Home PSA Set Registry Forum

Populations are now inaccurate!

Today I decided to sell some cards on E-bay. I went into the Population Report to see if the card I was selling had a low population. To my surprise "0" cards were graded for the card I was selling. I also noticed a large number of cards in the population have similar "0" grades.
I have 100% complete sets for the cards in question. There should be no card numbers in the population with "0" cards graded.

I contacted PSA set registry and was told there were variations to the sets and that the master spec numbers were changed. This would separate the Canadian version and the American versions of the cards.
I was further told that my already graded, accurate labeled cards would have to be re-holdered to appear in the population again.
WHAT IS GOING ON HERE!
Where are you Joe Orlando?
I NEED AN ANSWER!

Comments

  • Oh Yes, to add to my previous post. Most of my sets with no variations have similar, inaccurate "0" population cards.
    Those sets in the registry are also 100% complete.
    PSA, "We have a Problem!"

  • MCMLVToppsMCMLVTopps Posts: 4,554 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Worse than that, MUCH worse! Ever since the move to the half-point scale, the POP reports are (IMO) largely and forever will be totally inaccurate. Why? So many crackouts (many over and over and over again), for those seeking an upgrade, which in turn enhances the value of their card.

    The flips get tossed and each time that particular card is cracked over and over, there leaves ghost data in the POP report. i.e., a PSA 6 gets cracked, comes back a PSA 6, if the flip hasn't been sent in, there are now 2 PSA 6s of that card. Do the math and imagine the possible countless hundreds and hundreds of cards (if not many thousadns at this point) cracked out and have forever skewed the POP report in the PSA 5-7 arena, if not lower and maybe PSA 8 level, seeking the Holy Grail of getting a PSA 9 back. Tis all about $$$$ on both sides of the fence.

  • grote15grote15 Posts: 29,433 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The pop report is a useful guide but the numbers are not accurate as long as collectors crack out cards and don't return the flips from the crackouts, which hardly anyone does anymore.

    The zero pop issue is a bit more confusing. Even if variations have been added, shouldn't the original spec show that an example(s) has been graded?



    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.
  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 29,160 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The Pop report in my opinion is unfixable at this point. I know for a fact I have cracked out dozens of cards to resub and upon getting them back the pop report was affected.

  • bishopbishop Posts: 2,917 ✭✭✭

    I am just glad it turned out to be his fault and not Bob

    Topps Baseball-1948, 1951 to 2017
    Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
    Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007

    Al
  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 29,160 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 28, 2017 6:54AM

    Yea and the best part is when I tried to get a few cards the bump they deserved and failed I sold them and OFCOURSE the new owners subbed them in and got the bumps. So it's not all my fault lol

  • MCMLVToppsMCMLVTopps Posts: 4,554 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Let's not soft pedal this incredibly myopic move by PSA. Facts are facts...the half-point change could not be viewed as anything other than a monetary decision by the PSA Board of Directors to enhance their coffers. This was NOT a Collector's decision and anyone who thinks otherwise is simply not seeing reality.

    I suspect they (the BODs) KNEW that there would be a crush of crackouts, as Collector's would want the higher grades, be it half point or higher, which would enhance the value of their cards. Thus, more submissions, thus more $$$ for PSA.

    The half-point change has been in effect for many years now. On day one, the POP report was on a slow, but steady and guaranteed decline into an almost useless statistic for evaluating the actual #s of certain cards existing within a certain grade. I also suspect the parameters the graders use to define the differences between a PSA 7 and a PSA 7.5 are all but miniscule...surely somebody had to come up with parameters when the half point was activated. At arms length, can you really see the difference between a PSA 7 and PSA 7.5? I can't, it's all about $$$$$.

    EXAMPLE....and this is just one of countless THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS at this point. You have a star PSA 6 card...you look closely and in your opinion it deserves a higher grade. Let the crackout begin. You crack it and send it in, it comes back a PSA 6. Assuming you didn't send in the flip (which almost nobody does), there are now TWO PSA 6s of this card. Ah, let's send it in again. It comes back a PSA 6.5. There are now TWO PSA 6s and ONE PSA 6.5, but only ONE card. This card in your opinion is really a PSA 7...you crack it again, it comes back a PSA 6. Oops...you now have THREE PSA 6s, ONE PSA 6.5, yet only one card physically exists that generated the other cards. Keep cracking this card and you can easily see the bloating of the POP report for this one card.

    I suspect this is most rampant in the PSA 5-7 arena. I have no stats to back this up, just general thoughts and observations of how the 55 Topps POP numbers have EXPLODED over the years. Imagine you renew your Collector's club membership in the Premium level and get 15 free gradings. Right there you get to submit a card 15 times if you want, just gotta pony up the cost of shipping it back.

    Full disclosure...I've cracked a few, maybe 10. I once cracked an SGC86 and it came back a PSA 8.5. I was stunned, the card at that time was a 1 of 1 in the world of 55 Topps. Not even Don Spence had this card. I paid about $30 for the card and sold it later for $600 + if memory serves. So, the enticement exists to crack, crack and crack on. I really don't have heartburn over cracking a card out, but, the issue is that PSA never figured out a way to PROTECT the POP report, which is their obligation to Collector's to ensure that it is as valid as possible. IT ISN'T AND NEVER, EVER will be.

    I don't attend the National Convention, but maybe somebody going to the luncheon may want to ask Joe..."What is your position on the cracking out of PSA graded cards and the impact its had on the validity of the POP report?"

Sign In or Register to comment.