<< <i>I'd file a SNAD with PP and have 'Brent' refund my money.
Steve
edited to add: Steve at the BBCE would have refunded cheerfully. >>
I don't go along with "all" of the accolades that BBCE receives on here, but that time he refunded money on unopened packs which had been opened, when the buyers know that opening unopened packs is basically a gamble...was a pretty amazing thing that Steve did there.
I wish the casino woulda given my money back after a wrong bet at the craps table. LOL
I got the call today from Joe Orlando's assistant, the 1951 Bowman Whitey Ford PSA 5 I purchased has been deemed a mistake on their part. The reason given to me it could've been an older grading standard and there was an obvious oversight, no specifics, just an honest mistake.
It is now a PSA 2 VCP average $148, SMR $180
I have the option of taking a cash refund from PSA for the difference between PSA 5 and PSA 2 SMR value. OR I have the option of a gold membership plus a substantial amount in submission vouchers.
In the end I get the card back in a PSA 2 slab, I can ideally sell it for $120-$140 range, but I still need the PSA 5 Ford for my HOF registry.
Should I take the vouchers for the sake of I always meaning to get a membership.
Nah i'll take the money and buy me a true PSA 5
I'm very pleased with their professionalism at PSA, there straight forward approach and honesty.
Oh and I want to state the results of my case are solely for my scenario and not reflective of others results given the same scenario....if that makes sense.
So let me get this straight: You're not a member and never have been. PSA has never seen a dime of your money. And here they are, obviously doing the right thing and correcting a mistake on their part, and you're taking the cash they're offering you and running rather than their offer become a member and sub some cards on their dime? They're doing everything they can do to win your business here, and you're not giving them an inch. I sincerely hope someday you own your own business and all of your potential customers act in the same fashion.
The sheer number of people that post here complaining about grades, preferential treatment to bulk submitters, and anything else PSA related that have never spent a dime with the company they're complaining about is astonishing.
I support PSA by buying exclusively PSA Graded cards on the secondary market, I drive prices up, how is my part so much less insignificant than someone who subs cards?
For the above reason I've never had the opportunity to accumulate enough raw cards to submit to PSA, Ive got a stash going right now which is why "Ive been meaning to become a member"
I'm not taking the money and running here, I'm replacing the Ford I wanted.
I will become a member, I mention my results so others can have a point of reference if they deal with the same scenario.
I have nothing but good thoughts for PSA and will continue to support them through purchasing there graded cards...and becoming a member on my own.
"...The sheer number of people that post here complaining about grades, preferential treatment to bulk submitters, and anything else PSA related that have never spent a dime with the company they're complaining about is astonishing. ..."
///////////////////////////////////////
But, anybody who buys PSA-graded cards from PSA-submitters is certainly "supporting" PSA too.
.........
If I had cards I wanted to submit, I would take the membership and as many vouchers as I could get.
If I had no cards to submit AND wanted a PSA 5, I would take the cash.
I doubt PSA will be mad at you, either way.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
PSA offered a $180 incentive above the cash offer to become a member and you passed. If you really are considering becoming a member I don't see the logic of passing on the membership/voucher offer. Assuming you will eventually sub $400 worth at some point, you could use the extra money you saved to buy a PSA 6 Ford instead of the 5. That is "if" you were truly considering a membership.
But, anybody who buys PSA-graded cards from PSA-submitters is certainly "supporting" PSA too.
If you're suggesting that someone that doesn't submit to PSA has just as much of a right to complain about their service as someone who does, I completely disagree. Supporting indirect sales through PSA slabbed card sales is certainly part of CU's business model (if it wasn't they would tell akuracy to go f himself), but the reality is PSA extended an offer to become a member that is more than fair for a reason, and the fact that they were willing to make this gesture to a potential customer and the customer told them he'd rather have the cash rubs me the wrong way. I guess it's human nature to do what's in your own best interest with little regard for anything else, but PSA was willing to go into their pocket to the tune of $320, and for that they should be rewarded with at least some direct business at some point. And if akuracy does in fact become a member and starts submitting, then great. But there are scores of people on this forum that have no intention of subbing and spend maybe $200 a year on PSA slabs and get themselves in a tizzy about overgraded cards and mislabeled flips.
The secondary sales market is huge for PSA. The volume of cards sent to be sold as opposed to collected is probably fricking staggering. Otherwise I doubt the POP# for a 1986 Topps Nolan Ryan Card would be a tenth of what it is (that's just an example off the top of my head).
<< <i>If you're suggesting that someone that doesn't submit to PSA has just as much of a right to complain about their service as someone who does, I completely disagree. Supporting indirect sales through PSA slabbed card sales is certainly part of CU's business model (if it wasn't they would tell akuracy to go f himself), but the reality is PSA extended an offer to become a member that is more than fair for a reason, and the fact that they were willing to make this gesture to a potential customer and the customer told them he'd rather have the cash rubs me the wrong way. I guess it's human nature to do what's in your own best interest with little regard for anything else, but PSA was willing to go into their pocket to the tune of $320, and for that they should be rewarded with at least some direct business at some point. And if akuracy does in fact become a member and starts submitting, then great. But there are scores of people on this forum that have no intention of subbing and spend maybe $200 a year on PSA slabs and get themselves in a tizzy about overgraded cards and mislabeled flips. >>
This is his decision, not yours, and he came into this purchase with the desire for a 1951 Bowman Whitey Ford PSA 5. If he took the vouchers (while it IS the better deal) then he would still be without the Ford card. Personally, I would have taken the vouchers and would have kept the PSA 2 but I would still need to dish out $400 to get the card I wanted.
