PDA

View Full Version : PSA vs. SCG -- Discount Valuation


Archive
03-25-2008, 10:32 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Over the past year or so there has been much discussion regarding the issue of slabbed graded altered cards. During those discussions, we've come to learn from experts such as Kevin Saucier that the problem is a real one, that he knows of many examples of slabbed altered cards in graded PSA holders. We've also seen posts describing how alterers will wait until they know PSA's experienced graders are away on hobby business to submit their cards. And who can forget Jim Crandell's candid description of the deal PSA made with him to get him to re-submit his cards? That told us that upon re-submission (at least from its best customers), PSA will not only agree not to look for alterations, but should they inadvertently find one, they will go one step further and return the altered card in its original holder back to the sender. And last night came the latest revelation -- that a T206 PSA 6 Broad Leaf 460 Elberfeld (twice confirmed by PSA as being unaltered) from the upcoming REA auction shows such evidence of trimming that the auction house felt it could not in good conscious offer the card without a disclosure.<br /><br />So the question I want to raise is whether we have come to a point, or will soon come to a point, where slabbed graded cards in PSA holders from certain issues will sell at a discount relative to their SGC counterparts? Speaking only for myself, I will not buy PSA cards from certain issues without either knowing the provenance or without having an express understanding with the auction house/seller that should SGC refuse to cross it over with a numerical grade, I will receive a full refund. (What the grade SGC gives it is not the issue, only that they are willing to opine that it is not altered). It seems to me that the best way to clean up the hobby in regard to altered slabbed cards is via economic incentive. Should PSA (or any grading company for that matter) learn its cards sell at a discount relative to its competitors', then that revelation will do wonders to get them to implement all necessary measures to both detect alterations as well as remove from circulation its graded slabbed altered cards.<br><br>

Archive
03-25-2008, 10:45 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>PSA found the answer to this problem by creating the set registry. It was a brilliant piece of marketing.<br /><br />I have a fairly large inventory of both PSA and SGC graded cards, and I can't tell you how much better an SGC card of comparable grade looks over its competitor's.<br /><br />I think in the collector market, say between the grades of Good to Excellent, it is just a matter of time before SGC cards sell for a premium over PSA. I think in some ways we are already seeing it.<br /><br />But the set registry market, which I deem a different hobby altogether, props up the prices of these higher grade PSA cards. Only time will tell if that will ever change.

Archive
03-25-2008, 11:15 AM
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>1. Grading (in the first place)<br /><br />2. Set Regustry<br /><br />3. half grades<br /><br /><br />How do they keep a straignt face?<br /><br /><br /><br />Set Registry seems to be slab collecting, not card collecting. I'd love to see us all get back to card collecting.<br /><br />And I agree with Corey's concerns and Barry's observations.

Archive
03-25-2008, 01:49 PM
Posted By: <b>boxingcardman</b><p>We never will. As long as people are willing to dump huge sums of cash into slabbed cards, they will be a presence, and as long as people actually care about registry competition, they will buy slabbed cards with high grades assigned to them. Objective reality is less important than perceptions and attitudes of those spending the money on the cards (if PSA says it is an "8" it is an 8 even if it was cut out of a sheet. Twice). I just wish people would not confuse opinion with revelation. <br><br>Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectatos Nunc

Archive
03-25-2008, 01:57 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Yawn....<br />

Archive
03-25-2008, 02:04 PM
Posted By: <b>Neal Kane</b><p>haw

Archive
03-25-2008, 02:11 PM
Posted By: <b>LetsGoBucs</b><p>I don't know. I should state that I really don't buy graded cards so its not like I really care.<br /><br />I've believed for a long time that with the advent of grading that we'd get to a point where rarity and desirability of a particular card would become the drivers of price. Yes, condition will always impact the price, but its becoming well known that many high grade cards have (and can) been altered. Whether thats by removing creases, taking out stains, sharpening edges and corners, etc. That to me should lessen the extra demand between a 6 and a 7 or a 7 and an 8 if they both look nice. <br /><br />But then the set registry came along....it was a brilliant marketing move. Really brilliant. It hits just the right spot in the market. Guys who likely used to play the sport (and competed) plus guys with large disposable incomes (likely competing rather well in corporate world or in business for themselves) - put the two together - large disposable incomes plus competitive urges and suddenly you've unleashed a bragging rights type of game. And who hasn't been there - even think of the traditional Thanksgiving day extended family football (or any other) game where you'll kill yourself to beat your brother in law for the ninth straight year - even though you know that for the next 10 days you'll barely be able to get out of bed - same thing with the cards - might have blown 20 grand for some stupid commons BUT your the BEST IN THE WORLD!!!! <br /><br />I still think we'll end up with grades for pre-war cards being mostly secondary. I don't think we'll get there for post-war cards. So I don't think there will be a premium of one over the other....I think the importance of the grade itself will diminish and the importance of rarity in combination with demand will increase. I think we see some evidence of that with things like the Babe Ruth Baltimore rookie card, boston garters, and it will just take time to filter through all the hobby.<br /><br /><br />

Archive
03-25-2008, 02:14 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>"we've come to learn from experts such as Kevin Saucier that the problem is a real one, that he knows of many examples of slabbed altered cards in graded PSA holders."<br /><br />Really Corey, I know Kevin talks about this and hints but has he ever really put proof on the table, nice guy and all I'm sure. Kevin talks a big game, but what has he really blown the lid off of honestly? <br /><br />That trimmed cards are in holders....I'm speechless (all sarcasm intended), to date all he has really shown via is website is how to use Photoshop and chemicals to make bogus flips.... <a href="http://www.alteredcards.com/index.htm" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.alteredcards.com/index.htm</a><br /><br />Jim B well said..."Yawn"!<br />

Archive
03-25-2008, 04:05 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p> PSA will not only agree not to look for alterations, but should they inadvertently find one, they will go one step further and return the altered card in its original holder back to the sender.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /> I was told something very different. But it must be true since I read it here.<br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br />

Archive
03-25-2008, 04:25 PM
Posted By: <b>cmoking</b><p>Corey, you are now FYS' best friend!

Archive
03-25-2008, 04:54 PM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />Jim C's own words in describing his deal with PSA:<br /><br />"Every card that is not upgraded to an 8.5 or a 9 is returned in the same holder it was sent to them in.<br /><br />Jim"<br /><br />From the context in which this was said coupled with followup posts by myself and others, there was no question that the return in same holders applied to all cards rejected for an upgrade, regardless if the reason was that the card was altered.<br><br>

Archive
03-25-2008, 07:41 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>"Every card that is not upgraded to an 8.5 or a 9 is returned in the same holder it was sent to them in.<br /><br /> <br />Where does it say "even if the card is found to be altered"? Or did you just assume that?<br /><br />PSA has protocols in place for when they ever find an altered/counterfeit card in a PSA slab. I must have said this<br />5 times in that very same thread yet you continue only to harp on what Jim said.<br /><br />The fact of the matter is if they find a card in thier slabs that is counterfeit or that they deem altered <br />they will do what they have to do to get the card out of the slab. A phone call will be made to the owner of said <br />card. If you don't want to believe me give PSA a call. (I did) They will tell you the same thing. <br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br />edited for typos, I'm sure that their are more.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
03-25-2008, 08:43 PM
Posted By: <b>MikeU</b><p>Corey, <br /><br />The solution can not be for PSA to improve. The solution can only be to pay Kevin to certify the already PSA certified cards.

