Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

Recent harsh grading-Options

With people getting absolutely obliterated recently grading wise(unless it’s ultra modern), what can one do? Not even going to mention that changing grading standards is an abomination. Been submitting to PSA since 1998. I have around 2700 cards at PSA, of which only about 300 are ultra modern. So, that’s roughly 2400 cards I’m going to get slammed on. Can you actually withdraw orders if you decided to. On the fence here. Not looking forward to the money and work it’s going to take to sell over 2000 1987 Donruss Barry Bonds(I.e) PSA 8’s and 9’s. Thoughts?

«1

Comments

  • With the scarcity of 10s, it should increase the value....maybe. I recently got back 68 jordans, a ton of 89 hoops and 90 fleer. I got about 6 10s, which easily paid for the others. Still pretty easy to sell the 9s and 8s. I also have 2000 1987 Donruss Bonds-like cards there...so we'll see if it's a bloodbath, break even or profit in a year or 6 when we get these back

  • thedutymon11thedutymon11 Posts: 389 ✭✭✭

    @Blindmelon5 said:
    With people getting absolutely obliterated recently grading wise(unless it’s ultra modern), what can one do? Can you actually withdraw orders if you decided to. On the fence here. Thoughts?

    Been wondering this myself, have about 350 Cards I am going to be popping over the next few months. Can you withdraw orders. If they Slam my 1965 Rosan Blue Monster Cards Complete Set of 84 cards, Next up to Pop, that are as New as they can get, then this will be an option, I can't afford to waste $3K on cards that should be 7's-9's that come back 3's-5's? And yes I've subbed Thousands and thousands of Cards and am more worried than I have ever been!

    Thanks

    YeeHaw!

    Neil

  • surfyfunsurfyfun Posts: 75 ✭✭

    If they haven't entered 'grading' yet, just write customer service and request to cancel your order, it's actually that easy.

  • Blindmelon5Blindmelon5 Posts: 65 ✭✭✭

    How can they possibly explain this. Say, last year at this time I subbed 100 super clean 90’s Jordan’s and got 30 10’s. I send the same order in now and I get 6 10’s. That is absolutely the opposite of what you want a third party grading company to do. I’ve put in the work breaking and sifting and caring for the cards that are the cream of the crop and I know what a 9 and 10 should and will grade. Now those legit 9’s and 10’s are 8’s and 9’s. They better figure it out. And quick.

  • 80sOPC80sOPC Posts: 710 ✭✭✭

    Hold on, you have 2K 1987 Bonds Donruss in for grading right now? Have read your post 3 times thinking that must be a mistype.

  • FrozencaribouFrozencaribou Posts: 973 ✭✭✭✭
    edited May 10, 2021 3:46PM

    @80sOPC said:
    Hold on, you have 2K 1987 Bonds Donruss in for grading right now? Have read your post 3 times thinking that must be a mistype.

    Yeah, is 4SC on the forum now???

    Seriously, this has been the strangest turn of events. Long wait times can be understood. Grading standards changing is patently unfair. If done to protect the populations of 9's and 10's in pre-2000 cards, it certainly seems like manipulation of the populations rather than fairly providing an objective service.

  • blurryfaceblurryface Posts: 4,153 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 10, 2021 4:14PM

    with being as positive as humanly possible w the changing of grading standards by new management, i'd be lying if i didn't think it is an abomination myself. especially those cards that should have been back in our hands prior to the company being taken private.

    switching the standards and moving the goal posts on massively delayed cards when the standard was completely different is very, very concerning and completely unfair, imo. a travesty even.

    and if you think they aren't doing it on ultra modern, i beg to differ. i was in a group sub where the subber was a seasoned vet. guy submitted 34 panini burrow rcs. went 0/34 on 10s, only got 9 9s and the rest were returned MG.

    here's another fact. as of last week there were 59 2021 lebron and melo silver prizms combined. all had to be subbed at the $300+ level. not one 10. sure there are centering probs w prizm but i guarantee you the $300 grading fee a pop weren't taken lightly.

    eta: then take into account the cards are doomed to this graded crackdown forever w not being able to crack and resub and it's a serious, undisclosed issue.

    just like they can't change the submitted price point, they shouldn't be changing the standards either. it's as easy fix, send out a pr release stating they are buckling down on grading standards. be straight up w your customers. then it's on them. changing the rules and letting the customers figure out for themself is the problem.

    i always forget to check pms. hit me over the head.