Also, without a secondary market PSA would fail, period. If dealers did not sub to PSA with the intention to sell then PSA would never have taken off. The business generated by companies such as 4 sharp corners and 707 provide a great deal of income into PSA and those companies rely on the secondary market to survive as well. Yes, it is somewhat sad that PSA is forking over so much money to a customer who hasn't directly contributed to PSA ever but without a buyer for PSA cards there would never have been PSA cards.
it doesn't matter who submitted the card and who ended up with it. the card clearly did not meet the standards for a PSA 5 EX grade. it should be taken off the market and put into the correct holder. whether a PSA member initiates this or a non member, it doesn't matter. the buyer of the card is looking for a PSA 5 Ford and getting a free membership to PSA is not what he purchased. it's his call as to what compensation he takes for the error on PSA's part.
it doesn't matter who submitted the card and who ended up with it. the card clearly did not meet the standards for a PSA 5 EX grade. it should be taken off the market and put into the correct holder.
Totally agree.
whether a PSA member initiates this or a non member, it doesn't matter. the buyer of the card is looking for a PSA 5 Ford and getting a free membership to PSA is not what he purchased. it's his call as to what compensation he takes for the error on PSA's part.
What you all fail to realize is that PSA didn't have to offer anything. akuracy sent the card in to be reviewed, and legally PSA doesn't need to offer any compensation if they deem the grade to be lower than originally thought and reslab it. This was a good faith gesture they made to him in an effort to gain his business, which he declined. Why else would they offer 60% more in trade than cash? I'm not saying he has to take the trade offer, but if it were me I would be ethically persuaded to take them up on it since I would've been out $300+ if they decided to be cheap about it.
Let's go with an analogy: When we opened the doors to our first restaurant, we made a good faith gesture to honor gift cards from the previous restaurant for the full amount. A lady came in with a $100 gift card, bought dinner for her family, thanked us up and down and said she had a great time. We haven't seen her since. Now, we didn't have to honor that gift card, but we made a good faith gesture in order to try and win her business. Of course she isn't obligated to come back and pay full price, but the spirit of our offer was meant as a good faith gesture that we would win her business if we helped her out, which we did. Now I know this isn't exactly the same thing, but there's something to be said for a business going the extra effort to win your business, and it should be rewarded if at all possible on the customer's end.
Clearly I'm putting myself in the business owner's shoes, and it looks like I'm the only one here. All I can say is don't be surprised at some point if PSA decides to stop offering compensation when they downgrade your cards when you send them in for review. At our second restaurant we put a cap of $50 on honoring the previous restaurant's gift cards, and the next one we will probably do away with it altogether.
I am a business owner as well and I understand the sweetened offer for future services. But if I extended the same type of offer and was rejected I wouldn't worry too much. A short term loss is better than a long term headache, plus I would look like a good guy to the rest of the people reading the boards. A publicized good will gesture to an audience that likes me anyway is a plus, whether or not that is the motivation I don't know. It does look good for PSA in this situation.
Another analogy- it would be like taking a Vegas casino's offer of a comped room for a week, and not gambling, eating or spending one dime at the place. Maybe you guys are ok with this, but there should be some moral or ethical obligation to at least give a little something back to the business that's helping you out.
Yet, even another analogy- Say it was the seller that gave him $320 out of his pocket for the error, and asked only that akuracy consider bidding in his next round of auctions. Don't you think akuracy should be compelled to throw a little business his way as a reward?
All I'm saying is that when somebody (person or business) goes above and beyond to do right by you, maybe you should consider giving a little back to reward their generosity. Again, PSA didn't have to offer akuracy anything. They could've just sent him back the card in a PSA 2 slab and been done with it.
They could have sent him back the card in a 2 slab, but it would make stink beyond all to do so. They did what they thought was right (ethically and in business terms) they have no control over what the claimant of the offer does. The OP is doing what he thinks is in his best interest, I think we are making more of it than PSA is. I can see your view, and I can agree with it but sometimes when mistakes are made repercusions are what happens. Goodwill is extended and declined, it's business not personal.
But if I extended the same type of offer and was rejected I wouldn't worry too much.
Yeah, no doubt PSA probably doesn't care one way or the other, and I'm sure this thread does them some good. But they did akuracy a solid and he took the cash and declined to give them some business, even though he's "always [been] meaning to get a membership." I guess I'm the only one that sees this as greedy and unappreciative.
I don't disagree, I'm just saying they gave him options and he chose what is best for him. Let the chips of public opinion fall where they may, to make a villian out of the OP for looking into PSA's guarantee seems a bit weird.
I sent the following email to Joe Orlando prior to sending in my card, I received a prompt response from Joe. Joe Orlando said "You are doing the right thing by sending it to me, once I receive the card we can discuss"
I had no intentions of getting compensation from PSA, I was prepared to lose my pants on this purchase but doing the "right thing" paid off, I respect PSA even more for this gesture.
Hello Joe, My name is Martin and I am not a PSA member yet, although I have an account and participate in the set/inventory part of Collectors Universe and actively post on the message boards. Through the wonderful message forum i've met and learned a lot from fellow hobbyist's, I've actively purchased and collected PSA graded cards exclusively for the last 2 1/2 years since getting back into my childhood hobby.
I've been directed to you based on my recent concerns of a purchase I made from a very reputable dealer Brent Huigens "prewarcardcollector" from ebay. I am building a mid grade PSA 1951 Bowman Baseball set of Hall of Famer's and recently purchased a PSA 5 example of Whitey Ford PSA Cert #30621383, when I received this card in hand it had more flaws than I am used to seeing in comparable 5's of 1951 Bowman. I contacted Brent to voice my concerns and he offered to take the card back on consignment for his May auctions.
I am primarly concerned that this card was severaly overgraded and am honestly dissapointed as it doesnt hold a candle to the other 5's I own. Easy way out for me is to plead with Brent to offer a refund or sell the card, I feel neither is fair. I made the mistake of basing my purchase decision solely on a digital scan and PSA grade label.