Archive
03-25-2008, 08:47 PM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Thread cited: PSA Half Grades(last post 1/20/08)<br /><br />Question asked (by Barry Sloate to Jim Crandell):<br /><br />"Jim- my comment was not meant to be unfriendly. But there is still one aspect of this process that simply baffles me. And I would like your take on it, or anyone else's: <br /><br />If during the course of examining your collection, PSA finds just one card that is clearly trimmed- let's say it's just one card out of 22,000, and surely even you will admit that is possible- do they pull it out of circulation and put it in an "Authentic" holder, or do they pretend they never saw it and just throw it back in the pile?<br /><br />Because I am going to give them some credit here and say their grading skills have improved over time, and cards graded 5-10 years ago may not be as state of the art as those graded today. So now that they are about to get an inordinate number of resubmissions, they are going to see things. And I would like to know how they are going to handle it.<br /><br />Fair question I think."<br /><br />Response (by Jim Crandell)<br /><br />"Barry,<br /><br />Every card that is not upgraded to an 8.5 or a 9 is returned in the same holder it was sent to them in.<br /><br />Jim"<br /><br />That pretty clearly says to me that pursuant to the deal PSA made with Jim C, they would not take his altered cards out of circulation. Subsequent to that exchange I and others, both in that thread and others, challenged Jim on that point and not once did he ever refute it.<br /><br />What matters to me is not what people say but what they do. I have little interest in what public spin PSA is putting on this question. Indeed, it would be quite naive to believe they would ever admit publicly that they will consciously allow an altered graded card in a PSA holder that was re-submitted to them to return to circulation. I can just see the legal sharks circle around them on that one. What they do out of the public glare, though, is a different matter, and that is what means a heck of a lot more to me.<br /><br />But, hey, maybe I do have this all wrong. So let's put it to a test. Jim Crandell has agreed to re-submit all 22,000 of his cards to PSA. Let him come on and refute what I have said. Let him tell us that when he resubmitted those 22,000 cards to PSA, he was okay with them checking for alterations. And for those found to be altered, PSA refused to return them to him in their current holders. If in fact Jim will come on and say this, then you know what? I'll be a very happy guy. Because then FINALLY we will see both Jim C and PSA putting their money where their mouths are and doing something good for the hobby, despite their perceptions that what they are doing is against their economic interest. <br />

Archive
03-25-2008, 08:49 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Somehow I think PSA will be more likely to determine that one of their graded cards is altered if it is an inexpensive card. Do you think they'll pay full freight for a 10K card that is obviously altered and in their holder?

Archive
03-25-2008, 08:53 PM
Posted By: <b>MikeU</b><p>"Corey, you are now FYS' best friend!"<br /><br />Cmoking, <br /><br />My wagon is now hitched to the Gizmo Cards & Autograph Team :&gt;)

Archive
03-25-2008, 09:27 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>I would hope that they would act like SGC did when they found that Doyle that was altered. The one that even Olbermanns <br />driver could see.<br /><br /><br /><br />Corey<br /><br />Yeah that is alot easier then simply calling them and asking them what there position is. You would rather take as gospel what Crandall said, then hash it around with a few other guys on a message board. I suppose if you say it enough times you will get plenty of people to believe it as fact. <br /><br />Have you still missed the part where I replied in the very same thread? <br /><br />I called them and got my answer. Perhaps you should too? You won't because you would rather bash.<br /><br /><br />FWIW I appreciate both SGC and PSA.<br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
03-25-2008, 09:30 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p><br /> <br /><br />From the context in which this was said coupled with followup posts by myself and others, there was no question that the return in same holders applied to all cards rejected for an upgrade, regardless if the reason was that the card was altered.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />That was some leap lol<br /><br /><br />Steve

Archive
03-25-2008, 10:02 PM
Posted By: <b>James Gallo</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />I would like to know what knowledgable person you spoke to at PSA that gave you this ground breaking information. From my experience with PSA there aren't too many people you can get on the phone that really know what they are talking about. Well at least not to an average person like me.<br /><br />So since you are so inclined to believe what PSA told you over the phone, how about letting us know who told you this because without a name I can tell you I have 2 T-206 Honus Wagners but that doesn't mean anything if you don't know who I am and if there is a chance it might be true.<br /><br /><br />James G<br><br>Looking for 1915 Cracker Jacks and 1909-11 American Caramel E90-1.

Archive
03-26-2008, 05:24 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Joe Orlando<br /><br />He had told everyone on the forums that they could call him.<br /><br />Thanks for inclining to believe me.<br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br />edited to add:<br /><br />maybe Leon could phone Joe that way someone you believe can put this to rest?<br /><br /><br />maybe someone should call him so these reckless rumours can be put to bed.<br /><br />Steve

Archive
03-26-2008, 05:57 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />So there is no misunderstanding, could you please confirm the following.<br /><br />1) Upon re-submission PSA will look for alterations.<br /><br />2) No card found to be altered will be returned to its owner in its original slab, period.<br /><br />3) PSA has taken no actions inconsistent with the above two statements.<br /><br />4) Jim Crandell has either misrepresented or misunderstood his re-submission deal with PSA.<br /><br />I'm not trying to be confrontational with you. As I said, if in fact these statements are true, I'll be very happy. And if Joe Orlando is willing over the phone to say they are, maybe he would be willing to come on this board and in writing confirm them. After all, this is an issue of vital importance to the hobby and I would think he would relish the favorable publicity such a written statement would garner for his company. He would also in the process satisfy a few doubters who are reasonably skeptical of statements made only over the phone but not in writing.<br><br>

Archive
03-26-2008, 06:04 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>No Corey, I gave the phone number, so call him and get the poop straight from the source.<br /><br />The only person(s) that misunderstood what Jim said were you and your buddies here that disected what he said and used it and came up with your reckless statement. All I know is what he told me, call him and he will tell you. What else can i say?<br /><br />It is very obvious that no matter what he says you will not believe him. <br /><br /><br /><br />I will now delete the phone number and if anyone else wants it they can email me.<br /><br />Stev

Archive
03-26-2008, 09:46 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Corey has asked me to call Joe Orlando to ask these questions so I will. I did call him many months ago, about something else, and didn't get a return call. I will try again and report back.....<br /><br />edited to add....I just (10:54am CST) left a v-mail for Joe with my 2 phone numbers......we'll see

Archive
03-26-2008, 10:22 AM
Posted By: <b>scott levy</b><p>Upon discovering that our PSA 1 Cobb/Drum was rebacked we sent it to PSA for examination. Joe & Co. were quick to acknowledge that they made a mistake - much to their credit. <br /><br />Their first recommendation however, was not to take the card out of circ, it was to ask BVG (the previous slabber) to re-slab the card thereby relieving PSA of any negative consequences. For obvious reasons, this offer was somewhat upsetting to hear and was promptly rejected.<br /><br />Their second recommendation was, to their credit, to provide adequate compensation and ensure that the card is never released back into the market. Had this been their first offer, I would have said that PSA acted highly ethically and very honorably. Nevertheless, the end result was acceptable for my dad and I and positive for the hobby.<br /><br />-Scott

Archive
03-26-2008, 10:49 AM
Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Scott - in your story, how was the contact with PSA initiated - did you submit the card for a re-grade and they found the re-backing on their own, or did you find the re-backing and therefore contacted them to make amends.

