1/2 GRADES

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimH</b><p>What about a discount for "already" graded PSA cards resubmitted for a possible upgrade? How about that for customer service! Maybe they will start charging extra because they have to grade through the holder.<br><br>Jim.Heffron@cox.net

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>lumberg</b><p>Get with the times! Welcome to capitalism in America - you would try and make an extra buck if you could to. <br /><br />This is a great opportunitity for collectors to get a real assessment of their collections. <br /><br />With price usually comes quality. Sorry if you have to put out a few extra bucks to get an HONEST grade but this is what great companies do to maintain their gold standard. If you want the best, you have to pay for the best.<br /><br />If your sitting on a 9.4 and you got a 9, you're gonna like that 9.5 when it comes in the mail.<br />It's guys like you, though, who are probably sitting on a bunch of 8.6's or 8.7"s and are laughing all the way to the bank with PSA"s generous grade of 9.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p><br />If your sitting on a 9.4 and you got a 9, you're gonna like that 9.5 when it comes in the mail.<br /><br /><br />Too bad that is impossible.<br /><br />Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>lumberg</b><p>Are you saying that PSA is not planning on rounded to the nearest 1/2 point? Are they planning on always rounding down? So any borderline 7's or 8's can only drop a half grade? Please explain.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>No, I am saying that they do not have a 9.5 grade.<br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>lumberg</b><p>Thank you - <br />Do you know if psa will grade according to what the card is closer to or what level it reached? In other words say a card is somewhere between 7.5 and 8. If you had to put a number on it say a 7.9. Will they grade it an 8 or a 7.5?<br /><br />In my opinion the card should be an 8 because that is a more honest assessment.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Marty Ogelvie</b><p><P>PSA will not bump a 9 to a 9.5.</P><P>There will be nothing between MINT and GEM MINT.. what would it be anyway... NEARLY GEM MINT??</P><P>an 8.5 is the highest half grade offered by PSA.&nbsp; </P><br><br>martyOgelvie<br />nyyankeecards.com

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimH</b><p>I'm glad I finally got some discussion going. I ask that you stick to basics. It is understood that PSA are not collectors or sellers. That, as far as I know, is not open to public review. PSA controls price (SMR). The prices in the SMR do not reflect what the cards actually sold for (check for the small print in just about any set listing). A card that is raw goes to PSA for grading and PSA is asking the person submitting the card for a value for that card. Then a card is encased by PSA and it has a specific value assigned. Now they take that card which they gave a specific value reference to and are willing to change it at an additional cost to the consumer. It very well may cost the consumer more because that card may fall into a more costly grading service determined by PSA. PSA keeps the cost of submission even if the card does not get a higher grade. Additionally, they have to grade the card through a holder. I ask you, does this pass the smell test? It seems to me that they should offer a reduced cost for cards to be resubmitted as a service to people who are truly collectors and not merchants.<br><br>Jim.Heffron@cox.net

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric B</b><p>According to PSA, an 8 that is truly an 8.4 will still be an 8. You round down. remember, a 7.9 still was called a 7 because it did not meet the minimum requirements to become an 8.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Jim<br /><br /><br /> No one is being forced to resubmit their cards.<br /><br />One the one hand you say PSA should give collectors a discount yet at the same time you want your cards resubmitted so they can be worth more.<br /><br />I am at a loss as to what you truly are trying to say.<br /><br />If you are a collector (not just you, anyone) and wish a more precise grade, by all means do it. If you (again anyone) are a merchant and within your inventory you have cards that you feel could upgrade, again by all means do it.<br /><br /> The former can have cards graded more precise for their registry sets/collections and the latter can have cards again graded more precise that they may be able to sell for a higher price.<br /><br />Again, let me stress no one is being forced to resubmit.<br /><br />A few other things, no card sent in under the resub program will get a lower grade, they will either be bumped .5 or a full point or more for that matter. <br /><br />Cards that are found to be altered or counterfieted/reprints can expect a phone call.<br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Then a card is encased by PSA and it has a specific value assigned.<br /><br />////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////<br /><br /><br />I would disagree with that statement. PSA assigns grade, not value.<br /><br />The seller/owner assigns value, the marketplace agrees or disagree.<br /><br />PSA/SGC and so on ask for you to value it only for insurance reasons.<br /><br /><br />Steve<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Solomon</b><p>I would assume, any significant card that is already a 7.9 is in an 8 holder. Who is selling incredibly high end 7s and 8s on cards with significant moves in price?<br /><br />For all that people complain about PSA's overgrading - do you really think there are tons of 7.9s out there in 7 holders? <br /><br />The half grades are a cop out - all those really nice 7s (and 8s, etc.) finally have a place, where the grader is bailed out about what to do with the vending card with 70/30 centering. <br /><br />Anyone who things PSA did this out of a sense of "make the hobby better" is deluding themselves. Grading is always going to be subjective. But, in theory, the arguments should now be over a half grade spread, not a full grade. Just like that T206 Lajoie now posted - I think most people would agree it's closer to a 5 than a 7, but not an abortion in a 6 holder. Doesn't that 5.5 grade make a lot of sense?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimH</b><p>Steve, I expected that response from someone. Reminds this old man of "love it or leave it". Cards that are newly submitted I have little heartburn with. Your observations are valid. But cards that have already been submitted open up all kinds of problems. Just a few of these are: at what price are cards submitted and how can cards be accurately graded through an insert sleeve and holder. If I once submitted a card for 10.00 to be graded, now it could cost me much more to submit that same card possibly getting the same result. If PSA would simply do something for the "old time" loyal customers it would go a long way. After all, rightly or wrongly, we do trust the grade they give and the value they give.<br><br>Jim.Heffron@cox.net