I feel the right thing to do is get this card reviewed by PSA to make good on the grade, even if I lose money on it, both for the sake of future buyers and PSA's reputation for consistency and integrity in providing the best grading service in the industry. I spoke to a lady at CU customer service today and she is sending me a review submission form.
Fellow hobby members advised that I take this issue directly to Mr. Joe Orlando himself. I was hesitant to do so since a measely $400 card isn't worth the time for a president of a company. If time allows it would be a pleasure to get your feedback on the issue. Thank you for your time,
Lee - of course psa is going to sweeten the pot when giving memberships or vouchers compared to cash. take your restaurants - say your staff makes some kind of mistake and the customer spent $100. you could either give them back $100 cash or give them a $125 voucher to use on a repeat trip. if you are running 30% food cost then that voucher costs your business far less than the $125. you'd want them to take the voucher as you'd be out less money. but it would be up to the customer to decide what they take.
I simply can't see where akuracy has done anything wrong. The error was on PSA's part and they offered him a choice of remedies. He should simply pick the option that serves his needs the best. I'm pretty sure PSA's actions were done in its own best interest, as it serves to reassure buyers that the company stands behind its product. IMO, the good will generated by this far outweighs the monetary cost to PSA.
PSA has a guarantee on their grades regardless of if you are a member or not. It makes zero sense that you would have to be a member in order for their guarantee to kick in.
akuracy - I'm glad things worked out for you and admire what you did. Most people would have added the card to their registry even though it is really a lower grade. You bought the card and not the flip and for that get two thumbs up in my book! So does PSA for their work here.
<< <i>Most people would have added the card to their registry even though it is really a lower grade. >>
I highly doubt that.
<< <i>You bought the card and not the flip and for that get two thumbs up in my book!
Patrick >>
And oh great wise one please explain then how if he bought the card and not the flip (damage was clearly visible in the auction pics) why was he so disappointed in the card?
There's no way PSA gave that card a 5 originally, especially if 2 graders looked at it. I think it was an expert crack and switch, which PSA would have no obligation to pay for. I'm glad they're compensating you, but I think you got lucky here.
I had a PSA 9 88 Score Glavine that I thought was overgraded so I sent it in for review. Joe Orlando called me and broke the bad news- it was now in a PSA 7 slab. He offered either $1.35 in cash or $3 in a voucher as compensation. I took the voucher because it seemed like the right thing to do.
whether PSA ever has anything to gain from akuracy by supporting his claim is kind of insignificant at this point.....there is a captive audience here, and a wheelbarrow full of them are, and always have been believers.....the future of PSA will rely heavily on the actions of submitters who have the ability to produce bulk business for them and i doubt they will lose any sleep over one person who doesn't actively pursue raw submittable cards anyways.
I had a PSA 9 88 Score Glavine that I thought was overgraded so I sent it in for review. Joe Orlando called me and broke the bad news- it was now in a PSA 7 slab. He offered either $1.35 in cash or $3 in a voucher as compensation. I took the voucher because it seemed like the right thing to do.
Similar thing happened to me. Joe said all he had on him was an Olive Garden gift card with about 5 bucks left on it. I said that would do, and we called it good.
<< <i> I guess I'm the only one that sees this as greedy and unappreciative. >>
He wants a PSA 5. The membership and vouchers will not help him meet that goal. The cash will. He’s done nothing wrong, and has violated no moral or ethical code.
I posted my experience with PSA for others to reference, intention for some good spirits towards PSA. I did not ask for a lecture on business etiquette or any bad mouthing whatsoever.
Perhaps if I opted to resale the card knowing it was a bad grade I would've been called something else.
PSA made a mistake on this vintage card and I gave them the chance to correct it. Or else it wouldve been another fellow hobbiest down the road dealing with my dilema.
For those with a chip on their shoulder give it a break.
Welcome to the PSA Message boards. There is a reason why many people do not post or start threads here. I swear some people here have nothing better to do with there time then pick holes in others and hide behind a keyboard. I for one think you did nothing wrong and once again Joe shows why PSA is a great company. Good luck in your quest.
Simply amazing to me that Martin (akuracy503) is actually being beat up over this. He has done nothing wrong whatsoever, yet he's getting raked over the coals, as if he just screwed one of you!
Martin, I am glad to see that things worked out for you in the end. Aside from all the other crap, it was a very informative post, and I am glad to see that PSA took steps to make it right.
I'm glad he sent it back to PSA to get it out of circulation. But in my view, PSA stepped up and offered compensation for a card I feel could very well have been switched. I think to reciprocate, you take the voucher/membership. I don't see bad-mouthing here, just disagreement.
I posted my experience with PSA for others to reference, intention for some good spirits towards PSA. I did not ask for a lecture on business etiquette or any bad mouthing whatsoever.
You started this thread asking for advice on what you should do. I gave my opinion on what I thought you should've done. I'm sorry that my opinion and the logic behind it paints you in a negative light, but it seems nobody agrees with me so you really have nothing to worry about. Enjoy your PSA 5.
Several years ago back when Mark Murphy was grading packs for GAI I sent in several wax boxes from my PC for GAI to grade with a declared value of slightly over $2000. A couple weeks after my order should have been completed and graded I called GAI. I was informed that the order was still in process. Several weeks later I called again with same response. Finally 3 months after my order was supposed to have been completed I get someone from GAI to tell me that the boxes were graded and were in the process of being shipped to my house. A week later I call because I have yet to receive the boxes even though they had been shipped 3 day UPS back to me supposedly. I am told by GAI that the boxes were actually delivered several months back by UPS. I explain, not quite calmly, that I have been calling them for weeks on end asking about my order and not once during the last 4 months was I told that my order had already been delivered. I ask for the UPS signature validation since this was a 2k+ package and they say there was no signature required on delivery. I finally talk to one of the higher ups at GAI and they admit fault for losing my boxes and offer me 3k in GAI service vouchers. I told them to f*** off, keep their vouchers and that I would never send them an order again and I haven't though I still on occasion buy GAI graded products (with very mixed results).