  • orioles93orioles93 Posts: 3,379 ✭✭✭✭

    I had an order come back with 29 10s out of 50 cards. This was 2017-2020 cards. Overall i was extremely happy with this order. My next order came back with 7 10s out of 64 cards. This was some 80s and 90s as well as a bunch of 2000s. This order was much more perplexing. Lots of 7s, 8s, and 9s. Some of the 10s looked worse than the 9s. And some of the 7s and 8s looked better than some of the 9s. It’s getting more difficult to understand what is going on with grading right now. I even had a few that I didn’t think would grade higher than a 7, but I sent them anyways, and they got 8s and 9s. Not complaining about that but not to often do I see that happen. I have a few more subs there that I am slightly worried about, Including some high end 69 basketball.

    What I Collect:

    PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 79.63% Complete)


    PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 15.22% Complete)


  • Kepper19Kepper19 Posts: 160 ✭✭✭

    @blurryface said:
    with being as positive as humanly possible w the changing of grading standards by new management, i'd be lying if i didn't think it is an abomination myself. especially those cards that should have been back in our hands prior to the company being taken private.

    switching the standards and moving the goal posts on massively delayed cards when the standard was completely different is very, very concerning and completely unfair, imo. a travesty even.

    and if you think they aren't doing it on ultra modern, i beg to differ. i was in a group sub where the subber was a seasoned vet. guy submitted 34 panini burrow rcs. went 0/34 on 10s, only got 9 9s and the rest were returned MG.

    here's another fact. as of last week there were 59 2021 lebron and melo silver prizms combined. all had to be subbed at the $300+ level. not one 10. sure there are centering probs w prizm but i guarantee you the $300 grading fee a pop weren't taken lightly.

    eta: then take into account the cards are doomed to this graded crackdown forever w not being able to crack and resub and it's a serious, undisclosed issue.

    just like they can't change the submitted price point, they shouldn't be changing the standards either. it's as easy fix, send out a pr release stating they are buckling down on grading standards. be straight up w your customers. then it's on them. changing the rules and letting the customers figure out for themself is the problem.

    I agree with what you say, but if they came out and actually said that today's grading standards are different than the 10's of millions of cards graded over the previous 20 years, that could create an even bigger issue, no?

  • thedutymon11thedutymon11 Posts: 389 ✭✭✭
    edited May 10, 2021 4:43PM

    @surfyfun said:
    If they haven't entered 'grading' yet, just write customer service and request to cancel your order, it's actually that easy.

    Thank You!

    If my next Sub Up is Trashed like I am seeing nowadays and hearing about what is transpiring, (The set is a Complete 1965 Rosan Blue Monster cards set Complete of 84 Cards, as nice as I have ever seen and owned, and I've Owned Hundreds and Hundreds, and 10-15 complete sets, and subbed at least a 1/4 to a 1/3 of the Current population of 459 Cards), then the next 8 Subs at PSA will be cancelled!

    As a slight Conspiracy wanker occasionally, is it possible that the Outcome of losing a bunch of orders to be sent home, could this be an Unintended Consequence, or Intended perhaps. And perhaps a means to start weeding out us Small Fry (Riff-Raff) subbing a paltry 50-100 a month? No matter what, this was discussed around the PSA Board Room. And to facilitate more Large Bulk Submittors, like 4SC, blurry and other Large Multiple Thousands of Cards submitters??

    BTW, do you just end up paying whatever the Original return shipping was on the Sub?

    Thanks

    YeeHaw!

    Neil

  • surfyfunsurfyfun Posts: 75 ✭✭

    @thedutymon11 said:

    @surfyfun said:
    If they haven't entered 'grading' yet, just write customer service and request to cancel your order, it's actually that easy.