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I agree with most of what you say on this board. I do disagree somewhat with you saying no one is forcing anyone to resubmit cards to PSA. You are right but if you are playing the Registry game, and PSA knows full well what they are doing, then you risk being overtaken by someone that does resubmit. I agree with Solomon in that this is purely money making on PSA's part (not wrong but not admitted either) and little else. Although I do think they might have come over to SGC's way of thinking and are now agreeing to what SGC has known all along. (I hate it when that happens) Yeah, PSA is helping the hobby. If they are helping the hobby then they would be charging $4-$5 each for resubmissions to cover their costs and not to make more profit....Just my opinion....BTW, I am sure SGC does things for profit too, I have no problem making a profit .... It's the peeing on my leg and telling me it's raining that I don't care for....<br /><br />edited for full disclosure to say that I have submitted to PSA but only use SGC now and SGC is obviously an advertiser.....I still feel the pee though <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>ErlandStevens</b><p>How is this different from any other product improvement? If you buy a car, you would never expect the manufacturer to give you something back if the next model is improved somehow. Anyone who previously sent in cards to PSA got exactly what they paid for - cards graded under the terms outlined by PSA. PSA has now changed their terms (grading scale). While some feel that this move makes PSA look bad, I don't think that SGC or Beckett are beyond doing the same thing. If business is down, you change to try to make it better.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimH</b><p>Leon, You got it!!!! <br><br>Jim.Heffron@cox.net

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>lumberg</b><p>This issue may have very legitimate reasons for a law suit. It may require legislation and government intervention.<br />You may say I am full of it but don't be suprised when someday the IRS audits every high end ebayer and classified ad that reads "wanted vintage sports collectibles." <br />So much for the treasure hunting and flea markets - thanks alot PSA!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Leon that is exactly why I said no one is being forced to resubmit anything. I too dislike the idea of having to pay again. i also mentioned one of the reasons why people just might resubmit (registry)<br /><br />My post was not to proclaim PSA as the greatest, just as an informational piece. It goes without saying that they will make money on this.<br /><br />Thanks God you do agree with most of what i say though lol that is good to know.<br /><br />Hehe.<br /><br />Steve<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric B</b><p>Lawsuit? On what grounds?<br /><br />Erland made a great analogy. If you purchased a car a few years ago, you got what you paid for. If the manufacturer decided to put XM radios in this year's models, you aren't entitled to an exchange. But if they decide to give uou the XM radio for a discounted price, then take it if you want it.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>If they are helping the hobby then they would be charging $4-$5 each for resubmissions to cover their costs and not to make more profit.<br /><br /><br /> PSA may be thinking that they are re grading a card that in 9 sells for 10k and in 8 sells for 2K. The spread between the two is great thus they feel those cards should be sent in whatever tier they belong in. Is it right? not for me to decide, but no one grades 2k cards for 5.00 Just like no one sells 250k cards for 100k. Please do not take me for a PSA apollogist&lt;sp&gt; I am simply telling it like it is. Would I love for them to allow me to resubmit any card for 5.00 You bet I would!<br /><br />Steve<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Of course PSA is forcing the hands of collectors. If you don't resubmit your cards you are leaving money on the table. This microcap company is running out of ways to generate income....

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Jeff,<br /><br />Just to warn you, I am resubmitting all my 1955 Topps first. I figured it out 7.94 vs. 7.85--hmmm .09 out of the top 10! How many 8.5s will it take to overtake you? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I understand your position of charging again with respect to this new found value. Fine, then PSA should not charge when the bump up doesn't happen. ALSO, these cards that stay in 8 holders (or whatever whole number)could be stigmatized as lower end cards and therefore lose value. IS PSA going to compensate people for that? Sorry, this is indefensible except to make more money...you can say anything you want to but that is what it is.....and I am ok with that but prefer to call it what it is....When a car mfg goes up in price they don't say it's to help consumers....that wouldn't be very good PR....as folks know better......regards

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>marty</b><p>there are still a few more changes that might come (years from now), if sales fall, what would stop psa and sgc from going to sub-grades?? ya know, surface, edges, maybe a new one "smell" if like bubblegum or wax 9.5, basement and attic 5.0! always choices regardless , i do wish psa would also go to a black insert with new submissions and bumps, would it be anymore of an uproar than what's going on anyhow?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Corey R. Shanus</b><p>"Cards that are found to be altered or counterfieted/reprints can expect a phone call."<br /><br />What happens when the card owner gets that phone call and tells PSA to return the card in the original (graded) holder? Will they?<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p> What happens when the card owner gets that phone call and tells PSA to return the card in the original (graded) holder? Will they?<br /><br /><br />How should I know? lol, Perhaps you could call them and ask? I would think no. I would think they would then negotiate a price. What would SGC or GAI or Beckett do? I have no idea. I mean who wants a reprint/counterfiet card? I surely wouldn't. I'd be grateful that they caught it the 2nd time around. <br /><br /><br /><br />Leon, you have no idea what will happen to the straight graded card as I do not either.<br /><br />The value can remain stable too. And if a card is in fact a dog for the grade the market in most cases already did that. If collectors are not worried about the value of their cards or the registry they can keep them the way they are. If they want to sell and get what they feel is a hi end card they can use PSA an attempt a bump. If a certifacate and or placement on some list is their bag they too can play the game. MOI? Going forward I have no problem with the .5 system, I'm just not going to play the resubmit game. If I feel a card is hi end for the grade I'll price it accordingly if I'm selling. Same as I always did when buying. <br /><br />And for the life of me where is this 'helping the hobby' coming from?<br /><br />They simply said they wanted more precise grading.<br /><br />They then gave a few reasons, showed a few charts. I don't recall them saying they want to help the hobby.<br /><br />I think someone somewhere mentioned that and it was said enough times that it became fact. Like alot of other things that get said on message boards.<br /><br /><br />ok carry on.<br /><br /><br />Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>You asked about where PSA said they were helping the hobby? <br /><br />"In conclusion, we feel that this change will further enhance the PSA graded card market by providing more detailed grading and additional value to the hobbyist."<br /><br /><br /><br />I don't know but to me "additional value to the hobbyist" means just that...but maybe I am misinterpreting that statement and adding value doesn't really mean helping ...it means hurting?.....best regards

