Doesn't PSA have a repurchase policy? I seem to recall hearing that if you ask them to review an already-graded card and they decide they overgraded, they'll buy it from you for SMR price. Was I high, or do they just not do that anymore? If they do, seems like an easy $279 for someone.
WANTED: 2005 Origins Old Judge Brown #/20 and Black 1/1s, 2000 Ultimate Victory Gold #/25 2004 UD Legends Bake McBride autos & parallels, and 1974 Topps #601 PSA 9 Rare Grady Sizemore parallels, printing plates, autographs
Sorry ctsoxfan but i honestly feel that anyone who thinks this was a perk is being foolish and my theory was just backed up by the submitter on these boards he had no friend in the grading room as was suggested so i guess i was right it was a mistake not an intentional overgrade and just because some have a perception of widespread shennanigans going on does not make it so. i suggest you arrange a visit to psa i think you would be suprised at how the operation actually works.
I believe you are correct helionaut but they will not buy it back from the submitter, though i have heard of them giving some compensation for a submitters honesty, they expect them (the submitter) to note a drastic mistake and be honest and return it.
I had a card that me, two guys who frequent the local card shop (who are big submitters), and the card shop owner (also a big submitter) looked over and all four of us agreed it was an easy PSA 10. The card comes back a 7.
If I ever had PSA make a mistake where it would benefit me I'd take the opportunity too...who would return it???
All of us who get lower grade mistakes can't return them...so why should higher grade mistakes be returned.
PSA wants honesty if we spot an obvious mistake...I don't think if I tell them about my shoula-beena-ten 7 they're gonna care too much about honesty.
I have returned a card already that was overgraded significantly and i know of 2 major dealers who have done the same thing. i to have gotten screwed over on grades but that didnt mean i wanted to screw over someone else who was innocent( by selling them an obviously overgraded card) so i turned it in and yes i got a few free grades this was around 1999 when Rocchi was still incharge i dont know how Joe handles these things but i am sure he is reasonable.
Boopots, I only read as far as your post, but that's all I was going to say. Just an obvious input error that slipped through the cracks. It's a shame it happens, but it does. No crack-smoking, just a mistake. What's really a shame is that people will pay upwards of 50 bucks for a label.
Point taken, glynparson. I want very much to believe in the integrity of the PSA process anyway, since I have a lot invested in my PSA collection (and more every day!). If I possibly could, I would definitely take that trip to PSA to see how the grading process really occurs.
<< <i>2.) you have 18 others of the same card, why list this one given the obvious ramifications. even though you are an upstanding honest seller it does not make you look that way. it looks like you are trying to take advantage. >>
<< <i>my 2 cents, you state that you are a collector, as a collector and knowing all the bs that goes on in the market place, i would have kept that card and got it corrected instead of opening up the potential for someone else to defraud another collector. >>
That about sums it up for me; well stated, pack collector. Why open the door to the buyer reselling this card in a scan-less Ebay auction in a few weeks or so? Watch for that to happen.
I'll agree to disagree. You can't be held accountable for who buys the card and what they plan to do with it. If I ever bought a card with no scan I would request some info ie. centering, corners, surface. This thing could be debated on many different aspects.
I once sent in a 1948 Bowman Rizzuto that had a small tear in it. It was a slam-dunk PSA 1, but I wanted it graded for protection only. Lo and behold the card came back an 8! An 8 with a tear in it! Some of you may remember how I posted the scan of it here and the whole saga. In the end I sent it back for proper holdering because PSA offered me a pretty good deal. If I was unscrupulous I could have given it to a buddy and had him complain to PSA that he spent $800 on an 8 that was torn, then split the proceeds.
I felt that the slabber mistook the card number, #8, for the grade. But who knows what could have happened.
I tend to think that mistakes such as my Rizzuto, and the OC Clemente, force PSA to take a hard look at their quality control and hopefully make the necessary changes. If mistakes like these were rampant then the industry would be dead by now.