Archive
03-26-2008, 11:28 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>That was the same card I wanted to buy in the Beckett holder, off of ebay, and their then President wouldn't stand behind it. I asked him that if I bought it and it turned out to be rebacked would he compensate me for it. His answer was something like....If it's in our holder then that is it. Period.........Thankfully that President is long gone from Beckett....

Archive
03-26-2008, 11:51 AM
Posted By: <b>Tom Nieves</b><p><a href="http://www.psacard.com/articles/article_view.chtml?artid=5212&universeid=314" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.psacard.com/articles/article_view.chtml?artid=5212&universeid=314</a><br /><br /><b>How to Submit Previously Graded PSA Cards</b><br /><br />Previously graded PSA cards should be submitted just like ungraded submissions with the only exception being that they be submitted on a separate form, much like crossovers or Tall Boys. They must also be separated by service level. Again, just like a normal PSA submission.<br /><br />In addition, the cards must be submitted at the level of their declared value. Since the cards are already graded by PSA, this process should be even easier than with ungraded cards. Furthermore, keep in mind that we are not looking to charge any submitter for what they think a card might receive (the value after the half-point increase). We simply want the submitter to pay the appropriate fee based on the current status and value of the card.<br /><br />For example, if you submit a 1955 Topps Sandy Koufax in PSA NM-MT 8, we would require that the card be submitted at the $60 Super Express level (cards with a declared value of $1,000-$2,499) even though the card will most certainly be worth significantly more (placing the card at the $100 Walk-Thru service level) if the card receives the half-point bump. PSA is charging the customer based on the current state of the card, not what the outcome might be. <br /><br />Last but not least, remember that <b>cards submitted under this program will never be in jeopardy of going down in grade.</b> So, the only risk in submitting cards under this new program would be the cost of the submission since there is no guarantee that the cards will reach the higher, half-point grade. In other words, cards submitted under this service will always be returned to the customer, at minimum, in the same grade they arrived in.

Archive
03-26-2008, 01:18 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Scott, it sounds like PSA was really concerned about cleaning up the hobby! Nice first offer they made.

Archive
03-26-2008, 01:27 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Why would PSA be concerned with cleaning up the hobby? They're a corporation, they have stockholders. They are only interested in their bottom line. <br /><br />Because clearly in the course of reviewing these thousands of submissions, they are bound to see many errors they made in the past; but according to their agreement, there is nothing they can do to rectify those mistakes.

Archive
03-26-2008, 01:56 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Barry, I agree -- I was being facetious. That being said, their suggestion that a rebacked card should be removed from a PSA holder and put back into a BVG holder is sleazy.

Archive
03-26-2008, 02:38 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Just the idea that if they see a clearly misgraded card, or an altered one, their hands are tied is unacceptable. There is no doubt that as they reexamine these thousands of resubmissions, they are going to see some obvious errors. And they will just toss them aside and put them right back into circulation. That is an extremely odious policy.

Archive
03-26-2008, 02:39 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>delete

Archive
03-26-2008, 02:42 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Just the idea that if they see a clearly misgraded card, or an altered one, their hands are tied is unacceptable. There is no doubt that as they reexamine these thousands of resubmissions, they are going to see some obvious errors. And they will just toss them aside and put them right back into circulation. That is an extremely odious policy.

Archive
03-26-2008, 02:43 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>delete

Archive
03-26-2008, 02:44 PM
Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>Hi Barry.<br />Hi Barry.<br />Hi Barry.<br /><br />-Al<br />-Al<br />-Al

Archive
03-26-2008, 02:57 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Al- can't you see I was trying to make an emphatic point?<br /><br />My computer went nuts. I will delete two of them right now.

Archive
03-26-2008, 03:10 PM
Posted By: <b>scott levy</b><p>Matt,<br /><br />Card was listing on ebay, Net54 let me know in no uncertain terms what the deal was with it, I sent it into PSA for review/verification and that's where the story starts....<br /><br />-Scott

Archive
03-26-2008, 03:37 PM
Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Scott - just to clarify - you tipped off PSA to the fact it might be altered or you just asked them for a review, giving no mention of the specific issue.<br />thanks.

Archive
03-27-2008, 07:25 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>I have no special deal with Joe Orlando.<br /><br />The obsession that a certain poster has about my collection is unbelievable. I feel like I'm David Letterman and someone is stalking me.<br /><br />For someone who has never seen a card in my collection, who has no idea about the special care that went into buying(mostly raw) each and every card to represent that I may have a number of altered cards in my collection is completely irresponsible. <br /><br />I think its called jealousy.

Archive
03-27-2008, 09:30 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I am sure there are a lot of people jealous of you.....I know I am.

Archive
03-28-2008, 04:06 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />Yeah...but at least you are not obsessed with me.

Archive
03-28-2008, 04:41 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>ob·ses·sion [uhb-sesh-uhn] <br /><br />1. the action of acting on a cause promoted by a certain board member.<br />2. the pointing out of hypocritical actions by said certain board member related to said cause.<br />3. the amusement over the denial of the undeniable by said certain board member. <br />4. the admiration over the consistency of said certain board member not to do, say or admit anything that he perceives could lower the value of a single of his baseball cards.<br />5. the state of being obsessed. <br />6. the act of obsessing. <br /><br />Jim, yes you're right. I guess I am obsessed. If you'd like, I'd be happy to give you my definition of jealousy.<br /><br />Oh, and by the way, next time you talk to your buddy Joe Orlando, could you please ask him to return Leon's call?<br /><br /><br><br>

Archive
03-28-2008, 05:08 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Corey,<br /><br />I must have said 100 times and you must have complained 100 times that my efforts to improve card grading standards are for all submissions from this point forward.<br /><br />I am not resubmitting my cards as I am very happy with them. You have never seen them and do not have a clue how much care I put into buying each card.<br /><br />I happen to be visible so I am an easy target but not one of the top 500 collectors of psa cards to my knowledge has resubmitted cards because they may have a few that are altered.<br /><br />And in answer to your original complaint, PSA and SGC cards will trade around each other in terms of price. PSA cards generally have a higher value today in large part due to rthe phenomenal success of the registry but SGC has its advocates--particularly in prewar cards.<br /><br />

Archive
03-28-2008, 05:51 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>But Jim, you just did resubmit your cards. The problem wasn't with you, but with PSA.<br /><br />Instead of the grading company reexamining the group with an objective eye, they simply gave you bonus points wherever they could.<br /><br />Instead of the process being risk/reward- some cards may grade higher, others may grade lower or not qualify for a grade at all- it was exclusively a reward system. That really doesn't seem fair to me. And I am not blaming you; you did what was in your best interest.

