Options
Brutal Poppage...REVISITED
ymarea
Posts: 1,576 ✭✭✭
***SEE PAGE 2 FOR THE LATEST***
These sub results are so brutal that I will not bother to post them.
The order consisted of 109 cards ranging from 1968 through 1973. TWENTY SEVEN of them received the dreaded N1: Evidence of Trimming. The frustrating thing about this is that EIGHTEEN of these now "trimmed" cards were cracked out of PSA 9 holders, 3 from PSA 8. A few other former 9's now are 6's. OUCH!
The moral of the story: Don't crack out high grade cards, even if you are strictly a raw card collector (as I used to be).
These sub results are so brutal that I will not bother to post them.
The order consisted of 109 cards ranging from 1968 through 1973. TWENTY SEVEN of them received the dreaded N1: Evidence of Trimming. The frustrating thing about this is that EIGHTEEN of these now "trimmed" cards were cracked out of PSA 9 holders, 3 from PSA 8. A few other former 9's now are 6's. OUCH!
The moral of the story: Don't crack out high grade cards, even if you are strictly a raw card collector (as I used to be).
Brett
0
Comments
Maybe PSA needs to get a few more subs to get their bonus, because I'm sure you are going to resub those cards.
speed kills.
I have my "blackout periods" and this is one of them.
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
<< <i>I don't ever send stuff in this time of year. Ever.
I have my "blackout periods" and this is one of them. >>
Interesting. Is this due to the national convention being held a this time of year?
I could theorize to say that perhaps they're tightening up in order to scrutinize stuff correctly at the National, or their going the other direction, getting careless with so much to do before the show. But that's all speculation. I just know my history and have imposed personal blackouts as a result.
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
<< <i>I don't ever send stuff in this time of year. Ever.
I have my "blackout periods" and this is one of them. >>
Wish you had told me this about 2 weeks ago
<< <i>I don't ever send stuff in this time of year. Ever.
I have my "blackout periods" and this is one of them. >>
Hope this does not turn out to be true for me. They just logged in 322 items for me today.
1. Have a friend, wife, etc. pick 100 cards from your collection and you "grade" them. Write the grades down.
2. Mix the 100 cards up and wait another month and "grade" them again.
Doing that, I would be hard pressed to find any of us who would issue the same grades twice. While it is probably not a perfect experiment, it should give you a gist of how difficult grading can be. I mean I could not imagine being a grader sitting in a dark room with a bright light for eight hours a day, day after day. I am sure on top of that each grader has a daily quota. Lets assume 15 seconds a card for seven hours of work a day (giving an hour of "fudge" room). That works out to 840 cards a day. Lets round that down a bit to an even 800; that would be 4,000 cards in a week. I can honestly say in my entire collecting life I have not looked at 4,000 cards with the critical view needed for "accurate" grading. Usually when I look through cards, including those for potential grading, I quickly eyeball centering. If that passes, I go to corners. If my naked eye finds a bad corner, I move on. I am then left with a short pile of good centered, good cornered cards that meet my very brief naked eyeball test. Those in the short pile are then scrutinized. I cannot imagine scrutinizing what is in my "typical" short pile 4,000 times in a week. Ugh.
With the above in mind (and who knows, my estimates may be off), you also have to factor in feelings of the grader. Got a headache? Such will impact performance. Something outside of work bothering you? Such could impact performance. Your cards happen to be graded later in the day? That can make a difference too (one person may be more lenient later in the day because he/she is tired for example).
Given all of the foregoing, there is unfortunately quite a bit of luck that goes into the equation. I know many, myself included, try to theorize on different things (i.e., is it better to send in a big order, group certain years together, etc.) but at the end of the day, it does to a large degree come down to luck: (1) which grader you get; (2) how they are feeling at the moment; and (3) what is their grading tendencies. On the last item, I would suspect PSA looks for each grader to stay within some average grade range. Lets just say for sake of argument that the average range of all cards graded must be 7.5. Let us further assume Grader A is averaging 8.5 on grades. I suspect in that scenario that grader is going to be told he/she needs to tighten up her standards to come within the acceptable range. Well guess what-- if your submission is next up for that grader after that discussion, your submission could be slaughtered. Conversely, if you hit that grader who is trending to low and is told to bring it up, you could hit a jack pot.
