@gemint said:
Well I had a modern bulk order from last year pop this evening. This is the first bulk order I've received grades for since the shut down. I have to say I was fearing the worst but pleasantly surprised. These were mostly '72-'77 Topps baseball with some 80s thrown in. Here's the grade distribution:
PSA Grade=Quantity of Cards in That Grade
N6=2
3=1
4=2
5=5
6=7
7=34
8=190
9=148
10=2
Some comments and observations:
It's interesting that I didn't get a single half grade....and I'm perfectly fine with that
No matter how hard I try, I can't seem to weed out the occasional mid grade card. This order had a lower bottom but overall fewer sub PSA 7 cards in it. I use magnifying readers now in addition to my loupe and try different angles and lighting to catch light surface wrinkles
The PSA 10s were the Ripken FF error and a '72 Luis Aparicio
At an almost 38% PSA 9 rate, that's the best I've ever achieved. Though historically I was able to lump 70s cards and 60s cards into the same submission. This would result in lower percentages of 9s due to the higher difficulty of finding mint cards from the 60s compared to the 70s
Some PSA 9 highlights include: Marino RC, '84 Fleer UD Puckett, '75 Staubach, 1975 Stargell (x2), 1986 Fleer Jeff Malone, 1972 Catfish Hunter, 1979 Thurman Munson, 1976 Ted Simmons (tough upgrade for my set), '82 Traded Ripken, '86 Fleer Johnny Moore, '72 Munson, '74 Staubach, '72 Kingman RC, '76 Yaz (x2), '89 UD Griffey (x3), '75 O.J., '74 Parker RC, '75 Brock (x2), '74 Brock (x2), '75 Yaz, '72 Cleon Jones Green Letters.
These will go into my sets. The extras will go to eBay over time.
Not bad at all but only 2 10’s?!?just seems like it’s getting harder and harder to get 10’s. in my prior submissions, I typically get 1 10 per submission, and only one.
Psa grading has become harsh and are losing customers. I hope they know what they are doing
Some PSA 9 highlights include: Marino RC, '84 Fleer UD Puckett, '75 Staubach, 1975 Stargell (x2), 1986 Fleer Jeff Malone, 1972 Catfish Hunter, 1979 Thurman Munson, 1976 Ted Simmons (tough upgrade for my set), '82 Traded Ripken, '86 Fleer Johnny Moore, '72 Munson, '74 Staubach, '72 Kingman RC, '76 Yaz (x2), '89 UD Griffey (x3), '75 O.J., '74 Parker RC, '75 Brock (x2), '74 Brock (x2), '75 Yaz, '72 Cleon Jones Green Letters.
These will go into my sets. The extras will go to eBay over time.
Those are great 9s! I'd take any of those in a second. Those Munsons and Parker are sweet pulls.
These days if you're getting 9s on mid-70s then you're winning. That's a beautiful list. I'm hitting a ton of 8s on my 70s, but not a lot of 9s.
I've been doing the fine combing of my recent submittals too, and still get the occasional 5 or 6. I've been trying to eliminate those but they keep happening.
Norcal - 1 to 2 tens in a 500 card sub is typical for me. There have been subs in the past where I got a dozen or so tens but those are definitely the exception and not the rule. This sub did have more 80s cards than I typically submit, so maybe it should have had more tens. However, in today's environment, I'll take these grades any day of the week.
After all the horror stories I have read, I was pleasantly surprised. However, that is a subjective observation. Objectively, I don't think I have ever received an order that met my expectations more accurately than this one. After opening the package I looked carefully at each item under a lighted loupe and was simply amazed at the accuracy of these grades, with only an exception or two.
Submission #10530163
Arrived 02/18/21
Date Received 04/10/21
Date Shipped 07/19/22
1999 PADRES MADD STEVE GARVEY EX 5
1986 SPORTS CARDS PADRES POSTCARD PLAYER COMPOSITE VG-EX 4
1981 GARVEY GAFLINE STEVE GARVEY NM 7
1974 VENEZUELAN TIGRES TEAM PHOTO GD 2
1986 DONRUSS ALL-STARS 3 STEVE GARVEY EX-MT 6
1986 DONRUSS ALL-STARS 50 DON MATTINGLY MINT 9
1972 TOPPS 132 JOE MORGAN MINT 9
1973 TOPPS 255 REGGIE JACKSON NM 7
1975 TOPPS 308 R.B.I. LEADERS JEFF BURROUGHS/JOHNNY BENCH MINT 9
1976 TOPPS 95 BROOKS ROBINSON NM 7
1976 TOPPS 95 BROOKS ROBINSON NM-MT 8
1976 TOPPS 95 BROOKS ROBINSON NM-MT 8
1976 TOPPS 95 BROOKS ROBINSON NM-MT 8
1976 TOPPS 150 STEVE GARVEY MINT 9
1976 TOPPS 201 NL ERA LEADERS JONES/MESSERSMITH/SEAVER NM 7
I got my sub back today. Looking at some of the lowest graded cards, it definitely looks like some damage happened. They had obvious bends which formed light creases across the surface. They were easy to see in the holder and I would never miss something that obvious let alone a dozen or so of them. Fortunately none of those were high value cards. There also seemed to be some 1975s that were graded low which look like they were soaked. Again, obvious damage I would have detected. Maybe I dodged a bullet but overall I'm quite happy and relieved with this sub.
@gemint said:
I got my sub back today. Looking at some of the lowest graded cards, it definitely looks like some damage happened. They had obvious bends which formed light creases across the surface. They were easy to see in the holder and I would never miss something that obvious let alone a dozen or so of them. Fortunately none of those were high value cards. There also seemed to be some 1975s that were graded low which look like they were soaked. Again, obvious damage I would have detected. Maybe I dodged a bullet but overall I'm quite happy and relieved with this sub.
I don't know how on earth they ding cards up so bad and so often...I can't even imagine how it would be happening so much but they're flat out beating them up on a regular basis. I am pretty sure it's physically impossible to have a curled up corner when it's been sandwiched I'm a card saver for over a year, or so I thought anyway. You tell me, maybe physics are deceiving but I would have to see to believe frankly...
Have a modern $30 per card order that was entered 6/13 that just moved from Grading to Assembly. That surprised me. Would have rather had the $50 per card order sent just a little earlier and insured at about 3x higher value go there but I cant complain and am glad to see the movement.
Got back my last submission-- vintage cards. One Basketball rookie was miscut (not sure what constitutes that- certainly more noticeable on the back, I guess).