Archive
03-28-2008, 05:51 AM
Posted By: <b>cmoking</b><p>"I am not resubmitting my cards as I am very happy with them. "<br /><br />I thought you just resubmitted your 1963 Fleer set? You weren't happy with those 8s?

Archive
03-28-2008, 06:19 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Barry,<br /><br />Thats their policy--noone would send in if they could go up or down. I believe a PSA 8 grade means that it is at least an 8.<br /><br />King,<br /><br />I wasn't clear--guys like Corey want me to submit my cards to SGC or want PSA to look at them again for alterations. It seems like he posted 100 times on this.<br /><br />Yes--I plan on having all my cards looked at for upgrades and am very encouraged that I will continue to do well based on my belief that I have a lot of very high-end 8s and how well I did on the 63 Fleers.<br /><br />I am sending in 1,000 more raw cards to be graded this weekend and will include another moderate size set for them to review. Of course good or bad I will let everyone know how I did.<br /><br />Jim<br /><br />

Archive
03-28-2008, 06:47 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Yes, I am still waiting for good ole Joe to call me. I left both phone numbers and, as anyone that has tried to get a hold of me will testify, it's rather easy.<br /><br />Jim- here's the rub on PSA...You said:<br /><br />"Of course good or bad I will let everyone know how I did."<br /><br />Actually, you will only need to let us know the good or neutral. <br /><br /><br />Personally.....<br />I don't mind the Registry at all. I think those folks can be as passionate about collecting as anyone. No harm at all. If they want to compete in the slab number game it's fine by me. ... best regards

Archive
03-28-2008, 09:25 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Jim,<br /><br />My goal, and I thought yours, is to rid the hobby of slabbed altered cards. To do that, there are various fronts from which to attack the problem. One, which to your credit you have been on the forefront on, is to call auction houses to task for actions they do to cards prior to submitting them for grading. Through your efforts significant progress has been on this front.<br /><br />Another front is to remove from circulation graded altered cards. This front is just as important to the goal of cleaning up the hobby as the other front. Yet, no doubt due to the potentially adverse economic impact this front could have on the value of certain of your cards, you not only have been very silent but have gone further and said that your cleaning-up-the-hobby crusade is not meant to encompass that front. <br /><br />Respectfully that makes no sense. This hobby can NEVER be clean as long as grading companies and collectors will not take steps to remove from circulation such cards. <br /><br />You on your own initiative decided to resubmit all 22,000 of your cards to PSA in the hope of getting upgrades. To say PSA has no duty to look to see if any of the cards are altered and for those that are to refuse to return them to you in their current holders is nonsensical. Of course they should be doing that. And, to any person with a thread of common sense who sincerely wants to see the hobby cleaned up, their refusal to do so is just as wrong and just as blameworthy as an auction house refusing to stop its practice of prepping cards prior to submission. <br /><br />Earlier on this thread it was suggested that I have it all wrong, that PSA does/did not make deals to turn a blind eye to alterations for re-submissions. And that in fact for re-submissions they do look for alterations and will not return an altered card in its original holder. And too I have used your description of your re-submission arrangement for my own nefarious purposes and distorted what you said. So I, or Leon or anybody else was told to call Joe Orlando directly to clarify this once for all. Well, we're still trying.<br /><br /><br /><br /> <br /><br /><br><br>

Archive
03-28-2008, 10:34 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Joe,<br /><br />Neutral is bad....or at least predomintly neutral.<br /><br />Corey,<br /><br />My goal is not to rid the hobby of slabbed or unslabbed altered cards, its to stop the flow of newly altered cards into the hobby--while it sounds noble, not one of the 500 largest holders of psa graded cards has or would submit their cards with the sole purpose of ridding the hobby of altered cards--nor will I....said for about the hundredth time which you know.

Archive
03-28-2008, 10:38 AM
Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Jim - it seems your stance is inconsistent - perhaps you can clarify. You are trying to stop the flow of newly altered cards into the hobby. The premise to that is that you believe having altered cards in the hobby is bad. If that is the case, then it becomes difficult to understand (from an ethical standpoint) why you won't take measures to remove such cards from your own collection. So, I'm guessing that perhaps that is not your premise, to which I ask, why do you feel it important to stop the flow of altered cards into the hobby?

Archive
03-28-2008, 10:43 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Matt,<br /><br />So me who maybe owns a thousandth of a percent or less of the altered cards vin the hobby is the only one to tell psa or sgc to regrade them all and take the financial hit--do you want to take it for me?

Archive
03-28-2008, 11:16 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>I have a dream,<br /><br />A person will not openly pine for change unless he/she is prepared to sacrifice to effectuate said change.<br /><br />I have a dream,<br /><br />A person openly pining for change will cease trying to distinguish his/her hypocritical actions on the basis they are unrelated to his/her initial call for change.<br /><br />I have a dream,<br /><br />PSA HOFers will demand PSA, upon re-submission, check for alterations and for those found to be altered, take them out of circulation and provide fair compensation for the damages caused thereby to the card owner.<br /><br />I have a dream,<br /><br />No one gives business to a grading company that knowingly turns a blind eye to alterations upon re-submissions, or that will not remove such cards from circulation.<br /><br />I have dream,<br /><br />People who blast certain auction houses and their executives for actions inconsistent with the best interests of the hobby set their crosshairs on grading companies and their executives who are guilty of similar transgressions.<br /><br />I have a dream.<br /><br /><br />Note: This version of "I Have a Dream" is not meant to be in any way disrespectful to Dr. Martin Luther King or his legacy. To the contrary, I regard his "I Have a Dream" speech to be one of the most inspirational and important addresses given in our country's history.<br /><br />EDITED for grammar.<br /><br />

Archive
03-28-2008, 11:33 AM
Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>An ant can lift 50 times its own weight<br /><br />some certain people on this forum must have heads made of ants!<br /><br /><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br />

Archive
03-29-2008, 03:57 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Jim<br /><br />Going forward is no good, all altered cards should be removed from the hobby (when found) <br /><br />By a simple downgrade to Auth and the owner of such cards made whole. Isn't that basically <br /><br />what PSA does?<br /><br />Why Joe hasn't replied to Leon? I don't have an answer for that I do know he replies <br /><br />to me whenever I email or phone him (1x)<br /><br />