    Thank You!

    If my next Sub Up is Trashed like I am seeing nowadays and hearing about what is transpiring, (The set is a Complete 1965 Rosan Blue Monster cards set Complete of 84 Cards, as nice as I have ever seen and owned, and I've seen and subbed at least a 1/4 to a 1/3 of the Current population of 459 Cards), then the next 8 Subs at PSA will be cancelled!

    Do you just pay whatever the Original return shipping was on the Sub?

    Thanks

    YeeHaw!

    Neil

    Yeah, the original return shipping charge is still on you. I told them how admirable and what an amazing good faith effort it would be to comp the return shipping due to the unprecedented delay and inconvenience to customers and they were having none of it.

  • blurryfaceblurryface Posts: 4,153 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Kepper19 said:

    @blurryface said:
    with being as positive as humanly possible w the changing of grading standards by new management, i'd be lying if i didn't think it is an abomination myself. especially those cards that should have been back in our hands prior to the company being taken private.

    switching the standards and moving the goal posts on massively delayed cards when the standard was completely different is very, very concerning and completely unfair, imo. a travesty even.

    and if you think they aren't doing it on ultra modern, i beg to differ. i was in a group sub where the subber was a seasoned vet. guy submitted 34 panini burrow rcs. went 0/34 on 10s, only got 9 9s and the rest were returned MG.

    here's another fact. as of last week there were 59 2021 lebron and melo silver prizms combined. all had to be subbed at the $300+ level. not one 10. sure there are centering probs w prizm but i guarantee you the $300 grading fee a pop weren't taken lightly.

    eta: then take into account the cards are doomed to this graded crackdown forever w not being able to crack and resub and it's a serious, undisclosed issue.

    just like they can't change the submitted price point, they shouldn't be changing the standards either. it's as easy fix, send out a pr release stating they are buckling down on grading standards. be straight up w your customers. then it's on them. changing the rules and letting the customers figure out for themself is the problem.

    I agree with what you say, but if they came out and actually said that today's grading standards are different than the 10's of millions of cards graded over the previous 20 years, that could create an even bigger issue, no?

    had they held off until reopening and knowing they are under new management, i don't think so. and it could be as simple to changing 10 centering issues to 55/45 vs 60/40 and so forth.

    i'm not saying, post bill boards stating "it's now going to be 10x harder to land gems". but there is a way to let folks know grading is getting stricter.

    as a positive, i actually like the tighter grading standards and think it boasts well for the long term forecast. i just have an issue w how they are doing it is all.

    i always forget to check pms. hit me over the head.

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 8,949 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @80sOPC said:
    Hold on, you have 2K 1987 Bonds Donruss in for grading right now? Have read your post 3 times thinking that must be a mistype.

    Re-read his post again.

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • weaselpuppyweaselpuppy Posts: 181 ✭✭✭
    edited May 10, 2021 6:32PM

    @blurryface said:
    with being as positive as humanly possible w the changing of grading standards by new management, i'd be lying if i didn't think it is an abomination myself. especially those cards that should have been back in our hands prior to the company being taken private.

    switching the standards and moving the goal posts on massively delayed cards when the standard was completely different is very, very concerning and completely unfair, imo. a travesty even.

    and if you think they aren't doing it on ultra modern, i beg to differ. i was in a group sub where the subber was a seasoned vet. guy submitted 34 panini burrow rcs. went 0/34 on 10s, only got 9 9s and the rest were returned MG.

    here's another fact. as of last week there were 59 2021 lebron and melo silver prizms combined. all had to be subbed at the $300+ level. not one 10. sure there are centering probs w prizm but i guarantee you the $300 grading fee a pop weren't taken lightly.

    **> eta: then take into account the cards are doomed to this graded crackdown forever w not being able to crack and resub and it's a serious, undisclosed issue.

    **
    just like they can't change the submitted price point, they shouldn't be changing the standards either. it's as easy fix, send out a pr release stating they are buckling down on grading standards. be straight up w your customers. then it's on them. changing the rules and letting the customers figure out for themself is the problem.

