Options
First ever PSA sub popped... Ugh.
Porkins
Posts: 605 ✭✭✭
Well, grades popped on my first ever PSA sub about 8-10 days ago and I've just now gotten around to posting them. Sub was a 15 card Platinum voucher variety, a mixed bag of stuff I picked up over the past year. Am very grateful to the couple of members whose advice kept me from subbing a 50+ card order until I was able to familiarize myself with PSA's grading preferneces. I had previously subbed smallish to Beckett a few times and from the outset was pretty good at spotting 9-9.5's. Now my confidence was knocked down about 5 pegs, and at this point you can color me befuddled. Here's results:
Line # Item # Cert # Grade Description Type
1 1 19710589 N6: MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT 1979 TOPPS 1 PASSING LEADERS R.STAUBACH/T.BRADSHAW Card
2 1 19710590 EXCELLENT 5 1982 TOPPS 488 JOE MONTANA ALL-PRO Card
3 1 19710591 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 OC 1979 O-PEE-CHEE 52 OZZIE SMITH Card
4 1 19710592 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1979 TOPPS 116 OZZIE SMITH Card
5 1 19710593 NEAR MINT 7 1980 TOPPS 482 RICKEY HENDERSON Card
5 2 19710594 NEAR MINT 7 1980 TOPPS 482 RICKEY HENDERSON Card
5 3 19710595 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1980 TOPPS 482 RICKEY HENDERSON Card
6 1 19710596 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1979 TOPPS 390 EARL CAMPBELL Card
7 1 19710597 EXCELLENT 5 1982 TOPPS 486 RONNIE LOTT ALL-PRO Card
8 1 19710598 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1986 TOPPS 374 STEVE YOUNG Card
8 2 19710599 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1986 TOPPS 374 STEVE YOUNG Card
9 1 19710600 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1986 TOPPS 161 JERRY RICE Card
10 1 19710601 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1978 TOPPS 707 ROOKIE SHORTSTOPS Card
11 1 19710602 N6: MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT 1985 TOPPS 314 DAN MARINO ALL PRO Card
12 1 19710603 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1978 TOPPS 6 NOLAN RYAN Card
Was pretty disappointed. I have no idea what happened on the '82 Fball's. I thought both had great shots a 10's and then they both happen to come back as 5's?? I honestly don't see what I missed to be so horribly off.
Other than the two 7 Rickey's (which I thought were 8's) I figured the rest of the cards were straight 9ish and I didn't receive a single one!!
I mean my collection is not near too good for the Ozzie, Molitor, Rickey 8's, I just had expected more
Also, I personally pulled every single 1 of these cards from a BBCE box or pack so I was shocked about getting 4/15 EOT/MSR!!!
Please... Any kind words would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for looking.
Line # Item # Cert # Grade Description Type
1 1 19710589 N6: MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT 1979 TOPPS 1 PASSING LEADERS R.STAUBACH/T.BRADSHAW Card
2 1 19710590 EXCELLENT 5 1982 TOPPS 488 JOE MONTANA ALL-PRO Card
3 1 19710591 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 OC 1979 O-PEE-CHEE 52 OZZIE SMITH Card
4 1 19710592 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1979 TOPPS 116 OZZIE SMITH Card
5 1 19710593 NEAR MINT 7 1980 TOPPS 482 RICKEY HENDERSON Card
5 2 19710594 NEAR MINT 7 1980 TOPPS 482 RICKEY HENDERSON Card
5 3 19710595 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1980 TOPPS 482 RICKEY HENDERSON Card
6 1 19710596 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1979 TOPPS 390 EARL CAMPBELL Card
7 1 19710597 EXCELLENT 5 1982 TOPPS 486 RONNIE LOTT ALL-PRO Card
8 1 19710598 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1986 TOPPS 374 STEVE YOUNG Card
8 2 19710599 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1986 TOPPS 374 STEVE YOUNG Card
9 1 19710600 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1986 TOPPS 161 JERRY RICE Card
10 1 19710601 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1978 TOPPS 707 ROOKIE SHORTSTOPS Card
11 1 19710602 N6: MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT 1985 TOPPS 314 DAN MARINO ALL PRO Card
12 1 19710603 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1978 TOPPS 6 NOLAN RYAN Card
Was pretty disappointed. I have no idea what happened on the '82 Fball's. I thought both had great shots a 10's and then they both happen to come back as 5's?? I honestly don't see what I missed to be so horribly off.
Other than the two 7 Rickey's (which I thought were 8's) I figured the rest of the cards were straight 9ish and I didn't receive a single one!!