So there was actually a third option akuracy503 could have taken. I applaud you for not following in my footsteps.
Akuracy, I'm glad things worked out for you. PSA stepped up and did the right thing and offered you a few options towards compensation. Everyone has an opinion and I don't mind speaking mine--"You don't have to grade cards to be a member of this board whatsoever"
On another note....that Ford was a dog just from the scan of the front of the card. If one is not happy with the scan; don't purchase the card. It's that simple.
<< <i>it doesn't matter who submitted the card and who ended up with it. the card clearly did not meet the standards for a PSA 5 EX grade. it should be taken off the market and put into the correct holder.
Totally agree.
whether a PSA member initiates this or a non member, it doesn't matter. the buyer of the card is looking for a PSA 5 Ford and getting a free membership to PSA is not what he purchased. it's his call as to what compensation he takes for the error on PSA's part.
What you all fail to realize is that PSA didn't have to offer anything. akuracy sent the card in to be reviewed, and legally PSA doesn't need to offer any compensation if they deem the grade to be lower than originally thought and reslab it. This was a good faith gesture they made to him in an effort to gain his business, which he declined. Why else would they offer 60% more in trade than cash? I'm not saying he has to take the trade offer, but if it were me I would be ethically persuaded to take them up on it since I would've been out $300+ if they decided to be cheap about it.
Let's go with an analogy: When we opened the doors to our first restaurant, we made a good faith gesture to honor gift cards from the previous restaurant for the full amount. A lady came in with a $100 gift card, bought dinner for her family, thanked us up and down and said she had a great time. We haven't seen her since. Now, we didn't have to honor that gift card, but we made a good faith gesture in order to try and win her business. Of course she isn't obligated to come back and pay full price, but the spirit of our offer was meant as a good faith gesture that we would win her business if we helped her out, which we did. Now I know this isn't exactly the same thing, but there's something to be said for a business going the extra effort to win your business, and it should be rewarded if at all possible on the customer's end.
Clearly I'm putting myself in the business owner's shoes, and it looks like I'm the only one here. All I can say is don't be surprised at some point if PSA decides to stop offering compensation when they downgrade your cards when you send them in for review. At our second restaurant we put a cap of $50 on honoring the previous restaurant's gift cards, and the next one we will probably do away with it altogether. >>
PSA doesn't "have" to offer him anything, but it is their own stated business policy to do so:
"The PSA Financial Guarantee Of Grade & Authenticity: The PSA Financial Guarantee of Grade & Authenticity is fundamental to PSA's concept of third-party grading. The cash-back policy ensures the accuracy of the grade assigned to any PSA-graded card as long as the card remains in its tamper-evident holder. PSA guarantees that all cards submitted to it shall be graded in accordance with PSA grading standards and under the procedures of PSA."
They held true to their word and will likely benefit from the goodwill generated by such a decision. Had they refused to make good on their guarantee (note: I am assuming the holder had not been tampered with), many of us would be calling out their failure to enforce their own policies. I see absolutely nothing wrong with Martin accepting one of the options offered to him.
And, if there ever does come a time where they have to deliver too many guarantee payouts such as this, they would have FAR bigger problems to worry about as this would call into question their whole grading quality standards which would put their entire business at risk.
Collectors Universe offers a warranty covering the coins and sportscards it authenticates and grades. Under the terms of the warranty, any coin or
sportscard originally graded by us, which subsequently receives a lower grade upon resubmittal to us, obligates us to either purchase the coin or
sportscard or pay the difference in value of the item at its original grade as compared with its lower grade. We accrue for estimated warranty costs
based on historical trends and related experiences.
I did not realize it was established on paper that this was their policy. I assumed they decided on a case by case basis. Thanks for the clarification.
Let's go with an analogy: When we opened the doors to our first restaurant, we made a good faith gesture to honor gift cards from the previous restaurant for the full amount. A lady came in with a $100 gift card, bought dinner for her family, thanked us up and down and said she had a great time. We haven't seen her since. Now, we didn't have to honor that gift card, but we made a good faith gesture in order to try and win her business. Of course she isn't obligated to come back and pay full price, but the spirit of our offer was meant as a good faith gesture that we would win her business if we helped her out, which we did. Now I know this isn't exactly the same thing, but there's something to be said for a business going the extra effort to win your business, and it should be rewarded if at all possible on the customer's end.
Lee,
What you dont know is how much "goodwill" you picked up by honoring her gift card as opposed to the "badwill" you would have received for not honoring it. In this case ultimatelty PSA will and has received alot of goodwill from this transaction.
What you dont know is how much "goodwill" you picked up by honoring her gift card as opposed to the "badwill" you would have received for not honoring it. In this case ultimatelty PSA will and has received alot of goodwill from this transaction.
Kirk
True, this is not something you can measure. Is this thread worth $320 to PSA? Who knows, probably not but somewhere close. You just have to do what you feel is right as a business and hope it works out. All I was really trying to say is what hammerd put into words a little better than myself- since PSA did right by a potential customer, it should be reciprocated. I guess this thread and the goodwill created as a result could be considered reciprocation, but I still would've taken the vouchers. Maybe I was a little out of line in calling out akuracy for not taking the membership and vouchers. I probably should've just said "I would take the vouchers" and leave it at that.