Archive
03-29-2008, 08:40 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />I appreciate you coming on and saying that.<br /><br />This thread was never intended to be about Jim Crandell. I mentioned him only for the purpose of example as he had described his re-submission deal with PSA. As Jim correctly says, as large as his holdings are, they represent only a very small percentage of graded cards. The focus therefore is on PSA, not Jim. And on this score I am not trying to distort what anybody/any company says. I'm just trying to clarify once and for all what their policy is upon re-submission, as their new half-grade policy represents a golden opportunity to re-examine previously graded cards and remove from graded holders those deemed to be altered. <br /><br />So, since Joe Orlando does return your calls (and apparently not Leon's), could YOU call him and ask the following three questions and report back his answers?<br /><br />1) Upon re-submission, will PSA will look for alterations?<br /><br />2) If for whatever reason a re-submitted card is found to be altered (after all, some alterations are sufficiently obvious as to be apparent when examining those characteristics of the card germane to whether it should be upgraded), will PSA in every instance remove the card from its graded holder, regardless of the desires of the card owner, and provide fair compensation to the card owner?<br /><br />3) Has PSA made any re-submission deals with any of its major customers to not look for alterations and, even if they find one, to still return the card to its owner in its original holder?<br /><br />Answers to these questions will clarify exactly what their policy is, which I respectfully opine the hobby has a right to know and PSA has an obligation to specify. <br /><br />

Archive
03-29-2008, 09:11 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Corey <br /><br />some of those questions you want me to ask are basically none of my business.<br /><br />I will though, again ask him the following:<br /><br />If PSA upon this resubmission program finds a card in its slab that is either counterfiet or altered what will they do?<br /><br /><br />That should be sufficient? It is after all the same question he has already answered for me.<br /><br />Asking him if anyone has any side deals is frankly none of my business.<br /><br />And would be rude of me.<br /><br />Crandall and those guys got a deserving break in price, I doubt that they are getting bumps that they do not deserve.<br /><br />If you read a submission form it clearly states that discounts are available all one needs to do is call customer service.<br /><br />And just to set the record straight regarding me and my opinions of the top grading firms I think that SGC is in the top<br /><br />tier of graders and I have some SGC cards in my own collection. I would not hesitate to use them either.<br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br />edited 2 typos<br />edited again typo.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
03-29-2008, 12:02 PM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />Thanks, okay, let's start with that, though I will politely ask you to consider whether you might be willing to go one further and ask him too whether they consciously look for alterations upon re-submissions (e.g., perform tests that go beyond what is necessary to determine whether the card deserves a bump-up, tests that they would perform for first-time submissions). <br /><br />To be clear, I agree that it is none of anybody's business many specifics of Jim C's or anybody else's deal with PSA. In fact, to go further, and I even said this on an earlier thread, any prudent company would give volume discounts to its best customers. I also have never said or implied PSA would give unwarranted bump-ups to Jim or to anybody else. My SOLE focus has been on the question of alterations. To the extent that PSA has side agreements with ANYBODY to turn a blind eye to alterations upon re-submissions, that affects EVERYBODY because those altered cards remain in circulation in their original graded holders. And putting Joe Orlando on the spot to ascertain whether or not he has made exceptions to whatever alterations policy he describes to you, and I say this very respectfully, is neither being rude nor intruding into somebody else's private affairs.<br /><br />Thanks again for your help and involvement with this. I think you and I share a similar belief that cleaning up the hobby involves more than just preventing cards from this point forward from being altered. It also involves removing from circulation graded altered cards.<br><br>

Archive
03-29-2008, 01:02 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>I don't have a problem with Jim not taking a financial hit by resubmitting his cards cold. It's his life, his family and only he is reponsible for both -- we cannot expect him to put some moving definition of baseball card nobility ahead of what is best for his family.<br /><br />In essence, Jim is playing by the rules that exist. We cannot fault him for that. That being said, whether or not Jim is getting preferential treatment on the upgrade submissions is an open question in my mind. To be clear, I have no doubt that Jim would not be party to such a thing but, after seeing how PSA sometimes plays fast and loose with its special friends (i.e. Memory Lane), I simply can't presume they are being honorable on this issue.<br /><br />Edited to add: I just ready Corey's "I Have a Dream" speech, laughed at his evident insanity, but also agree with nearly all that he says. I wish the real world could be like that, too.<br />

Archive
03-29-2008, 02:50 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>What amazes me, especially with all the lawyers here (real and imagined) is how <br />PSA's original statement was twisted to include what they would do regarding counterfeits<br />and alterations. I simply read it as that they would not downgrade any card.<br /><br /><br /> Meaning, if I sent a card in and it was originally an 8 it would not <br />be returned graded a 7.5. That it would be returned as it was sent in or bumped. <br /><br />No mention was made at that time if they would scrutinize every card sent in for alterations, <br />after all, it was already in a slab and thus had already passed that test. They were now looking for <br />cards that were hi end for the grade. <br /><br />I then assumed that if they did by chance find a card that they now felt was altered/counterfeit<br />that on a case by case basis the owner of said card would be contacted and with protocols already in place for such matters <br />the owner and PSA would decide what was best for each other. Rather simple stuff if you ask me.<br /><br /><br />What happened was a few people here read into what was <br />not said and after a few posts among themselves decided what PSA was doing!<br />From there the conspiracy was formed and no matter what anyone said, they, like horses with blinders on<br />had formed an opinion and by golly nothing anyone said would change their minds. It was now FACT!<br /><br /> I have no idea what PSA does behind closed doors. I only know what I was told and what I read on the website<br />regarding the guarantee. I think (and this is just my opinion) that many of you here know that many<br />pre war cards have in fact been trimmed down if they were over sized or cut from sheets and are in holders. And it <br />is these cards that you have the problem with.<br /><br />That is a completely different animal and one I have no expertise on. Nor do I even want to go there.<br />As far as I am concerned they are in holders and are market acceptable. If a buyer/owner has a problem with one they should feel free to take it up with PSA though. <br /><br />I have always just stressed that (IMO) PSA would simply bump a card up if warranted or return said card as it was <br />if it did not. Any cards that they happened upon that they felt was altered/counterfeit they would use existing protocols.<br /><br />AS soon as Joe replies to my email I'll pass what he says to me along, I will not copy and paste his email though.<br /><br />I hope this post clears up a few misconceptions that have abounded since PSA decided to go to a .5 system and thus <br />created a resub program. Again, this is all my opinion and it based upon how I read the original statement and<br />the conversation I had.<br /> <br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
03-29-2008, 06:20 PM
Posted By: <b>MikeU</b><p>Steve, <br /><br />With certainly, your response from Joe will be that altered cards, if found, will be removed from circulation and the owners will be compensated. <br /><br />When he states the above, ask him to update their official statement. That would certainly silence some criticism. <br /><br />However, the critics will still complain and moan that PSA is pretending it has no overgraded cards. Ask Joe if overgraded cards, if found, will be downgraded and the owners will be compensated. If he says yes, ask him to update their official statement. That should shut up the remaining critics. <br /><br />If Joe is unwilling to do either of the above, then these real and so-called attorneys may not entirely be the over educated, worthless, conspiracy theorists that everyone believes. <br /><br />For the record, I am involved with Contract Law and while certainly over educated and worth less than I am paid, I do not consider myself a conspiracy theorist. <br /><br />

Archive
03-29-2008, 07:18 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Hey I called it as I saw it. Or, more importantly as I read it.<br /><br />If everyone knew what Joe was to say why all the bruhaha?<br /><br />Of course PSA has overgraded cards in the slabs, prolly have just as many undergraded ones too.<br /><br />Last I knew grading was an art not a science.<br /><br />Not sure what would please the masses here.<br /><br />Steve

Archive
03-29-2008, 07:19 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Steve,<br />Well stated.<br /><br />Corey,<br />With all due respect, why don't you call Joe? I have not read this whole thread, so if it is stated there, I apologize.<br />JimB

Archive
03-29-2008, 07:30 PM
Posted By: <b>TFerg</b><p>I think Steve has it nailed. As far as trying to "please the masses" , I think that's taken care of. The masses couldn't care less, it's the few that have a problem from what I can see.