Here are some conclusions, based on all my submissions mainly early to mid 1980s, some 70s, only 1 1990 card----totaled around 300 cards- I got TWO (2) PSA 10s: (They came in same sub).
1) I put too much insurance (estimated value). The only thing that I guess would be ok with it, is that they sat in storage somewhere almost a year and a half--so they could have been lost. Probably let PSA give you an upcharge notice, which is a good extra, especially if you are selling.
2) Star cards of one year versus more common (semi-star) cards of the same year are graded more harshly (pop control?) I remember watching a youtube video on this topic, which also compared where specific cards are located on auncut sheet.
3) Monotonous grading patterns exist in higher quantity submissions. (If the PSA 5s or 6's start, many will be like that).
Case in point, a number of my 1971 Topps cards were graded 3s. Some had dinged corners, the rookie card (without soft corners and had nice black borders) received the same grade.
4) Many cards are 1-2 grades lower than expected- just got to anticipate it. This also made many cards not worth grading--cost (slab, fees, insurance, postage) outweighed value.
5) Subgrades (ala Beckett) would eliminate some of the questioning of grades--would answer why card fell short of a specific grade(s).
6) One person verifying and grading cello packs (even if he is generally right), is not a good thing. Should be competition in the marketplace. In baseball more HP umpire mistakes are made calling strikes outside the strikezone (should have been a ball), than incorrectly calling balls for pitches inside the zone. Same with packs. Outside of the great Pokemon error, I would tend to think more packs are called invalid which are actually legit, than deciding a pack is valid, when it isn't.
7) I imagine some of the higher tech/automating grading cards will be more valued down the road taking out the human element. (Similar to the roboumps working their way up to the majors in baseball).
8) Will there be 2 sets of price guides (PSA pre-pandemic and current)? Will we see higher premiums paid for a HOF PSA 8 just graded, then a PSA of the same player/card year graded several years ago?
9) If I were just starting a collection now (rather than paring down and selling most of it) I would buy cards already graded. I would only submit raw, if I got the raw card for a good price and saw it in person, not online.
That's it. I have really enjoyed reading posts on this forum, and having all of you share pictures of your treasures!
Gretzky,Ripken, and Sandberg collection. Still trying to complete 1975 Topps baseball set from when I was a kid.
I've gotten three subs back since I last posted, and they all had some of the most accurate grades I've received in a long time. Decent 10 ratio, fair grades on vintage, no cards rejected for mysterious reasons, and auto grades have been 100% spot on. Maybe luck or maybe the new graders are hitting their stride, but I'm content. Turnaround times have been as stated or faster.
@scmavl said:
I've gotten three subs back since I last posted, and they all had some of the most accurate grades I've received in a long time. Decent 10 ratio, fair grades on vintage, no cards rejected for mysterious reasons, and auto grades have been 100% spot on. Maybe luck or maybe the new graders are hitting their stride, but I'm content. Turnaround times have been as stated or faster.
Fair grades on vintage, 100% spot on auto grades, decent 10 ratio and turnaround times as stated or faster.........you should go out right now and purchase a lottery ticket. I'm serious. I don't think 1 person has stated these compliments in 2 years about the grading and service. "Congrats"
@scmavl said:
I've gotten three subs back since I last posted, and they all had some of the most accurate grades I've received in a long time. Decent 10 ratio, fair grades on vintage, no cards rejected for mysterious reasons, and auto grades have been 100% spot on. Maybe luck or maybe the new graders are hitting their stride, but I'm content. Turnaround times have been as stated or faster.
I hope you're right that new graders are hitting their strides, because I'm done subbing vintage until the prices come down/card. At $18 it's still a stretch when you only get 5-7s back with some 8s and an occasional 9. If they'd get back to $12 then I'd really send some in.
I won't send anymore at $30/card with vintage. I'll just let them stack and wait for special deals.
@StatsGuy said:
Got back my last submission-- vintage cards. One Basketball rookie was miscut (not sure what constitutes that- certainly more noticeable on the back, I guess).
Here are some conclusions, based on all my submissions mainly early to mid 1980s, some 70s, only 1 1990 card----totaled around 300 cards- I got TWO (2) PSA 10s: (They came in same sub).
1) I put too much insurance (estimated value). The only thing that I guess would be ok with it, is that they sat in storage somewhere almost a year and a half--so they could have been lost. Probably let PSA give you an upcharge notice, which is a good extra, especially if you are selling.
2) Star cards of one year versus more common (semi-star) cards of the same year are graded more harshly (pop control?) I remember watching a youtube video on this topic, which also compared where specific cards are located on auncut sheet.
3) Monotonous grading patterns exist in higher quantity submissions. (If the PSA 5s or 6's start, many will be like that).
Case in point, a number of my 1971 Topps cards were graded 3s. Some had dinged corners, the rookie card (without soft corners and had nice black borders) received the same grade.
4) Many cards are 1-2 grades lower than expected- just got to anticipate it. This also made many cards not worth grading--cost (slab, fees, insurance, postage) outweighed value.
5) Subgrades (ala Beckett) would eliminate some of the questioning of grades--would answer why card fell short of a specific grade(s).
6) One person verifying and grading cello packs (even if he is generally right), is not a good thing. Should be competition in the marketplace. In baseball more HP umpire mistakes are made calling strikes outside the strikezone (should have been a ball), than incorrectly calling balls for pitches inside the zone. Same with packs. Outside of the great Pokemon error, I would tend to think more packs are called invalid which are actually legit, than deciding a pack is valid, when it isn't.
7) I imagine some of the higher tech/automating grading cards will be more valued down the road taking out the human element. (Similar to the roboumps working their way up to the majors in baseball).
8) Will there be 2 sets of price guides (PSA pre-pandemic and current)? Will we see higher premiums paid for a HOF PSA 8 just graded, then a PSA of the same player/card year graded several years ago?
9) If I were just starting a collection now (rather than paring down and selling most of it) I would buy cards already graded. I would only submit raw, if I got the raw card for a good price and saw it in person, not online.
That's it. I have really enjoyed reading posts on this forum, and having all of you share pictures of your treasures!
I’ve always wished PSA would offer sub grades. It would definitely take a lot of the uncertainty out of why some cards that we think are 9’s come back as 7’s. Tell us WHY !!!
My 2 swinging sixties from mid April 21 hasn’t moved off 4 in like 8 months. It’s been so long I have to keep checking time to time to remember what I sent
@1959 said:
There used to be ONE "Grader of Death". Now there seems to be many, many, G.O.D. and every once in a while one that did an OK job.