<< <i>I mentioned the SMR for a 9 as a reference point, not as a claim that this card was worth that. >>
PSA10fan - I'm not trying to pile on this, but why did you use an EXCLAMATION MARK in quoting the SMR - ! - that seemed to put HYPE in what you were presenting and could be misleading. Also, I agree that this item can cause more bad than good based on what other people might do with it. I am also a collector and want to see the hobby grow. I'm stating my two cents and in no way am I responding to get under your skin. This is a great bunch of people at the PSA boards and I think their passion speaks for itselt - I believe they just care. Mike
<< <i>If mistakes like these were rampant then the industry would be dead by now. >>
JRINCK - Correct! Dispite what many PSA-haters say, these mistakes are few and far between. This (Clemente oc) wasn't the 1st mistake, nor will it be the last. But when 6 million+ cards have been graded, we are talking about such a minimal #....jay
Jay I can't express how much I agree with that - ya know, when I used to buy raw cards, even from someone I liked and trusted, it was like a crap shoot, shuttling cards back and forth from the post office. With a scan and PSA behind it, I buy with confidence!!! Mike
<< <i>6 million+ cards have been graded, we are talking about such a minimal #.... >>
I bet there are a lot of mistakes out there. It's just people won't report them. Sure they might not be as obvious as this off centered card but I've seen PSA 8's bump up to PSA 10's. Now why would I tell PSA this or try returning the card? Plenty of people make good cash off graded card bumping (resubmitting for higher grades).
As for this card....I would have listed it the exact same way.... PSA 9 with the SMR in bold....people like making money and if PSA screwed up on this card they should have caught it when they were grading it. Everyone makes mistakes but these little mistakes can cost/make people thousands of dollars.
I tend to agree that it is just a mistake, but considering the scan shown of the card does not show the entire edges of the slab are we absolutely sure it was not switched in the slab (ala Wigwag) ?? Have we seen other photos or know for sure? (just curious)
BKAH, Plain and simple, it' a labeling mistake. To replace a 'true' 9 with this OC example would be totally stupid, not to mention dishonest. I can't see a seller with his record even thinking that.
Look, we all know it's an OC and so does the seller and the rest of the world. What is a little suspect is that it's advertising infers that things are a-ok-SMR-$335-!. The lack of any nugget of info in the description that things aren't just all huncky-dory with the centering is what curls my eyebrow.
That's the main problem, BOTR...and I agree. To trumpet this in your listing by saying SMR $335! is a con, as any collector knows this card is not worth even a fraction of that. Just because PSA may have made a mistake here, why try to take advantage of someone else because of it? The card obviously doesn't belong in that holder, so don't try to pass it off like it does. The cost to your reputation as a seller would be too high for me to pay, certainly. Any collector who says they would sell and market this card exactly like this seller sold this one is immediately suspect, IMO.
look, if he wanted to he could have used photoshop to give the card perfect centering and change the cert # and then said "you are bidding on X psa 9 card, I have 3 of them in my collection, you may not receive the same exact one pictured"
and he would have gotten away with it because the buyer did get what they bid on and were warned that they might not get the exact one pictured
I think he was perfectly honest, if bidders don't look at scans and/or use the "ask seller a question" button if they are questioning something then they shouldn't be bidding
Big Kid- You simply have no idea what you are talking about. Do you know who the seller is? Bob is one of the nicest guys in this hobby. Take a look at his eBay store....he has a world class collection. Why on earth would you even bring up WIWAG regarding this card everyone knows it is not an issue.
This seller is as straight forward as they come. The grade on the label is what it is. The auction came with a big fat scan and all potential buyers could judge for themselves. Who knows.....to some getting a straight 9 can help them improve their registry GPA. Some people value that more than the aesthetics of the card itself. To each their own. The picture in the auction enabled all to decide for themselves. What more can anyone ask for?
Bob- Did you check the cards before and after this one in your submission to see if PSA accidentally put the straight 9 that belonged in this holder in one of the OC holders?
Thats what we dont know (when it comes to finding out what kind of error this was). We dont know if this card was not labeled properly or if they put the wrong card(s) in the wrong holder(s) as there were so many cards in succession that were similar.
And I think I would be in the same boat as some of the others. If there is a picture included, I could care less what the description says. If your bid is swayed simply by what the seller says it might be worth, then you are in trouble to begin with.
If there wasnt a picture, then thats a different story. But in this case there was.
Bob has Set Registry Hall of Fame recognition and would be one of the last people whose integrity I would question.
Thanks Basilone and Cubfan for your kind comments.
It comes down to this. PSA made a mistake, and I too made a mistake in listing the card. As John indicated, if I had to do it over again, I would not have listed the card. I recognize that it adds to the fuel of those who expect PSA to be perfect. They are not perfect, and I am not a perfect human being. For those of you who feel that I mishandled this, please accept my sincere apologies.
