Are they currently only doing this on serial numbered cards? (I've long suspected but never had any proof)
What happens when Joe Schmo buys a raw card off ebay or at a show that someone else had graded an 8 and they cracked and sold raw?
What if Joe is perfectly ok with that card in an 8 holder and wants PSA to slab it anyway?
How would anyone know if that card had ever been graded?
I love what this does to prevent and identify the card-altering guys but there are so many unintended consequences that could arise here. Plus, the crack & resubmit game has existed since the beginning of time. I can only imagine it's a small but substantial percentage of PSA revenues. If it wasn't profitable, people wouldn't do it and I believe the crack & resub guys that are doing things to the cards is an even smaller percentage. We are going to need a whole new thread just for this!
here's the kicker. all of this modern basketball that i've subbed was from stuff i ripped myself during covid shut down. none of it was purchased raw off ebay and it's been in my hands only. i'm building a '19 covid historic bubble season set that i know is 100% pack pulled, self subbed and unaltered to tuck away. kinda why i shied away from vintage during/post trimming scandal. this is the only way i truly know i have an unaltered set.
anyways, with that being said and that it's a kawhi 10th year card and even though it's an /8, its not something i would really crack and resub. not confident, but no real incentive to pay a sub fee again. it's not a centered mantle, a ryan card or a blazing hot rookie card.
my first instinct is that they miscued a 3/8 instead of an 8/8. again, i'm gonna have to go thru tons of popped subs to look. it could be, but i just don't remember it and strikes me as odd.
with that being said, i just don't understand it. there are so many chrome cards that are dust and fingerprint magnets coupled w tons of newbie subbers that don't know to prep a card prior to subbing that it seems ridiculous to restrict a card based off a previous submittal.
on the flip side, we all say not all 9's a created equal, right? what if you take a 9 with a chipped border or corner, trim it down to where it looks and presents much better. now creating a top shelf 9? does that get the auto-grade into a 9 holder based of a previous submittal?
this is very concerning for several different reasons. and i still fully haven't processed all the pros and cons.
So this one hasn't even actually been submitted before? That just makes this far more interesting! There are so many ways this could go sideways. There are some great things that come out of this but so many unintended consequences as well.
@envoy982 said:
So this one hasn't even actually been submitted before? That just makes this far more interesting! There are so many ways this could go sideways. There are some great things that come out of this but so many unintended consequences as well.
i can't say for certain. but my initial instinct based off what i usually do crack and resub is a no. i'm gonna have to go thru tons of subs and 1000s of lines of cards.
but here's another head scratcher...even if it 10d before, that doesn't make it a $1000 card, i wouldn't think. so! did they just log the serial number (or mistranscribed more like it) or do they actually have a scan of the card. and its obvious they have one or the other than WHY ARE THEY ASKING ME FOR THE PREVIOUS CERT? 😉
@blurryface said:
and what if it was a card someone else purchased raw and didn't know the previous cert number? what, the card could never be holdered again? SAY WHAT?
because that's exactly what the letter indicates.
that is extremely messed up, imo. who's ever gonna wanna risk buying a raw card ever again?
yep, all coming back. card was graded an 8, and currently was and still is a pop 1, 0 higher.
but when i got it back, i remember this thumb print w residue on it. i hate gloves but i wear finger cots when prepping subs. plus i'm left handed, so hold w the right hand and wipe w the left. but no big deal, never thought a thing about it. certainly wasn't gonna raise a big fuss. so popped it out, wiped it back down and resubbed it. no big deal.
but all thumbs aside, i'll go ahead and take full blame. that is my thumb. i think i just got finished polishing off a dozen wings w extra hot sauce and picked my nose w that exact thumb at least 5 times while prepping my sub. the fact that a booger, buffalo-winged fingerprint that is easily swiped dooms this card to an 8 forever?
who cracks a pop 1, 0 higher /8 card? well, i do. because i don't want cards w someone else's booger on it. ahhhh...covid 2020 y'all?
One thing that does occur to me is that we are now essentially guilty until proven innocent if submitting a card that has been scanned and identified/logged in this new AI Computer VIsion 4D Chess Cut Em Off At The Pass system and policies.
@weaselpuppy said:
One thing that does occur to me is that we are now essentially guilty until proven innocent if submitting a card that has been scanned and identified/logged in this new AI Computer VIsion 4D Chess Cut Em Off At The Pass system and policies.
Pretty sure I don't like that.
here's the only thing that needs to be taken away by this policy...any and every raw card out there that you didn't pull personally is now a gamble. period. end of story.
think it's solely gonna be modern day, serial numbered cards? nope, genamint tech is touting even vintage cards have over 70 different unique "finger print" points.
can't get the og cert number from the guy that passed it down the line from the guy who purchased it from the previous guy? unless you are miss cleo, it stays raw for-ev-er.
eta: and since it takes well over 6 months to get a sub back, your time frame for a return has come and gone.
i understand the premise here and probably done to thwart certain things but i just don't think this one was well thought out of numerous different fall outs and consequences.
I don't understand that at all, I have cracked hundreds of cards over the last 12-15 yrs and resubbed over the years netting PSA many many extra $$ in fees. What is the point as long as it is deemed not altered, proceed accordingly. So you can never disagree with psa ever again?
so if the grader of death gets your card the first time around it is going to be mis-graded forever but all the over graded cards will command the premium because they went to the grader of love the first time. seems to make sense to me .........
This is a definitel game-changer. I have thousands of raw cards and most were purchased from others. Did PSA let the customer know this was coming? I hadn't heard but I don't always pay much attention. And why is it wrong to crack and resub? I guess the valid point would be related to the pop report but PSA should probably fix SMR first. A lot of the "values" listed are an absolute joke.
@bobbybakeriv said:
This is a definitel game-changer. I have thousands of raw cards and most were purchased from others. Did PSA let the customer know this was coming? I hadn't heard but I don't always pay much attention. And why is it wrong to crack and resub? I guess the valid point would be related to the pop report but PSA should probably fix SMR first. A lot of the "values" listed are an absolute joke.
i forget exactly where but i posted somewhere of two scenarios i had heard of a month or so back. one vintage and one a modern. both guys well trusted, respected and more important unlinked. i think @1951WheatiesPremium and i we're discussing it. he prolly has a better memory about it than i do.