Yeah, well prior to these last two orders (easily over 1000 in the last 20 years) I had never once had an entire order come back without a single 10 and you already know...2 straight. I musta forgot how to grade cards, makes perfect sense. This is why I send in 20ish ct orders so when an a***ole gets a hold of one I don't watch as much money burn in flames. Btw, we're talking mid 90's stuff here . i literally chuckled when I saw the results because it is laughable and obviously ridiculous
With all of the dings and dents and surprisingly low grades we've seen recently, I've started to scan all of my cards before I submit them. At least this way I have a baseline idea what they looked like before I shipped them. Does anyone else do this?
@jeffcbay said:
With all of the dings and dents and surprisingly low grades we've seen recently, I've started to scan all of my cards before I submit them. At least this way I have a baseline idea what they looked like before I shipped them. Does anyone else do this?
For my 3 orders I’ve submitted to PSA recently, I took 10 pictures of each card before sending. I think we can’t be too careful.
Also, in the event I don’t get my cards back before we make a full revolution around the Sun, I can at least see what my cards looked like.
Down to my last order in the great backlog. This one was entered on 4/20/21 and was the smallest of all of the ones I had sent. Hope that one clears soon. Then it's all new activity for me.
Looking for a Glen Rice Inkredible and Alex Rodriguez cards
I am down to just FIVE older personal orders and if you pay close attention you'll notice patterns and I'll leave it at that
,
,
,
OLDER STUFF
===========
job id / sub number / arrived date / entered date / shipped date / status / amount / type of sub
22298656 10637986 03/30/21 05/06/21 N/A See Details 11 Value Modern (1972- 2017)
22298638 10637943 03/30/21 05/06/21 N/A See Details 29 Value Vintage Deal (1971-)
22263108 10562584 03/11/21 04/22/21 N/A See Details 20 Value Modern (1972- 2017)
22263092 10557401 03/11/21 04/22/21 N/A See Details 21 Value Modern (1972- 2017) 22249816 10577070 03/05/21 04/19/21 N/A See Details 30 Value Vintage Deal (1971-)
,
,
,
The two bolded popped. The others are over 300 business days old
I am down to just FIVE older personal orders and if you pay close attention you'll notice patterns and I'll leave it at that
,
,
,
OLDER STUFF
===========
job id / sub number / arrived date / entered date / shipped date / status / amount / type of sub
22298656 10637986 03/30/21 05/06/21 N/A See Details 11 Value Modern (1972- 2017)
22298638 10637943 03/30/21 05/06/21 N/A See Details 29 Value Vintage Deal (1971-)
22263108 10562584 03/11/21 04/22/21 N/A See Details 20 Value Modern (1972- 2017)
22263092 10557401 03/11/21 04/22/21 N/A See Details 21 Value Modern (1972- 2017) 22249816 10577070 03/05/21 04/19/21 N/A See Details 30 Value Vintage Deal (1971-)
,
,
,
The two bolded popped. The others are over 300 business days old
You had a vintage pop and a modern pop. You have vintage and modern still in grading. What pattern am I supposed to notice????
Only 2 cards graded as expected.
3 came back as miscut or questionable authenticity.
The rest came back 2-3 grades lower than expected. I am glad I decided not to send anything in during their “special”. Long time to wait for a Disappointment. I have one value vintage submission left (1 card of mine, the rest are my brothers). I also have 2 cards left and they are cards that were damaged at their facility. It’ll be while(if ever) before I throw away my money with PSA. It seems like they have much to figure out.
As I said earlier, overall I was happy with my order. However, a handful of cards were damaged, including surface creases that are easy to see even in the holder. The Stargell below probably would have been a 9 like the other two I submitted except for the surface crease running through the 'A' in Stargell and up his left leg. The creased cards had the damage in the same general area at the bottom middle of the card. This leads me to believe that they were likely damaged during order prep when they were still in their cardsavers and stacked together.
I have some top notch cards still pending in other orders and am concerned about them surviving the process unscathed. I fear some may already be damaged if it is occurring during order prep as they are past that phase in the grading process.
Sorry for the glare. It's the only way I could get the crease to show in the photo.
I have some top notch cards still pending in other orders and am concerned about them surviving the process unscathed. I fear some may already be damaged if it is occurring during order prep as they are past that phase in the grading process.
This feeling of dread that cards will be damaged comes with every order I submit now. It's justified as well because I have yet to receive one order back in the last couple years that didn't include some form of damage. I too have seen that similar creasing done to one of my cards, albeit it was running horizontally but in the same area.
Just had these grades pop. For the most part, the grades are pretty awful. It's just frustrating because it can be so inconsistent. I sent in 4 Nestle Mattinglys a few months ago and got 3 10s and 1 9. Now 4 8s and 1 7. They really don't look that different. And you can tell after you see those first couple grades that popped that you got the grader of death and it's not going to be your day. I mean it could have been a lot worse. Somehow middle of the order the strictness seemed to lift and I got some awesome 10s. I love the Skyridge Holo Machamp in a 10. I love that Ohtani Chrome with the 83 Topps design in a 10. I can't get enough Kaprizovs in a 10. The 95 Finest Refractor Mattinglys as 8s feels silly. Centered and free of print lines with sharp corners. Last one I submitted that was similar was a 9 and felt like it could have been a 10. All in all, I didn't get killed. Just not good business. It just doesn't seem like a worthwhile venture to acquire these cards and get them graded by PSA if this strictness is going to continue. I probably lost money in terms of what my costs were and what I got back. Have 3 more orders in and that might be it for me. At $30 per card and $18 per card. I hope to see better than this but even if I do, I don't know if I want to make the investment to potentially get this inconsistency. Think I will stop the buying raw cards game and opening packs and just buy graded cards where I don't have to wait and hold my breath and hope they see it the same way I do and probably won't. This one was $50 a card so I guess if it was a lower fee it might not have seemed so bad. I was just really encouraged by another order I received back at $50 a card which were close to the best grades I have ever seen, even surpassing my expectations. It's clear this person and that person see the way cards should be graded in a very different way. I can't help but feel that makes this whole exercise kind of pointless and not something that really holds much value.