    Here is what will happen IMO. One of Beckett/SGC/HGA/CSG/GMA will get close enough in value to a PSA valuation generally and they will get flooded with crack and re-subs. Say all those 9s and Min Grade Burrows, which are now Raw Price go to whomever out of those 5 emerges that are within 80-90% of PSA premium.... and become a couple few 10s, a handful or two of 9s and maybe 1/3 are Min Grade...and say it's someone with some visibility in the hobby and word gets around via the grapevine or a YouTube Video or Twitter etc etc etc

    Stampede Ensues.

  • weaselpuppyweaselpuppy Posts: 181 ✭✭✭

    Giant delay + Price increase+ Grader of Death on Steroids cloning himself like Duncan Idaho is the issue PSA has to worry about...it's not just the 1 thing, it's all of them together that is creating the backlash that is now like the water flowing away from the beach....Best get to Higher Ground pronto.

  • rexvosrexvos Posts: 2,941 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Blindmelon5 said:
    This is the truest example I can impart to you guys. I’ll break, buy etc and have 20-30 of each submittable card and split them up into 3 or 4 orders to avoid the “grader of death.” Got back 150 card 80’s special order late February. All 86 and 87 donruss. 42 10’s. Multiple Maddux, McGwire 10’s. Got back another 150 card exact order 2 weeks ago. 11 10’s. All of the 10’s on the “non-expensive” cards. I.e. Clemens, Seaver. It’s just such an obvious kick in the nuts. The results were just so egregious, it actually made me really mad. I know they are just cards, but all we ever ask is consistency. Without that. What’s the whole point of grading in the first place?

    I wish someone would address these issues. Instead nothing. I can say more but I will not.

    Looking for FB HOF Rookies
  • 82FootballWaxMemorys82FootballWaxMemorys Posts: 290 ✭✭✭
    edited May 10, 2021 6:47PM

    If a firms grading standards have changed, silently or publicly, it invalidates all prior items graded by that company. To eliminate danger a 10 vs 9 or 9 vs 8 might say be determined based on the submitter. Thus keeping population %'s consistent with the past.

    Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.
    “Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but the highest form of intelligence” - Oscar Wilde

  • galaxy27galaxy27 Posts: 4,220 ✭✭✭✭✭

    all along my biggest fear with the immense backlog was never the time involved, but an almost unavoidable hit to grading accuracy

    perform any task without pressure and with ample time at your disposal, then ratchet things up a number of notches and compare sample sizes.............your results will not mirror each other

    in my head i envision things moving at breakneck speed right now and i just cringe

  • LGCLGC Posts: 213 ✭✭✭

    Just grade every card Authentic and let the prospective buyers and sellers sort it out.

  • 82FootballWaxMemorys82FootballWaxMemorys Posts: 290 ✭✭✭
    edited May 11, 2021 9:35AM

    @blurryface said:

    as a positive, i actually like the tighter grading standards and think it boasts well for the long term forecast. i just have an issue w how they are doing it is all.

    Would that not also invalidate 20+ years of previous grading?

    This means do not buy any card not in the current newest slab or you likley spending money on something that will soon be thought of as inferior thus lower value.

    Seems to me it could be a market destroyer for any card graded prior to Feb/Mar 2021.

    I can see it soon at Goldin Auctions:

    1986 Fleer Michael Jordan PSA10 in current slab subject to the industries newest strictest grading standards. For discriminating collectors who will not accept 2nd best.

    A Mint or Gem Mint standard in 2004 must be same as 2021 or risk alienating all but the largest submitter who will only carry newest slab inventory. Unless of course that is the plan.

    Also what is to say standards don't change again, then again? A constantly moving target in effect. Not sure how any of this is in best interest of the hobby short, mid or long term.

    IMHO cancel anything in pipeline that can be cancelled and see what happens over next 1-2 years.

    Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.
    “Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but the highest form of intelligence” - Oscar Wilde

  • @weaselpuppy said:
    Giant delay + Price increase+ Grader of Death on Steroids cloning himself like Duncan Idaho is the issue PSA has to worry about...it's not just the 1 thing, it's all of them together that is creating the backlash that is now like the water flowing away from the beach....Best get to Higher Ground pronto.

