Options
Half grades are a slight to the high-end collector.
MattyC
Posts: 1,335 ✭✭
EDITED: Yes I posted this in the Registry board as well but don't know where the eyeballs will be, so apologies...
The PSA missive regarding the new grading system states:
"...there is no question that the half-point grade will impact the ratings, thus the rankings, in a major way. Just imagine…if a collector has been very picky about the quality of their cards and owns a substantial percentage of cards that will achieve the half-point increase, that set could make a serious climb in the rankings. The difference between a PSA NM-MT 8 and a PSA NM-MT + 8.5, multiplied many times over, can make a big difference, especially when the set contains hundreds of cards.
Not only will this further distinguish high-quality sets within the PSA Set Registry, it will also properly reward those who have selected their cards carefully, those who have most likely paid a premium for the cards they own. This was a key factor behind making this decision. With the graded card market continuing to evolve and as it becomes more advanced, we felt that this system will make the grading more accurate and help protect the investment of the buyer."
Now...
All this system does (aside from netting PSA new revenue due to the re-grading of already-graded cards) is narrow the gap between sets with many 9s and sets with many 8s. Thus, this move hurts the collector who paid serious premiums for 9s.
In the uber-competitive Set Registry, sets previously composed of all lower cost 8s stand to gain 50% new ground against sets with mostly expensive 9s. Put another way, with the advent of the 8.5-grade card, the 1pt advantage one previously paid for in obtaining a PSA 9 has been effectively halved. That's just great if you bought 8s that you now pay a nominal fee to get raised to 8.5, but not great if you paid top dollar for 9s that cannot move up to a 9.5.
In short, this system stands to reward ONLY the collector who owns (much cheaper) PSA 8s. We all know one of the biggest price gaps lies between 8 and 9. In the zero-sum game of the competitive Registry, one man's gain is always another's loss, and so who is on the short end of this new system? The high end collector, who, in his rearview, sees a much less expensive set now much closer. Owners of these newly minted 8.5s (or "high end 8s") see all this new value, both in their Registry sets and for resale. But if you paid dearly for many PSA 9s? No soup for you. Your investment hasn't been "protected," it's likely been UNDERMINED. Maybe not to a great extent, as the truly high-end collector will still prefer 9s and resent these new 8.5s.
Spending the serious money on 9s is no longer worth it. Does PSA realize they've hurt the value of their highest end cards? Why would one pay the big bucks for a 9 when it's now only .5 better than an 8.5? In an attempt to broaden their cards' resale market and value, PSA has slighted the collector of very high-end material. They've narrowed the gaps in the Registry competition, which they no doubt believe (probably correctly) will create more intense competition and more business, but the savvy, highest-end collector must be turned off. PSA has made a (likely good business) choice, to embrace the broad middle at the cost of putting off the top end.
PSA is more than "protecting the investment" of those who bought "high-end 8s," they are giving those collectors new money, new value-- in exchange for re-grading fees. What positive is in this new system for a collection of 9s? Zilch. If your 9 is strong for its grade and close to a 10? Again, no soup. You are soupless. But your strong 8, if so determined, gets a formal upgrade.
In the end, I suppose this will save some of us hundreds of thousands of dollars, as we're completely turned off by these massive benefits given to inferior cards previously known as 8s. Still, it's a smart business move by PSA; the goal is satisfying the masses, it's better to open a hundred McDonalds than one Peter Lugers. Better to sell ten Honda Civics than one SL 65.
If you'd rather have the porterhouse and the Benz and you collect PSA cards, this system is just not palatable.
If our feedback is truly valued, as was written, let's see.
In the words of a Simpsons character:
Smell ya later, PSA.
Smell ya later forever.
The PSA missive regarding the new grading system states:
"...there is no question that the half-point grade will impact the ratings, thus the rankings, in a major way. Just imagine…if a collector has been very picky about the quality of their cards and owns a substantial percentage of cards that will achieve the half-point increase, that set could make a serious climb in the rankings. The difference between a PSA NM-MT 8 and a PSA NM-MT + 8.5, multiplied many times over, can make a big difference, especially when the set contains hundreds of cards.