So again, while I do not profess that any of this is actually how PSA operates, it would to me logically make sense in their business model. With that being the case, I personally look at it as a large luck factor. Unless you had a robot doing these things, I don't see how you could change it. It is of course maddening when you have a card undergraded but you never hear anyone complain (and I don't) when you get that card back that overgrades.
Back to reading tea leaves!!
Matt
I was just killed on my submission today - I sent in some '55 Bowmans for the first time ever. Here's the auction I got them from:Auction
8 of 9 got EOT. One got PSA 8. I've bought from this seller often and I know he's not a trimmer, and I know the source where these cards originally came from. Although I could never prove it to PSA, I know with 99% certainty these aren't trimmed.
I even called customer service today to complain (1st time I've ever done that). She said they could look at them again, but then she saw the order had already shipped.
I agree that they rushed through these, and the grader saw one he didn't like for whatever reason and assumed the rest of the order must be the same.
It sucks. All I can do now is resubmit them. More money to PSA.
I guarantee most of these (if not all) will be graded next time.
<< <i>put away your knives and stop performing surgery on your ball cards >>
Great way to endear yourself to the boards Newbie!
1. come back a 10
2. comeback a 9
3-25. something worse
The odds are not favorable.
<< <i>Cracking and resubbing a 9 can have several results:
1. come back a 10
2. comeback a 9
3-25. something worse
The odds are not favorable. >>
Right you are. I didn't crack them with the intent to submit, however. I bought the cards over the course of several years and cracked 'em to keep with my raw sets. I never had any real interest in graded cards and thought I would keep my collection forever. My interest in cards began to wane, albeit unexpectedly, and I decided to sell, sell, sell. There was little initial interest in my raw cards, so I decided to get into the grading game to enhance sales. For the most part it's been successful. Not this time, though.
You win some, you lose some.
finally decide to get them graded. You lose a grade, grading fees and your left scratching your head wondering, "what just happened?". It makes you a little leary about the next submission. You just
have to try again I guess since your sales are better graded than not. Maybe the time of year does matter for better results, you might have to what a few months. You still have some of the best raw
cards around. Take care. Doug
The first group below shows the 27 cards that returned "N1" from PSA. Just for kicks, I sent 26 of them to SGC under a similar service level as the PSA group...$4.50/card. I had to omit 1968 #409 because the SGC special was for 1970-present. This was my first-ever SGC submission.
SGC slabbed 21 cards while 5 met the same fate as they had at PSA...trimmed. Of those 5, three were formerly PSA 9's while one was once a PSA 8. All cards except one got at least 88, with most getting 96. Only 1970 Woods #253 graded low at 80. This was once in a PSA 9 holder. The back is badly discolored along the edges and should have graded a PSA 9 (PD) at best. It's very sharp and well-centered, but that back is UGLY. I assume that SGC, which doesn't use qualifiers, downgraded the card to an 80 because of the back.
Of the 21 cards slabbed by SGC (all deemed "N1" on their previous visit to PSA), 16 used to be in PSA slabs (14-9; 2-8). In all, 20 of the 21 cards were once in PSA holders.
Overall, I lost quite a bit in re-sale value, but that doesn't bother me (much). I found the experience to be very educational and fun.
Order #20418202 / Submission #685477
Line # Item # Cert # Grade Description Type Country
2 1 17457689 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1968 TOPPS 409 ORIOLES ROOKIES F.PETERS/R.STONE Card US...Not sent to SGC because service level was for 1970-present.
8 1 17457695 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1970 TOPPS 223 NATE OLIVER Card US
9 1 17457696 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1970 TOPPS 253 RON WOODS Card US
12 1 17457699 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1970 TOPPS 347 RUSS SNYDER Card US
19 1 17457706 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1970 TOPPS 583 HAL LANIER Card US
24 1 17457711 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 30 RICO PETROCELLI Card US...SGC also says "trimmed."