@bobbybakeriv said:
This is a definitel game-changer. I have thousands of raw cards and most were purchased from others. Did PSA let the customer know this was coming? I hadn't heard but I don't always pay much attention. And why is it wrong to crack and resub? I guess the valid point would be related to the pop report but PSA should probably fix SMR first. A lot of the "values" listed are an absolute joke.
i forget exactly where but i posted somewhere of two scenarios i had heard of a month or so back. one vintage and one a modern. both guys well trusted, respected and more important unlinked. i think @1951WheatiesPremium and i we're discussing it. he prolly has a better memory about it than i do.
I do vaguely recall you saying something about it but I didn't pay it much mind then. I still think PSA should have made an announcement as this is a big deal to many of us. Thanks Blurry. I need to pay better attention ....
@soxaddict said:
So does PSA still charge for grading that card or does it get the NO GRADE NO CHARGE tag?
hadn't got that far, but i'm sure it'll be charged considering the cost of anything plastic in today's world.
Man, if so, that is total BS! I buy 99% of the cards I submit raw (I break very little wax). Granted, I don’t purchase very expensive cards raw, and little to none serial numbered cards. But this is ridiculous. What recourse would I have? It takes eight months to a year to get your cards back, so by then it’s too late to file a charge back with pay pal. SMH.
I could see this scenario playing out a lot when people crack out other companies slabs, not knowing psa had graded the card. But maybe when enough time has passed for two companies to grade a card this policy will be amended.
@demondeacs said:
I could see this scenario playing out a lot when people crack out other companies slabs, not knowing psa had graded the card. But maybe when enough time has passed for two companies to grade a card this policy will be amended.
I have cracked out dozens upon dozens of other companies' slabbed cards (e.g., SGC, BVG, GAI) in order to submit to PSA. I sure hope this isn't somehow checked. I don't see how they could reasonably do so. Still, I have also cracked out dozens of PSA slabbed cards too in hopes for a better grade. I remember when they switched to .5 grades, etc, doing so, I think there simply has to be a better way to manage the accuracy of pop reports though. At a glance, it seems like PSA knows their grading is inconsistent and are trying to minimize the PR damage that is being caused by it? I dunno but I don't like this new part of the process.
@demondeacs said:
I could see this scenario playing out a lot when people crack out other companies slabs, not knowing psa had graded the card. But maybe when enough time has passed for two companies to grade a card this policy will be amended.
I have cracked out dozens upon dozens of other companies' slabbed cards (e.g., SGC, BVG, GAI) in order to submit to PSA. I sure hope this isn't somehow checked. I don't see how they could reasonably do so. Still, I have also cracked out dozens of PSA slabbed cards too in hopes for a better grade. I remember when they switched to .5 grades, etc, doing so, I think there simply has to be a better way to manage the accuracy of pop reports though. At a glance, it seems like PSA knows their grading is inconsistent and are trying to minimize the PR damage that is being caused by it? I dunno but I don't like this new part of the process.
They'd only know if they had previously graded the card before it went to the other company. But you wouldn't know that if you bought the card already graded from bgs/sgc/etc.
I'm actually surprised they're concerned with it. I mean, resubmitting is common on the coin side as well. You could construct a bible with all the resubmitting discussions on their coin boards.
@bobbybakeriv said:
This is a definitel game-changer. I have thousands of raw cards and most were purchased from others. Did PSA let the customer know this was coming? I hadn't heard but I don't always pay much attention. And why is it wrong to crack and resub? I guess the valid point would be related to the pop report but PSA should probably fix SMR first. A lot of the "values" listed are an absolute joke.
i forget exactly where but i posted somewhere of two scenarios i had heard of a month or so back. one vintage and one a modern. both guys well trusted, respected and more important unlinked. i think @1951WheatiesPremium and i we're discussing it. he prolly has a better memory about it than i do.
I do vaguely recall you saying something about it but I didn't pay it much mind then. I still think PSA should have made an announcement as this is a big deal to many of us. Thanks Blurry. I need to pay better attention ....
I am no expert.
However, I missed where PSA said they were not going to allow people to crack out cards.
I read the public releases and so I guess I just interpreted things differently. After reading the April 21 release, my thought process was to look at what is the advantage of AI technology to PSA’s bottom lines - profitability, speed and security - and how this tech is going to be used to do it.
Security - it goes without saying that ‘card fingerprints’ are already being used by BODA (Blow Out Detective Agency) - and working. This takes that to the next level and in house.
Speed - Again, I think much of the AI is concerned with a ‘pre-check’ of the card. Basically, you can think about it as the card will hit the desk of the grader with a report of the details/measurements and needing only a number assigned. This saves time several ways.
NOW , if the card is altered, it never makes it to the graders desk - saves time. If the card has been graded once already, the card still goes to the graders desk...but they will now know the old cert and grade already thanks to it ‘popping’ in the image database. As a result, the chances of the mythic 2-3 full point bump on a cracked out card days are almost certainly over BUT the card can still get into a holder and potentially even bump up.
This makes a ton of sense to me as a means of establishing greater consistency, limiting the sense of impropriety some collectors have (if so and so subbed it, he’d get a better grade) while keeping the revenue stream open but discouraging the crack outs that damage the population reports.
Profitability - processing orders faster, becoming more consistent, catching more alterations and providing a better overall service seems to be exactly what the hobby has been clamoring for since Gary Moser was knee high to a grasshopper. There’s an old expression that goes something like this:
Be careful what you wish for because you just might get it.
So to sum up, I don’t think that PSA intends to make crack outs forbidden as much they are making it much less worthwhile with the main goal being their improvements - real and/or perceived - to credibility and accuracy.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
I will also say I have basically stopped checking this thread (and sending any cards to PSA) until I get my collectors club submission back because it is quite depressing at this point watching months go by and the CC service level improves its clock by 3 days.
There is incredible irony in the decision to move the Collectors Club voucher submissions to the lowest and slowest turnaround times offered and it is not lost on me.
It’s like buying a ticket to Disney, getting on line for Space Mountain when the park opens and then waiting there - on line - while they let all the FastPass riders go. Only the park closes every single day without you getting to ride, your told to come back the next day and they’ve sold more FastPass’s.