    <3 The Dune reference!

  • ckimckim Posts: 19
    edited May 11, 2021 12:21PM

    Maybe the whole notion of "junk slab era", which many believe we're in, is not so much about the card inside the slab but the poor & careless grade rendered to it.

  • blurryfaceblurryface Posts: 4,153 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 11, 2021 12:51PM

    @82FootballWaxMemorys said:

    @blurryface said:

    as a positive, i actually like the tighter grading standards and think it boasts well for the long term forecast. i just have an issue w how they are doing it is all.

    Would that not also invalidate 20+ years of previous grading?

    This means do not buy any card not in the current newest slab or you likley spending money on something that will soon be thought of as inferior thus lower value.

    Seems to me it could be a market destroyer for any card graded prior to Feb/Mar 2021.

    I can see it soon at Goldin Auctions:

    1986 Fleer Michael Jordan PSA10 in current slab subject to the industries newest strictest grading standards. For discriminating collectors who will not accept 2nd best.

    A Mint or Gem Mint standard in 2004 must be same as 2021 or risk alienating all but the largest submitter who will only carry newest slab inventory. Unless of course that is the plan.

    Also what is to say standards don't change again, then again? A constantly moving target in effect. Not sure how any of this is in best interest of the hobby short, mid or long term.

    IMHO cancel anything in pipeline that can be cancelled and see what happens over next 1-2 years.

    i dont think so. most folks can differentiate between early, initial 10s and current 10s in a multitude of ways. i also think the hobby has evolved quite tremendously from eye appeal focused on flip to the eye appeal of the card. as stated before, i have no problem with them getting tighter. and its more than obvious to everybody that they have. its just how its been done.

    with them all but closing up shop, they coulda very easily held off on moving the graded goal posts. simple adjustment coulda been just prior at reopening sub levels.

    in reality the bigger issue here is the continued lack of transparency. with the torch being passed on, and to actual card collectors, one would think that woulda changed.

    i always forget to check pms. hit me over the head.

  • GansetttimeGansetttime Posts: 112 ✭✭

    What I don't understand is how anyone can now complain about the "stricter" grading standards now after the "looser" grading standards were the norm previously (trimming and altering were getting through). After all, weren't the majority here and in other forums looking for this to be cleaned up? This is exactly what was going to happen.

    Everyone wants the best grades for their cards. Everyone is the best grader of their own cards. Reality is sometimes tough to accept. Especially when $ is involved. Not every card is a 10. Nobody wants to hear their card isn't the top grade they desire. Remember, it's only an opinion.

    Grading companies should have set the standard of grading FOR EVERYONE from Day 1 when their doors opened. They did not. The situation became a mess. Now the top priority is to get it right, move forward, and establish trust for the future. The trust part will be the hardest for them to attain. The posts above prove this. My guess is though they are getting it right. Unfortunately not soon enough.

    Enjoy your cards, at the end of the day they are for you to enjoy, no matter what a grader says otherwise.

  • RoflesRofles Posts: 601 ✭✭✭✭

    @Gansetttime said:
    What I don't understand is how anyone can now complain about the "stricter" grading standards now after the "looser" grading standards were the norm previously (trimming and altering were getting through). After all, weren't the majority here and in other forums looking for this to be cleaned up? This is exactly what was going to happen.

    Everyone wants the best grades for their cards. Everyone is the best grader of their own cards. Reality is sometimes tough to accept. Especially when $ is involved. Not every card is a 10. Nobody wants to hear their card isn't the top grade they desire. Remember, it's only an opinion.

    Grading companies should have set the standard of grading FOR EVERYONE from Day 1 when their doors opened. They did not. The situation became a mess. Now the top priority is to get it right, move forward, and establish trust for the future. The trust part will be the hardest for them to attain. The posts above prove this. My guess is though they are getting it right. Unfortunately not soon enough.

    Enjoy your cards, at the end of the day they are for you to enjoy, no matter what a grader says otherwise.