And akuracy, I know you don't give two squirts about what I think, but you're going to have a lot more fun at card shows and shops now that you have an open line to submit cards. From here on out that random high grade common from a set you don't collect will jump out at you and you might take a $7 flier on it and hit paydirt, then you can turn the money into something you collect. All you need is a 3 or 4 decent hits a year and that's an extra PSA 5 Aaron or Clemente RC.
I really do appreciate the sincere feedback you gave on the topic and understand where you're coming from, it's not often we hear a serious tone from your posts. I will enjoy the PSA membership and perhaps find a gem or two to submit, it'll definitely bring a new exciting element to my collecting.
<< <i>I think it's because I haven't been drinking the past couple days. >>
I'm sorry this happened to you.
Edited to add: What do you know, hit a 100 and didn't even know it.
100!
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
Comments
<< <i>I'd file a SNAD with PP and have 'Brent' refund my money.
Steve
edited to add: Steve at the BBCE would have refunded cheerfully. >>
I don't go along with "all" of the accolades that BBCE receives on here, but that time he refunded money on unopened packs which had been opened, when the buyers know that opening unopened packs is basically a gamble...was a pretty amazing thing that Steve did there.
I wish the casino woulda given my money back after a wrong bet at the craps table. LOL
as the saying goes, you buy the card not the holder. we all know of cards that are undergraded as well.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
jeff,
help me out was that quote originally from the first o.j. trial or from a jesse jackson campaign speech? it eludes me now.
anyway thanks for going retro.
The reason given to me it could've been an older grading standard and there was an obvious oversight, no specifics, just an honest mistake.
It is now a PSA 2
I have the option of taking a cash refund from PSA for the difference between PSA 5 and PSA 2 SMR value.
OR
I have the option of a gold membership plus a substantial amount in submission vouchers.
In the end I get the card back in a PSA 2 slab, I can ideally sell it for $120-$140 range, but I still need the PSA 5 Ford for my HOF registry.
Should I take the vouchers for the sake of I always meaning to get a membership.
Nah i'll take the money and buy me a true PSA 5
I'm very pleased with their professionalism at PSA, there straight forward approach and honesty.
Thanks PSA...I think..
CU Ancient Members badge member.
Collection: https://flickr.com/photos/185200668@N06/albums
I'm just happy everything has been corrected.
CU Ancient Members badge member.
Collection: https://flickr.com/photos/185200668@N06/albums
The sheer number of people that post here complaining about grades, preferential treatment to bulk submitters, and anything else PSA related that have never spent a dime with the company they're complaining about is astonishing.
For the above reason I've never had the opportunity to accumulate enough raw cards to submit to PSA, Ive got a stash going right now which is why "Ive been meaning to become a member"
I'm not taking the money and running here, I'm replacing the Ford I wanted.
I will become a member, I mention my results so others can have a point of reference if they deal with the same scenario.
I have nothing but good thoughts for PSA and will continue to support them through purchasing there graded cards...and becoming a member on my own.
CU Ancient Members badge member.
Collection: https://flickr.com/photos/185200668@N06/albums
"...The sheer number of people that post here complaining about grades, preferential treatment to bulk submitters, and anything else PSA related that have never spent a dime with the company they're complaining about is astonishing. ..."
///////////////////////////////////////
But, anybody who buys PSA-graded cards from PSA-submitters
is certainly "supporting" PSA too.
.........
If I had cards I wanted to submit, I would take the membership
and as many vouchers as I could get.
If I had no cards to submit AND wanted a PSA 5, I would take
the cash.
I doubt PSA will be mad at you, either way.
PSA offered a $180 incentive above the cash offer to become a member and you passed. If you really are considering becoming a member I don't see the logic of passing on the membership/voucher offer. Assuming you will eventually sub $400 worth at some point, you could use the extra money you saved to buy a PSA 6 Ford instead of the 5. That is "if" you were truly considering a membership.
But, anybody who buys PSA-graded cards from PSA-submitters
is certainly "supporting" PSA too.
If you're suggesting that someone that doesn't submit to PSA has just as much of a right to complain about their service as someone who does, I completely disagree. Supporting indirect sales through PSA slabbed card sales is certainly part of CU's business model (if it wasn't they would tell akuracy to go f himself), but the reality is PSA extended an offer to become a member that is more than fair for a reason, and the fact that they were willing to make this gesture to a potential customer and the customer told them he'd rather have the cash rubs me the wrong way. I guess it's human nature to do what's in your own best interest with little regard for anything else, but PSA was willing to go into their pocket to the tune of $320, and for that they should be rewarded with at least some direct business at some point. And if akuracy does in fact become a member and starts submitting, then great. But there are scores of people on this forum that have no intention of subbing and spend maybe $200 a year on PSA slabs and get themselves in a tizzy about overgraded cards and mislabeled flips.
<< <i>If you're suggesting that someone that doesn't submit to PSA has just as much of a right to complain about their service as someone who does, I completely disagree. Supporting indirect sales through PSA slabbed card sales is certainly part of CU's business model (if it wasn't they would tell akuracy to go f himself), but the reality is PSA extended an offer to become a member that is more than fair for a reason, and the fact that they were willing to make this gesture to a potential customer and the customer told them he'd rather have the cash rubs me the wrong way. I guess it's human nature to do what's in your own best interest with little regard for anything else, but PSA was willing to go into their pocket to the tune of $320, and for that they should be rewarded with at least some direct business at some point. And if akuracy does in fact become a member and starts submitting, then great. But there are scores of people on this forum that have no intention of subbing and spend maybe $200 a year on PSA slabs and get themselves in a tizzy about overgraded cards and mislabeled flips. >>
This is his decision, not yours, and he came into this purchase with the desire for a 1951 Bowman Whitey Ford PSA 5. If he took the vouchers (while it IS the better deal) then he would still be without the Ford card. Personally, I would have taken the vouchers and would have kept the PSA 2 but I would still need to dish out $400 to get the card I wanted.