But be patient because you’re going to get to ride, too, it just might be next year. Or the year after. Now, back up because we’re about to open up more FastPass lanes. And no, you can’t have a FastPass and can’t get on that line because...yeah, we can’t do that.
😉
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
^ and not the nefarious type w psa either. new management, new ideas. some good, some bad. just gotta be respectful and voice opinions in a constructive manner. they inherited a big problem. and even w the head scratcher crack and sub thing, we cant forget they cut off subs. thats the biggest sign of responsible management in my eye. excuse mi spanish, but that took huge juevos.
It is also a way of checking their graders. If a lot of cards are sent in and have been graded before, PSA knows when they were graded, who sent them in and who graded them. If time after time many cards are being re-graded because of the same grader that could awaken them to possible G. O. D. Plus, if a card has been stolen, cracked, and then sent to PSA, they at least know who sent it to them. Which could lead to solving the theft. Just a thought '
@1959 said:
It is also a way of checking their graders. If a lot of cards are sent in and have been graded before, PSA knows when they were graded, who sent them in and who graded them. If time after time many cards are being re-graded because of the same grader that could awaken them to possible G. O. D. Plus, if a card has been stolen, cracked, and then sent to PSA, they at least know who sent it to them. Which could lead to solving the theft. Just a thought '
These could all be positives out of this. It's the unintended consequences that are giving me pause. I like where your head is at on this though as I agree that these are all great side-effects. If they decided that the card is paired with a memberID and as long as that memberID changed they'll forgo the email of death, then cool. If not, and as @blurryface put it, any raw card in the future becomes a legit gamble, then it's a serious issue.
I wish this would lead to a "Grader Oversight Department" or something where you could send your GOD-graded card in, still holdered, for a legit review. Yes, I know you can send it for a bump, but a special department for cards that you truly believe were dinged by a full point or more and they treated it seriously. And if the grade was justified, sending back a report on why.
I sent in a raw Jordan RC I'd had for years expecting a 7 and got it back as a 5 earlier this year. But it was at the height of Jordan-mania, and I'm sure it was graded overly harsh. So I'd like a separate division to look at cards like that, that way I wouldn't have to crack and resub a card like that.
I have been wondering for years why PSA didn't have an internal database of grades for numbered cards that they could check. My guess is that it wasn't worth the time/effort and mildly impacted their revenue stream. I don't believe crack and sub is was that common in the overall scope of how many cards PSA graded a year even pre-COVID, and definitely not now when they are getting 3 months worth of cards in 1 week. Once they added the imaging service, and now with the new Genamint acquisition, it was only a matter of time. I wonder if this new policy will impact all graded cards or only those above a certain value threshold.
Many people have complained about the inconsistency of PSA grading related to crack outs, this is another step in the direction of fixing that. Overall, seems a little harsh to me as there have been cards (even numbered ones) I have cracked and resubbed, or even gotten MIN-SIZE or EOT that I subsequently regraded and had graded. Conceptually, you have the option of a graded card review but I (and many others) have found those tend to be more harsh than cracking and resubbing. My guess is that won't be the case anymore, as knowing the previous grade or defect (assuming this policy is extended to cards PSA rejects) will always bias the grader which we see with both crossovers and reviews.
I hope that whatever this finally looks like that they put information about the new policy on their website. If they plan to not regrade cards, or give them the same grade as before if a card is cracked and resubbed, they should spell that out so people know that going in so they can adjust accordingly. In the end, if this helps fix the issue of card doctors modifying already graded cards and then resubmitting for a higher grade then I am not sure why people would complain since the review option is still available. If you want the one issue solved (doctoring previously graded cards) then you have to be willing to accept the secondary impacts IMO.
As for those complaining about buying raw and then finding out the card had previously been graded, having a raw card rejected by PSA is risk you always take. Buying a raw card never has equated with a guarantee of being able to get it into a PSA slab whether due to EOT, MIN-SIZE, alteration, etc. This will just add one more risk to that equation that buyers will have to factor in. For instance, I have learned through bitter experience that BGS cards tend to fail due to EOT with PSA pretty frequently. After enough rejections, I changed my behavior and expectations when buying BGS cards with the intent to get them in PSA slabs.
if genamint technology is doing what its supposedly going to be capable of doing, then why the need for this crack & resub shutdown policy in the first place? wouldnt it be completely unnecessary to shut down that revenue stream?
It is still unclear when Genamint is going to be used (every card, high dollar cards, etc) and how much of the Genamint technology will be used. My guess is everything will eventually be graded by Genamint software and graders will simply do spot checks, especially for lower value cards, but we will see.
I think the revenue stream from crack and resub is utterly insignificant to PSA and it helps their brand in the long run to have more consistency with grading (especially the same card). Obviously, will take a bit for collectors/submitters to adjust but they will eventually. I anticipate the increase in reviews will offset any lose from disallowing crack and resub. I do think it will be especially frustrating for some when they get a G.O.D. sub but with the increase in prices that is already the case for many.
its actually pretty clear what genamint was touted to be able to do. to assist in grading AND detect alterations thru a cards individual characteristics. no different than what the guys do over at blowout w/ the overlays, the colored circles and arrows that point to the obvious defining characteristics of the before and after pics. these dudes are just doing it by eye and physical labor. genamint is the criminal fingerprint database for cards.
and obviously the revenue stream isnt of significant importance, but the issue of even losing revenue shouldnt be there in the first place and moot.
and if i had to guess, i would say that genamint is already being used. i doubt psa would make a pr release about purchasing it without some serious testing. i find it very difficult to believe that w/ the backlog currently in place that they thru an additional step of having employees stop the flow of research and id by eying each card w a serial number then physically looking up to see if its been graded already. that would be so time consuming and the exact reason psa never did it prior to being taken private. and here’s the biggest smoking gun...if they were doing that and found a match, there’d be zero need for the employee to stop the cards process, kick it up to a problem order specialist, have them generate a ticket, send out an email asking for the cert number. genamint is doing that by matching it to something already in its database and then kicking it out. thats why they put the burden back on the subber to find the og cert. psa isnt even allocating resources to look the card up itself once they get a hit. so they definitely arent doing it on every card w/ a serial number prior.