Line # Item # Cert # Grade Description Type
1 1 65739961 NEAR MINT 7 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 8 Don Mattingly Card
2 1 65739962 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 8 Don Mattingly Card
3 1 65739963 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 8 Don Mattingly Card
4 1 65739964 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 8 Don Mattingly Card
5 1 65739965 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 8 Don Mattingly Card
6 1 65739966 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 182 Darryl Strawberry Card
7 1 65739967 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 182 Darryl Strawberry Card
8 1 65739968 NEAR MINT 7 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 596 Ryne Sandberg Card
9 1 65739969 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 300 Pete Rose Card
10 1 65739970 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 230 Rickey Henderson Card
11 1 65739971 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 490 Cal Ripken Jr. Card
12 1 65739972 MINT 9 1994 Stadium Club Bowman's Best 12 Brett Favre Black Refractor Card
13 1 65739973 MINT 9 1994 Stadium Club Bowman's Best 12 Brett Favre Black Refractor Card
14 1 65739974 MINT 9 2019 Topps Chrome 201 Vladimir Guerrero Jr. Card
15 1 65739975 GEM MINT 10 2019 Topps Chrome 201 Vladimir Guerrero Jr. Card
16 1 65739976 GEM MINT 10 2018 Topps Silver Pack 1983 Chrome Promo 145 Shohei Ohtani Card
17 1 65739977 GEM MINT 10 2018 Topps Chrome Update HMT1 Shohei Ohtani Card
18 1 65739978 MINT 9 2019 Upper Deck 201 Jack Hughes Card
19 1 65739979 GEM MINT 10 2020 Upper Deck 451 Kirill Kaprizov Card
20 1 65739980 GEM MINT 10 2019 Panini Prizm 249 Ja Morant Card
21 1 65739981 GEM MINT 10 2021 Metazoo Cryptid Nation 4 Bigfoot-Holo 1st Edition Card
22 1 65739982 GEM MINT 10 2021 Metazoo Cryptid Nation 4 Bigfoot-Holo 1st Edition Card
23 1 65739983 GEM MINT 10 2021 Metazoo Cryptid Nation 4 Bigfoot-Holo 1st Edition Card
24 1 65739984 GEM MINT 10 2003 Pokemon Skyridge H15 Machamp-Holo Card
25 1 65739985 MINT 9 2021 Pokemon Sword & Shield Evolving Skies 180 Full Art/Espeon V Card
26 1 65739986 MINT 9 2021 Pokemon Sword & Shield Evolving Skies 196 Full Art/Noivern V Card
27 1 65739987 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1995 Finest 126 Don Mattingly Refractor Card
28 1 65739988 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1995 Finest 126 Don Mattingly Refractor Card
Or maybe I just need to never submit another 1984 Topps Nestle card or anything 95 or earlier again. Definitely am feeling some modern love here so maybe there is a little room to continue in that direction. Funny to say I feel good about Bigfoot. I might have overpaid on the fee but love that Ja too. Thought it was lost in the mail after purchasing on eBay and then one day like half a year later there it was.
I may just keep my cards raw after the last 2 submissions. Can’t find myself just buying graded either. Not sure that I want to keep supporting such an inconsistent method of grading. Also bothers me that their is no way to give any input. I feel that complaints would just fall upon deaf ears. How do they actually know if every grader is using the same standards. I think most agree that only one grader sees each card.
@UlyssesExtravaganza said:
Or maybe I just need to never submit another 1984 Topps Nestle card or anything 95 or earlier again. Definitely am feeling some modern love here so maybe there is a little room to continue in that direction. Funny to say I feel good about Bigfoot. I might have overpaid on the fee but love that Ja too. Thought it was lost in the mail after purchasing on eBay and then one day like half a year later there it was.
I only submit 85 and older, and am mostly done with any of that. I have a bunch built up over the shutdown, and then that's that. PSA has effectively fired this customer.
I will NEVER submit anything at $30/card again, because it seems the best you should expect is an 8 with an occasional 9 on those years. That's very tough to make work financially if you're chasing packs, etc... It's even tough at $18/card.
I also only buy graded now because at least I know what the grade is.
@shawther said:
I may just keep my cards raw after the last 2 submissions. Can’t find myself just buying graded either. Not sure that I want to keep supporting such an inconsistent method of grading. Also bothers me that their is no way to give any input. I feel that complaints would just fall upon deaf ears. How do they actually know if every grader is using the same standards. I think most agree that only one grader sees each card.
I was "selected" to take part in an anonymous survey this past month. The last part of the survey was a blank screen to give input or whatever. I wrote a nice long page about how I didn't care about the turn around times, or the costs so much as a reason to not submit, but my issue as to why I stopped submitting was the inconsistency issue with vintage that has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum and with my own experiences. Figured that was my shot that those comments would actually get read and passed on, so I took it.
Is it even possible to ask for your cards back? I submitted 145 at $18 for 95 and earlier. Its at level 3 Research. Just felt like at that price it was a value but not sure its worth taking the chance that one of these tons of people they hired that like to grade cards 2 or 3 grades lower gets their hands on it. Felt like at $50 a card I might have gotten one of the better more experienced graders but it was a bad gamble. I am hoping that now that they divided it up between 95 and earlier and 96 to current, the people on 95 and earlier know how to grade older cards the way they have been graded in the past. But probably not worth taking that chance. I could maybe throw 20 out there here and there to test the waters if there was a special. If the first sub is bad, just close the book on that idea. Have some modern stuff there that I would probably just want to let play out.
I also only buy graded now because at least I know what the grade is.
Unfortunately you don’t know if the graded 7 card you are buying is a 7 or a 5 or it could even be an 8. That also still drives up the price of PSA graded cards. As a collector, I also don’t like how you you can submit cards through Golden Auctions to be graded through PSA and sold at auction. That seems pretty shady to me. I would guess that those cards may get a bump in the opposite direction that most of ours have gotten. May not happen but the fact it’s a possibility makes me feel uneasy.
@UlyssesExtravaganza said:
Or maybe I just need to never submit another 1984 Topps Nestle card or anything 95 or earlier again. Definitely am feeling some modern love here so maybe there is a little room to continue in that direction. Funny to say I feel good about Bigfoot. I might have overpaid on the fee but love that Ja too. Thought it was lost in the mail after purchasing on eBay and then one day like half a year later there it was.
I only submit 85 and older, and am mostly done with any of that. I have a bunch built up over the shutdown, and then that's that. PSA has effectively fired this customer.
I will NEVER submit anything at $30/card again, because it seems the best you should expect is an 8 with an occasional 9 on those years. That's very tough to make work financially if you're chasing packs, etc... It's even tough at $18/card.