I mean my collection is not near too good for the Ozzie, Molitor, Rickey 8's, I just had expected more
Also, I personally pulled every single 1 of these cards from a BBCE box or pack so I was shocked about getting 4/15 EOT/MSR!!!
Please... Any kind words would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for looking.
0
Comments
results are pretty typical of 1st submissions except the eot's. we tend to look at centering on our own cards a lot better than it really is until you go through the process a few times which would be the difference between an 8 or a 9.
<< <i>4 EOT / min size is a bit unusual >>
I agree with you. Who trims 1986 steve young's? Sometimes maybe the graders should just use common sense on trimming.
<< <i>
<< <i>4 EOT / min size is a bit unusual >>
I agree with you. Who trims 1986 steve young's? Sometimes maybe the graders should just use common sense on trimming. >>
plenty do because of the price difference from an 8 to a 9 or 10. Are you a better grader than a professional?
The above tips are important, the only time I have ever gotten an OC was my first sub, after that I knew it had to be near perfectly centered.
One other thing that really helped me was getting a 10 x loupe or mag glass, break out one of your 5's and go over it with one and you will see exactly why it got the low grade, spider web or tiny crease but it will show up. From now on pre loupe all your submission cards and your grades will go up big time.
I think you will do fine, you listened to the boards advice from the start and made a small first sub vs a 50+ card one that would have been a disaster so now just follow more of the advice and you will be getting those 9-10's on your future subs.
Good luck!!!
Bosox1976
Thanks very much for the kind words and advice. Extra thanks to BBG for a great breakdown of where to look (and shedding some light on what organisms exist and/or might be doing in the deep recesses of my cards
So I guess you guys would suggest resubbing all the EOT/MSR if I am positive these cards are untouched??
Thanks again guys, it takes a little of the sting off!
Good luck going forward.
1. The fact that you pulled them from a BBCE box merely shows that Topps produced a lot of garbage over the years. Topps could never have imagined the grading craze and simply churned out anything. In their defense, it was a 10 to 50 cent product intended to be eventually disposed of by angry mothers.
2. I disagree a bit on the 5's. In my experience, any sort of a wrinkle, crease or spider vein starts it at a 4 and can only go down from there. A scan of the 5's might help and I could be wrong as well.
3. I disagree a bit on the loupe (sp?) as well. To me, the overall 'look and appeal' of the raw card with the naked eye works out better for me. It doesn't always work, of course, but I think you can still submit decent cards under this approach.
You asked for 'kind words'...
Really not a bad sub. The cards would appear to be worth more with their current grade than ungraded. My first sub was far, far worse...
The guy who wants to make $7k for a PSA 10.
<< <i>I had one partcular EOT, a '73 Ryan, that I knew was a slam-dunk 9. Submitted 3 times, 2 EOT's, then the 9 NQ >>
Yikes. This is what scares me about 'card grading' and why I avoid pouring too much money into it. Joe O. wrote a whole article on the card industry vs. coin industry in this month's SMR. All he has to do is read your quote once and he has his answer. I'm no expert but this seems less likely in the coin world? Perhaps a rookie comment...
<< <i>Who trims 1986 steve young's?
The guy who wants to make $7k for a PSA 10. >>
I already covered that Lee.
By the way, you will be receiving grading vouchers for the MSR cards, but not the EOT cards.
<< <i>
<< <i>I had one partcular EOT, a '73 Ryan, that I knew was a slam-dunk 9. Submitted 3 times, 2 EOT's, then the 9 NQ >>
Yikes. This is what scares me about 'card grading' and why I avoid pouring too much money into it. Joe O. wrote a whole article on the card industry vs. coin industry in this month's SMR. All he has to do is read your quote once and he has his answer. I'm no expert but this seems less likely in the coin world? Perhaps a rookie comment... >>
Every EOT I've had I would resubmit and eventually it would receive a grade value. This is the case with MSRQ as well. I don't mind it or get upset any longer as I did when I first saw it on my first submission. Now I just turn it around and submit it again, though the vouchers almost never make it to me in a timely fashion.
First submissions are always tough. Practice makes perfect, you'll eventually get better at finding cards worthy of submission. You need to train your eye to be able to spot these types of defects.