Also, without a secondary market PSA would fail, period. If dealers did not sub to PSA with the intention to sell then PSA would never have taken off. The business generated by companies such as 4 sharp corners and 707 provide a great deal of income into PSA and those companies rely on the secondary market to survive as well. Yes, it is somewhat sad that PSA is forking over so much money to a customer who hasn't directly contributed to PSA ever but without a buyer for PSA cards there would never have been PSA cards.
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
it doesn't matter who submitted the card and who ended up with it. the card clearly did not meet the standards for a PSA 5 EX grade. it should be taken off the market and put into the correct holder. whether a PSA member initiates this or a non member, it doesn't matter. the buyer of the card is looking for a PSA 5 Ford and getting a free membership to PSA is not what he purchased. it's his call as to what compensation he takes for the error on PSA's part.
Totally agree.
whether a PSA member initiates this or a non member, it doesn't matter. the buyer of the card is looking for a PSA 5 Ford and getting a free membership to PSA is not what he purchased. it's his call as to what compensation he takes for the error on PSA's part.
What you all fail to realize is that PSA didn't have to offer anything. akuracy sent the card in to be reviewed, and legally PSA doesn't need to offer any compensation if they deem the grade to be lower than originally thought and reslab it. This was a good faith gesture they made to him in an effort to gain his business, which he declined. Why else would they offer 60% more in trade than cash? I'm not saying he has to take the trade offer, but if it were me I would be ethically persuaded to take them up on it since I would've been out $300+ if they decided to be cheap about it.
Let's go with an analogy: When we opened the doors to our first restaurant, we made a good faith gesture to honor gift cards from the previous restaurant for the full amount. A lady came in with a $100 gift card, bought dinner for her family, thanked us up and down and said she had a great time. We haven't seen her since. Now, we didn't have to honor that gift card, but we made a good faith gesture in order to try and win her business. Of course she isn't obligated to come back and pay full price, but the spirit of our offer was meant as a good faith gesture that we would win her business if we helped her out, which we did. Now I know this isn't exactly the same thing, but there's something to be said for a business going the extra effort to win your business, and it should be rewarded if at all possible on the customer's end.
Clearly I'm putting myself in the business owner's shoes, and it looks like I'm the only one here. All I can say is don't be surprised at some point if PSA decides to stop offering compensation when they downgrade your cards when you send them in for review. At our second restaurant we put a cap of $50 on honoring the previous restaurant's gift cards, and the next one we will probably do away with it altogether.
Yet, even another analogy- Say it was the seller that gave him $320 out of his pocket for the error, and asked only that akuracy consider bidding in his next round of auctions. Don't you think akuracy should be compelled to throw a little business his way as a reward?
All I'm saying is that when somebody (person or business) goes above and beyond to do right by you, maybe you should consider giving a little back to reward their generosity. Again, PSA didn't have to offer akuracy anything. They could've just sent him back the card in a PSA 2 slab and been done with it.
Yeah, no doubt PSA probably doesn't care one way or the other, and I'm sure this thread does them some good. But they did akuracy a solid and he took the cash and declined to give them some business, even though he's "always [been] meaning to get a membership." I guess I'm the only one that sees this as greedy and unappreciative.
"...They could've just sent him back the card in a PSA 2 slab and been done with it...."
////////////////////////////////////
What would be the legal theory in support of PSA doing that?
........
I don't know if PSA has a policy obligation to fix mistakes, or not.
Legend has it that PSA has always corrected grading mistakes without
any hassle; as they certainly did in the OP's case.
I am thinking that PSA does not consider 3-point spreads to be an
element of subjectivity. They are mistakes that need to be corrected
by PSA.
On the currency side - no longer part of CLCT - the grades
are "guaranteed" to be correct. I think the same is true
for the coin side.
CLCT has paid out tons of money to remedy errors. I really
think it is pretty much their standard policy.
"Grading Accuracy You Can Depend On
...........be assured that the only interest [PSA graders] have in your cards..........is to make sure they’re properly graded and carefully
preserved. ..............So when you see a card or ticket for sale in a holder displaying the PSA logo, you’ll know you can buy with the confidence
that it has been properly and professionally graded..........."
.......................................
/////////////////////////////////
...........................................
Joe Orlando said "You are doing the right thing by sending it to me, once I receive the card we can discuss"
I had no intentions of getting compensation from PSA, I was prepared to lose my pants on this purchase but doing the "right thing" paid off, I respect PSA even more for this gesture.
Hello Joe, My name is Martin and I am not a PSA member yet, although I have an account and participate in the set/inventory part of Collectors Universe and actively post on the message boards. Through the wonderful message forum i've met and learned a lot from fellow hobbyist's, I've actively purchased and collected PSA graded cards exclusively for the last 2 1/2 years since getting back into my childhood hobby.
I've been directed to you based on my recent concerns of a purchase I made from a very reputable dealer Brent Huigens "prewarcardcollector" from ebay.
I am building a mid grade PSA 1951 Bowman Baseball set of Hall of Famer's and recently purchased a PSA 5 example of Whitey Ford PSA Cert #30621383, when I received this card in hand it had more flaws than I am used to seeing in comparable 5's of 1951 Bowman.
I contacted Brent to voice my concerns and he offered to take the card back on consignment for his May auctions.
I am primarly concerned that this card was severaly overgraded and am honestly dissapointed as it doesnt hold a candle to the other 5's I own.
Easy way out for me is to plead with Brent to offer a refund or sell the card, I feel neither is fair.
I made the mistake of basing my purchase decision solely on a digital scan and PSA grade label.