I also only buy graded now because at least I know what the grade is.
just be careful when "buying the grade" -- no matter the company doing the grading, cards get graded incorrectly or get holdered with damage, etc...buy the card and not so much the holder
@UlyssesExtravaganza said:
Or maybe I just need to never submit another 1984 Topps Nestle card or anything 95 or earlier again. Definitely am feeling some modern love here so maybe there is a little room to continue in that direction. Funny to say I feel good about Bigfoot. I might have overpaid on the fee but love that Ja too. Thought it was lost in the mail after purchasing on eBay and then one day like half a year later there it was.
I only submit 85 and older, and am mostly done with any of that. I have a bunch built up over the shutdown, and then that's that. PSA has effectively fired this customer.
I will NEVER submit anything at $30/card again, because it seems the best you should expect is an 8 with an occasional 9 on those years. That's very tough to make work financially if you're chasing packs, etc... It's even tough at $18/card.
I also only buy graded now because at least I know what the grade is.
just be careful when "buying the grade" -- no matter the company doing the grading, cards get graded incorrectly or get holdered with damage, etc...buy the card and not so much the holder
Oh, I get it, but it's still a more definitive condition than trying to determine raw at this point.
I just had a Value order hit Assembly today. They must be doing well on the backlog because I thought these were supposed to only be completed when that was done. Maybe it will sit in Assembly or QA for a while.
Arrived - June 24
Processing Started - June 30
Grading Started - July 13
Assembly - August 3
@MarshallFaulk28 said:
I just had a Value order hit Assembly today. They must be doing well on the backlog because I thought these were supposed to only be completed when that was done. Maybe it will sit in Assembly or QA for a while.
Arrived - June 24
Processing Started - June 30
Grading Started - July 13
Assembly - August 3
,
,
,
,
I see I'm not the only one wondering what logic is being used internally
I sent someone internally a short email. Asking what the logic is behind your statement ( and my own experiences) , and WHO internally bears responsibility for understanding order processing flows, how to determine bottlenecks, and how to fix them so business runs smoother. So that they don't pop orders from 10 minutes ago for customers and - oh I don't know- concentrate on getting them back their 16 month old subs ??
Let's just say the person I contacted has been very helpful in hooking me up professionally with appropriate internal staff so we can work together and resolve customer based issues such as this
Order 1 below- mailed Feb 2021, entered April 2021-- cost $15
Order 2 below- mailed July 2022, entered July 2022 3 days after receipt- cost $18
Just so the backgrounds understood
,
,
,
>
@MarshallFaulk28 said:
I just had a Value order hit Assembly today. They must be doing well on the backlog because I thought these were supposed to only be completed when that was done. Maybe it will sit in Assembly or QA for a while.
Arrived - June 24
Processing Started - June 30
Grading Started - July 13
Assembly - August 3
,
,
,
,
I see I'm not the only one wondering what logic is being used internally
I sent someone internally a short email. Asking what the logic is behind your statement ( and my own experiences) , and WHO internally bears responsibility for understanding order processing flows, how to determine bottlenecks, and how to fix them so business runs smoother. So that they don't pop orders from 10 minutes ago for customers and - oh I don't know- concentrate on getting them back their 16 month old subs ??
Let's just say the person I contacted has been very helpful in hooking me up professionally with appropriate internal staff so we can work together and resolve customer based issues such as this
Order 1 below- mailed Feb 2021, entered April 2021-- cost $15
Order 2 below- mailed July 2022, entered July 2022 3 days after receipt- cost $18
Just so the backgrounds understood
,
,
,
>
>
Wow, yours is even a Special that has reached Assembly already?
Please do share if you learn anything from your contact. I’d be very interested how they explain things. I totally get if someone is paying for the premium, very costly service levels and get their cards back quickly. Even the $50 service. However, if we’re seeing new value orders and specials breeze past the remaining backlog, something is not right there operationally.
Comments
Not bad at all but only 2 10’s?!?just seems like it’s getting harder and harder to get 10’s. in my prior submissions, I typically get 1 10 per submission, and only one.
Psa grading has become harsh and are losing customers. I hope they know what they are doing
That's a great sub. Nice!
Bosox1976
Those are great 9s! I'd take any of those in a second. Those Munsons and Parker are sweet pulls.
These days if you're getting 9s on mid-70s then you're winning. That's a beautiful list. I'm hitting a ton of 8s on my 70s, but not a lot of 9s.
I've been doing the fine combing of my recent submittals too, and still get the occasional 5 or 6. I've been trying to eliminate those but they keep happening.
Norcal - 1 to 2 tens in a 500 card sub is typical for me. There have been subs in the past where I got a dozen or so tens but those are definitely the exception and not the rule. This sub did have more 80s cards than I typically submit, so maybe it should have had more tens. However, in today's environment, I'll take these grades any day of the week.
There used to be ONE "Grader of Death". Now there seems to be many, many, G.O.D. and every once in a while one that did an OK job.
After all the horror stories I have read, I was pleasantly surprised. However, that is a subjective observation. Objectively, I don't think I have ever received an order that met my expectations more accurately than this one. After opening the package I looked carefully at each item under a lighted loupe and was simply amazed at the accuracy of these grades, with only an exception or two.
