I wish PSA would summarize a card's flaws

plifter · February 11, 2008 11:21AM

Wouldn't it be nice if PSA would provide a letter explaining the grade your card received? I know that would take a lot of time but it would sure make me feel better about the grades my cards received. Perhaps they could offer it as an optional service and charge for it. I wouldn't mind paying a little extra especially when I'm submitting a high end card.

BobaFett72 · February 11, 2008 11:24AM

Dear Sir,

Your 1988 topps A.S. Wade Boggs card made us laugh so hard that one of our graders laughed so hard he sneezed a glob of snot, thus rendering your card a (ST) qualifier.

Please submit again with a $20 bill an we will get rid of the qualifier.

Regards

"The grader of death"

RawPlusSlabbed · February 11, 2008 11:25AM

<< Wouldn't it be nice if PSA would provide a letter explaining the grade your card received? I know that would take a lot of time but it would sure make me feel better about the grades my cards received. Perhaps they could offer it as an optional service and charge for it. I wouldn't mind paying a little extra especially when I'm submitting a high end card. >>

Nice, but not very practical. If a card averages 30-45 seconds to grade, the letter would take several times longer than the grading itself. Unless one is prepared to pay several times the current price, then it would not be pratical. For high dollar cards, could potentially be interesting to pay $50 for a detailed letter of condition.

plifter · February 11, 2008 11:29AM

<< 

<< Wouldn't it be nice if PSA would provide a letter explaining the grade your card received? I know that would take a lot of time but it would sure make me feel better about the grades my cards received. Perhaps they could offer it as an optional service and charge for it. I wouldn't mind paying a little extra especially when I'm submitting a high end card. >>

Nice, but not very practical. If a card averages 30-45 seconds to grade, the letter would take several times longer than the grading itself. Unless one is prepared to pay several times the current price, then it would not be pratical. For high dollar cards, could potentially be interesting to pay $50 for a detailed letter of condition. >>

That's why I suggested it as an optional service. If you're submitting a $3000 card, it would be nice to know what was going through the grader's mind.

chaz43 · February 11, 2008 11:35AM

Fuget bout' it. chaz

SportsItUpCards · February 11, 2008 11:37AM

<< Fuget bout' it. chaz >>

Don't you mean Forgetaboutit!?

Giovanni

Edited to add: Or Fugedaboudit!

storm888 · February 11, 2008 11:58AM

"I wish PSA would summarize a card's flaws."

/////////////////////////////////////

I do, too.

BUT, I do not think I want to pay a bunch extra to make it so.

Bosox1976 · February 11, 2008 11:59AM

While I don't care for BGS or CTA, their methodology is more telling than PSA or SGC's by far. Subgrades are quite useful.

bluemarlin · February 11, 2008 12:00PM

Not gonna happen.

WinPitcher · February 11, 2008 12:01PM

I would for certain cards.

I agree with the OP.

he did say cards valued at 3k

I would like that for cards valued at 5k or more

Steve

RipublicaninMass · February 11, 2008 12:17PM

BTW it's more commonly spelled

Fuhgettaboutit

F1ferrari · February 11, 2008 7:45PM

I think when you get into the upper tier of PSA's grading services, this should be mandatory. For example, if I were to submit a '52 Mantle that I thought was a 6 and it came back a 4, I'd expect their graders to be able to back up their decisions. On $5-10 cards, it wouldn't be as necessary, but with high ticket cards it should be expected for the extra scratch you pay.

HighChopper · February 11, 2008 10:03PM

This would remove the mystique and shrouded mystery of PSA grading.

GOODLIEU · February 11, 2008 11:20PM

This idea has a lot of merit when dealing with very expensive vintage cards. It makes the graders accountable to the customer and as the service would be paid for by the collector its a win/win for PSA.

Morgoth · February 12, 2008 12:01AM

This would remove the mystique and shrouded mystery of PSA grading

Agreed, I much prefer to view card grading as magic and voodoo makes my resubmissions much less painful and maybe if I could just get my sacrifical chicken this time I can get a ten.

AlmostPerfect · February 12, 2008 3:21PM

<< 

<< Fuget bout' it. chaz >>

Don't you mean Forgetaboutit!?