    Absolutely spot on.
    Also, there’s so much speculation on this thread that has absolutely NO MERIT or anything to backup these claims whatsoever.
    Also, consider this:
    -Everyone here focuses solely on the “harshness” of the grade. What about everything else??

    • The amount of research POST grading; does the grade of the card match the declared value?? Does there need to be an upcharge?
    • Moving the cards physically from one stage to another? From grading, to assembly, then the QA checks, then physically? Some of you act like this should be instantaneous! Come on. It’s not as simple as slapping it in a holder buzzing it through the sealer.
    • You are entrusting PSA with YOUR valuables! As far as I’m concerned they can take all the time they want if it means my cards/collectibles are being handled properly.
    • They are actively upgrading/improving their processes all the time. Upgrades don’t happen overnight. They take time and patience. Their current system has been overwhelmed, no doubt. But before everyone starts heading towards PSA with pitchforks and torches, give them the benefit of the doubt that what they’re working on now ensures that shutdowns like this don’t happen again.

    Many of you have way more submissions in than I do (I have a 79 card submission received 8/3/2020, entered 9/29/20, and been in grading since 3/24/21), but let’s give them the benefit of the doubt that they’re doing everything they can to get our collectibles back to us in the most timely manner possible. Hope you all get the grades you want/expect, and happy collecting!

  • 80sOPC80sOPC Posts: 710 ✭✭✭

    This has nothing to do with trimming. Trimmed cards are not on the grade scale - they should not grade at all. A trimmed card going from a 10 to a 9 is not progress.

    I have my ideas on why grades are down across the board but not appropriate to post on a forum owned by PSA.

  • 80sOPC80sOPC Posts: 710 ✭✭✭

    Sorry one last comment....

    Grading cards that meet 10 standards, and would traditionally have been graded 10's is not getting it right. By all means change the standards, maybe a 10 needs to be no worse then 52/48, can not have any print issues, etc. But the standards are the same, only the grades have changed.

    I have stacks of cards that I expect to be graded tough, in the same way they would have been graded tough 1 year ago. Getting top grades has never been easy, and standards have been up the past 5 years. What I don't expect is a card that meets a certain standard to be arbitrarily bumped down a grade. Just looking for my cards to be graded within the existing standards and consistent with previously graded cards.

    For that reason I will wait it out, be it 6 months, or 6 years. My plan is to be a buyer instead, these lower grades offer a great opportunity for guys that don't mind great cards in 7/8/9 slabs.

  • Blindmelon5Blindmelon5 Posts: 65 ✭✭✭

    Couldn’t disagree more. If I submit a 100 card order, for example, I’m pretty spot on with my grading. I know I’ll have say 30 cards with legit shots at 10’s, 10 slam dunk 10’s and hoping for 9’s on the rest. Now, I do the same thing and everything comes back a grade lower. That is patently absurd and unacceptable. I grade according to their guidelines, so they damn sure better do the same.

  • brad31brad31 Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 14, 2021 7:51AM

    I am guessing we will eventually see two grading standards - one for vintage and one for ultra-modern. Think they are struggling to determine a 9 on a 2021 card the same way as a 9 on a 1971 card. The standards are exactly the same. I think they will tighten up centering and some other things in the ultra-modern standards and the vintage will get looked at like it used to.

  • miwlvrnmiwlvrn Posts: 3,720 ✭✭✭✭

    These concerns look perhaps like the absence of more precision within the PSA grading scale? Relatively recently, SGC updated their scale to include not only a 9.5 but also a separation between 10-GM and 10-PRI. The difference between 10-GM and 10-PRI is basically equivalent to the difference between a BGS 10 and a BGS 10 black label, though SGC 10-PRI seems to be more common than BGS Black Label. Maybe it's time to see a PSA 9.5 introduced?

  • scmavlscmavl Posts: 1,327 ✭✭✭

    I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I would love to see half grades gone completely. I think a 10 should be 100% perfect, including centering. This would take the number of 10s down for sure, but it would also add value to the 9s. I hate that getting a 9 on a card now is almost a wasted sub fee, especially for modern. A 9 should be a grade you're happy to get. And I'm sorry, but two versions of a 10 is ridiculous.