Justin
Retired - Eddie Mathews Master Registry Set (96.36%) Rank 1
By the way, you will be receiving grading vouchers for the MSR cards, but not the EOT cards. >>
I had no idea... I thought you got vouchers for both... Well I guess this would make me tend to not resub the EOT's as much because it wouldnt be making up for itself and I might have to pay for it 4-5 times. This might be good to know
They call me "Pack the Ripper"
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I had one partcular EOT, a '73 Ryan, that I knew was a slam-dunk 9. Submitted 3 times, 2 EOT's, then the 9 NQ >>
Yikes. This is what scares me about 'card grading' and why I avoid pouring too much money into it. Joe O. wrote a whole article on the card industry vs. coin industry in this month's SMR. All he has to do is read your quote once and he has his answer. I'm no expert but this seems less likely in the coin world? Perhaps a rookie comment... >>
Every EOT I've had I would resubmit and eventually it would receive a grade value. This is the case with MSRQ as well. I don't mind it or get upset any longer as I did when I first saw it on my first submission. Now I just turn it around and submit it again, though the vouchers almost never make it to me in a timely fashion.
First submissions are always tough. Practice makes perfect, you'll eventually get better at finding cards worthy of submission. You need to train your eye to be able to spot these types of defects.
Justin >>
That doesn't always work. I have a NM-MT 1971 Jim Shellenback that I've submitted 6 or more times and every time it has come back N6 (for the newbies that means cut short at the factory). Having said that, often you can get a N6 or N8 holdered if you try multiple times. It's worth it for a low pop common or star card but not for run-of-the-mill stuff.
<< <i>the 2 5's are probably spider veins would be my guess. tilt the cards sideways in the light and you will see them.
results are pretty typical of 1st submissions except the eot's. we tend to look at centering on our own cards a lot better than it really is until you go through the process a few times which would be the difference between an 8 or a 9. >>
Agreed. Spider veins have killed me before on 78 FB, 78 BB, and 82 FB. Straight 5s on all of them and when tilting to light, it's very obvious of the flaw. I learned the hard way as well.
For the first time, the ones that did grade aren't bad at all. I'd like to have a straight 8 Ozzie RC.
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
<< <i>
<< <i>4 EOT / min size is a bit unusual >>
Agreed.
If you can disregard those for a moment and focus on the others, I can say with 100% certainty that I've been there. When I first started subing, in 2009, I was floored. It's taken a while but if you stay at it, I think you'll improve in these ways (and in this order):
1. Centering - this is the first thing that I think everyone notices and focuses on first, the card just pops when it's right, feels funny when it's off
2. Corners - once centering is more or less a no-brainer then your eyes will extend out to the corners and you'll become even more critical of them pointy devils
3. Cleanliness - spots, marks and dust ... stuff that's in the borders or splattered over the image ... you'll start to notice this more
4. Focus - WTF the card can be out of focus?! Yep ... everything else is great and then you realize the whole card is blurry
5. Registration - a color was printed slightly off and now there's a weird yellow or magenta or blue line running down an edge or giving the card a faux 80s 3d look sans glasses
6. Surface* see below
*This is where I'm guessing you missed the mark. I think it's much easier to do 1-5 and hard as all heck to do 6. You can look straight at the card and it might look perfect ... even the back is centered. Then you tilt it (under a single light source) and notice the card seems to have acne or varicose veins or little grand canyons where tiny villagers are grading tiny cards with their own canyons. This part sucks ... not the villagers ... but having a card instantly go from 10 to 5 ... but that's how you know you're getting better, when you weed these mischievous cards out (the trojan horses) ... and your grades will benefit from this stringent treatment ... I can guarantee this. >>
This is without a doubt some of the best advice you can ever receive prior to making a submission. The only thing I might add is be critical of yourself and your grading, maybe even overly critical. As for as magnification, I use a 10x magnifying glass to get a good overall view, then I use a 16x loupe for the corners and edges. That being said, nothing replaces a good light and rotating the card through virtually every axis you can rotate it through...amazing what you can find. Then once you find it...be critical. Leniency is out the door.
Good luck to you...you'll be fine.
Everybody's advice here is awesome and you should heed it. One further thing I would like to mention is the phenomnon of diminishing returns. For the first few years that I would send stuff in for Subbing I would crack a Box or Buy a lot, or bust a bunch of packs and as I would do it I would decide which cards I wanted to sub. Then over the course of the next 2-3 subs I would go through those piles of cards I originally rejected and always find a few that I felt needed to be subbed. I learned that I needed to stick with my First instinct as each sub made up of cards rejected from previous subs, were obviously lesser and lesser grades (With a squeeker or two thrown in just to screw with my Brain). So I learned this doen't work, for me at least!!