If you want to check the rest of this submission, the number was 4104874 and the zip code is 91750.
Again, as I mentioned before, I mentioned the SMR (with an exclamation mark) not in any attempt to indicate that this card had that value, but as a reference point for bidding on the card as it actually appeared in the scan. I realize, now, that that was misleading to some as to my intentions, and I apologize for that.
Thanks, again, to those of you who know me and have attested to my honesty. I regret that the way I handled this created any doubt in anyone's mind. One's reputation is worth far more than any amount of money.
psa10fan I, for one, made a comment about the ad, and am now MORE than confident that you are an honest and trusted ebay seller and retract my incredulous remarks. I am getting to know Basilone and trust him in turn. I apologize, after the fact, if I have added to any anxiety on your part. I will continue, like others, to critically look at things but when wrong, am not affraid to say so. Mike
Thanks, Mike (Stone193). Your comments are greatly appreciated. As you pointed out, I have a great ebay reputation with over 2000 positive feedbacks and no negatives ever. I regret that this listing cast any doubt on that record. It is VERY hard to get 2000 feedbacks with no negatives.
You're a class guy, and I hope we have a chance to help each other with our collections. John Basilone is one of the nicest guys I've met on ebay. He actually quit collecting one of his sets to help me out with mine on the set registry. A truly unselfish guy.
I'm currently working to upgrade my 1969, 1970 and 71 Topps Supers sets. Also I need 2 cards in the 1970 Milton Bradley set to have it in all 10s. Check them out on the set registry.
As I was reading the thread, all I was thinking was ... man, it sucks to be you. Nothing like being outted on the boards for a judgement call. I was glad to see you come onto the thread to acknowledge it, and take the thrashings from all of the saints on the board.
It would be interesting to know how many cards PSA has gotten back in all of their years.... from collectors that feel the card was overgraded and would like it adjusted down a few grades. I bet you could count them on a couple of hands.
Yea, in hind site you probably could have done something differently.... but it's hard to say what each of us would do, until we are faced with this exact same scenario. A couple of millimeters more on that boarder... and this would have been a non-issue.
So now everyone has learned what they should do if this happens to them.... right?
I just hope my next PSA package doesn't contain any "gifts" or "errors".
Thanks, Mike (shouldabeena10). I appreciate your support. To be philosophical for a moment, I always wonder why, with all the serious problems in our world, that some people choose to be so negative and cynical about things that are supposed to be fun, even to the point of attributing dishonest motives to people where none were intended. I've seen it repeatedly on the message boards, people accusing other people of things with no information. Why can't we all be more like Jim Crandall and use our hobby for something good like honoring the life of Phil Messomore, a good human being and friend?
Kobe, Thanks for your reply. I respect your viewpoint. Hope you and I can get better acquainted in the future if the opportunity presents itself to help each other with our collections. Best wishes. Bob
Bob, You are right in that this board can be brutal at times. However, I do believe some very good information and concerns come through these boards, although not in the most congenial way sometimes. Most of the time it's for the betterment of the hobby, but it does have it's moments.............
I think there's lessons learned here for all of us. Not only this Clemente card, but in many others as well.
Your candor in responding to all is appreciated and I know for one that I will be more than happy to do business with you in the future.
Thanks, Bill. I'm one who likes to have harmony in my life, not discord. I appreciate your positive attitude. Hope to do business with you in the future. Best to you! Bob
Absolutely-- it has to be a mistake. In fact, I think we can fairly confident of that now, given PSA10's post.
Also, and I hate to bring this up again, but I'm getting sick of the idea that volume submitters get these monstrous breaks on their submissions in the grading room. I don't know where these rumors started, but I'll bet donuts to holes that whoever first gave this idea currency had never met a volume submitter, and therefore didn't understand how they operate.
Comments
2005 Origins Old Judge Brown #/20 and Black 1/1s, 2000 Ultimate Victory Gold #/25
2004 UD Legends Bake McBride autos & parallels, and 1974 Topps #601 PSA 9
Rare Grady Sizemore parallels, printing plates, autographs
Nothing on ebay
I had a card that me, two guys who frequent the local card shop (who are big submitters), and the card shop owner (also a big submitter) looked over and all four of us agreed it was an easy PSA 10. The card comes back a 7.