    2.5 is pretty much my speed.
  • Geoff76Geoff76 Posts: 76 ✭✭

    At the risk of beating a dead horse about current vs. old grading standards, I’ve kept an eye on 60s Mantles for my personal collection and couldn’t help but notice the contrast between these 5s I found on eBay last night.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 4,141 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Buy the card, not the holder.

    Set the attributes that you like.

    I could never ever afford the 9. Ever. Never ever.

    But...

    ...if they were raw and side by side, I might pick mine anyway. Probably not, because the 9 is gorgeous. But might is good. I’ll take might. 🤪


    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 4,141 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Geoff76

    I’ll add that I bought the card (above) raw and subbed it myself. I think if I had subbed it at the same time as that first 5 you posted, it probably would have gotten a higher grade. But that generation flip is decades old and even PSA would acknowledge (I think) that their standards are tighter from that generation of flip until now.

    Most people seem to be relating that they’re having issues within the Lighthouse generation; I don’t submit the high grade cards to know but I trust the PMs and posts of guys who have been at it and do it much more professionally than I. I’m a mid to low grade collector, who like cards that can look high grade.


    Others...





    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • miwlvrnmiwlvrn Posts: 3,720 ✭✭✭✭

    @scmavl said:
    And I'm sorry, but two versions of a 10 is ridiculous.

    Ridiculous and confusing.

  • daltexdaltex Posts: 1,513 ✭✭✭✭

    @scmavl said:
    I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I would love to see half grades gone completely. I think a 10 should be 100% perfect, including centering. This would take the number of 10s down for sure, but it would also add value to the 9s. I hate that getting a 9 on a card now is almost a wasted sub fee, especially for modern. A 9 should be a grade you're happy to get. And I'm sorry, but two versions of a 10 is ridiculous.

    I don't understand what you are talking about re "two versions of a 10". Can you please explain further?

  • scmavlscmavl Posts: 1,327 ✭✭✭

    @daltex said:

    @scmavl said:
    I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I would love to see half grades gone completely. I think a 10 should be 100% perfect, including centering. This would take the number of 10s down for sure, but it would also add value to the 9s. I hate that getting a 9 on a card now is almost a wasted sub fee, especially for modern. A 9 should be a grade you're happy to get. And I'm sorry, but two versions of a 10 is ridiculous.

    I don't understand what you are talking about re "two versions of a 10". Can you please explain further?

    Both SGC and Beckett have two levels of 10. Regular 10, and gold/black label respectively for "pristine 10" cards.

    2.5 is pretty much my speed.
  • 82FootballWaxMemorys82FootballWaxMemorys Posts: 290 ✭✭✭
    edited May 19, 2021 7:54PM

    @gemint said:
    Add me to those advocating for consistency. I can understand mid-1990s era slabs being graded more loosely. They were still refining the grading process and definition in that era. However, I don't see much reason to tighten the standards vs 2004 or 2012 or 2018...at least in terms of the condition. I also really hope populations aren't being controlled based on value though this has probably gone on for a long time. The 1980 Henderson RC is a good example. Far fewer 9 success rate on that card even when controlling for variables such as popularity that drives submissions of lower grade examples vs commons, placement on sheet, comparing to other A's cards in the set, etc. Most star cards are harder to hit high grades vs common cards in semi-modern sets. It shouldn't be that way. A 9 is a 9 is a 9 whether it's Mickey Klutts, Rickey Henderson or a team card.

    Agreed.

    I'd like to add "population" control if truly employed by any grading service is tantamount to fraud. It means a card is not being graded which is a large portion of the service being purchased, it means a card is assigned a grade number based on on past %'s. It also leaves door open to huge amounts of market manipulation and possibility that entities submitting are not on an equal grading playing field.

    Legality aside those type of tactics in short term may be profitable, however seeds of mistrust in today's age grow fast and long-term reputational damage is near impossible to repair.