26 1 17457713 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 49 WILLIE MAYS Card US...SGC also says "trimmed."
29 1 17457716 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 80 TONY PEREZ Card US
30 1 17457717 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 82 RON WOODS Card US
33 1 17457720 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 88 A.L. R.B.I. LEADERS KILLEBREW/ROBINSON/SMITH Card US...SGC also says "trimmed."
34 1 17457721 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 90 AL HOME RUN LEADERS MELTON/CASH/JACKSON Card US
43 1 17457730 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 212 GRANT JACKSON Card US
44 1 17457731 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 221 N.L. PLAYOFFS BUCS CHAMPS! Card US
50 1 17457737 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 259 SPARKY LYLE Card US
52 1 17457739 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 275 CESAR TOVAR Card US
55 1 17457742 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 303 JOE PEPITONE Card US
56 1 17457743 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 311 CLAY CARROLL Card US
59 1 17457746 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 343 WILLIE STARGELL BOYHOOD PHOTO Card US
60 1 17457747 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 345 RICK WISE BOYHOOD PHOTO Card US
63 1 17457750 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 375 REGGIE CLEVELAND Card US
65 1 17457752 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 424 BILL GOGOLEWSKI Card US
66 1 17457753 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 458 AURELIO MONTEAGUDO Card US
67 1 17457754 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 462 RICKEY CLARK Card US
76 1 17457763 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 580 LOU PINIELLA Card US...SGC also says "trimmed."
77 1 17457764 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 604 CHECKLIST 657-787 COPYRIGHT ON LEFT Card US
84 1 17457771 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 634 DICK WOODSON Card US...SGC also says "trimmed."
85 1 17457772 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1972 TOPPS 660 PAUL BLAIR Card US
Invoice # : 8186999
Service : 1970-PRESENT SPECIAL (10 CARD MIN)
# of Cards : 35
Invoice Tracking
Status Date
Received 07/20/2010
Shipped 08/10/2010
Details
Item # Year Publisher Set Card# Player Name Description Grade
1 1970 Topps 223 NATE OLIVER 96
2 1970 Topps 347 RUSS SNYDER 92
4 1970 Topps 583 HAL LANIER 96
6 1972 Topps 30 RICO PETROCELLI 0 - T7...Raw card not previously slabbed.
7 1972 Topps 49 WILLIE MAYS 0 - T...Cracked out of a PSA 8 holder.
8 1972 Topps 80 TONY PEREZ 96
9 1972 Topps 82 RON WOODS 96
10 1972 Topps 88 A.L. RBI LEADERS 0 - T6...Cracked out of a PSA 9 holder.
11 1972 Topps 90 A.L. HOME RUN LEADERS 88
13 1972 Topps 212 GRANT JACKSON 96
14 1972 Topps 221 N.L. PLAYOFFS 96
15 1972 Topps 259 SPARKY LYLE 96
16 1972 Topps 275 CESAR TOVAR 96
17 1972 Topps 303 JOE PEPITONE 96
18 1972 Topps 311 CLAY CARROLL 96
19 1972 Topps 343 WILLIE STARGELL Boyhood Photos Of The Stars 92
20 1972 Topps 345 RICK WISE Boyhood Photos Of The Stars 96
21 1972 Topps 375 REGGIE CLEVELAND 96
22 1972 Topps 424 BILL GOGOLEWSKI 96
23 1972 Topps 458 AURELIO MONTEAGUDO 96
24 1972 Topps 462 RICKEY CLARK 96
25 1972 Topps 604 CHECKLIST 96
26 1972 Topps 580 LOU PINIELLA 0 - T7...Cracked out of a PSA 9 holder.
28 1972 Topps 634 DICK WOODSON 0 - T7...Cracked out of a PSA 9 holder.
29 1972 Topps 660 PAUL BLAIR High# 96
35 1970 Topps 253 RON WOODS 80