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>I think the most interesting part of this whole program, that they are charging full price for the review, is what it implies about the amount of time spent grading.<br /><br />A card comes in raw for grading, and gets the full evaluation. Now suppose the same card comes back for the bump review. I assume that PSA has armed its graders with very specific direction for each grade level to help the bump review. It would say something like "if a card comes in with Grade X, then look only for features Y and Z (something like undented corners or even borders or something) and if they are present assign the card a new Grade X.5. If not, leave it at X." Clearly this review would take far less time than a full intitial eval of a raw card, no? So why no discount?<br /><br />There is only one explanation. <br /><br />The cost of grading consists of many components. There is logging, tracking, the actual review, making labels, purchase label supplies, the cost of the molded slab halves, the cost of the sonic weld process, packaging, shipping, etc etc. All of these items contribute to the cost.<br /><br />For PSA to say that a substantially reduced time for review will not change the cost to customer is essentially saying that the role and contribution of the eval process to the entire cost is minimal - all of the other items make up the bulk of the cost.<br /><br />So in a way they are acknowledging that evaluations (meaning original, not the bump reviews) are quick and limited, otherwise they would make up a higher portion of the overall cost. And if they made up a higher portion of overall cost, then a significant reduction in eval time for a bump review would lower the cost. But it hasn't.<br /><br />That's both interesting and a little startling to me.<br /><br />J

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Frank Evanov</b><p><I>" I assume that PSA has armed its graders with very specific direction for each grade level to help the bump review. It would say something like "if a card comes in with Grade X, then look only for features Y and Z (something like undented corners or even borders or something) and if they are present assign the card a new Grade X.5. If not, leave it at X." Clearly this review would take far less time than a full intitial eval of a raw card, no? So why no discount?"</I><br /><br />You make some very good points. This month's PSA SMR magazine [in very tiny print on page 44] notes on half grades: "While PSA graders will evaluate all of the attributes possessed by a card.....<B>there will be a clear focus on centering</B>. Generally speaking, for an upgrade a card must exhibit centering that is <B>5-10% better</B> than the lowest % allowed within a particular grade"<br /><br /><br />Essentially, if you are going to spend the bucks to get the bump, you had better have a very sharply centered card; otherwise you're wasting your money..<br /><br><br>Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Corey R. Shanus</b><p>Joann -- While I think you make some insightful points, I look at it a bit differently. The reason PSA doesn't offer a discount is because they don't have to. Their half-grade scheme has their set registry participants over a barrel. PSA knows those people will feel they have to resubmit, discount or no discount, because if they don't their sets will go down in the standings. So why offer a discount if you don't have to? <br /><br />Steve -- From what I have been made to understand from the thread a few weeks ago on the new half-grade system, for the resubmits PSA will NOT be looking for alterations. So I don't think any phone calls will be forthcoming.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>additional value to the hobbyist."<br /><br /><br />Means exactly what it implies.<br /><br />I took in a a way of that they were proving their point with the charts.<br /><br />I did not take it, and they did not say, they were helping the hobby. Especially the way that you have been trying to claim. <br /><br /><br />So yes, I think you misinterpreted them.<br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p> Steve -- From what I have been made to understand from the thread a few weeks ago on the new half-grade system, for the resubmits PSA will NOT be looking for alterations. So I don't think any phone calls will be forthcoming.<br /><br /><br />So basically you take what you read on a message board as gospel? I don't recall anyone from PSA coming here (they no better) and making that claim. Just like the 'helping the hobby' speel, if something gets said enough times it becomes the truth.<br /><br />Great, however, all I did was answer your previous question. Now I'll try and answer this one as well.<br /><br />Lets assume an altered/counterfiet/reprint is obvious, The grader is not looking for them but can't miss it. Then you will expect a call.<br /><br />Everyone and their grand mother knows PSA is making money doing this. What company doesn't make money selling a service or product?<br /><br />What collector selling his cards doesn't try to make money?<br /><br /><br />Jonne makes some great points however I think she missed one, PSA or whoever charges more for higher dollar cards. If something happens to them the payout is higher thus the service level is too. That is at least the theory. Or part of it anyway.<br /><br />Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimH</b><p>I am enjoying reading the strong logic used countering PSA's move to abuse customers who have been faithful to them. Like I said when I started this it dosen't pass the smell test. If one looks at PSA's submission form it says you have to submit a card in the 30.00, 55.00, 85.00 or 200.00 cost per submission if a card has a certain declared value. My question is, who declares value on a graded card? It is my understanding PSA forces you to use the SMR value for values of graded submitted cards. And to think our young friends say PSA dosen't set price. Also, would it not be smart to break out already graded cards to get the better submission charge. Isn't that great "for thr hobby"!<br><br>Jim.Heffron@cox.net