Blurry- keep us posted on the final psa verdict on your card.
PSA set up a specific incentive to resubmit through the introduction of half grades in 2008.
Not surprisingly, many of us used a crack and resub approach in addition to the in holder reviews.
I don’t like the idea that PSA would see all resubs as problems, especially when they could treat all resubs that pass the gemamint test exactly like reviews.
If the card isn’t altered from its original submission then take another look. Money in you pocket, PSA.
If this constitutes a ban on resubbing then it is a pretty strong indication that they can’t tell the difference between an altered and unaltered card.
PSA already has a step where they ID every card before grading, that card identification many times would have required checking the serial number (i.e. #/99, #/199, #/999) to make sure the card was correctly identified. Inputting the card number at that time would have been an insignificant increase in effort and a simple automated search would allow for a check to see if the card was already graded. That said, I imagine that you are correct that the Genamint technology is already in use.
@fergie23 said:
PSA already has a step where they ID every card before grading, that card identification many times would have required checking the serial number (i.e. #/99, #/199, #/999) to make sure the card was correctly identified. Inputting the card number at that time would have been an insignificant increase in effort and a simple automated search would allow for a check to see if the card was already graded. That said, I imagine that you are correct that the Genamint technology is already in use.
Robb
then they’d have the cert number if they were physically looking it up. there’d be zero need to do all those extra steps to ask for the cert.
how do you think i found it? i didnt scour all my subs, i went to the pop report and it was there w a pic. i was shocked they even had a pic of it. the pic posted above wasnt a personal pic. “imaged by psa at psa.”
@envoy982 said:
So this one hasn't even actually been submitted before? That just makes this far more interesting! There are so many ways this could go sideways. There are some great things that come out of this but so many unintended consequences as well.
i can't say for certain. but my initial instinct based off what i usually do crack and resub is a no. i'm gonna have to go thru tons of subs and 1000s of lines of cards.
but here's another head scratcher...even if it 10d before, that doesn't make it a $1000 card, i wouldn't think. so! did they just log the serial number (or mistranscribed more like it) or do they actually have a scan of the card. and its obvious they have one or the other than WHY ARE THEY ASKING ME FOR THE PREVIOUS CERT? 😉
Here's a suggestion that helped me comb through thousands of line items in multiple subs to locate cards for tax cost basis confirmation. I export my submission results into Excel and paste them one after the other. When I have them all exported to a single Excel file, I use the 'find' feature to search for the card of interest. You can also use the filter feature to select from a list in year/card number order which is sometimes the easiest way to find items that don't have a unique enough search name (e.g., for cards like Bob Johnson).
blurryface, In the end, I am not sure why you made the comment you did. I explained how PSA could have already been performing checks against previously graded cards with a minimal increase in effort which was in my original post - "I have been wondering for years why PSA didn't have an internal database of grades for numbered cards that they could check.". I was not commenting on how they found your particular card as the timing would indicate the introduction of the genamint (or similar) technology.
i had a more detailed answer here. it got erased by the glitch this board suffers from.
long story short, there's nothing minimal about entering in a bazillion different serial numbered cards. they just got a barcode system. your theory is sound and is easy on paper. implementation however is not so minimal.
That said, I do appreciate you posting your experiences with PSA especially regarding this new policy on re-subs. It will be interesting to see if PSA returns the card with the same grade or not. Either way, I think this change in direction by PSA will impact folks that planned to crack and re-sub once PSA is accepting submissions again.
@fergie23 said:
blurryface, In the end, I am not sure why you made the comment you did. I explained how PSA could have already been performing checks against previously graded cards with a minimal increase in effort which was in my original post - "I have been wondering for years why PSA didn't have an internal database of grades for numbered cards that they could check.". I was not commenting on how they found your particular card as the timing would indicate the introduction of the genamint (or similar) technology.
Robb
there's been a talk of possibly 13 million cards sitting there at psa. how many of those do you think have serial numbers? let's just go w half. that's 6.5 million cards. w the announcement of genamint, thats pretty much concrete evidence that there was zero software in place to i.d., log and track every serial numbered card. therefore that suggests that each one would have to be manually inputted in the "serial number tracking database" when they are already constipated on cards as it is. do you realize what it would cost to do such a thing on 6.5 million cards with 100k more coming in each and every day? again, your theory is sound and i fully agree it makes sense from an outside perspective. applying "minimal effort" to the actual implementation of such a theory is flawed, imo.
@fergie23 said:
blurryface, In the end, I am not sure why you made the comment you did. I explained how PSA could have already been performing checks against previously graded cards with a minimal increase in effort which was in my original post - "I have been wondering for years why PSA didn't have an internal database of grades for numbered cards that they could check.". I was not commenting on how they found your particular card as the timing would indicate the introduction of the genamint (or similar) technology.
Robb
there's been a talk of possibly 13 million cards sitting there at psa. how many of those do you think have serial numbers? let's just go w half. that's 6.5 million cards. w the announcement of genamint, thats pretty much concrete evidence that there was zero software in place to i.d., log and track every serial numbered card. therefore that suggests that each one would have to be manually inputted in the "serial number tracking database" when they are already constipated on cards as it is. do you realize what it would cost to do such a thing on 6.5 million cards with 100k more coming in each and every day? again, your theory is sound and i fully agree it makes sense from an outside perspective. applying "minimal effort" to the actual implementation of such a theory is flawed, imo.
SecureScan has been in place for almost two years. It originally applies to the highest service levels but more and more cards started to get it. I’m not sure if they’re at 100% yet but the “Image by PSACard” that @blurryface referred to earlier has been applied to a lot of cards over that span.
However, like everything else it is operating on a lag right now. As a result, the scans show up long after the grades come in.
That said, if this is new information for anyone, you can start to go back and check old express (and higher) submissions and see if your own scans are complete and uploaded.
So the database was being constructed even before they had software with which to sift through it.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
@fergie23 said:
blurryface, In the end, I am not sure why you made the comment you did. I explained how PSA could have already been performing checks against previously graded cards with a minimal increase in effort which was in my original post - "I have been wondering for years why PSA didn't have an internal database of grades for numbered cards that they could check.". I was not commenting on how they found your particular card as the timing would indicate the introduction of the genamint (or similar) technology.