I have developed a system the last few years that I do what I just outlined, but I take a little more time and examine the Cards the first go around carefully (On a Box of 36 packs, 15 cards each this is approx. 450 Cards after Gum/Wax throw aways) That first go around I will have about 60-90 cards (Mainly concentrating on Centering) that I thought looked like 10's, I stick these in Card savers. Then the second time around I get out the Glass and usually whittle that down to about 30-40. Then when I get reay to sub, I go through them again and end up with 15-20. I find this works well and gets me much higher grades then in the past.
YeeHah
Neil
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>4 EOT / min size is a bit unusual >>
Agreed.
If you can disregard those for a moment and focus on the others, I can say with 100% certainty that I've been there. When I first started subing, in 2009, I was floored. It's taken a while but if you stay at it, I think you'll improve in these ways (and in this order):
1. Centering - this is the first thing that I think everyone notices and focuses on first, the card just pops when it's right, feels funny when it's off
2. Corners - once centering is more or less a no-brainer then your eyes will extend out to the corners and you'll become even more critical of them pointy devils
3. Cleanliness - spots, marks and dust ... stuff that's in the borders or splattered over the image ... you'll start to notice this more
4. Focus - WTF the card can be out of focus?! Yep ... everything else is great and then you realize the whole card is blurry
5. Registration - a color was printed slightly off and now there's a weird yellow or magenta or blue line running down an edge or giving the card a faux 80s 3d look sans glasses
6. Surface* see below
*This is where I'm guessing you missed the mark. I think it's much easier to do 1-5 and hard as all heck to do 6. You can look straight at the card and it might look perfect ... even the back is centered. Then you tilt it (under a single light source) and notice the card seems to have acne or varicose veins or little grand canyons where tiny villagers are grading tiny cards with their own canyons. This part sucks ... not the villagers ... but having a card instantly go from 10 to 5 ... but that's how you know you're getting better, when you weed these mischievous cards out (the trojan horses) ... and your grades will benefit from this stringent treatment ... I can guarantee this. >>
This is without a doubt some of the best advice you can ever receive prior to making a submission. The only thing I might add is be critical of yourself and your grading, maybe even overly critical. As for as magnification, I use a 10x magnifying glass to get a good overall view, then I use a 16x loupe for the corners and edges. That being said, nothing replaces a good light and rotating the card through virtually every axis you can rotate it through...amazing what you can find. Then once you find it...be critical. Leniency is out the door.
Good luck to you...you'll be fine. >>
I respectfully disagree. The best advice you can give someone prior to making a submission is to tell them to only submit those cards that could see a significant increase in value from having them graded. All this talk about loupes, minute spots on the surface, slight flaws in registration, etc., serve only to detract from the issue which the submitter should be confronting. And that issue is this: Anytime you find yourself agonizing over whether or not to submit a card, you have- without exception-- chosen a card where the expected added-value gained from grading the card is minimal. So why bother?
The reason most people end up unhappy with their subs is because they submit crap that can only end up profitable if every single star aligns for them. And, in more cases then not, this isn't going to happen. A great example of this is post-1971 commons. What's the upside here? An average 10 sells for $30-$90, a 9 recoups slightly more than the grading fees, and you lose on everything else. Why screw around with cards like that? In the best case you're going to make maybe $2 in profit per card submitted. Who needs it? Why take on the headaches?
If you want to get into submitting and selling graded cards, then skip all the penny-ante crap and try to make a big it. Crack cards where a bump would result in a significant financial gain and send them in- if you have even a decent eye then 10-15% of them will bump, and you'll be well on your way to building a part-time business on the side that's fun to manage. Skip the 1979 commons- your time is worth more than that.
There are cases when that advice also does not apply, I have submitted a number of cards just to have them graded for my personal collection, I didnt care what the grade or the value. They will be sold and a few given to my family when I am no longer here.
<< <i>I think Boopotts advice is great and you should always know the possible values change by grade vs submission cost before you send in any sub. That said if a submitter cant tell the difference between a 5 and a 9 then you can throw values out the door until he hones his skills at determining the grades and can be within 1 grade on most cards. Both areas are equally important in my eyes.
There are cases when that advice also does not apply, I have submitted a number of cards just to have them graded for my personal collection, I didnt care what the grade or the value. They will be sold and a few given to my family when I am no longer here. >>
Agreed- submitting for personal reasons is another beast entirely. I don't do that, so I can't speak to it, but I'm aware that others do- in which case my advice doesn't apply.
If I could overcome the above, I would be golden!
Speaking of cracking and resubmitting, anyone ever have such a beast make a jump from an 8 to a 10? I have a card that pulled an 8; when I submitted I felt that card out of all I submitted had the best chance at a 10.
Special note to Neil: thanks so much for posting... I've literally been waiting over 5 months for a YeeHah in my general direction