Archive
03-29-2008, 07:42 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Its not the few that have the problem its the few that have the opportunity.<br /><br />Resubmitting your graded cards for upgrades is win/win.<br /><br />My second graded set as well as 1300 ungraded are on their way.

Archive
03-29-2008, 07:55 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I think the win/win concept is what is troubling many of us.

Archive
03-29-2008, 09:03 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Jim has a way with words.<br /><br />It is win/win only in that if a card warrants it, it will get bumped.<br /><br />It has nothing to do with altered cards allowed to slip thru with a wink.<br /><br />Now does it bother anyone?<br /><br />Steve

Archive
03-29-2008, 09:13 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />Exactly--noone would of course think any differently.<br /><br />8.5s are tough to get and are worth a clear premium. Price of 8s will remain the same.<br /><br />If you put a lot of care into the quality of the cards you are buying not just buying the grade you will do well. So far so good for me.

Archive
03-30-2008, 12:01 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Jim B, I'm more than happy to call Joe Orlando. I had asked Leon to do it because I thought representing this board he would have the most credibility. Then when Joe did not return his call, I thought Steve, based on his comments that Joe always returned his calls, would have a good chance of getting through. If that doesn't work or if Joe doesn't fully respond, then I have no problem placing the call.<br /><br />As to comments bemoaning that it is only a few of us who are dissatisfied, to that I'll say you've got to be kidding. The issue we're talking about here is whether PSA is allowing PSA-graded cards that they know or reasonably should know are altered to be returned to their owners in their original slabs. I think this is an issue that is of concern to the majority of hobbyists. Too I feel based on all the threads/posts on this issue over the past number of months, there are many people who have reasonable questions as to exactly what PSA does. I think MikeU hit it on the head when he asks not whether PSA will say the right thing over the phone to someone, but whether they are willing to change their official statement and say altered cards will be taken out of circulation and fair compensation given to their owners. IF PSA will be willing to do that, then I will be satisified. <br /><br />Such a public statement will have legal consequence. It will mean that if anybody has a PSA-graded card that is found to be altered, PSA is on the hook to remove the card from the holder and compensate the owner. Going further, it will also mean the card owner will not be at the mercy of PSA's assessment whether the card is altered. If someone with established expertise can as a matter of law establish that a card has trimmed borders, or rebuilt corners, or added coloring, or indeed to go further exhibits such characteristics that PSA as a matter of practice uses as a basis to reject other cards as altered, then PSA will have to provide compensation.<br /><br />One last point. While designating a numerical grade may be an art not a science (and to repeat, my issue with PSA does not concern whether they give a card the correct NUMERICAL grade), detecting alterations in many instances is a science. With many types of alterations, an expert will be able to prove that (i) a card is either altered or (ii) exhibits such characteristics that were used as the basis for PSA to reject other cards as altered. So any qualification by PSA in any offical statement that PSA is to be the sole judge whether a card is altered would be a disreputable manuever intended only to make worthless the legal consequence of their statement.<br /><br />So, let's see what they're willing to do as regards their official statement. <br /><br />EDITED to add that it was not PSA's original statement about their re-submission policy that started the whole hulabaloo about what they do with altered cards. Rather it was Jim C's description of his deal with PSA that raised (at least in my mind) the question whether PSA would knowingly return altered cards in their original holders. Yes, I know I'm being accused of distorting what Jim C said and being a conspiracy maniac, but I still think that it doesn't take anything more than English 101 to come to the interpretation I did (see my March 25 10:47pm post on this thread which quotes exactly the exchange between Barry Sloate and Jim C). But again, let's wait to see what PSA will do with their official statement and let's make that the final determinant.

Archive
03-30-2008, 02:26 AM
Posted By: <b>Kevin Saucier</b><p>There may be an easy way to test the system and keep this broken record from playing over an over.<br /><br />I'll send PSA some graded altered cards in a mix requesting upgrade reviews and see what happens.<br /><br /><br />Kevin

Archive
03-30-2008, 05:11 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Go for it Kevin, and please let us know the results.

Archive
03-30-2008, 05:45 AM
Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>I was hoping for Matt Sears to do that with his fake PSA "National Game" Joe Jax, but it seems he did not. Kevin - let us know what happens.

Archive
03-30-2008, 06:31 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>based on his comments that Joe always returned his calls,<br /><br /><br /><br />I called him once, he never returned any call, typical of how you interpret the english language.<br /><br />You get a thought into your head and it becomes fact.<br /><br />Please show me where I said he returned my call?<br /><br />He answered my call!<br /><br />He returns my emails!<br /><br /><br />The fact remains PSA NEVER said that they would allow altered/counterfeit cards be returned.<br /><br />That was how you insisted on reading the press release.<br /><br /><br />edited to add: and now it seems in your last post what Jim said and not PSA.<br /><br />You have twisted your story at least 3 times in this thread, earlier you said this was not a thread<br />about JC now it was him that got you to think this way!<br /><br />I'm lost Corey, so now it was not PSA? Well don't you think that is silly? <br /><br />Is it possible that you took out of context what JC said?<br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
03-30-2008, 06:38 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Rather it was Jim C's description of his deal with PSA that raised (at least in my mind) the question whether PSA would knowingly return altered cards in their original holders.<br /><br /><br /><br />Jim never said any such thing.<br /><br />He said, and has said that PSA won't return any card graded lower.<br /><br />Kevin is right this is beginning to sound like a broken record.<br /><br /><br /> <br />&lt;&lt;&lt;I have no doubt that Jim would not be party to such a thing but, after seeing how PSA sometimes plays fast and loose with its special friends (i.e. Memory Lane)&lt;&lt;&lt;<br /><br /><br />Jeff as usual makes a good point.<br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
03-30-2008, 07:07 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Ugh!!<br /><br />I would tell you all how this will turn out but it would allow Corey to write 100 more threads about what i said or didn't say over the next six months.<br /><br />Thank you Steve.