Robb
there's been a talk of possibly 13 million cards sitting there at psa. how many of those do you think have serial numbers? let's just go w half. that's 6.5 million cards. w the announcement of genamint, thats pretty much concrete evidence that there was zero software in place to i.d., log and track every serial numbered card. therefore that suggests that each one would have to be manually inputted in the "serial number tracking database" when they are already constipated on cards as it is. do you realize what it would cost to do such a thing on 6.5 million cards with 100k more coming in each and every day? again, your theory is sound and i fully agree it makes sense from an outside perspective. applying "minimal effort" to the actual implementation of such a theory is flawed, imo.
SecureScan has been in place for almost two years. It originally applies to the highest service levels but more and more cards started to get it. I’m not sure if they’re at 100% yet but the “Image by PSACard” that @blurryface referred to earlier has been applied to a lot of cards over that span.
However, like everything else it is operating on a lag right now. As a result, the scans show up long after the grades come in.
That said, if this is new information for anyone, you can start to go back and check old express (and higher) submissions and see if your own scans are complete and uploaded.
So the database was being constructed even before they had software with which to sift through it.
this actually drives home my point. even now and w/ some sort of technology, it's so far backed up, it's insane. and what do you think the ratio of serial numbered cards that qualify for securescan vs that dont? 1:1000? 1:10,000? and if it's backed up, as is on a 1:1 ratio, then how backed up would it be if they were doing them all? as you stated, the system and the intentions have been in place for years. the implementation though...😉
the popular phrase of "easier said than done" comes to mind.
@fergie23 said:
blurryface, we will agree to disagree.
That said, I do appreciate you posting your experiences with PSA especially regarding this new policy on re-subs. It will be interesting to see if PSA returns the card with the same grade or not. Either way, I think this change in direction by PSA will impact folks that planned to crack and re-sub once PSA is accepting submissions again.
Robb
and that's ok! it's a discussion board. if we all agreed it'd be boring. plus, just because we (or anyone here) don't happen to agree on 1 topic doesn't mean i don't respect your opinion. first and foremost, we are all here because of a common camaraderie and to learn, help and protect one another.
btw: and im sorry, i think i might have left this detailed info out before. the two instances i've heard of this happening, both cards were returned in the same grade. i will definitely post the grade and (just thought about this)...if they apply the same cert number too. oh. and the new sub that this card is in is still only in the "grading" phase, could still be a few months before it pops (again).
@fergie23 said:
blurryface, In the end, I am not sure why you made the comment you did. I explained how PSA could have already been performing checks against previously graded cards with a minimal increase in effort which was in my original post - "I have been wondering for years why PSA didn't have an internal database of grades for numbered cards that they could check.". I was not commenting on how they found your particular card as the timing would indicate the introduction of the genamint (or similar) technology.
Robb
there's been a talk of possibly 13 million cards sitting there at psa. how many of those do you think have serial numbers? let's just go w half. that's 6.5 million cards. w the announcement of genamint, thats pretty much concrete evidence that there was zero software in place to i.d., log and track every serial numbered card. therefore that suggests that each one would have to be manually inputted in the "serial number tracking database" when they are already constipated on cards as it is. do you realize what it would cost to do such a thing on 6.5 million cards with 100k more coming in each and every day? again, your theory is sound and i fully agree it makes sense from an outside perspective. applying "minimal effort" to the actual implementation of such a theory is flawed, imo.
SecureScan has been in place for almost two years. It originally applies to the highest service levels but more and more cards started to get it. I’m not sure if they’re at 100% yet but the “Image by PSACard” that @blurryface referred to earlier has been applied to a lot of cards over that span.
However, like everything else it is operating on a lag right now. As a result, the scans show up long after the grades come in.
That said, if this is new information for anyone, you can start to go back and check old express (and higher) submissions and see if your own scans are complete and uploaded.
So the database was being constructed even before they had software with which to sift through it.
this actually drives home my point. even now and w/ some sort of technology, it's so far backed up, it's insane. and what do you think the ratio of serial numbered cards that qualify for securescan vs that dont? 1:1000? 1:10,000? and if it's backed up, as is on a 1:1 ratio, then how backed up would it be if they were doing them all? as you stated, the system and the intentions have been in place for years. the implementation though...😉
the popular phrase of "easier said than done" comes to mind.
You’re making me work too much 😂😂😂
I checked - it has applied to Regular Service level and up since at least 12/31/19.
For the economy levels and bulks, I couldn’t tell you but I’m not sure if there’s a ton of concern over ‘88 DonRuss commons submitted at the service level.
(Just a silly joke 😉).
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
Comments
crack and review rumors officially confirmed:
@blurryface
This opens up so many questions...
I love what this does to prevent and identify the card-altering guys but there are so many unintended consequences that could arise here. Plus, the crack & resubmit game has existed since the beginning of time. I can only imagine it's a small but substantial percentage of PSA revenues. If it wasn't profitable, people wouldn't do it and I believe the crack & resub guys that are doing things to the cards is an even smaller percentage. We are going to need a whole new thread just for this!
here's the kicker. all of this modern basketball that i've subbed was from stuff i ripped myself during covid shut down. none of it was purchased raw off ebay and it's been in my hands only. i'm building a '19 covid historic bubble season set that i know is 100% pack pulled, self subbed and unaltered to tuck away. kinda why i shied away from vintage during/post trimming scandal. this is the only way i truly know i have an unaltered set.
anyways, with that being said and that it's a kawhi 10th year card and even though it's an /8, its not something i would really crack and resub. not confident, but no real incentive to pay a sub fee again. it's not a centered mantle, a ryan card or a blazing hot rookie card.
my first instinct is that they miscued a 3/8 instead of an 8/8. again, i'm gonna have to go thru tons of popped subs to look. it could be, but i just don't remember it and strikes me as odd.
with that being said, i just don't understand it. there are so many chrome cards that are dust and fingerprint magnets coupled w tons of newbie subbers that don't know to prep a card prior to subbing that it seems ridiculous to restrict a card based off a previous submittal.
on the flip side, we all say not all 9's a created equal, right? what if you take a 9 with a chipped border or corner, trim it down to where it looks and presents much better. now creating a top shelf 9? does that get the auto-grade into a 9 holder based of a previous submittal?
this is very concerning for several different reasons. and i still fully haven't processed all the pros and cons.