Not only will this further distinguish high-quality sets within the PSA Set Registry, it will also properly reward those who have selected their cards carefully, those who have most likely paid a premium for the cards they own. This was a key factor behind making this decision. With the graded card market continuing to evolve and as it becomes more advanced, we felt that this system will make the grading more accurate and help protect the investment of the buyer."
Now...
All this system does (aside from netting PSA new revenue due to the re-grading of already-graded cards) is narrow the gap between sets with many 9s and sets with many 8s. Thus, this move hurts the collector who paid serious premiums for 9s.
In the uber-competitive Set Registry, sets previously composed of all lower cost 8s stand to gain 50% new ground against sets with mostly expensive 9s. Put another way, with the advent of the 8.5-grade card, the 1pt advantage one previously paid for in obtaining a PSA 9 has been effectively halved. That's just great if you bought 8s that you now pay a nominal fee to get raised to 8.5, but not great if you paid top dollar for 9s that cannot move up to a 9.5.
In short, this system stands to reward ONLY the collector who owns (much cheaper) PSA 8s. We all know one of the biggest price gaps lies between 8 and 9. In the zero-sum game of the competitive Registry, one man's gain is always another's loss, and so who is on the short end of this new system? The high end collector, who, in his rearview, sees a much less expensive set now much closer. Owners of these newly minted 8.5s (or "high end 8s") see all this new value, both in their Registry sets and for resale. But if you paid dearly for many PSA 9s? No soup for you. Your investment hasn't been "protected," it's likely been UNDERMINED. Maybe not to a great extent, as the truly high-end collector will still prefer 9s and resent these new 8.5s.
Spending the serious money on 9s is no longer worth it. Does PSA realize they've hurt the value of their highest end cards? Why would one pay the big bucks for a 9 when it's now only .5 better than an 8.5? In an attempt to broaden their cards' resale market and value, PSA has slighted the collector of very high-end material. They've narrowed the gaps in the Registry competition, which they no doubt believe (probably correctly) will create more intense competition and more business, but the savvy, highest-end collector must be turned off. PSA has made a (likely good business) choice, to embrace the broad middle at the cost of putting off the top end.
PSA is more than "protecting the investment" of those who bought "high-end 8s," they are giving those collectors new money, new value-- in exchange for re-grading fees. What positive is in this new system for a collection of 9s? Zilch. If your 9 is strong for its grade and close to a 10? Again, no soup. You are soupless. But your strong 8, if so determined, gets a formal upgrade.
In the end, I suppose this will save some of us hundreds of thousands of dollars, as we're completely turned off by these massive benefits given to inferior cards previously known as 8s. Still, it's a smart business move by PSA; the goal is satisfying the masses, it's better to open a hundred McDonalds than one Peter Lugers. Better to sell ten Honda Civics than one SL 65.
If you'd rather have the porterhouse and the Benz and you collect PSA cards, this system is just not palatable.
If our feedback is truly valued, as was written, let's see.
In the words of a Simpsons character:
Smell ya later, PSA.
Smell ya later forever.
0
Comments
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
I do think it's silly that they didn't bring 'Pristine' grade into the mix. Sure, it's silly-- but then the whole 1/2 system is silly. By not doing this they've crippled their ability to make further inroads into the modern market (which is where I think all the grading money is going to come from in five year's time).
That is a VERY compelling argument. I guess it's the best argument thus far.
(The case made in the deleted post).
"That's just great if you bought 8s that you now pay a nominal fee to get raised to 8.5,
but not great if you paid top dollar for 9s that cannot move up to a 9.5. "
They should go with
MINT 9
Superior MINT 9.5
GEM MINT 10
BUT, if they did that..............doesn't the guy with the 10 have an argument that
his registry cards have been devalued?
It appears that when you change the rules in the middle of the game,
somebody has to get screwed.
