My pack submission popped: New Cases?

jalovra

Just had a sub pop that included some packs that I had resubmitted after they had been returned because of loose gum. Anyone else have this?

23278120 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1977 Topps Baseball Wax Pack Wax Pack
23278121 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1978 Topps Baseball Wax Pack Wax Pack
23278122 MINT 9 1978 O.P.C. Baseball Wax Pack Wax Pack
23278123 MINT 9 1978 O.P.C. Baseball Wax Pack Wax Pack
23278124 MINT 9 1978 O.P.C. Baseball Wax Pack Wax Pack
23278125 NEAR MINT 7 1978 O.P.C. Baseball Wax Pack Wax Pack Phil Niekro/Nolan Ryan-Back Pack
23278126 MINT 9 1978 O.P.C. Baseball Wax Pack Wax Pack Thurman Munson-Back Pack
23278127 MINT 9 1978 O.P.C. Baseball Wax Pack Wax Pack Willie McCovey R/B-Top Pack
23278128 MINT 9 1978 O.P.C. Baseball Wax Pack Wax Pack Carl Yastrzemski-Back Pack
23278129 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1978 O.P.C. Baseball Wax Pack Wax Pack
23278130 GEM MINT 10 1978 O.P.C. Baseball Wax Pack Wax Pack Brooks Robinson R/B-Back Pack
23278131 MINT 9 1979 Topps Baseball Cello Pack Cello Pack Nolan Ryan-Back Pack



4 of them were resubmitted and very happy with results. Shipped today and hope to see them first of the week.

Mefer

Well that is good news. Hopefully the new holders are here.

flcardtrader

So there must be multiple gatekeepers at PSA who screen packs differently before sending to Steve for authenticity validation?

I am a standards based guy and if that is true, the varying standards exhibited by PSA drives me crazy.

grote15

The new holders are just being introduced from what I've heard, so this is a good sign. Congrats on the PSA 10 pack!

grote15

<< <i>So there must be multiple gatekeepers at PSA who screen packs differently before sending to Steve for authenticity validation?

I am a standards based guy and if that is true, the varying standards exhibited by PSA drives me crazy. >>



No, the packs are first authenticated or rejected by Steve and then sent back to Newport Beach where PSA assigns a grade (or chooses not to grade the pack if gum is loose, with old holders at least). With the new holders, it appears they will be grading packs with loose gum again. I am interested in seeing what the new holders look like.

Raulsmaster

How long did it take to pop?

flcardtrader

<< <i>

<< <i>So there must be multiple gatekeepers at PSA who screen packs differently before sending to Steve for authenticity validation?

I am a standards based guy and if that is true, the varying standards exhibited by PSA drives me crazy. >>



No, the packs are first authenticated or rejected by Steve and then sent back to Newport Beach where PSA assigns a grade (or chooses not to grade the pack if gum is loose, with old holders at least). With the new holders, it appears they will be grading packs with loose gum again. I am interested in seeing what the new holders look like. >>



Thanks Grote - do you know why they decide not to grade a pack with loose gum?

I would think a pack with loose gum would grade less than one with whole gum - but it should still be graded if Steve deemed it authentic. Similar to a heavily creased cards garnering a PSA 2 vs. a crisp example getting a PSA 8.

I guess if I have a pack with loose/broken gum, I should probably wait a little bit before sending to get past the loose gum rejector?

ChiefsFan1st

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>So there must be multiple gatekeepers at PSA who screen packs differently before sending to Steve for authenticity validation?

I am a standards based guy and if that is true, the varying standards exhibited by PSA drives me crazy. >>



No, the packs are first authenticated or rejected by Steve and then sent back to Newport Beach where PSA assigns a grade (or chooses not to grade the pack if gum is loose, with old holders at least). With the new holders, it appears they will be grading packs with loose gum again. I am interested in seeing what the new holders look like. >>



Thanks Grote - do you know why they decide not to grade a pack with loose gum?

I would think a pack with loose gum would grade less than one with whole gum - but it should still be graded if Steve deemed it authentic. Similar to a heavily creased cards garnering a PSA 2 vs. a crisp example getting a PSA 8.

I guess if I have a pack with loose/broken gum, I should probably wait a little bit before sending to get past the loose gum rejector? >>


I think you might be confusing loose gum and broken gum. Broken gum (to my knowledge) is not an
issue. Loose gum is (gum that moves in the pack freely, not welded/stuck to the card) It is my understanding
that the loose gum was poking holes in packs after they were graded.

I also am interested if they are back to grading packs with loose gum. I have a few that I would like to sub.

MisterBungle

Loose gum, whether whole or broken, presents the same problem. The issue is, when the holder is jostled around, in the mail or elsewhere, the gum becomes a missile inside the pack. The corners of the gum end up poking through the wrapper.

Broken gum presents even more of an issue because, if the gum is broken in half, there are 8 corners instead of 4 to poke holes with.

John

flcardtrader

Thanks for setting me straight on loose vs. broken gum.

Yet another question - unless the gum is melded to the front card, doesn't all gum on the top of a wax pack break over time?

The idea that gum breaking yields an exponential 2 * n+1 power number of "missles", where n = the number of breaks within the original stick, is definitely disconcerting.

MULLINS5

<< <i>Thanks for setting me straight on loose vs. broken gum.

Yet another question - unless the gum is melded to the front card, doesn't all gum on the top of a wax pack break over time?