I feel the right thing to do is get this card reviewed by PSA to make good on the grade, even if I lose money on it, both for the sake of future buyers and PSA's reputation for consistency and integrity in providing the best grading service in the industry.
I spoke to a lady at CU customer service today and she is sending me a review submission form.
Fellow hobby members advised that I take this issue directly to Mr. Joe Orlando himself.
I was hesitant to do so since a measely $400 card isn't worth the time for a president of a company. If time allows it would be a pleasure to get your feedback on the issue.
Thank you for your time,
CU Ancient Members badge member.
Collection: https://flickr.com/photos/185200668@N06/albums
Lee - of course psa is going to sweeten the pot when giving memberships or vouchers compared to cash. take your restaurants - say your staff makes some kind of mistake and the customer spent $100. you could either give them back $100 cash or give them a $125 voucher to use on a repeat trip. if you are running 30% food cost then that voucher costs your business far less than the $125. you'd want them to take the voucher as you'd be out less money. but it would be up to the customer to decide what they take.
akuracy - I'm glad things worked out for you and admire what you did. Most people would have added the card to their registry even though it is really a lower grade. You bought the card and not the flip and for that get two thumbs up in my book! So does PSA for their work here.
Patrick
<< <i>Most people would have added the card to their registry even though it is really a lower grade. >>
I highly doubt that.
<< <i>You bought the card and not the flip and for that get two thumbs up in my book!
Patrick >>
And oh great wise one please explain then how if he bought the card and not the flip (damage was clearly visible in the auction pics) why was he so disappointed in the card?
Jeff
Miscut Museum
My Mess
<< <i>........You bought the card and not the flip........... >>
The scan showed a very weak card for the grade, so he absolutely 100% bought the flip. Then once in hand he took the above described path.
I think it was an expert crack and switch, which PSA would have no obligation to pay for.
I'm glad they're compensating you, but I think you got lucky here.
Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps
- uncut
Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
On high dollar vintage cards, yes
I had a PSA 9 88 Score Glavine that I thought was overgraded so I sent it in for review. Joe Orlando called me and broke the bad news- it was now in a PSA 7 slab. He offered either $1.35 in cash or $3 in a voucher as compensation. I took the voucher because it seemed like the right thing to do.
whether PSA ever has anything to gain from akuracy by supporting his claim is kind of insignificant at this point.....there is a captive audience here, and a wheelbarrow full of them are, and always have been believers.....the future of PSA will rely heavily on the actions of submitters who have the ability to produce bulk business for them and i doubt they will lose any sleep over one person who doesn't actively pursue raw submittable cards anyways.
I had a PSA 9 88 Score Glavine that I thought was overgraded so I sent it in for review. Joe Orlando called me and broke the bad news- it was now in a PSA 7 slab. He offered either $1.35 in cash or $3 in a voucher as compensation. I took the voucher because it seemed like the right thing to do.
Similar thing happened to me. Joe said all he had on him was an Olive Garden gift card with about 5 bucks left on it. I said that would do, and we called it good.
<< <i> I guess I'm the only one that sees this as greedy and unappreciative. >>
He wants a PSA 5. The membership and vouchers will not help him meet that goal. The cash will. He’s done nothing wrong, and has violated no moral or ethical code.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
I did not ask for a lecture on business etiquette or any bad mouthing whatsoever.
Perhaps if I opted to resale the card knowing it was a bad grade I would've been called something else.
PSA made a mistake on this vintage card and I gave them the chance to correct it.
Or else it wouldve been another fellow hobbiest down the road dealing with my dilema.
For those with a chip on their shoulder give it a break.
CU Ancient Members badge member.
Collection: https://flickr.com/photos/185200668@N06/albums
Martin, I am glad to see that things worked out for you in the end. Aside from all the other crap, it was a very informative post, and I am glad to see that PSA took steps to make it right.
But in my view, PSA stepped up and offered compensation for a card I feel could very well have been switched.
I think to reciprocate, you take the voucher/membership.
I don't see bad-mouthing here, just disagreement.
You started this thread asking for advice on what you should do. I gave my opinion on what I thought you should've done. I'm sorry that my opinion and the logic behind it paints you in a negative light, but it seems nobody agrees with me so you really have nothing to worry about. Enjoy your PSA 5.
So there was actually a third option akuracy503 could have taken. I applaud you for not following in my footsteps.
Robb
I'm glad things worked out for you. PSA stepped up and did the right thing and offered you a few options towards compensation. Everyone has an opinion and I don't mind speaking mine--"You don't have to grade cards to be a member of this board whatsoever"
On another note....that Ford was a dog just from the scan of the front of the card. If one is not happy with the scan; don't purchase the card. It's that simple.
<< <i>it doesn't matter who submitted the card and who ended up with it. the card clearly did not meet the standards for a PSA 5 EX grade. it should be taken off the market and put into the correct holder.
Totally agree.
whether a PSA member initiates this or a non member, it doesn't matter. the buyer of the card is looking for a PSA 5 Ford and getting a free membership to PSA is not what he purchased. it's his call as to what compensation he takes for the error on PSA's part.
What you all fail to realize is that PSA didn't have to offer anything. akuracy sent the card in to be reviewed, and legally PSA doesn't need to offer any compensation if they deem the grade to be lower than originally thought and reslab it. This was a good faith gesture they made to him in an effort to gain his business, which he declined. Why else would they offer 60% more in trade than cash? I'm not saying he has to take the trade offer, but if it were me I would be ethically persuaded to take them up on it since I would've been out $300+ if they decided to be cheap about it.