<< <i>Absolutely you are right. The 9.5 would hurt guys who shelled out thousands, so I back not using a 9.5. The emerging answer imo is that, like you say, changes the rules midgame and it becomes a mess. >>
Matty, I agree wholeheartedly with your recent posts, but I also believe that they didn't institute the 9.5 grade because Beckett 9.5 and SGC 98/9.5 are the premium grades of those companies and because of their low pop 10's/100's, PSA 9.5's would look weaker against the other companies. Add that to your point about killing their high dollar collectors and it makes no sense for them to institute a 9.5.
My Podcast - Now FEATURED on iTunes
<< <i>That's an excellent post, and I can't argue with one word of it. That being said, PSA need answer to only two parties-- CU shareholders, and PSA submitters. Both of these parties stand to benefit from this change, which I think makes it a no brainer (from PSA's perspective). We can argue whether PSA's secondary customers-- i.e., collectors--will benefit or not from this move, but if there are a) more people who collect PSA 8's than PSA 9's, and b) people with PSA 8's stand to benefit (at the expense of those who collect 9's), then if nothing else at least the greater good is served.
I do think it's silly that they didn't bring 'Pristine' grade into the mix. Sure, it's silly-- but then the whole 1/2 system is silly. By not doing this they've crippled their ability to make further inroads into the modern market (which is where I think all the grading money is going to come from in five year's time). >>
boo, I respectfully disagree. Submitters are most often collectors and the collectors are what control the hobby, as Joe so eloquently posted here. If the collector gets screwed...the whole deal will fall apart. I see registry set fire sales on ebay over the next month.
If they brought a "pristine" grade to the market PSA would lose MAJOR market share as collectors who shelled out thousands, if not millions, on PSA 10's all saw thier cards devalued.
PSA can survive this but they will lose many of thier most loyal customers, the registry set collectors.
Just the thought, even a whisper, of a "pristine" grade would end PSA sales on any "post-pristine" PSA 10 for years.
Kirby Puckett Master Set
shareholder > submitter
bigger fish to fry in psa skillet right now, customers are ALWAYS right.
julen
RIP GURU
This idea will kill brand loyalty that they have worked years to build.
Kirby Puckett Master Set
but not great if you paid top dollar for 9s that cannot move up to a 9.5."
Your statement reads a little that all PSA 8's can be now bumped to 8.5's. If done correctly, it will only be those that sold for a premium that get the bump. There is a big difference in a low end 7 and a high end 7, or 8.
It should read more:
"That's just great if you bought 8s that you now pay a nominal fee to TRY TO get raised to 8.5."
Whereas before, MANY paid the fee to TRY TO get a 9.
Mark
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
The more I think about this, it seems that PSA
may have decided that the registry is not really enough
of a profit-center that it needs to be defended at
the cost of failing to adequately suck-up market share.
The unintended consequences may, as written above,
be to deprive dealer-submitters of a good piece of
the profit they collect on their 9s and 10s. Surely
those grades are the ONLY thing that make BIG BULK
submissions workable for the dealers. If those fall
out of favor much beyond the registry, there could
be an unexpected hit to submission revenues.
BUT, maybe PSA knows there is more money to be
made from NEW retail business than will be lost if
current customers turn a bit sour.
I want to believe they have thought this all the way
through. I am somewhat unsure of it.
I guess a lot of it will depend how strict they are with the 8.5 grade. I think they'll get a flurry of resubs at first, and then collectors and dealers will get a lot more selective about what they send back.
Why pay serious premiums for 9s over 8s? whats the difference, a speck of white on the corner of a sportscard? I think this change would help people who stayed sensible and didnt get caught up in some registry bidding war.
John
HOF SIGNED FOOTBALL RCS
/////////////////////////
Yeah.
BUT, PSA, in both subtle and not so subtle ways,
pumped the competition elements of the registry.
Now, the people who were not as you say "sensible,"
but played the game like PSA wanted them to, are
likely to lose money...... starting tomorrow.