If I ever had PSA make a mistake where it would benefit me I'd take the opportunity too...who would return it???
All of us who get lower grade mistakes can't return them...so why should higher grade mistakes be returned.
PSA wants honesty if we spot an obvious mistake...I don't think if I tell them about my shoula-beena-ten 7 they're gonna care too much about honesty.
I only read as far as your post, but that's all I was going to say. Just an obvious input error that slipped through the cracks. It's a shame it happens, but it does. No crack-smoking, just a mistake. What's really a shame is that people will pay upwards of 50 bucks for a label.
dgf
<< <i>2.) you have 18 others of the same card, why list this one given the obvious ramifications. even though you are an upstanding honest seller it does not make you look that way. it looks like you are trying to take advantage. >>
<< <i>my 2 cents, you state that you are a collector, as a collector and knowing all the bs that goes on in the market place, i would have kept that card and got it corrected instead of opening up the potential for someone else to defraud another collector. >>
That about sums it up for me; well stated, pack collector. Why open the door to the buyer reselling this card in a scan-less Ebay auction in a few weeks or so? Watch for that to happen.
I felt that the slabber mistook the card number, #8, for the grade. But who knows what could have happened.
I tend to think that mistakes such as my Rizzuto, and the OC Clemente, force PSA to take a hard look at their quality control and hopefully make the necessary changes. If mistakes like these were rampant then the industry would be dead by now.
<< <i>I mentioned the SMR for a 9 as a reference point, not as a claim that this card was worth that. >>
PSA10fan - I'm not trying to pile on this, but why did you use an EXCLAMATION MARK in quoting the SMR - ! - that seemed to put HYPE in what you were presenting and could be misleading. Also, I agree that this item can cause more bad than good based on what other people might do with it. I am also a collector and want to see the hobby grow. I'm stating my two cents and in no way am I responding to get under your skin. This is a great bunch of people at the PSA boards and I think their passion speaks for itselt - I believe they just care.
Mike
<< <i>If mistakes like these were rampant then the industry would be dead by now. >>
JRINCK - Correct!
Dispite what many PSA-haters say, these mistakes are few and far between. This (Clemente oc) wasn't the 1st mistake, nor will it be the last. But when 6 million+ cards have been graded, we are talking about such a minimal #....jay
Website: http://www.qualitycards.com
I can't express how much I agree with that - ya know, when I used to buy raw cards, even from someone I liked and trusted, it was like a crap shoot, shuttling cards back and forth from the post office. With a scan and PSA behind it, I buy with confidence!!!
Mike
<< <i>6 million+ cards have been graded, we are talking about such a minimal #.... >>
I bet there are a lot of mistakes out there. It's just people won't report them. Sure they might not be as obvious as this off centered card but I've seen PSA 8's bump up to PSA 10's. Now why would I tell PSA this or try returning the card? Plenty of people make good cash off graded card bumping (resubmitting for higher grades).
As for this card....I would have listed it the exact same way.... PSA 9 with the SMR in bold....people like making money and if PSA screwed up on this card they should have caught it when they were grading it. Everyone makes mistakes but these little mistakes can cost/make people thousands of dollars.
but considering the scan shown of the card
does not show the entire edges of the slab
are we absolutely sure it was not switched
in the slab (ala Wigwag) ??
Have we seen other photos or know for sure?
(just curious)
Plain and simple, it' a labeling mistake. To replace a 'true' 9 with this OC example would be totally stupid, not to mention dishonest. I can't see a seller with his record even thinking that.
Look, we all know it's an OC and so does the seller and the rest of the world. What is a little suspect is that it's advertising infers that things are a-ok-SMR-$335-!. The lack of any nugget of info in the description that things aren't just all huncky-dory with the centering is what curls my eyebrow.
BOTR
But, I guess I am an idealist at heart...
look, if he wanted to he could have used photoshop to give the card perfect centering and change the cert # and then said "you are bidding on X psa 9 card, I have 3 of them in my collection, you may not receive the same exact one pictured"
and he would have gotten away with it because the buyer did get what they bid on and were warned that they might not get the exact one pictured
I think he was perfectly honest, if bidders don't look at scans and/or use the "ask seller a question" button if they are questioning something then they shouldn't be bidding
Big Kid- You simply have no idea what you are talking about. Do you know who the seller is? Bob is one of the nicest guys in this hobby. Take a look at his eBay store....he has a world class collection. Why on earth would you even bring up WIWAG regarding this card everyone knows it is not an issue.
Are you trying to stir up trouble again?
Not trying to "start anything"
I just asked the question.
we should still be able to do that.
Bob- Did you check the cards before and after this one in your submission to see if PSA accidentally put the straight 9 that belonged in this holder in one of the OC holders?
Thats what we dont know (when it comes to finding out what kind of error this was). We dont know if this card was not labeled properly or if they put the wrong card(s) in the wrong holder(s) as there were so many cards in succession that were similar.
And I think I would be in the same boat as some of the others. If there is a picture included, I could care less what the description says. If your bid is swayed simply by what the seller says it might be worth, then you are in trouble to begin with.
If there wasnt a picture, then thats a different story. But in this case there was.
Bob has Set Registry Hall of Fame recognition and would be one of the last people whose integrity I would question.
It comes down to this. PSA made a mistake, and I too made a mistake in listing the card. As John indicated, if I had to do it over again, I would not have listed the card. I recognize that it adds to the fuel of those who expect PSA to be perfect. They are not perfect, and I am not a perfect human being. For those of you who feel that I mishandled this, please accept my sincere apologies.
If you want to check the rest of this submission, the number
was 4104874 and the zip code is 91750.
Again, as I mentioned before, I mentioned the SMR (with an exclamation mark) not in any attempt to indicate that this card had that value, but as a reference point for bidding on the card as it actually appeared in the scan. I realize, now, that that was misleading to some as to my intentions, and I apologize for that.
Thanks, again, to those of you who know me and have attested
to my honesty. I regret that the way I handled this created any
doubt in anyone's mind. One's reputation is worth far more than any amount of money.
I, for one, made a comment about the ad, and am now MORE than confident that you are an honest and trusted ebay seller and retract my incredulous remarks. I am getting to know Basilone and trust him in turn. I apologize, after the fact, if I have added to any anxiety on your part. I will continue, like others, to critically look at things but when wrong, am not affraid to say so.
Mike
Your comments are greatly appreciated. As you pointed out, I have a great ebay reputation with over 2000 positive feedbacks and no negatives ever. I regret that this listing cast any doubt on that record. It is VERY hard to get 2000 feedbacks with no negatives.
You're a class guy, and I hope we have a chance to help each other
with our collections. John Basilone is one of the nicest guys I've met on ebay. He actually quit collecting one of his sets to help me out with mine on the set registry. A truly unselfish guy.
I'm currently working to upgrade my 1969, 1970 and 71 Topps Supers sets. Also I need 2 cards in the 1970 Milton Bradley set
to have it in all 10s.
Check them out on the set registry.
As I was reading the thread, all I was thinking was ... man, it sucks to be you. Nothing like being outted on the boards for a judgement call. I was glad to see you come onto the thread to acknowledge it, and take the thrashings from all of the saints on the board.
It would be interesting to know how many cards PSA has gotten back in all of their years.... from collectors that feel the card was overgraded and would like it adjusted down a few grades. I bet you could count them on a couple of hands.
Yea, in hind site you probably could have done something differently.... but it's hard to say what each of us would do, until we are faced with this exact same scenario. A couple of millimeters more on that boarder... and this would have been a non-issue.
So now everyone has learned what they should do if this happens to them.... right?
I just hope my next PSA package doesn't contain any "gifts" or "errors".
Mike
Thanks for your reply. I respect your viewpoint. Hope you and I can get better acquainted in the future if the opportunity presents itself to help each other with our collections.
Best wishes.
Bob
You are right in that this board can be brutal at times. However, I do believe some very good information and concerns come through these boards, although not in the most congenial way sometimes. Most of the time it's for the betterment of the hobby, but it does have it's moments.............
I think there's lessons learned here for all of us. Not only this Clemente card, but in many others as well.
Your candor in responding to all is appreciated and I know for one that I will be more than happy to do business with you in the future.
Sincerely,
Bill
Best to you!
Bob
Absolutely-- it has to be a mistake. In fact, I think we can fairly confident of that now, given PSA10's post.
Also, and I hate to bring this up again, but I'm getting sick of the idea that volume submitters get these monstrous breaks on their submissions in the grading room. I don't know where these rumors started, but I'll bet donuts to holes that whoever first gave this idea currency had never met a volume submitter, and therefore didn't understand how they operate.