Submission #10530163
Arrived 02/18/21
Date Received 04/10/21
Date Shipped 07/19/22
1999 PADRES MADD STEVE GARVEY EX 5
1986 SPORTS CARDS PADRES POSTCARD PLAYER COMPOSITE VG-EX 4
1981 GARVEY GAFLINE STEVE GARVEY NM 7
1974 VENEZUELAN TIGRES TEAM PHOTO GD 2
1986 DONRUSS ALL-STARS 3 STEVE GARVEY EX-MT 6
1986 DONRUSS ALL-STARS 50 DON MATTINGLY MINT 9
1972 TOPPS 132 JOE MORGAN MINT 9
1973 TOPPS 255 REGGIE JACKSON NM 7
1975 TOPPS 308 R.B.I. LEADERS JEFF BURROUGHS/JOHNNY BENCH MINT 9
1976 TOPPS 95 BROOKS ROBINSON NM 7
1976 TOPPS 95 BROOKS ROBINSON NM-MT 8
1976 TOPPS 95 BROOKS ROBINSON NM-MT 8
1976 TOPPS 95 BROOKS ROBINSON NM-MT 8
1976 TOPPS 150 STEVE GARVEY MINT 9
1976 TOPPS 201 NL ERA LEADERS JONES/MESSERSMITH/SEAVER NM 7
1976 TOPPS 203 NL STRIKEOUT LDRS. SEAVER/MONTEFUSCO/MESSERSMITH NM-MT 8
1976 TOPPS 365 CARLTON FISK MINT 9
1976 TOPPS 420 JOE MORGAN MINT 9
1976 TOPPS 420 JOE MORGAN MINT 9
1976 TOPPS 420 JOE MORGAN NM-MT 8
1976 TOPPS 420 JOE MORGAN MINT 9
1976 TOPPS 420 JOE MORGAN MINT 9
1976 TOPPS 420 JOE MORGAN NM-MT 8
1977 O-PEE-CHEE 143 ROD CAREW NM-MT 8
1977 O-PEE-CHEE 255 STEVE GARVEY NM 7
1979 O-PEE-CHEE 167 GEORGE BRETT NM-MT 8
1979 TOPPS 418 ALL-TIME ERA LEADER D.LEONARD/W.JOHNSON NM-MT 8
1979 TOPPS 700 REGGIE JACKSON NM-MT 8
1979 TOPPS 700 REGGIE JACKSON MINT 9
1981-93 LOUISVILLE SLUGGER PEDRO GUERRERO DODGERS EX-MT 6
1981-93 LOUISVILLE SLUGGER OREL HERSHISER DODGERS EX-MT 6
1981-93 LOUISVILLE SLUGGER FRED LYNN ANGELS EX-MT 6
1981-93 LOUISVILLE SLUGGER ERIC DAVIS REDS NM 7
1981-93 LOUISVILLE SLUGGER STEVE GARVEY DODGERS NM 7
1982 FLEER 176 CAL RIPKEN JR. MINT 9
1982 FLEER 405 GEORGE BRETT MINT 9
1982 ON DECK COOKIES DISCS STEVE GARVEY MINT 9
1983 TCMA ALBUQUERQUE DUKES 3 OREL HERSHISER MINT 9
1984 TOPPS 8 DON MATTINGLY MINT 9
1984 TOPPS 8 DON MATTINGLY MINT 9
1984 TOPPS 8 DON MATTINGLY MINT 9
1987 INSIDE BASEBALL SAN DIEGO PADRES STEVE GARVEY NM-MT 8
1987 INSIDE BASEBALL SAN DIEGO PADRES JERRY COLEMAN NM-MT 8
1987 INSIDE BASEBALL SAN DIEGO PADRES STEVE GARVEY/DOUGLAS ALLRED NM-MT 8
1987 MOTHER'S COOKIES DODGERS 4 FERNANDO VALENZUELA MINT 9
1987 MOTHER'S COOKIES DODGERS 6 OREL HERSHISER NM-MT 8
1988 VENEZUELAN LEAGUE STICKERS 14 DAVE CONCEPCION VG 3
I got my sub back today. Looking at some of the lowest graded cards, it definitely looks like some damage happened. They had obvious bends which formed light creases across the surface. They were easy to see in the holder and I would never miss something that obvious let alone a dozen or so of them. Fortunately none of those were high value cards. There also seemed to be some 1975s that were graded low which look like they were soaked. Again, obvious damage I would have detected. Maybe I dodged a bullet but overall I'm quite happy and relieved with this sub.
I don't know how on earth they ding cards up so bad and so often...I can't even imagine how it would be happening so much but they're flat out beating them up on a regular basis. I am pretty sure it's physically impossible to have a curled up corner when it's been sandwiched I'm a card saver for over a year, or so I thought anyway. You tell me, maybe physics are deceiving but I would have to see to believe frankly...
I got a few back like this…
Bosox1976
Have a modern $30 per card order that was entered 6/13 that just moved from Grading to Assembly. That surprised me. Would have rather had the $50 per card order sent just a little earlier and insured at about 3x higher value go there but I cant complain and am glad to see the movement.
That's ridiculous!
c;mon...seriously?
Wow I can't believe the corner on your Ryan. NO ONE would have submitted it like that. Did the grade reflect that ding?
Gretzky,Ripken, and Sandberg collection. Still trying to complete 1975 Topps baseball set from when I was a kid.
Got back my last submission-- vintage cards. One Basketball rookie was miscut (not sure what constitutes that- certainly more noticeable on the back, I guess).
Here are some conclusions, based on all my submissions mainly early to mid 1980s, some 70s, only 1 1990 card----totaled around 300 cards- I got TWO (2) PSA 10s: (They came in same sub).
1) I put too much insurance (estimated value). The only thing that I guess would be ok with it, is that they sat in storage somewhere almost a year and a half--so they could have been lost. Probably let PSA give you an upcharge notice, which is a good extra, especially if you are selling.
2) Star cards of one year versus more common (semi-star) cards of the same year are graded more harshly (pop control?) I remember watching a youtube video on this topic, which also compared where specific cards are located on auncut sheet.
3) Monotonous grading patterns exist in higher quantity submissions. (If the PSA 5s or 6's start, many will be like that).
Case in point, a number of my 1971 Topps cards were graded 3s. Some had dinged corners, the rookie card (without soft corners and had nice black borders) received the same grade.
4) Many cards are 1-2 grades lower than expected- just got to anticipate it. This also made many cards not worth grading--cost (slab, fees, insurance, postage) outweighed value.
5) Subgrades (ala Beckett) would eliminate some of the questioning of grades--would answer why card fell short of a specific grade(s).
6) One person verifying and grading cello packs (even if he is generally right), is not a good thing. Should be competition in the marketplace. In baseball more HP umpire mistakes are made calling strikes outside the strikezone (should have been a ball), than incorrectly calling balls for pitches inside the zone. Same with packs. Outside of the great Pokemon error, I would tend to think more packs are called invalid which are actually legit, than deciding a pack is valid, when it isn't.
7) I imagine some of the higher tech/automating grading cards will be more valued down the road taking out the human element. (Similar to the roboumps working their way up to the majors in baseball).
8) Will there be 2 sets of price guides (PSA pre-pandemic and current)? Will we see higher premiums paid for a HOF PSA 8 just graded, then a PSA of the same player/card year graded several years ago?
9) If I were just starting a collection now (rather than paring down and selling most of it) I would buy cards already graded. I would only submit raw, if I got the raw card for a good price and saw it in person, not online.
That's it. I have really enjoyed reading posts on this forum, and having all of you share pictures of your treasures!