    As the current boom and euphoria is already past it's peak as things fully return to "normal" not just trading cards but all collectible demand will drop accordingly. Grading company's should be seeking to expand trust tight now, not diminish it - leaner times are on the horizon, not if but when.

    Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.
    “Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but the highest form of intelligence” - Oscar Wilde

  • daltexdaltex Posts: 1,513 ✭✭✭✭

    @scmavl said:

    @daltex said:

    @scmavl said:
    I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I would love to see half grades gone completely. I think a 10 should be 100% perfect, including centering. This would take the number of 10s down for sure, but it would also add value to the 9s. I hate that getting a 9 on a card now is almost a wasted sub fee, especially for modern. A 9 should be a grade you're happy to get. And I'm sorry, but two versions of a 10 is ridiculous.

    I don't understand what you are talking about re "two versions of a 10". Can you please explain further?

    Both SGC and Beckett have two levels of 10. Regular 10, and gold/black label respectively for "pristine 10" cards.

    Sure. Are you saying that you should only submit to PSA?

  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 3,837 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @blurryface said:

    yea. you lost me there.

    not that i dont agree w/ you in the fact that some of that would be nice. heck, i'd like another night w/ halle berry. but im back here in the real world again.

    Another?! 😳

  • blurryfaceblurryface Posts: 4,153 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @PaulMaul said:

    @blurryface said:

    yea. you lost me there.

    not that i dont agree w/ you in the fact that some of that would be nice. heck, i'd like another night w/ halle berry. but im back here in the real world again.

    Another?! 😳

    stupid david justice. :)

    i always forget to check pms. hit me over the head.

  • brad31brad31 Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭✭✭

    There is a video on YouTube that shows parts of the grading process of one of PSAs competitors. The video shows the use of a VSC machine which looks to be a Video Spectral Comparator. In the video it shows wrinkles on a card not visible to the naked eye. I would not be surprised if something similar is used at PSA in a limited or test capacity. You can probably find the video by searching for it rather easily. It seems to be hardly used by the competitor as they only have one machine and do not seem to have any well thought out criteria on when to use it.

    I could see a time when machines like this are available at a price point where they become a standard part of the grading process. If that happens, it would be impossible for grades not to come down on average. Alternatively they will be re-defined speaking of defects apparent with the naked eye vs. those apparent under magnification vs. those apparent only with enhancements.

    My point is technology will change the grading standard someday and there will be an eventual shift. This shift right now likely has nothing to do with technology - but someday grading will become more refined and an old 9 may no longer be considered a 9 without it being looked at again.

  • GreenSneakersGreenSneakers Posts: 627 ✭✭✭

    Not to get all philosophical ... but if there are only wrinkles that can be seen via technology, and not by human eye even under magnification, then does there really need to be differentiation on a 1-10 grading scale?

  • stevegarveyfanstevegarveyfan Posts: 451 ✭✭✭✭

    Look at ANYTHING under sufficient magnification and imperfections will be found, without exception.

  • brad31brad31 Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 27, 2021 7:45AM

    @GreenSneakers said:
    Not to get all philosophical ... but if there are only wrinkles that can be seen via technology, and not by human eye even under magnification, then does there really need to be differentiation on a 1-10 grading scale?

    I don’t disagree with this - I don’t even look at my cards under magnification.

    It was not clear from the video if the wrinkle could be scene with magnification - but the wrinkle was huge and should have been easy to see even with the naked eye. I was wondering if it was showing an alteration (something restored in some way that made it not apparent to the naked eye) rather than a wrinkle. The video was not clear on this point. However, I cannot imagine a card being placed in this machine and a grader not factoring in what it helps them see.

    There will be people who want the “best” version possible of a card. We have already gone from 10 to higher than 10 at most grading companies. Rarity of popular cards increases price - so if there is a way to make a 10 an “11” I bet we will see it someday. Not really a collector of ultra modern - but think this area is where there will be an appetite to differentiate the best of the best.

    I really think technology will change grading. Outside of detecting alterations I am not sure if this is a good thing. Hope we never get to a day when people are posting VSC images of their cards instead of pictures.

Sign In or Register to comment.