A good-faith act, though not a profitable one, would
be to EXEMPT cards in the registry from participating
in the 1/2 point bump-scheme. Registry cards would
remain on the current scheme.......forever; NO 1/2
point cards allowed.
Boy. What a can of worms.
at least they cant go down,thats about the only good point i see,i might try it on some of my 50 bowman 8s like joe perry after i see what other people get-just sucks 15 $ a pop to have em regraded,we already paid for this once
be to EXEMPT cards in the registry from participating
in the 1/2 point bump-scheme. Registry cards would
remain on the current scheme.......forever; NO 1/2
point cards allowed.
In the long run, that might be the better way to go if this move hurts their biggest submitters. They'd still get all the resubs from star cards. Even half grade bumps on the lower end of the scale would be worth it for valuable cards.
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
<< <i>Yes...but, what about the PSA 9 you have that is oh so close to a GEM MT 10. That card gets no love? No recognition whatsoever. But the 8 that's close to a 9 does. The 7 that's close to an 8 does. >>
I think PSA 9 is giving it some love.....that is a mint card.
There is however a big difference between a PSA 7 and a "high end" 7, while there is very little difference, if any at times, in a PSA 9 and a PSA 10.
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
My take is that my mantle might go from a 7 to a 7.5 and be worth about oh...1300 instead of 925 SMR. Thats about right because I had to pay 1200 to get it 50/50. THIS MAKES SENSE.
I am the guy they are talking about..I sought out the 50/50 psa 7 57 mantle, i sought out th 50/50 psa 7 54 aaron....i wanted a card that looked great for its grade and SHOULD be worth more then the actual grade. I have always had to pay over SMR to get the centered card in a specific grade. This new system will reflect that.
Now...they are giving a chance for a collection like mine to actually hold its real value in everyones eyes. For me?? Heck no im not re-submitting. I know what my cards are worth....its plain to the eye!!! I dont buy cards for investment I buy cards because I love them....so no sweat off my back.
In the future.....there will be no guesswork.
Ron
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
for more high end collectors, pop report is vital resource to estimating $$$ for cards that are no longer 1/1's, 2/2's, etc....
w/ new system, how will this problem be addressed, since it is probably not working functionally "as is".
j
RIP GURU
1. PSA is accountable to it's shareholders and needs a growth area. To the extent people crack and resubmit, they will get a boost in revenue.
2. This system will not make a significant dent in BGS's share of the modern card grading market since it's all about sub grades and 9.5s are a significant incentive to submit modern cards to BGS.
3. The pop report for sub 9 grades will be rendered meaningless unless PSA comes up with a system to "incent" people for submitting cards in current holders, i.e. discount for reholdering and a discount for a "MG" submission. This will also help maintain the pop report integrity assuming adjustments are made for cards getting a bump.
4. what would have been a far better move for PSA IMO would have been to establish a clear cut-off point for allowing the .5 grade bump. I would have made it somewhere between 1990 or later. I would have gone to sub-grades and would have attacked BGS head on. This is a growth market and without the sub grades or the 9.5 overall grade, I think they're missing a golden opportunity to put BGS down for the count. Nobody can convince me that the resubmission market is bigger than the modern market. I can tell you unequivocally, I will never resubmit 8s just to gain a few points on the set registry ranking.
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
John
HOF SIGNED FOOTBALL RCS
Joe
-Bill Gates,1981
"With hurricanes,tornados, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another,& with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks,"Are we sure this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?"" Jay Leno 2006
<< <i>what is the difference between a mint and gem mint 9/10 anyway? I thought a mint card was a mint card. that is why there is no 9.5 I guess.
John >>
Strong mint vs a non-strong mint card?? A rose is a rose is a rose? John you are right my friend....100%!!
<< <i>
i do agree...if they are truly concerned for us they will re-grade cards at a significantly decreased cost...and a even greater discount to psa registry users with >75% of set and/or BULK re-submission. This only makes sense. Going to a half point system makes sense...helping us who make PSA what it is..makes sense as well.