So this one hasn't even actually been submitted before? That just makes this far more interesting! There are so many ways this could go sideways. There are some great things that come out of this but so many unintended consequences as well.
i can't say for certain. but my initial instinct based off what i usually do crack and resub is a no. i'm gonna have to go thru tons of subs and 1000s of lines of cards.
but here's another head scratcher...even if it 10d before, that doesn't make it a $1000 card, i wouldn't think. so! did they just log the serial number (or mistranscribed more like it) or do they actually have a scan of the card. and its obvious they have one or the other than WHY ARE THEY ASKING ME FOR THE PREVIOUS CERT? 😉
and what if it was a card someone else purchased raw and didn't know the previous cert number? what, the card could never be holdered again? SAY WHAT?
because that's exactly what the letter indicates.
that is extremely messed up, imo. who's ever gonna wanna risk buying a raw card ever again?
1000000% this
yep, all coming back. card was graded an 8, and currently was and still is a pop 1, 0 higher.
but when i got it back, i remember this thumb print w residue on it. i hate gloves but i wear finger cots when prepping subs. plus i'm left handed, so hold w the right hand and wipe w the left. but no big deal, never thought a thing about it. certainly wasn't gonna raise a big fuss. so popped it out, wiped it back down and resubbed it. no big deal.
but all thumbs aside, i'll go ahead and take full blame. that is my thumb. i think i just got finished polishing off a dozen wings w extra hot sauce and picked my nose w that exact thumb at least 5 times while prepping my sub. the fact that a booger, buffalo-winged fingerprint that is easily swiped dooms this card to an 8 forever?
who cracks a pop 1, 0 higher /8 card? well, i do. because i don't want cards w someone else's booger on it. ahhhh...covid 2020 y'all?
the fact that a booger, buffalo-winged fingerprint that is easily swiped dooms this card to an 8 forever?
yep, forevvvverrrr!
ok, over it. on to the next sub.
I'm gonna need a flow chart to follow this possibility tree of unintended consequences. Venn diagram isn't going to cut it.
One thing that does occur to me is that we are now essentially guilty until proven innocent if submitting a card that has been scanned and identified/logged in this new AI Computer VIsion 4D Chess Cut Em Off At The Pass system and policies.
Pretty sure I don't like that.
here's the only thing that needs to be taken away by this policy...any and every raw card out there that you didn't pull personally is now a gamble. period. end of story.
think it's solely gonna be modern day, serial numbered cards? nope, genamint tech is touting even vintage cards have over 70 different unique "finger print" points.
can't get the og cert number from the guy that passed it down the line from the guy who purchased it from the previous guy? unless you are miss cleo, it stays raw for-ev-er.
eta: and since it takes well over 6 months to get a sub back, your time frame for a return has come and gone.
i understand the premise here and probably done to thwart certain things but i just don't think this one was well thought out of numerous different fall outs and consequences.
I don't understand that at all, I have cracked hundreds of cards over the last 12-15 yrs and resubbed over the years netting PSA many many extra $$ in fees. What is the point as long as it is deemed not altered, proceed accordingly. So you can never disagree with psa ever again?
so if the grader of death gets your card the first time around it is going to be mis-graded forever but all the over graded cards will command the premium because they went to the grader of love the first time. seems to make sense to me .........
This is a definitel game-changer. I have thousands of raw cards and most were purchased from others. Did PSA let the customer know this was coming? I hadn't heard but I don't always pay much attention. And why is it wrong to crack and resub? I guess the valid point would be related to the pop report but PSA should probably fix SMR first. A lot of the "values" listed are an absolute joke.
i forget exactly where but i posted somewhere of two scenarios i had heard of a month or so back. one vintage and one a modern. both guys well trusted, respected and more important unlinked. i think @1951WheatiesPremium and i we're discussing it. he prolly has a better memory about it than i do.
I do vaguely recall you saying something about it but I didn't pay it much mind then. I still think PSA should have made an announcement as this is a big deal to many of us. Thanks Blurry. I need to pay better attention ....
So does PSA still charge for grading that card or does it get the NO GRADE NO CHARGE tag?
hadn't got that far, but i'm sure it'll be charged considering the cost of anything plastic in today's world.
Man, if so, that is total BS! I buy 99% of the cards I submit raw (I break very little wax). Granted, I don’t purchase very expensive cards raw, and little to none serial numbered cards. But this is ridiculous. What recourse would I have? It takes eight months to a year to get your cards back, so by then it’s too late to file a charge back with pay pal. SMH.
I could see this scenario playing out a lot when people crack out other companies slabs, not knowing psa had graded the card. But maybe when enough time has passed for two companies to grade a card this policy will be amended.
I have cracked out dozens upon dozens of other companies' slabbed cards (e.g., SGC, BVG, GAI) in order to submit to PSA. I sure hope this isn't somehow checked. I don't see how they could reasonably do so. Still, I have also cracked out dozens of PSA slabbed cards too in hopes for a better grade. I remember when they switched to .5 grades, etc, doing so, I think there simply has to be a better way to manage the accuracy of pop reports though. At a glance, it seems like PSA knows their grading is inconsistent and are trying to minimize the PR damage that is being caused by it? I dunno but I don't like this new part of the process.
They'd only know if they had previously graded the card before it went to the other company. But you wouldn't know that if you bought the card already graded from bgs/sgc/etc.
I'm actually surprised they're concerned with it. I mean, resubmitting is common on the coin side as well. You could construct a bible with all the resubmitting discussions on their coin boards.
I am no expert.
However, I missed where PSA said they were not going to allow people to crack out cards.
I read the public releases and so I guess I just interpreted things differently. After reading the April 21 release, my thought process was to look at what is the advantage of AI technology to PSA’s bottom lines - profitability, speed and security - and how this tech is going to be used to do it.
Security - it goes without saying that ‘card fingerprints’ are already being used by BODA (Blow Out Detective Agency) - and working. This takes that to the next level and in house.
Speed - Again, I think much of the AI is concerned with a ‘pre-check’ of the card. Basically, you can think about it as the card will hit the desk of the grader with a report of the details/measurements and needing only a number assigned. This saves time several ways.