Archive
03-30-2008, 08:31 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>"Why Joe hasn't replied to Leon? I don't have an answer for that I do know he replies <br /><br />to me whenever I email or phone him (1x)"<br /><br />Those are your words Steve. So I am guilty of the unforgivable sin of interpreting the "(1x)" to mean that it is not necessary for you to leave multiple messages in order to get a return call (as apparently Leon will have to do). That intepretation in the context in which you made the remarks seemed to make sense. I do apologize for getting it wrong.<br /><br />In regard to Jim C's exchange with Barry Sloate that I referred to, PLEASE, let's stop the BS, no one can reasonably argue that the most sensible interpretation to draw from that exchange is anything other than that PSA will return to him in their orginal slabs any altered cards they find. Apparently too based on followup posts by myself and other idiotic-distorting-conspiracy maniacs such as I (some of whom are among the most respected voices on this board), that interpretation seems to enjoy widespread support. <br /><br />And in regard to this being a broken record, Jim C, how many times have you raised the issue of what Mastro does to cards, or blasted Doug Allen? But hey, that's okay because there YOU were the one raising the issue or doing the blasting. Doug at least, in addition to publicly changing his company's policy about prepping cards, also repeatedly came on this board to respond to inquiries as well as invited people to call him directly. Yet, Jim C, by your way of looking at the world, Mastro/Doug Allen are the bad guys and PSA/Joe Orlando the good guys. One thing I will give you credit for is that you never miss an opportunity to be a hypocrite.<br /><br />EDITED to add that in response to comments that we put a new record on the turntable, I for one will stop rehashing prior comments on this issue. I doubt there will ever be uniformity of view as to what I or others said. In addition, it distracts from the main issue, which is what PSA does and whether they will amend their official statement.

Archive
03-30-2008, 09:06 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Uh Corey--Doug Allen admitted on the board to altering cards in the past--Joe Orlando's company is trying to stop these altered cards from getting through. Very hypocritical(ha ha).<br /><br />On Doug Allen, he has said that he does not do crease removal anymore and I take him at his word. I have no intention at this time of continuing to post about his past comments. I met with him personally in Scranton and I intend to go back to buying cards in his auctions.<br /><br />

Archive
03-30-2008, 09:45 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Steve- I think Corey and I are trying to make the same point, perhaps worded a little differently.<br /><br />I don't think this thread is about Jim C. It's about PSA, and whether they are willing to look at these resubmitted cards objectively. That includes three possibilities: 1) bumping a card a half grade or more if it warrants it; 2) leaving the card as is if they deem it was properly graded; 3) knocking it down a half grade or putting it in an Authentic holder if they recognize they made a mistake.<br /><br />That would be a really valuable service to the hobby, but that's not what this is all about. The new policy rewards their best customers, such as Jim, creates an enormous new revenue stream for the company, and protects PSA's liability as they are under no obligation to ever acknowledge an error. And Corey and I, among others, believe this is unfair.

Archive
03-30-2008, 10:42 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I think you summed up the whole issue perfectly. I think we should take a snapshot of this last post you made and speak to it. Had this been a situation where PSA was doing something unbiased it would have been better than the stacked deck they are playing with, so to speak. It's a win win for PSA and their customers but a "win win lose" for the hobby, imo. This PSA half grade service isn't about making past wrongs right though....it's ONLY about the bottom line. (which I totally understand) regards<br /><br />edited to add....I don't want to change what I said but I will say that I do believe there could be a shred of truth to the fact PSA would want to have a more accurate grading system. I can certainly agree with them on that point and, after further thought, there is no doubt in my mind this had something to do with the decision to go to a half grade system. The way they are going about the process is the issue. Things should be viewed to be downgraded as much as upgraded if it is to be a legit process, imho. ...regards

Archive
03-30-2008, 10:44 AM
Posted By: <b>Jay</b><p>I have been reading the thread and not posting, but one of Jim's last posts raised a question for me. Jim--You said that 8.5s are very desireable (no doubt) and that they would trade for a premium over 8.0s. You also said that 8.0s would not decline in value. If you are correct in both cases, and I have no reason to believe that you are not, then PSA, by altering their grading system, has created value out of thin air. Some portion of the old 8.0s gain value, the rest stay unchanged in value. Lets say that $X in value in aggregate is created. PSA gets some portion of this through their grading fees. The rest, I assume, is coughed up by registry set junkies hungering for an extra half point here and there. Pasteur was wrong-spontaneous generation does exist.

Archive
03-30-2008, 11:05 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />Exactly.<br /><br />PSA wins and their customers win. Win/win as I called it earlier.<br /><br />As I mentioned several times and doubtless Barry and Leon both know this, no one would submit if their cards could go down in value or at least dramatically fewer. Good money-making opportunity for PSA and their customers.<br /><br />In addition to a money making opportunity for PSA, I think they want to be competitive with SGC who offers the half-grade.

Archive
03-30-2008, 11:11 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jim- you are articulating the problem.<br /><br />Win/win doesn't work here. I have an even better solution: why doesn't PSA start a program where anyone who spends a certain amount of money with them each year is automatically entitled to a free half grade bump on five cards of their choice.<br /><br />That's win/win. The consumer wins, PSA wins, and like Jay so keenly observed, they are creating value out of thin air.

Archive
03-30-2008, 11:13 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Its like resubmitting all of your cards but putting a minimum grade requirement of 8.0--whats wrong with that?

Archive
03-30-2008, 11:27 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Actually, while it is a common practice, and I thought of it as I was posting, I think there is something wrong with that, and I always did.<br /><br />Even in that situation if you are asking a company to review a card, I don't think the consumer should be able to dictate parameters to the grading company. That's like taking a class and telling the professor your minimum grade requirement on the exam.<br /><br />Because we come back to the same argument: what if you resubmit one of your 8's to PSA with directions for them not to grade it less than an 8, and upon reexamination they discover to their chagrin that the card is trimmed and never should have been graded? Why aren't they allowed to rectify the error?<br /><br />If your answer is hardly anyone would resubmit a card under those conditions, then that's fine with me. If the so-called "grading game" ceased to exist that would be a plus for the hobby. It would reduce considerably the number of cards resubmitted.<br /><br />Which of course goes against the whole purpose of the half grade program- creating a fresh stream of revenue for the company. It's not about grading, it's about the bottom line.

Archive
03-30-2008, 11:34 AM
Posted By: <b>Jay</b><p>Jim--I hope the way the market prices cards going forward is that 8.5s are worth more than 8.0s and 8.0s are worth less than they used to be. That way there is no value created and the system is fine. My sense is that as this year rolls on both 8.0s and 8.5s will be worth less than 8.0s were last year, based on the economy, and seperating out the impact of PSA's actions, everything else held equal, will be impossible.

Archive
03-30-2008, 11:39 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />You may be correct???<br /><br />I view it as value creation however--we'll see. This is largely based upon how stingy PSA appears to be in giving out the 8.5 grade. Also remember, one can even get 9s as I got four upgraded to 9 in my first 67 card submission<br /><br />I for one would be prepared to step up my budget materially if cards say dropped by 20%.