Loth
Grading is subjective enough already... add the .5 grades and we get more confused, not less.
-1 for PSA from modern collectors.
PS, for all of you that want to dispute that 9's won't lose value.....think about why they are not using 9.5...becuase it will cut into the premium for 10's, right? Right!
Kirby Puckett Master Set
<< <i>PS, for all of you that want to dispute that 9's won't lose value.....think about why they are not using 9.5...becuase it will cut into the premium for 10's, right? Right! >>
I am a modern PSA collector and I disagree. Why? Because I do not want PSA 8's in my collection....and I do not want a PSA 8.5 either. If you are a modern collector odds are your set weighs over 9 and if a serious player collector, likely closer to 9.5. Sure I will take a 9 for $2-3, an eight maybe a $1. I would not place a premium on an 8.5 modern card with few exceptions (like cards on the top 200 all-time list).
"Mint" to me, and most I believe, is PSA 9 and 10.
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
-- PSA 8.5, The Poor Man's 9.
As a modern player collector who has 9's in your collection. Your 9's just lost a fair percentage of their premium over the 8's as they now are only .5 better than the next lowest grade. The difference in demand and associated premium will lower the value of all PSA 9's and if you don't see it coming...I'll sell you every single one of my 9's, today!! I have about 600 of them in my two sets. In 9 months they will sell for less, although maybe only 20-40% less (as this is about half the difference between the price of an eight) but who here is happy about instantly losing 20-40% of the value in their registry sets...and no chance to protect your value by submitting for a bump to 9.5 (not that it would be right either).
Every registry collector who has built their sets with PSA 9's should be leading the revolt.
Mike
If you are a modern collector who is putting a strictly PSA 10 set together, this does not effect you at all.
Kirby Puckett Master Set
<< <i>Amen, Meteorite Guy.
-- PSA 8.5, The Poor Man's 9. >>
Matty,
You have articulated the very reason the demand for PSA 9's will decrease and consequently so too will their value.
Kirby Puckett Master Set
Seriously, PSA has made a big error. This is a cut and run job and basically states that SGC and BGS were right all along with their 1/2 point systems. Here are some issues I see.
1. No one will know how to price the in between grades for a long long time.
2. If they are going to jump the shark why not institute the 9.5? This seems like a half hearted attempt at being more like BGS.
3. They are hoping set registry people resub with under a Min grade review to help their own set rankings. I am sure someone has done the calculation at PSA of how many cards are registered and if only 20% are resubbed how much income that creates.
4. People are going to loss faith in PSA due to this backtracking and turn their attention over to SGC and BGS.
Joe's response about how us the message board members aren't his primary concern is troubling as everyone who has worked in PR or marketing should know that the individual customer no matter how big or small should be communicated to like they are their primary concern. To just smack us down and our concerns with the back of the hand shows their utter lack of any customer service training. I couldn't fathom my company telling any of it's customers that sorry but you aren't even 10% of our buisness so quit complaining.
The bad thing for PSA is that if you think about it SGC is quickly cornering the market on prewar vintage and beckett has modern so what is PSA good at, 1950's thru the 80s? I can see SGC growing into taking all vintage cards away from PSA and leaving them to chase Becketts customers. Not today but in time I could see PSA losing ground due to this.
<< <i>what is the difference between a mint and gem mint 9/10 anyway? I thought a mint card was a mint card. that is why there is no 9.5 I guess.
John >>
exactly right!
As far as modern goes there is no such thing as a "high end 9", cause then it would be a 10.....
there is no such thing as "low end 9" cause then it would be an 8......
the difference between a 10 and a 9 in my eyes, is pretty clear....there is no need for a 9.5
this .5 change is better for 1914 cracker jacks providing a difference between a 1.0 and 1.5 , and a 2.0 and 2.5...and so on...
Also, I doubt Mint star and rookie cards would be hurt by 8.5's since a lot of those buyers aren't in it for the registry.