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>The funny thing is I am not countering anything. The hate here is unbeliavable, I have said "I did not like it,That I would not play that game". No one saw that i guess. I was simply explaining what I feel is going on.<br /><br />Ok Ill be like the rest of you, Ill become a sheep and follow u all. PSA is peeing down my leg, like I didn't already know. Thanks Leon for bringing it to my attention.<br /><br /><br />God forbid someone tries to explain the simplist of things all he will get is another question.<br /><br /> <br />Bahhhhhhh<br /><br /><br /><br />Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>My question is, who declares value on a graded card? It is my understanding PSA forces you to use the SMR value for values of graded submitted cards<br /><br /><br />Your understanding is wrong. They do not force you to do that. And if they did it would work both ways. If I was to send in a MINT 9 mars attack card they book for 300.00, yet they sell always for 1000.00. I could take the chance and insure it for 300.00. And to clarify, since PSA does not go toa 9.5 just say Im looking for a review to 10. <br /><br />How many times have I heard here that the SMR is out of wack. Ohh, that is when it fits whatever you are trying to convey. Probably when you are trying to sell a Cobb card for 3k when the smr states it has a value of 1k. In this PSA bash, it is best to imply that SMR is right on! I get it!! <br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br />You in my post does not mean anyone specifically. Just people in general.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimH</b><p>I'm not sure I understand what declared value means. If I have a graded card (PSA graded) which is thought to be expensive ($10K) and I want to submit it to PSA for a possible upgrade, will PSA accept it if I put a declared value of $100 on it?<br><br>Jim.Heffron@cox.net

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>No<br /><br /><br />Edited to add:<br /><br />You could though, since you think it is worth 10k, declare that, even if PSA SMR states it is a 12k card. <br /><br />Just like the opposite could happen with my Mars attacks example i spoke of earlier.<br /><br /><br /> <br /> Steve<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matthew</b><p>If i purchase a card that is not on a half grade how will i know if it ws ever sent out to psa for that half grade higher. psa will make tons of money on the same cards getting resubmitted by someone not knowing it was already sent in. and psa will have that all in there computers so there will be no mistakes by them. they will know it was previously summitted.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p> Also, would it not be smart to break out already graded cards to get the better submission charge.<br /><br /><br /><br />Again no.<br /><br /><br />That makes absolutley no sense. You are missing the point, besides declaring the value for them to determine the cost of grading you are insuring your item at that level. <br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /> <br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>lumberg</b><p>JIM H -<br />You obviously have the best handle on the situation here and is why I think you should feel compelled to at least write the company.<br /><br />It seems the reasonable person would support your claim that previously graded cards deserve a least a discount.<br /><br />If someone (you jim) doesn't put a stop to this type of abuse there is no end in sight. The company will continue to gouge the collectors and diminish the hobby to profits and efficiency as its ultimate values.<br /><br />That's stright talk.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>If i purchase a card that is not on a half grade how will i know if it ws ever sent out to psa for that half grade higher. psa will make tons of money on the same cards getting resubmitted by someone not knowing it was already sent in. and psa will have that all in there computers.<br /><br /><br />That is the pee Leon was talking about earlier. lol<br /> <br />I think once it gets going people that track certs will know when a card was graded. Just like anything else info is power.<br /><br /><br /><br />Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p> And to think our young friends say PSA dosen't set price.<br /><br /><br />I think that was directed at me. I thought the same about you!<br /><br />Sadly I am not young anymore. (I wish I was) And by the content of some of your questions I have come to the conclusion that maybe it is you that is 'young' or at the least is trying to portray that.<br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>george &quot;bulldog&quot; adams</b><p>steve winpitcher i hear your levi`s son is that true. bulldog

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p> Does your head hurt coming up with that question Dogg?<br /><br />This thread, which I thought was intended for information has now degenerated to the typical pissing match that usually happens here whenever the topic is PSA.<br /><br />so I'm done with it.<br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>What I find odd about these type of discussions are those who apparently know little about the PSA Set Registry(Like Corey and Leon)presume that PSA collectors must resubmit to maintain their position on the PSA Set Registry. <br /><br />While most collectors want to get the best possible card they can and enjoy seeing their set ratings rise there is very little overt competition--particularly at below the number one spot.<br /><br />Instead from all the collectors I know, collectors are focused on the value of their collection. Instead of speculating what will happen in price to the straight 8s(probably not much)versus the 8.5s(which will unquestionably rise)it is best to look at the corresponding SGC grades as a guide). With the exception of certain pre-war sets I think it is reasonable to assume because of the huge popularity of the PSA Set Registry that a PSA 8 will sell at a moderate premium to an SGC 88 and a PSA 8.5 will trade at a moderate premium to a SGC 92. The fact is that for a set collector(which is what most collectors are)the cards simply do not exist in the the required grade or exist in sufficient quantities in SGC.<br /><br />Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Hey Jim- how are you doing with your submission? Has the process started yet?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Jim, obviously I agree that the issue of competition on the Registry is not what will drive resubmissions. As I've stated, if you have a valuable Registry set you almost have no choice but to resubmit; otherwise, you are leaving money on the table for all the 8s that could become 8.5s. For me, I won't resubmit until I'm ready to sell the set, though I might send in a handful of cards that I believe should get the pop at some point.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jim- it would be interesting if you were willing to share the results of your submission after it is completed. Your collection is so large that it would achieve some statistical norm regarding what percentage of cards would likely get half grade bumps- 10%, 20%, etc. And it would give other collectors an idea what to expect.<br /><br />Of course there will be two kinds of submissions: 1) those who examine each of their cards and only send in the ones that clearly look undergraded; 2) or those who send entire sets or collections in, even though they know some of the cards don't have a chance.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Jeff,<br /><br />I know you this--a couple others do not. Thats why I posted the example that I was going to submit all my 55s first so I could overtake you and get into the top 10.<br /><br />Barry,<br /><br />Joe has committed in prinipal to coming east and grading them although they would be done in stages--perhaps I would give him pre-war baseball first and take it from there. I am not wild about a Brinks truck coming and shipping 20,000 cards across the country.