Gretzky,Ripken, and Sandberg collection. Still trying to complete 1975 Topps baseball set from when I was a kid.
I've gotten three subs back since I last posted, and they all had some of the most accurate grades I've received in a long time. Decent 10 ratio, fair grades on vintage, no cards rejected for mysterious reasons, and auto grades have been 100% spot on. Maybe luck or maybe the new graders are hitting their stride, but I'm content. Turnaround times have been as stated or faster.
Fair grades on vintage, 100% spot on auto grades, decent 10 ratio and turnaround times as stated or faster.........you should go out right now and purchase a lottery ticket. I'm serious. I don't think 1 person has stated these compliments in 2 years about the grading and service. "Congrats"
I hope you're right that new graders are hitting their strides, because I'm done subbing vintage until the prices come down/card. At $18 it's still a stretch when you only get 5-7s back with some 8s and an occasional 9. If they'd get back to $12 then I'd really send some in.
I won't send anymore at $30/card with vintage. I'll just let them stack and wait for special deals.
Wow.
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
I’ve always wished PSA would offer sub grades. It would definitely take a lot of the uncertainty out of why some cards that we think are 9’s come back as 7’s. Tell us WHY !!!
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
My 2 swinging sixties from mid April 21 hasn’t moved off 4 in like 8 months. It’s been so long I have to keep checking time to time to remember what I sent
My Swinging 60's is finally in assembly.
Bosox1976
Are you talking about the cards or you submitted these in the Vietnam era ??? At least you're still kicking. Good luck with the sub Mike.
Not to rain on your parade, but next Thursday my Value submission (that they received in March, 2021) will have been in Assembly for 3 months.
As Charles Barkley says.... Turrible!
Bosox1976
Yeah, well prior to these last two orders (easily over 1000 in the last 20 years) I had never once had an entire order come back without a single 10 and you already know...2 straight. I musta forgot how to grade cards, makes perfect sense. This is why I send in 20ish ct orders so when an a***ole gets a hold of one I don't watch as much money burn in flames. Btw, we're talking mid 90's stuff here . i literally chuckled when I saw the results because it is laughable and obviously ridiculous
With all of the dings and dents and surprisingly low grades we've seen recently, I've started to scan all of my cards before I submit them. At least this way I have a baseline idea what they looked like before I shipped them. Does anyone else do this?
For my 3 orders I’ve submitted to PSA recently, I took 10 pictures of each card before sending. I think we can’t be too careful.
Also, in the event I don’t get my cards back before we make a full revolution around the Sun, I can at least see what my cards looked like.
Down to my last order in the great backlog. This one was entered on 4/20/21 and was the smallest of all of the ones I had sent. Hope that one clears soon. Then it's all new activity for me.
,
,
,
The two bolded popped. The others are over 300 business days old
You had a vintage pop and a modern pop. You have vintage and modern still in grading. What pattern am I supposed to notice????
,
,
,
,
Pattern = lowest cost subs
24 card value vintage submission
Only 2 cards graded as expected.
3 came back as miscut or questionable authenticity.
The rest came back 2-3 grades lower than expected. I am glad I decided not to send anything in during their “special”. Long time to wait for a Disappointment. I have one value vintage submission left (1 card of mine, the rest are my brothers). I also have 2 cards left and they are cards that were damaged at their facility. It’ll be while(if ever) before I throw away my money with PSA. It seems like they have much to figure out.
almost hitting 18 months since receipt on the last order ........ tick tock. lol
Had some cards sent to SGC, received 7/15 and had the grades pop today.
eBay Store
Greg Maddux #1 Master SetGreg Maddux #2 Basic Set
As I said earlier, overall I was happy with my order. However, a handful of cards were damaged, including surface creases that are easy to see even in the holder. The Stargell below probably would have been a 9 like the other two I submitted except for the surface crease running through the 'A' in Stargell and up his left leg. The creased cards had the damage in the same general area at the bottom middle of the card. This leads me to believe that they were likely damaged during order prep when they were still in their cardsavers and stacked together.
I have some top notch cards still pending in other orders and am concerned about them surviving the process unscathed. I fear some may already be damaged if it is occurring during order prep as they are past that phase in the grading process.
Sorry for the glare. It's the only way I could get the crease to show in the photo.
This feeling of dread that cards will be damaged comes with every order I submit now. It's justified as well because I have yet to receive one order back in the last couple years that didn't include some form of damage. I too have seen that similar creasing done to one of my cards, albeit it was running horizontally but in the same area.
Just had these grades pop. For the most part, the grades are pretty awful. It's just frustrating because it can be so inconsistent. I sent in 4 Nestle Mattinglys a few months ago and got 3 10s and 1 9. Now 4 8s and 1 7. They really don't look that different. And you can tell after you see those first couple grades that popped that you got the grader of death and it's not going to be your day. I mean it could have been a lot worse. Somehow middle of the order the strictness seemed to lift and I got some awesome 10s. I love the Skyridge Holo Machamp in a 10. I love that Ohtani Chrome with the 83 Topps design in a 10. I can't get enough Kaprizovs in a 10. The 95 Finest Refractor Mattinglys as 8s feels silly. Centered and free of print lines with sharp corners. Last one I submitted that was similar was a 9 and felt like it could have been a 10. All in all, I didn't get killed. Just not good business. It just doesn't seem like a worthwhile venture to acquire these cards and get them graded by PSA if this strictness is going to continue. I probably lost money in terms of what my costs were and what I got back. Have 3 more orders in and that might be it for me. At $30 per card and $18 per card. I hope to see better than this but even if I do, I don't know if I want to make the investment to potentially get this inconsistency. Think I will stop the buying raw cards game and opening packs and just buy graded cards where I don't have to wait and hold my breath and hope they see it the same way I do and probably won't. This one was $50 a card so I guess if it was a lower fee it might not have seemed so bad. I was just really encouraged by another order I received back at $50 a card which were close to the best grades I have ever seen, even surpassing my expectations. It's clear this person and that person see the way cards should be graded in a very different way. I can't help but feel that makes this whole exercise kind of pointless and not something that really holds much value.