Giovanni

Edited to add: Or Fugedaboudit! >>

prestine

JeremyDie1 · February 12, 2008 3:28PM

torc · February 12, 2008 4:23PM

<< 
If a card averages 30-45 seconds to grade, the letter would take several times longer than the grading itself. . >>

So what would be so difficult then for the grader to have a standard checklist that he/she could check off the flaws found, and have that checklist returned with the graded card?

Just a thought

Stone193 · February 13, 2008 2:48AM

I could conceive of a computerized Check List of criteria that the grader would only have to "check"/click to describe their findings - it would not take that long.

My guess? As of now? They look for flaws really quickly - don't really remember where they see it in their head - they just come up with an over-all subjective impression of the grade of the card? To find a flaw - check it off on the sheet would take way more time at the end of the day.

But, if they were to do a study - see how it affects the productivity of the grader - they could - then - adjust the fees for those wanting that kind of service?

I could see the graders being very unhappy with that kind of change?
mike

Alfonz24 · February 13, 2008 3:00AM

I wish they would go to a half point grading system.

11235813 · February 13, 2008 3:43AM

And I could see customers being unhappy at the fact that decisions are being made in 30-45 seconds which could increase or decrease the value of their card by hundreds of dollars. No wonder so many people end up being unhappy with the grades they receive! There isn't a person alive on the face of the planet who can consistently grade cards accurately if they are only given 30-45 seconds to examine each one.

Stone193 · February 13, 2008 3:58AM

<< And I could see customers being unhappy at the fact that decisions are being made in 30-45 seconds which could increase or decrease the value of their card by hundreds of dollars. No wonder so many people end up being unhappy with the grades they receive! There isn't a person alive on the face of the planet who can consistently grade cards accurately if they are only given 30-45 seconds to examine each one. >>

Ahhhh....au contraire - my friend with numbers for a name.

First off - you're assuming facts not in evidence - i.e. - the amount of time a grader takes on every card - why do you think they charge more for high end cards? Because they have to spend more time on it.

However....

Tell ya what - take a card - hold it in your hand - set the timer for 45 seconds - and look at it.

That - as such - is quite a bit of time.

Why is it - if we knew they took 2.5 hrs per card - some people would find fault?

mike.5

11235813 · February 13, 2008 4:13AM

Mike,

I can look at a card for 30-45 seconds and form a decent opinion about a card's condition (i.e. this looks like a "7" to me), but I doubt I could give it the type definitively accurate grade that everyone else would agree with (and that you are supposed to be getting from a grading company). Especially when one has to check for trimming, restoration, etc.

That said, you probably are right in that high value cards get more time in front of the grader (at least I hope so), but you can't be certain. The grading companies make their money off volume, not accuracy, especially considering how many people resubmit cards a second and sometimes third time if they believe them to have been graded inaccurately.

Matt

Stone193 · February 13, 2008 7:22AM

<< Mike,

I can look at a card for 30-45 seconds and form a decent opinion about a card's condition (i.e. this looks like a "7" to me), but I doubt I could give it the type definitively accurate grade that everyone else would agree with (and that you are supposed to be getting from a grading company). Especially when one has to check for trimming, restoration, etc.

That said, you probably are right in that high value cards get more time in front of the grader (at least I hope so), but you can't be certain. The grading companies make their money off volume, not accuracy, especially considering how many people resubmit cards a second and sometimes third time if they believe them to have been graded inaccurately.

Matt >>

Matt + numbers

Most cards will not need the time you've so eloquently detailed - checking a card for size takes a second and most of those graders can spot most fakes a mile away.

On the resubs and 1 to 2 grade bumps? Part of the game - especially at 5 bucks a card.

I just firmly believe the old saying: dance with the partner ya came with...or ya might wind up going home alone!

Mike.5

Leiascards · February 13, 2008 7:29AM

When you actually put it to the test 45 seconds is a long time. I estimate the cards in my subs I spend less than 30 seconds determining if I should even risk submiting them.

Carew29 · February 13, 2008 8:13AM

This would require the grader to drop his beer from one hand and the cigerette from the other. I don't see this ever happening anytime soon.

I wish PSA would summarize a card's flaws

Comments