NOW , if the card is altered, it never makes it to the graders desk - saves time. If the card has been graded once already, the card still goes to the graders desk...but they will now know the old cert and grade already thanks to it ‘popping’ in the image database. As a result, the chances of the mythic 2-3 full point bump on a cracked out card days are almost certainly over BUT the card can still get into a holder and potentially even bump up.
This makes a ton of sense to me as a means of establishing greater consistency, limiting the sense of impropriety some collectors have (if so and so subbed it, he’d get a better grade) while keeping the revenue stream open but discouraging the crack outs that damage the population reports.
Profitability - processing orders faster, becoming more consistent, catching more alterations and providing a better overall service seems to be exactly what the hobby has been clamoring for since Gary Moser was knee high to a grasshopper. There’s an old expression that goes something like this:
Be careful what you wish for because you just might get it.
So to sum up, I don’t think that PSA intends to make crack outs forbidden as much they are making it much less worthwhile with the main goal being their improvements - real and/or perceived - to credibility and accuracy.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
@blurryface
I slipped in a hopefully better worded explanation of how I interpreted things above.
I am not one who assigns nefarious intent to PSA, though I know people do.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
I will also say I have basically stopped checking this thread (and sending any cards to PSA) until I get my collectors club submission back because it is quite depressing at this point watching months go by and the CC service level improves its clock by 3 days.
There is incredible irony in the decision to move the Collectors Club voucher submissions to the lowest and slowest turnaround times offered and it is not lost on me.
It’s like buying a ticket to Disney, getting on line for Space Mountain when the park opens and then waiting there - on line - while they let all the FastPass riders go. Only the park closes every single day without you getting to ride, your told to come back the next day and they’ve sold more FastPass’s.
But be patient because you’re going to get to ride, too, it just might be next year. Or the year after. Now, back up because we’re about to open up more FastPass lanes. And no, you can’t have a FastPass and can’t get on that line because...yeah, we can’t do that.
😉
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
we good. like always! (once you get a bigger table, that is).
^ and not the nefarious type w psa either. new management, new ideas. some good, some bad. just gotta be respectful and voice opinions in a constructive manner. they inherited a big problem. and even w the head scratcher crack and sub thing, we cant forget they cut off subs. thats the biggest sign of responsible management in my eye. excuse mi spanish, but that took huge juevos.
.
It is also a way of checking their graders. If a lot of cards are sent in and have been graded before, PSA knows when they were graded, who sent them in and who graded them. If time after time many cards are being re-graded because of the same grader that could awaken them to possible G. O. D. Plus, if a card has been stolen, cracked, and then sent to PSA, they at least know who sent it to them. Which could lead to solving the theft. Just a thought '
These could all be positives out of this. It's the unintended consequences that are giving me pause. I like where your head is at on this though as I agree that these are all great side-effects. If they decided that the card is paired with a memberID and as long as that memberID changed they'll forgo the email of death, then cool. If not, and as @blurryface put it, any raw card in the future becomes a legit gamble, then it's a serious issue.
I wish this would lead to a "Grader Oversight Department" or something where you could send your GOD-graded card in, still holdered, for a legit review. Yes, I know you can send it for a bump, but a special department for cards that you truly believe were dinged by a full point or more and they treated it seriously. And if the grade was justified, sending back a report on why.
I sent in a raw Jordan RC I'd had for years expecting a 7 and got it back as a 5 earlier this year. But it was at the height of Jordan-mania, and I'm sure it was graded overly harsh. So I'd like a separate division to look at cards like that, that way I wouldn't have to crack and resub a card like that.
I have been wondering for years why PSA didn't have an internal database of grades for numbered cards that they could check. My guess is that it wasn't worth the time/effort and mildly impacted their revenue stream. I don't believe crack and sub is was that common in the overall scope of how many cards PSA graded a year even pre-COVID, and definitely not now when they are getting 3 months worth of cards in 1 week. Once they added the imaging service, and now with the new Genamint acquisition, it was only a matter of time. I wonder if this new policy will impact all graded cards or only those above a certain value threshold.
Many people have complained about the inconsistency of PSA grading related to crack outs, this is another step in the direction of fixing that. Overall, seems a little harsh to me as there have been cards (even numbered ones) I have cracked and resubbed, or even gotten MIN-SIZE or EOT that I subsequently regraded and had graded. Conceptually, you have the option of a graded card review but I (and many others) have found those tend to be more harsh than cracking and resubbing. My guess is that won't be the case anymore, as knowing the previous grade or defect (assuming this policy is extended to cards PSA rejects) will always bias the grader which we see with both crossovers and reviews.
I hope that whatever this finally looks like that they put information about the new policy on their website. If they plan to not regrade cards, or give them the same grade as before if a card is cracked and resubbed, they should spell that out so people know that going in so they can adjust accordingly. In the end, if this helps fix the issue of card doctors modifying already graded cards and then resubmitting for a higher grade then I am not sure why people would complain since the review option is still available. If you want the one issue solved (doctoring previously graded cards) then you have to be willing to accept the secondary impacts IMO.
As for those complaining about buying raw and then finding out the card had previously been graded, having a raw card rejected by PSA is risk you always take. Buying a raw card never has equated with a guarantee of being able to get it into a PSA slab whether due to EOT, MIN-SIZE, alteration, etc. This will just add one more risk to that equation that buyers will have to factor in. For instance, I have learned through bitter experience that BGS cards tend to fail due to EOT with PSA pretty frequently. After enough rejections, I changed my behavior and expectations when buying BGS cards with the intent to get them in PSA slabs.
Robb
if genamint technology is doing what its supposedly going to be capable of doing, then why the need for this crack & resub shutdown policy in the first place? wouldnt it be completely unnecessary to shut down that revenue stream?
It is still unclear when Genamint is going to be used (every card, high dollar cards, etc) and how much of the Genamint technology will be used. My guess is everything will eventually be graded by Genamint software and graders will simply do spot checks, especially for lower value cards, but we will see.
I think the revenue stream from crack and resub is utterly insignificant to PSA and it helps their brand in the long run to have more consistency with grading (especially the same card). Obviously, will take a bit for collectors/submitters to adjust but they will eventually. I anticipate the increase in reviews will offset any lose from disallowing crack and resub. I do think it will be especially frustrating for some when they get a G.O.D. sub but with the increase in prices that is already the case for many.