Line # Item # Cert # Grade Description Type
1 1 65739961 NEAR MINT 7 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 8 Don Mattingly Card
2 1 65739962 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 8 Don Mattingly Card
3 1 65739963 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 8 Don Mattingly Card
4 1 65739964 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 8 Don Mattingly Card
5 1 65739965 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 8 Don Mattingly Card
6 1 65739966 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 182 Darryl Strawberry Card
7 1 65739967 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 182 Darryl Strawberry Card
8 1 65739968 NEAR MINT 7 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 596 Ryne Sandberg Card
9 1 65739969 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 300 Pete Rose Card
10 1 65739970 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 230 Rickey Henderson Card
11 1 65739971 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1984 Topps Nestle Hand Cut 490 Cal Ripken Jr. Card
12 1 65739972 MINT 9 1994 Stadium Club Bowman's Best 12 Brett Favre Black Refractor Card
13 1 65739973 MINT 9 1994 Stadium Club Bowman's Best 12 Brett Favre Black Refractor Card
14 1 65739974 MINT 9 2019 Topps Chrome 201 Vladimir Guerrero Jr. Card
15 1 65739975 GEM MINT 10 2019 Topps Chrome 201 Vladimir Guerrero Jr. Card
16 1 65739976 GEM MINT 10 2018 Topps Silver Pack 1983 Chrome Promo 145 Shohei Ohtani Card
17 1 65739977 GEM MINT 10 2018 Topps Chrome Update HMT1 Shohei Ohtani Card
18 1 65739978 MINT 9 2019 Upper Deck 201 Jack Hughes Card
19 1 65739979 GEM MINT 10 2020 Upper Deck 451 Kirill Kaprizov Card
20 1 65739980 GEM MINT 10 2019 Panini Prizm 249 Ja Morant Card
21 1 65739981 GEM MINT 10 2021 Metazoo Cryptid Nation 4 Bigfoot-Holo 1st Edition Card
22 1 65739982 GEM MINT 10 2021 Metazoo Cryptid Nation 4 Bigfoot-Holo 1st Edition Card
23 1 65739983 GEM MINT 10 2021 Metazoo Cryptid Nation 4 Bigfoot-Holo 1st Edition Card
24 1 65739984 GEM MINT 10 2003 Pokemon Skyridge H15 Machamp-Holo Card
25 1 65739985 MINT 9 2021 Pokemon Sword & Shield Evolving Skies 180 Full Art/Espeon V Card
26 1 65739986 MINT 9 2021 Pokemon Sword & Shield Evolving Skies 196 Full Art/Noivern V Card
27 1 65739987 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1995 Finest 126 Don Mattingly Refractor Card
28 1 65739988 NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1995 Finest 126 Don Mattingly Refractor Card
Or maybe I just need to never submit another 1984 Topps Nestle card or anything 95 or earlier again. Definitely am feeling some modern love here so maybe there is a little room to continue in that direction. Funny to say I feel good about Bigfoot. I might have overpaid on the fee but love that Ja too. Thought it was lost in the mail after purchasing on eBay and then one day like half a year later there it was.
I may just keep my cards raw after the last 2 submissions. Can’t find myself just buying graded either. Not sure that I want to keep supporting such an inconsistent method of grading. Also bothers me that their is no way to give any input. I feel that complaints would just fall upon deaf ears. How do they actually know if every grader is using the same standards. I think most agree that only one grader sees each card.
Nice on the Skyridge Holo 10!
Bosox1976
Thanks Bosox.
I only submit 85 and older, and am mostly done with any of that. I have a bunch built up over the shutdown, and then that's that. PSA has effectively fired this customer.
I will NEVER submit anything at $30/card again, because it seems the best you should expect is an 8 with an occasional 9 on those years. That's very tough to make work financially if you're chasing packs, etc... It's even tough at $18/card.
I also only buy graded now because at least I know what the grade is.
I was "selected" to take part in an anonymous survey this past month. The last part of the survey was a blank screen to give input or whatever. I wrote a nice long page about how I didn't care about the turn around times, or the costs so much as a reason to not submit, but my issue as to why I stopped submitting was the inconsistency issue with vintage that has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum and with my own experiences. Figured that was my shot that those comments would actually get read and passed on, so I took it.
Is it even possible to ask for your cards back? I submitted 145 at $18 for 95 and earlier. Its at level 3 Research. Just felt like at that price it was a value but not sure its worth taking the chance that one of these tons of people they hired that like to grade cards 2 or 3 grades lower gets their hands on it. Felt like at $50 a card I might have gotten one of the better more experienced graders but it was a bad gamble. I am hoping that now that they divided it up between 95 and earlier and 96 to current, the people on 95 and earlier know how to grade older cards the way they have been graded in the past. But probably not worth taking that chance. I could maybe throw 20 out there here and there to test the waters if there was a special. If the first sub is bad, just close the book on that idea. Have some modern stuff there that I would probably just want to let play out.
Unfortunately you don’t know if the graded 7 card you are buying is a 7 or a 5 or it could even be an 8. That also still drives up the price of PSA graded cards. As a collector, I also don’t like how you you can submit cards through Golden Auctions to be graded through PSA and sold at auction. That seems pretty shady to me. I would guess that those cards may get a bump in the opposite direction that most of ours have gotten. May not happen but the fact it’s a possibility makes me feel uneasy.
just be careful when "buying the grade" -- no matter the company doing the grading, cards get graded incorrectly or get holdered with damage, etc...buy the card and not so much the holder
Oh, I get it, but it's still a more definitive condition than trying to determine raw at this point.
I just had a Value order hit Assembly today. They must be doing well on the backlog because I thought these were supposed to only be completed when that was done. Maybe it will sit in Assembly or QA for a while.
Arrived - June 24
Processing Started - June 30
Grading Started - July 13
Assembly - August 3
,
,
,
,
I see I'm not the only one wondering what logic is being used internally
I sent someone internally a short email. Asking what the logic is behind your statement ( and my own experiences) , and WHO internally bears responsibility for understanding order processing flows, how to determine bottlenecks, and how to fix them so business runs smoother. So that they don't pop orders from 10 minutes ago for customers and - oh I don't know- concentrate on getting them back their 16 month old subs ??
Let's just say the person I contacted has been very helpful in hooking me up professionally with appropriate internal staff so we can work together and resolve customer based issues such as this
Order 1 below- mailed Feb 2021, entered April 2021-- cost $15
Order 2 below- mailed July 2022, entered July 2022 3 days after receipt- cost $18
Just so the backgrounds understood
,
,
,
>
Wow, yours is even a Special that has reached Assembly already?
Please do share if you learn anything from your contact. I’d be very interested how they explain things. I totally get if someone is paying for the premium, very costly service levels and get their cards back quickly. Even the $50 service. However, if we’re seeing new value orders and specials breeze past the remaining backlog, something is not right there operationally.