<br /><br />An alternative he suggested was to have a couple of his vintage graders come over to my house and cherry pick cards that looked like they could be upgrade candidates and look at them more carefully in California. This mighyt work as an alternative. I am in no great rush.<br /><br />Jim<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Barry,<br /><br />As long as Joe is amenable, I would likely do this. The results could be seen set by set on the PSA Set Registry anyway so I couldn't imagine him having a problem.<br /><br />Part of the deal is I would send in another couple thousand raw cards to Jow(a lot pre-war) so this may prove interesting as well.<br /><br />Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Corey R. Shanus</b><p>I think it strains credulity to believe the set registry wasn't created to take advantage of and fuel competition among participants. And that PSA is counting on this "overt competition" to contribute to a flood of initial re-submissions and help resuscitate their sagging business outlook. In addition, it is logical to believe PSA's rush to give certain prominant set registry members great deals to re-submit is motivated in large measure by PSA's hope that the bump in those members' set standings would create a domino effect and induce others to re-submit to maintain their place in the standings. <br /><br />If in fact the typical set registry member does not have competition as one of his motives, then presumably most of the initial set registry re-submissions will come from people ready to sell now. Otherwise, I don't see why such people would want to incur costs now that could be deferred to later.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Corey,<br /><br />I don't disagree that PSA wants to create this competition but I still think this is a minor reason why people may resubmit. Far greater in my opinion is the theoretical increase in value of the set<br />and the knowlwedge that your set has increased in perceived quality.<br />While its likely all major owners of PSA cards will take them up on their proposal(how could they not?)unlikely in my opinion that the increased set registry scores they attain will be an incentive for others to do so on a widespread basis.<br /><br />Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Corey R. Shanus</b><p>Jim,<br /><br />Thanks for the response. I think this is an issue that in the end we will agree to disagree. <br /><br />I'm not saying competition is the only motive of the typical registry member. But I am saying it is a key one and one that PSA is counting on to fuel a flood of initial re-submissions. Otherwise, I don't see why they would feel the need to offer such great deals to major registry members. Picking one to be the test case would suffice to show how re-submissions can result in increased theoretical value of their holdings and increased perceived quality. And the one they would most likely pick would not be one such as you with so many cards (and therefore greater cost to re-evaluate) but one with fewer holdings, though still enough to establish their point.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Corey,<br /><br />Fair enough.<br /><br />I have been outspoken against this in the past and perhaps it vwas deemed important to get me on board since I am not shy with my opinions?<br /><br />Jim<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>This whole concept is still in its infancy and it will take some time to see how it evolves.<br /><br />Here's something I just thought of (it may have already been mentioned before): Suppose PSA is really strict with giving half-grade bumps, and less than 5% of cards resubmitted get them? Once that news spreads the incentive for others to resubmit would be small. So is it possible PSA will be overly generous, giving so many half bumps that every major collector of PSA cards will feel compelled to send a batch in? Again, the more bumps they give out, the more future business for them.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Barry,<br /><br />The anecdotal evidence that I have received so far suggests the opposite.<br /><br />Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jim- I missed your drift. Are they being lenient or very strict?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric Brehm</b><p>For PSA, the downside to being too generous with the half-grade bumps is that it will diminish their reputation for accurate grading. In my opinion they will have condition standards (centering, etc.) that will be applied as objectively as possible. In theory, somewhere in the neighborhood of half of the cards submitted should get the bumps.<br /><br />PSA plans to release SMR values for half-grade cards in the near future. Since there won't be any actual sales figures to base these on, they will start with initial estimates (33% above next lowest whole grade value maybe?), and then refine these over time as they see how the market reacts to the new system. Of course since people do tend to use SMR as a guide for purchasing, these figures will influence to some degree the way the market does in fact react.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Barry<br /><br />PSA had a few collectors submit cards earlier this month so the graders could practice with the new .5 scale. From what i was told one guy sent in around 100 of his best cards and less then 15% were bumped up.<br /><br /><br />Not sure if that tells us anything. What I think we all should do is wait and see. See what some of these cards look like. Another problem to this is what happens to the lower grades? Will some 6.5's not look nicer then some 6's? h I think that is very possible.<br /><br /><br />The 6.5 could be a dog 7 while the 6 is a true Ex/MNT card. Again we will not know until we start seeing these cards appear on the market or in the registry.<br /><br />Then and only then will we then see how the market reacts.<br /><br /><br />Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Actually, since I threw out the numbers 10% and 20% in my earlier post, and you heard that about 15% of one submission got bumped, then maybe that will be the eventual range.<br /><br />I would think if 50% of the cards get half grade bumps that would be too liberal. And I agree centering will play a big factor.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Barry,<br /><br />I heard someone sent a reasonably large group of T206s(psa 8s) and got 12% bumped up. I think your guess is right on the money for pre-war but I do believe that the percentages will rise as we get into 50s and 60s.<br /><br />Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric Brehm</b><p>If I have a set on the registry, and I get 8 points for a PSA 8, 8.5 points for a PSA 8.5, and 9 points for a PSA 9, then an 8.5 card should be halfway between an 8 and a 9, quality-wise (not necessarily value-wise, of course). If only 15% of existing PSA 8 cards are considered good enough to get a half-grade bump, and I have one of those, I should get 8.85 points for it!<br /><br />One other thing to keep in mind though, is that the percentage of cards that do receive the half-grade bumps will be skewed somewhat by the fact that people will tend to submit stronger cards within each grade (i.e. that have a higher likelihood of being re-graded).

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Corey - you're absolutely right about not having to discount for the bump review. I hadn't thought about that. I was looking at it from just the mechanical perspective. Still, I'd like to ask someone from PSA that question (why no discount). Right now it looks like the answer would have to be one of wanting to pocket the money, or that the grading time is so minimal they can't discount it.<br /><br />Steve - I was talking about base level submissions. I've often wondered though about whether the more expensive service levels actually result in a more thorough review. Probably. But I know that bumping into a schedule is expensive in any operation, so that has to be part of it. <br /><br />And I must be missing something completely with this 10-12-15-20% bump issue. Why wouldn't it almost automatically be 50%. Shouldn't all cards graded 6 divide themselves roughly half and half between the top part of the range (6.5 - 7) and the bottom half (6 - 6.5)? It seems like they would almost have to.<br /><br />In fact, if the number of bumps isn't about 50% I would almost conclude that something went wrong with the process. I can't see any way that cards, after 100 years of use and travel, wouldn't be distributed somewhat evenly within a range. The outcome of the bumps just about has to reflect that reality, doesn't it? It wouldn't be natural to have all 6's somehow magically be at 80% in the lower half of the range and 20% upper half.<br /><br />I think I need this one 'splained to me. If I resubmitted all of my cards - even at a favorable bulk fee - and got back 15% bumps I'd hit the roof.<br /><br />It's gotta be something easy I'm missing, right?<br /><br />Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>SC</b><p>&lt;&lt;One other thing to keep in mind though, is that the percentage of cards that do receive the half-grade bumps will be skewed somewhat by the fact that people will tend to submit stronger cards within each grade (i.e. that have a higher likelihood of being re-graded).&gt;&gt;<br /><br />How many cards out there are truly worth getting graded regardless of condition? From post-war cards - some of the earliest Mantles and a few key rookies. Prewar? A little bit more, but a lot of it ends at Cobbs, Gehrigs, and Ruths. <br /><br />I really don't see why this is so disconcerting. It's not like BGS using a formula for their subgrades. A card has to meet certain criteria to get a specific grade. I've always thought - how can an absolutely blazing vending card that is 70/30, get the same grade as a card that's 70/30 with touched corners, etc.? They are both 7s, but one would universally be acknowledged as nicer.<br /><br />What about on lower grade cards? A card won't get above a 3 with a moderate crease, but that perfectly centered card with great color and appearance has to rate higher than the 90/10 example with dull color and nearly rounded corners.<br /><br />If Jim, for instance, sent in his entire sets, or someone else submitted a brand new batch of clean cards - we might have some idea what to expect on % upgrades. But if people are going to cherry pick their best 8s...the number will simply be a product of the quality of the person's skill in evaluating grading, and a standard variance.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>"Its gotta be something easy I'm missing right"<br /><br />For prewar cards the number of 7s is usually a lot less than the number of 8s. <br /><br />The number of 8s is usually a lot less than the number of 9s. It thus stands to reason that the number of 8s will be a lot less than the 8.5s. For pre-war cards it gets very difficult to find them in high grade.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Solomon,<br /><br />I disagree--collectors are by and large trying to collect entire sets in 8 or better--not just star cards--common cards that are low pop for every set in the 50s can run into the thousands in psa 8.<br /><br />If incentivized to do so, many collectors will be sending their entire sets in.<br /><br />Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>SC</b><p>&lt;&lt;And I must be missing something completely with this 10-12-15-20% bump issue. Why wouldn't it almost automatically be 50%. Shouldn't all cards graded 6 divide themselves roughly half and half between the top part of the range (6.5 - 7) and the bottom half (6 - 6.5)? It seems like they would almost have to.&gt;&gt;<br /><br />Look at the average population reports on vintage cards. Let's say you have a card that is worth $40 in Ex/Exmt Raw, $50 in a 5, $100 in a 6, $300 in a 7, and $1000 in an 8. So it's not really worth it to get it graded hoping/expecting less than a 6 (i.e. elminate values under 5 because they wouldn't be submitted intentionally). Your pop report might be:<br /><br />1-5 - 38%<br />6 - 50%<br />7 - 10%<br />8 - 2%<br /><br />With the fact that the difference in population is exponential, with 7s 5x as tough as 6, and 8s 5x as tough as 7s - doesn't it make sense that maybe only 20% of the 6s will be good enough for 7s? In other words, a lot more of the 6s will be proverbial "6.1s" than "6.9s". Plus a number of the really high end 6s have already been bumped (to 7s). Basic elements of standard deviation.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>SC</b><p>Jim,<br /><br />I was saying - how many cards are worth getting graded, regardless of grade? Yes, any 8 in the 50s is worth slabbing...but would you slab a 55T common in a 3? You may well do that with a Clemente RC, but there are only a handful of cards in most sets (especially post-mid 50s) that are worth getting graded less than a 7 at minimum.<br /><br />Point being that comparing the population on a PSA 7 '55 common to a PSA 8 isn't exactly a valid comparison of rarity, because a lot of 7s will never be submitted due to economics of grading.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Sol--I see your point.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>OK, I understand that an 8 is harder than a 7 which is harder than a 6, and so forth.<br /><br />But that's because the tail end of the distribution would understandably be decreasing across many grades. The entire distribution wouldn't be normal because of the number of low end cards - the distribtion would be skewed toward 1. But toward the high end of the overall grading scale the distribution would probably tail off in a way that closely resembles normal.<br /><br />But within a single grade, it seems like it would not have that steep of a fall-off from bottom half to top half. It can't (shouldn't) be steeper than the overall rate of fall-off. I understand that this is an imperfect process, but it seems like it would create a stair-step dropoff that doesn't seem right.<br /><br />I guess it would depend on how they set the critera for the mid-grades, which makes this all the more interesting to me. It seems like it would be hard to create these mid-interval criteria that finely. I'd think it would be more likely to split the range roughly equally. <br /><br />It's possible - even probable - that the existing whole grades create a stair step in between grades so that the distribtution within a grade is roughly equal. In that case the bump percent would have to result in something around 50%. <br /><br />I don't know - it's hard for me to see that there is such distinction within these higher grades that they could create such a subtle "fade" within a grade as you approach the next grade.<br /><br />It would make more sense in the lower grades where the condition can fall off dramatically within a grade (the great 2's versus the borderline beater 2's). <br /><br />But for the higher grades, I guess I'm surprised that such a detailed level of discrmination is possible. Especially since the actual card evaulation apparently constitutes such a minor part of the whole process! haahah.<br /><br />J<br /><br />Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric Brehm</b><p>It's a question of whether PSA will define 8.5 as the midpoint of observed quality over the 8 range, or as the midpoint relative to some independent objective standard regarding card condition (corner wear, centering, etc.). If the latter is the case, I could see that there will be less 8.5's than than there are 8's (i.e. less than 50% will get a bump), just as there now many fewer 9's than 8's. As Jim C. said that will be particularly true of pre-war cards where higher grade cards are more scarce.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt Bojorquez</b><p>I have been told the PSA 8.5 will require near perfect centering, absolutely zero PD, and must possess great eye appeal. It also means you will see far fewer vintage cards being graded a PSA 9 in the future, they will now be 8.5s.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Matt, that's interesting: I've seen plenty of 9s that don't possess such criteria.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Joann- I think it should be less than 50%, and here's why.<br /><br />I will have to assume that PSA's standards for giving a half-grade bump are rather strict. If they're not, then anything is possible. I kind of compare it to an NFL team challenging a play. Upon review an ump may see the possibility he called the play wrong, but unless he has conclusive proof, the play stands as is.<br /><br />If PSA has integrity (possible oxymoron) they will only bump cards that are clearly high end within the grade. So maybe 50% of all cards graded a 6 are roughly halfway to a 7, but unless they have some unmistakable characteristic- perfect centering, full gloss, whatever- they should stay as is. But that's assuming they just don't turn this into Christmas morning.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jeff- posted at the same minute again!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scot Reader</b><p>It has been suggested that a loose standard for half-point upgrades will result in a larger number of resubmissions than a strict standard. I don't think this is necessarily true because a strict standard will result in a larger number of cards being resubmitted for upgrade multiple times.<br /><br />Edited to add: If board members who try the upgrade service are willing to report on this thread their experience (e.g. the % of cards granted the half-point) I for one would greatly appreciate it!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Yesterday someone reported some poppage (not resubmits) and of 99 cards he received 3 .5 cards. He recieved grades from 6 thru 10 for 1960 61 type cards.<br /><br />Not sure if that tells anyone anything since the cards were sent in raw.<br /><br />Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scot Reader</b><p><br />Only three percent? Wow.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>SGC does not seem to use half grades as much either, except the 1.5/20s. Maybe PSA is following SGC's lead on that.<br />JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jim- SGC uses the 70 with some frequency, which is a 5.5.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric Brehm</b><p>I was curious to know how frequently SGC has been assigning their 1/2 grades, so I looked it up. For the issues I sampled, the rate of 1/2 grade assignments (as a fraction of the total cards graded with or without the 1/2 grade bump at each whole grade level) varies between about 15% and 30% for grades 7/7.5 and 8/8.5. Here is the data for all of the half grades:<br /><br />For T206:<br /><br />* of 99 total cards graded 8 (SGC 88) or 8.5 (SGC 92), 20 were given 8.5 (20.2%)<br />* of 713 total cards graded 7 (SGC 84) or 7.5 (SGC 86), 139 were given 7.5 (19.5%)<br />* of 6709 total cards graded 5 (SGC 60) or 5.5 (SGC 70), 1520 were given 5.5 (22.7%)<br />* of 6163 total cards graded 1 (SGC 10) or 1.5 (SGC 20), 3405 were given 1.5 (55.2%)<br /><br />For 1933 Goudey:<br /><br />* of 217 total cards graded 8 (SGC 88) or 8.5 (SGC 92), 31 were given 8.5 (14.3%)<br />* of 695 total cards graded 7 (SGC 84) or 7.5 (SGC 86), 185 were given 7.5 (26.7%)<br />* of 2569 total cards graded 5 (SGC 60) or 5.5 (SGC 70), 620 were given 5.5 (24.1%)<br />* of 904 total cards graded 1 (SGC 10) or 1.5 (SGC 20), 527 were given 1.5 (58.3%)<br /><br />For 1952 Topps:<br /><br />* of 510 total cards graded 8 (SGC 88) or 8.5 (SGC 92), 92 were given 8.5 (18.0%)<br />* of 1470 total cards graded 7 (SGC 84) or 7.5 (SGC 86), 444 were given 7.5 (30.2%)<br />* of 2197 total cards graded 5 (SGC 60) or 5.5 (SGC 70), 825 were given 5.5 (37.6%)<br />* of 141 total cards graded 1 (SGC 10) or 1.5 (SGC 20), 92 were given 1.5 (65.2%)<br /><br />As would be expected, there is a higher percentage of EX+, NM+ and NM/MT+ graded cards associated with the more recently produced issues, with the exception of the 8/8.5 grades for T206, which could be an anomaly of some sort, or just small sample variation.<br /><br />Perhaps similar half-grade upgrade rates can be expected from PSA when they begin using their new grading system.<br /><br />By the way, SGC's 10-100 grading scale does not include grades that are equivalent to 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, 6.5, or 9.5 on the traditional 1 to 10 scale; they currently use only 1.5 (Fair), 5.5 (EX+), 7.5 (NM+), and 8.5 (NM/MT+).<br /><br />Here is the SGC grade distribution for the three issues:<br /><br /><img src="http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r143/ebrehm1/sgc_gdist_t206.jpg"><br /><img src="http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r143/ebrehm1/sgc_gdist_33G.jpg"><br /><img src="http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r143/ebrehm1/sgc_gdist_52T.jpg">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Eric, I'm still trying to digest your work but in the meantime, some conclusions:<br /><br />1) I hope you're an accountant, actuary or math professor -- otherwise I suspect you're experiencing an unfulfilling life;<br />2) You clearly have too much time on your hands (would you like to help out on a federal narcotics trial in Manhattan next week?); and <br />3) We need to find you a hobby, one that takes up some of your free time. Do you collect coins? Or stamps?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric Brehm</b><p>Jeff, you guessed it, I am a semi-retired mathematician. Just can't keep my hands off the data. Numbers speak better than words, anyhow. Not sure how much I could contribute to a narcotics trial, is there some analysis of some sort that is needed? And baseball card collecting is enough (probably too much) of a hobby for me at the moment, thanks.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Eric,<br />Thanks for the data. That is great.<br />JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>math aside, another submission popped and of 50 hi grade cards exactly 1 was given an in between grade. These cards wre all 7, 8, and 9 caliber.<br /><br />Methinks the half grads are going to be for the cards that have large spreads between grades.<br /><br />Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>PSA is hilarious! They are making everyone spend all this money for resubmissions -- and then in order to make more money on the deal, PSA only spends the time and resources to break out one card out of every 50 submitted! Never get cheated, Joe!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>"I don't know - it's hard for me to see that there is such distinction within these higher grades that they could create such a subtle "fade" within a grade as you approach the next grade.<br /><br />It would make more sense in the lower grades where the condition can fall off dramatically within a grade (the great 2's versus the borderline beater 2's). <br /><br />But for the higher grades, I guess I'm surprised that such a detailed level of discrmination is possible."<br /><br />Well said, Joann. I was thinking the same thing but you said it very eloquently.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric Brehm</b><p>Even with the existing PSA system, I often have a hard time distinguishing between say, a '7' and an '8', or between an '8' and a '9'. And I have often scratched my head over some of the grades that PSA assigns, in all grades. But, SGC, GAI, and Beckett have been using half grades for a long time, so there must be some method to the madness. We'll see what PSA comes up with. I think they are in it to make money, yes, but I'm not so cynical as to think that they are just trying to rip everybody off.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Jeff<br /><br />The two examples I have posted about were from raw submissions not resubs. I thought I made that clear.<br /><br />Steve<br /><br />edited to add I see that the 2nd post i failed to mention that. I have yet to see a resub pop.<br /><br />Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>But Steve -- if only one of 50 cards merits the new half point grade, doesn't that suggest that PSA will rarely give it out whether on a raw submission or resubmission?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Jeff I have no idea, all I can do at this time is report what i have heard and seen.<br /><br />At this time I have heard of at least 10 RAW subs popped (around 1000 cards) and the .5 grade has been issued less then 7% (more like 5%) of the time.<br /><br />IMO the bumps are going to be issued to cards where a substantial spread in price between grades exists.<br /><br />The best pct thus far was to someone who had 2 cards out of 14 grade out with a .5 grade. Both those cards IMO have substantial spreads between grades too. One was a 68 Bench rookie the other a 53 or 54 Satchel Paige. I think both were 7.5's but am not sure. Could be 8.5's. <br /><br />If I was to resubmit any cards for this 'bump' Id make sure that they had substantial spreads in price. I wouldn't do it for commons just to raise my registry ranking.<br /><br />Steve