Robb
its actually pretty clear what genamint was touted to be able to do. to assist in grading AND detect alterations thru a cards individual characteristics. no different than what the guys do over at blowout w/ the overlays, the colored circles and arrows that point to the obvious defining characteristics of the before and after pics. these dudes are just doing it by eye and physical labor. genamint is the criminal fingerprint database for cards.
and obviously the revenue stream isnt of significant importance, but the issue of even losing revenue shouldnt be there in the first place and moot.
and if i had to guess, i would say that genamint is already being used. i doubt psa would make a pr release about purchasing it without some serious testing. i find it very difficult to believe that w/ the backlog currently in place that they thru an additional step of having employees stop the flow of research and id by eying each card w a serial number then physically looking up to see if its been graded already. that would be so time consuming and the exact reason psa never did it prior to being taken private. and here’s the biggest smoking gun...if they were doing that and found a match, there’d be zero need for the employee to stop the cards process, kick it up to a problem order specialist, have them generate a ticket, send out an email asking for the cert number. genamint is doing that by matching it to something already in its database and then kicking it out. thats why they put the burden back on the subber to find the og cert. psa isnt even allocating resources to look the card up itself once they get a hit. so they definitely arent doing it on every card w/ a serial number prior.
Blurry- keep us posted on the final psa verdict on your card.
PSA set up a specific incentive to resubmit through the introduction of half grades in 2008.
Not surprisingly, many of us used a crack and resub approach in addition to the in holder reviews.
I don’t like the idea that PSA would see all resubs as problems, especially when they could treat all resubs that pass the gemamint test exactly like reviews.
If the card isn’t altered from its original submission then take another look. Money in you pocket, PSA.
If this constitutes a ban on resubbing then it is a pretty strong indication that they can’t tell the difference between an altered and unaltered card.
PSA already has a step where they ID every card before grading, that card identification many times would have required checking the serial number (i.e. #/99, #/199, #/999) to make sure the card was correctly identified. Inputting the card number at that time would have been an insignificant increase in effort and a simple automated search would allow for a check to see if the card was already graded. That said, I imagine that you are correct that the Genamint technology is already in use.
Robb
then they’d have the cert number if they were physically looking it up. there’d be zero need to do all those extra steps to ask for the cert.
how do you think i found it? i didnt scour all my subs, i went to the pop report and it was there w a pic. i was shocked they even had a pic of it. the pic posted above wasnt a personal pic. “imaged by psa at psa.”
Here's a suggestion that helped me comb through thousands of line items in multiple subs to locate cards for tax cost basis confirmation. I export my submission results into Excel and paste them one after the other. When I have them all exported to a single Excel file, I use the 'find' feature to search for the card of interest. You can also use the filter feature to select from a list in year/card number order which is sometimes the easiest way to find items that don't have a unique enough search name (e.g., for cards like Bob Johnson).
blurryface, In the end, I am not sure why you made the comment you did. I explained how PSA could have already been performing checks against previously graded cards with a minimal increase in effort which was in my original post - "I have been wondering for years why PSA didn't have an internal database of grades for numbered cards that they could check.". I was not commenting on how they found your particular card as the timing would indicate the introduction of the genamint (or similar) technology.
Robb
i had a more detailed answer here. it got erased by the glitch this board suffers from.
long story short, there's nothing minimal about entering in a bazillion different serial numbered cards. they just got a barcode system. your theory is sound and is easy on paper. implementation however is not so minimal.
blurryface, we will agree to disagree.
That said, I do appreciate you posting your experiences with PSA especially regarding this new policy on re-subs. It will be interesting to see if PSA returns the card with the same grade or not. Either way, I think this change in direction by PSA will impact folks that planned to crack and re-sub once PSA is accepting submissions again.
Robb
there's been a talk of possibly 13 million cards sitting there at psa. how many of those do you think have serial numbers? let's just go w half. that's 6.5 million cards. w the announcement of genamint, thats pretty much concrete evidence that there was zero software in place to i.d., log and track every serial numbered card. therefore that suggests that each one would have to be manually inputted in the "serial number tracking database" when they are already constipated on cards as it is. do you realize what it would cost to do such a thing on 6.5 million cards with 100k more coming in each and every day? again, your theory is sound and i fully agree it makes sense from an outside perspective. applying "minimal effort" to the actual implementation of such a theory is flawed, imo.
SecureScan has been in place for almost two years. It originally applies to the highest service levels but more and more cards started to get it. I’m not sure if they’re at 100% yet but the “Image by PSACard” that @blurryface referred to earlier has been applied to a lot of cards over that span.
However, like everything else it is operating on a lag right now. As a result, the scans show up long after the grades come in.
That said, if this is new information for anyone, you can start to go back and check old express (and higher) submissions and see if your own scans are complete and uploaded.
So the database was being constructed even before they had software with which to sift through it.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
this actually drives home my point. even now and w/ some sort of technology, it's so far backed up, it's insane. and what do you think the ratio of serial numbered cards that qualify for securescan vs that dont? 1:1000? 1:10,000? and if it's backed up, as is on a 1:1 ratio, then how backed up would it be if they were doing them all? as you stated, the system and the intentions have been in place for years. the implementation though...😉
the popular phrase of "easier said than done" comes to mind.
and that's ok! it's a discussion board. if we all agreed it'd be boring. plus, just because we (or anyone here) don't happen to agree on 1 topic doesn't mean i don't respect your opinion. first and foremost, we are all here because of a common camaraderie and to learn, help and protect one another.
btw: and im sorry, i think i might have left this detailed info out before. the two instances i've heard of this happening, both cards were returned in the same grade. i will definitely post the grade and (just thought about this)...if they apply the same cert number too. oh. and the new sub that this card is in is still only in the "grading" phase, could still be a few months before it pops (again).
You’re making me work too much 😂😂😂
I checked - it has applied to Regular Service level and up since at least 12/31/19.
For the economy levels and bulks, I couldn’t tell you but I’m not sure if there’s a ton of concern over ‘88 DonRuss commons submitted at the service level.
(Just a silly joke 😉).
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest