You know all the graders smoke cigarettes///they took it out on your cards.
I just subbed some of the best '69s I had, not really going for value upside. The first review sub I did saw several bump to 8.5 or 9. So I decided to submit more of my set.
<< <i>The low percentage of cards getting bumped baffles me. There are many here who have a good eye for grading and their submission results confirm that. When these same submitters hand select the best of their best they seldom get a high percentage of bumps. I would like it if cards sent in for review were all reholdered but I understand the business advantages of not doing so. >>
I agree with Ralph about reviews being put into a new holder. When you pay x amount of money for a submission of cards to be reviewed, they charge you for every card whether they bump the card or not. When they can get $5 or more a card just to glance at it, seems the motivation would be low to reholder the card and give it a bump. When I read other board memebers as well as myself cherry pick the best cards from a collection only to get very low or no results in upgrades it baffles me too. I'd like to see a system in place for reviews where if a card fails to bump they will charge you y, if they upgrade a card and replace the holder then they charge z. I think everyone submitting reviews would feel like they are getting a fair assesment that way.
~WalterSobchak
My opinion is that PSA is not usually willing to admit grading errors on a large % of a review order, regardless of how worthy the cards are. I think there has to be an extraordinary and obvious reason to override a prior grader's opinion. That's why I think cracking out is a better way to go. Cracking also gives you a better chance at one of those former 8s going to a 9. Although full grade bumps exist, you are far more likely to get an 8.5 if you just review them. The Ferrara and the Scheinblum are possible 9s, in my opinion, but you're not likely to get 9 on review. Even the Perry could be a 9 with that slightly rough bottom edge. I've seen worse 9s. But on review, it will stay at 8, with a sticky note that points to the bottom edge. The Bench has snow in the black portion of the lettering but it is a very nice card and could still get 8.5 as a raw submission. On review, though, I think they'd use that as a reason to leave it where it is.
I've personally had far more success cracking out. While I agree with you on the risk of a downgrade, I think the chances of an upgrade (even a full point upgrade) are better this way.
And when you crack and resub, you generally don't have to wait two calendar months for your order to be graded, as with reviews.
Personally, my pet peeve are the over-graded cards I have bought on eBay over the years. I am basically stuck with these cards. Anyone want a pile of out of focus 9's and even 10's? You cannot get much if you point out the flaw and sell it. Combine that with any buyer is most likely a scammer that will re-sell without mentioning the flaw...and the circle continues. Anyone can make a mistake. Grading is difficult but I really, really dis-like that PSA does not address this issue. As you can imagine I like it when someone posts an overgraded card. Always fun.
<< <i>I agree with hammered. Grading involves a somewhat subjective decision (using so-called objective parameters) by a human being. Your odds are much better by cracking and submitting. Once the grader sees a previous grade, they are biased. No way around it. They may give you the half point but very rarely will give you the full point.
Personally, my pet peeve are the over-graded cards I have bought on eBay over the years. I am basically stuck with these cards. Anyone want a pile of out of focus 9's and even 10's? You cannot get much if you point out the flaw and sell it. Combine that with any buyer is most likely a scammer that will re-sell without mentioning the flaw...and the circle continues. Anyone can make a mistake. Grading is difficult but I really, really dis-like that PSA does not address this issue. As you can imagine I like it when someone posts an overgraded card. Always fun. >>
Agreed on the low end 9s. I have several 9s in my 1969 set that I got off eBay that I deem as being weaker than the 8 in my set. So I keep them both. The 9 may look nice on eBay but then when I get it, I see a light corner touch or two.