The idea that gum breaking yields an exponential 2 * n+1 power number of "missles", where n = the number of breaks within the original stick, is definitely disconcerting. >>



This is why there shouldn't be grades on packs. There should only be Authentic Unopened or Not Authentic, which is (or at least should be) the only concern for the collector/buyer.

Assigning a grade to a pack (which will eventually get damaged, even in the holder) is one of the most nonsensical things I've ever heard of.

belz

<< <i>

<< <i>Thanks for setting me straight on loose vs. broken gum.

Yet another question - unless the gum is melded to the front card, doesn't all gum on the top of a wax pack break over time?

The idea that gum breaking yields an exponential 2 * n+1 power number of "missles", where n = the number of breaks within the original stick, is definitely disconcerting. >>



This is why there shouldn't be grades on packs. There should only be Authentic Unopened or Not Authentic, which is (or at least should be) the only concern for the collector/buyer.

Assigning a grade to a pack (which will eventually get damaged, even in the holder) is one of the most nonsensical things I've ever heard of. >>



agreed

itzagoner

mmmm hmmmm.

ChiefsFan1st

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>Thanks for setting me straight on loose vs. broken gum.

Yet another question - unless the gum is melded to the front card, doesn't all gum on the top of a wax pack break over time?

The idea that gum breaking yields an exponential 2 * n+1 power number of "missles", where n = the number of breaks within the original stick, is definitely disconcerting. >>



This is why there shouldn't be grades on packs. There should only be Authentic Unopened or Not Authentic, which is (or at least should be) the only concern for the collector/buyer.

Assigning a grade to a pack (which will eventually get damaged, even in the holder) is one of the most nonsensical things I've ever heard of. >>



agreed >>


+1
Authentic is all I really care about (barring the pack doesnt look like its been run over by a truck
or something )

MisterBungle

"Yet another question - unless the gum is melded to the front card, doesn't all gum on the top of a wax pack break over time?"
-------------------------
Not necessarily. It depends on how carefully the pack
has been stored over the years.


"The idea that gum breaking yields an exponential 2 * n+1 power number of "missles", where n = the number of breaks within the original stick, is definitely disconcerting."
-------------------------
Sure, one break equals eight corners, one more break
of one of those halves equals twelve corners, etc.

...and I must also add, that a broken corner is sharper
than the original "molded" corner on the gum.

If you want to over think this, as I'm sometimes
want to do, at some point in the breakage of the
gum, you will reach a point where the individual
broken piece is too small to carry enough weight
or momentum to punch through the side of the
pack. Unless, of course, there are other broken
pieces behind that small piece to add to its weight.

Okay, I'm done. My brain hurts.

John

jalovra

Logged on 8/11/2014; shipped on 10/16/2014.

elsnorto

<< <i>This is why there shouldn't be grades on packs. There should only be Authentic Unopened or Not Authentic, which is (or at least should be) the only concern for the collector/buyer.

Assigning a grade to a pack (which will eventually get damaged, even in the holder) is one of the most nonsensical things I've ever heard of. >>



Why should PSA pack collectors only care about authentic or not authentic whereas PSA card collectors should care about authenticity and condition? I, personally, would be fine with that... but obviously there are pack collectors who care a great deal about registry standings, just as there are on the card side.

As far as what is nonsensical, how about a different spin, where putting packs in holders where they are prone to damage even with "normal" handling is more nonsensical than assigning grades to packs?

Hopefully the new holders will do a better job... but I wonder how many packs have already been lost (defined as now in a lesser condition than when originally graded)?

Snorto~

MULLINS5

<< <i>

<< <i>This is why there shouldn't be grades on packs. There should only be Authentic Unopened or Not Authentic, which is (or at least should be) the only concern for the collector/buyer.

Assigning a grade to a pack (which will eventually get damaged, even in the holder) is one of the most nonsensical things I've ever heard of. >>



Why should PSA pack collectors only care about authentic or not authentic whereas PSA card collectors should care about authenticity and condition? I, personally, would be fine with that... but obviously there are pack collectors who care a great deal about registry standings, just as there are on the card side.

As far as what is nonsensical, how about a different spin, where putting packs in holders where they are prone to damage even with "normal" handling is more nonsensical than assigning grades to packs?

Hopefully the new holders will do a better job... but I wonder how many packs have already been lost (defined as now in a lesser condition than when originally graded)?

Snorto~ >>



I, too, hope the new holders keep the packs safer, but it's hard for me to think that they will. It's just the nature of packs. Gum will move around. Wrappers break. Seals break.

It's up to the collector/buyer and graded packs are popular and here to stay. I want to build a 79 to 89 Hockey run of packs...want them in PSA holders (to keep me from ripping them late at night)...don't care about the grades though as it's hard for me to justify spending money on something (grading) that will inadvertently degrade itself over time.

baz518

Did OP ever get new holders back? Just curious, I've got an 86 Fleer BK pack I'd love to send in... but has broken gum.

ldferg

If you submit a wax pack, do you tell them if stars are showing on front/back or will PSA and/or Steve indicate this?

grote15

<< <i>If you submit a wax pack, do you tell them if stars are showing on front/back or will PSA and/or Steve indicate this? >>



You have to state it on the submission form. They will put any name on the flip, if you request it, even a common player.

I am seeing wax packs recently graded again by PSA, but holders look the same to me.