Let's go with an analogy: When we opened the doors to our first restaurant, we made a good faith gesture to honor gift cards from the previous restaurant for the full amount. A lady came in with a $100 gift card, bought dinner for her family, thanked us up and down and said she had a great time. We haven't seen her since. Now, we didn't have to honor that gift card, but we made a good faith gesture in order to try and win her business. Of course she isn't obligated to come back and pay full price, but the spirit of our offer was meant as a good faith gesture that we would win her business if we helped her out, which we did. Now I know this isn't exactly the same thing, but there's something to be said for a business going the extra effort to win your business, and it should be rewarded if at all possible on the customer's end.
Clearly I'm putting myself in the business owner's shoes, and it looks like I'm the only one here. All I can say is don't be surprised at some point if PSA decides to stop offering compensation when they downgrade your cards when you send them in for review. At our second restaurant we put a cap of $50 on honoring the previous restaurant's gift cards, and the next one we will probably do away with it altogether. >>
PSA doesn't "have" to offer him anything, but it is their own stated business policy to do so:
"The PSA Financial Guarantee Of Grade & Authenticity: The PSA Financial Guarantee of Grade & Authenticity is fundamental to PSA's concept of third-party grading. The cash-back policy ensures the accuracy of the grade assigned to any PSA-graded card as long as the card remains in its tamper-evident holder. PSA guarantees that all cards submitted to it shall be graded in accordance with PSA grading standards and under the procedures of PSA."
They held true to their word and will likely benefit from the goodwill generated by such a decision. Had they refused to make good on their guarantee (note: I am assuming the holder had not been tampered with), many of us would be calling out their failure to enforce their own policies. I see absolutely nothing wrong with Martin accepting one of the options offered to him.
And, if there ever does come a time where they have to deliver too many guarantee payouts such as this, they would have FAR bigger problems to worry about as this would call into question their whole grading quality standards which would put their entire business at risk.
After the good experience with PSA I decided it was the right time to get a gold membership today.
In the end it was a blessing in disguise, we are very fortunate to have such a grading company representing our hobby.
CU Ancient Members badge member.
Collection: https://flickr.com/photos/185200668@N06/albums
I'm glad they won your business.
we are very fortunate to have such a grading company representing our hobby.
Agreed. With a few flips of the coin 10 years ago, we would now all be posting on the GAI forums and sending our cards to them instead.
Since there was some disclarity on the issue of warranty obligations, this note
from an SEC-filing may clarify the issue:
........................................
WARRANTY COSTS
Collectors Universe offers a warranty covering the coins and sportscards it authenticates and grades. Under the terms of the warranty, any coin or
sportscard originally graded by us, which subsequently receives a lower grade upon resubmittal to us, obligates us to either purchase the coin or
sportscard or pay the difference in value of the item at its original grade as compared with its lower grade. We accrue for estimated warranty costs
based on historical trends and related experiences.
.....................................
Collectors Universe offers a warranty covering the coins and sportscards it authenticates and grades. Under the terms of the warranty, any coin or
sportscard originally graded by us, which subsequently receives a lower grade upon resubmittal to us, obligates us to either purchase the coin or
sportscard or pay the difference in value of the item at its original grade as compared with its lower grade. We accrue for estimated warranty costs
based on historical trends and related experiences.
I did not realize it was established on paper that this was their policy. I assumed they decided on a case by case basis. Thanks for the clarification.
Let's go with an analogy: When we opened the doors to our first restaurant, we made a good faith gesture to honor gift cards from the previous restaurant for the full amount. A lady came in with a $100 gift card, bought dinner for her family, thanked us up and down and said she had a great time. We haven't seen her since. Now, we didn't have to honor that gift card, but we made a good faith gesture in order to try and win her business. Of course she isn't obligated to come back and pay full price, but the spirit of our offer was meant as a good faith gesture that we would win her business if we helped her out, which we did. Now I know this isn't exactly the same thing, but there's something to be said for a business going the extra effort to win your business, and it should be rewarded if at all possible on the customer's end.
Lee,
What you dont know is how much "goodwill" you picked up by honoring her gift card as opposed to the "badwill" you would have received for not honoring it. In this case ultimatelty PSA will and has received alot of goodwill from this transaction.
Kirk
Thanks in advance
What you dont know is how much "goodwill" you picked up by honoring her gift card as opposed to the "badwill" you would have received for not honoring it. In this case ultimatelty PSA will and has received alot of goodwill from this transaction.
Kirk
True, this is not something you can measure. Is this thread worth $320 to PSA? Who knows, probably not but somewhere close. You just have to do what you feel is right as a business and hope it works out. All I was really trying to say is what hammerd put into words a little better than myself- since PSA did right by a potential customer, it should be reciprocated. I guess this thread and the goodwill created as a result could be considered reciprocation, but I still would've taken the vouchers. Maybe I was a little out of line in calling out akuracy for not taking the membership and vouchers. I probably should've just said "I would take the vouchers" and leave it at that.
And akuracy, I know you don't give two squirts about what I think, but you're going to have a lot more fun at card shows and shops now that you have an open line to submit cards. From here on out that random high grade common from a set you don't collect will jump out at you and you might take a $7 flier on it and hit paydirt, then you can turn the money into something you collect. All you need is a 3 or 4 decent hits a year and that's an extra PSA 5 Aaron or Clemente RC.
Lee
I really do appreciate the sincere feedback you gave on the topic and understand where you're coming from, it's not often we hear a serious tone from your posts.
I will enjoy the PSA membership and perhaps find a gem or two to submit, it'll definitely bring a new exciting element to my collecting.
Thanks to everyone who chimed in.
CU Ancient Members badge member.
Collection: https://flickr.com/photos/185200668@N06/albums
I think it's because I haven't been drinking the past couple days. I think I'm a better person when I'm sauced.
<< <i>I think it's because I haven't been drinking the past couple days. >>
I'm sorry this happened to you.
Edited to add: What do you know, hit a 100 and didn't even know it.
100!