Archive
03-30-2008, 12:05 PM
Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>I do think it is a little bit apples and oranges with respect to calling it the equivalent of a review with a minimum grade requirement.<br /><br />Most of the time when you're submitting a card with a minimum grade requirement, you're submitting a card graded by another service, for crossover. In this case, you're submitting PSA-graded cards that were graded using a different grading scale, for review in homes that it will adapt favorably to the new scale. However, if PSA got it wrong the first time, you don't have to deal with any consequences - it's all upside.<br /><br />The problem with that, of course, is that it is NOT "win/win." It's "win" for the submitter, and "win" for PSA, but it's definitely not "win" for the collector who buys the cards that didn't get the bump. That collector, unfortunately, has no way of knowing whether the cards they're buying have been resubmitted for a bump. And by plainly stating that they will not downgrade any card they find to be overgraded upon review, they're also saying - indirectly, by association - "Any card you receive that has a straight grade may or may not be accurately graded." <br /><br />-Al

Archive
03-30-2008, 12:18 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Yeah,<br /><br />But I'm not selling my cards.....collectors/ dealers will assume unless compelling evidence otherwise that all 8s have been resubmitted.<br /><br />

Archive
03-30-2008, 12:27 PM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Barry, Al, you say it very well.<br /><br />A grading company should be the bastion of integrity for the hobby. Good faith purchasers are relying on the good will associated with their name to make purchasing decisions. That reliance is violated when the grading company consciously releases back to circulation cards in their original slabs that they know are either overgraded or altered. As has been pointed out, that is a win/win/lose. Win for the grading company (they don't have to compensate the card owner for getting it wrong the first time and they also encourage more re-submissions), win for the card owner (his card is not downgraded, though I might add if the grading company were to compensate him for a downgrade, what has he lost?), but lose for good-faith-third-party purchasers (they are buying an overgraded or altered card).<br /><br />If this practice is okay, then how does it differ from an auction house prepping a card for grading? That too would be the same win/win/lose. The consigner wins because he will get more for his card, the auction house wins because the more the card sells for, the more money they make. But the good-faith purchaser loses becauses he just bought a prepped card. The view on this board seems to be unanimous that such an action by the auction house cannot be justified on the grounds that it is a rational profit-maximizing action. So why then is that same profit-maximizing rationale used to support an action by the grading company that has the same deleterious impact on good-faith-third-party purchasers? <br><br>

Archive
03-30-2008, 12:43 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I have no dog in this fight as I really couldn't care less...put me in the Frank Wakefield/Dan McKee card grading sucks boat, but I have to say that PSA offered a new service - half grade bumps - that's all you're paying for and that's all they are offering with this service. Why should PSA go beyond that with this service? If they stand behind their product then there is no reason to look for alterations if they have already in the past deemed the card to be unaltered and gave it a grade. Quite simply they are looking at cards that were not good enough to be bumped to an 9, but they could be better than the 8 they were originally given because at the time they didn't have half-grades. Of course this was a transparent means for them to fleece the registry folks and knowing the competitive nature of their customers they knew it would work and it has. It's nothing more than that....PSA will NOT and probably should NOT answer Corey's questions from a business standpoint they have nothing to gain.

Archive
03-30-2008, 12:55 PM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>"PSA will NOT and probably should NOT answer Corey's questions from a business standpoint they have nothing to gain."<br /><br />Dan, you're probably correct on that. Inasmuch as I harbor no illusions PSA would be willing/able to shoulder the financial burden of compensating owners of all cards that are found to be altered, I see no chance they will ever amend their official statement. And from the business standpoint, while I'd love to argue that offering such compensation will generate such good will as to be a business home run, for all I know the financial hit could be so great as to potentially put them out of business.<br /><br />Going forward, what I suspect will come from all this is PSA on a case-by-case basis will decide what to do with altered cards in their holders. For their best customers or perhaps for people who make the loudest noise, they will do something. But I don't expect to see any official pronouncement.<br /><br />

Archive
03-30-2008, 01:49 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>I think its funny that when someone agrees with you that the person says they say it well even if they have a hard time putting together a coherent sentence(maybe I am guilty of this too).<br /><br />Anyway, Dan says it well(ha ha). My prediction will be that Joe will not amend the company's policy. I don't think you will be seeing them downgrade any cards or take any cards out of circulation either. If that ticks off the Corey Shanus' of the world so be it.<br /><br />Dan--the cards can go right to a 9(I had four of 67 do this). And I don't think its succeeding because of the competitive nature of registry participants(although most are very competitive); its succeeding because its a tremendous economic proposition for those who own a lot of PSA 8 cards.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
03-30-2008, 02:07 PM
Posted By: <b>Jerry Hrechka</b><p> I believe that PSA has changed their Flips, so as time gos by it will be possible to tell which cards have been submitted for the .5 Bump & which don't qualify for the upgrade.<br /> I think that a year or 2 needs to go by, before prices for straight grades and those with the half graded added, become accurate.

Archive
03-30-2008, 03:17 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>based on his comments that Joe always returned his calls,<br />////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////<br /><br /><br /><br />Your quote above says 'comments' as if I said it more then 1x. I was specific that it was 1x and I never said<br />he returned my call. <br /><br />Seems like my comment(s) is/are not the only thing(s) that you have mis-interpreted.<br /><br /><br />You have gone from using JC in your opening post, to claiming this was not a thread about JC, back<br />to it was what JC said that gave you the impression. <br /><br /><br />You have changed your story at least 3x.<br /><br />Nothing more for me to say here, I'm done with this thread.<br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
03-30-2008, 03:45 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Don't worry Steve--he will find another reason to start a thread criticizing me very soon.<br /><br />Stay tuned.

Archive
03-30-2008, 04:43 PM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>"I don't think you will be seeing them downgrade any cards or take any cards out of circulation either."<br /><br />Jim, while really not necessary, thanks for comfirming that. Or have I misinterpreted that one too. As to who that ticks off, I think it's been demonstrated that it ticks off a lot more people than just than Corey Shanus.<br><br>

Archive
03-30-2008, 05:11 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>PSA is evaluating cards for a half-point bump(or perhaps more)--nothing else--thats what this is all about--not determining if they made a mistake on a card at some point in the past.<br /><br />Oh, I forgot--Steve--"well said".

Archive
03-30-2008, 05:18 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Isn't part of cleaning up the hobby correcting errors? That doesn't seem so farfetched.

Archive
03-30-2008, 05:21 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Barry, PSA is not involved with the "Cleanup" of the hobby. In case you hadn't noticed. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
03-30-2008, 05:26 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I have noticed. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
03-30-2008, 06:01 PM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>So, on that note maybe we have arrived at the answer which was the question of this thread -- over time, if not already, PSA cards WILL sell at a discount relative to SGC cards.<br><br>

Archive
03-30-2008, 06:18 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>What do you mean we?<br /><br />I don't.<br /><br />The PSA Set Registry trumps all.

Archive
03-30-2008, 06:25 PM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>MY GOD!!!!! WOW!!!<br /><br />Nothing more to add. <br><br>

Archive
03-30-2008, 06:30 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Corey,<br /><br />If not already is just a dumb, uninformed statement.<br /><br />Over time? 1 year, 20 years? No time soon unless something changes dramatically.

Archive
04-01-2008, 01:58 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Joe replied to my email and he said:<br /><br />The warranty applies to EVERYTHING we look at. If the graders determine that be the case then the warranty applies.<br /><br /><br />I have taken the liberty and forwarded the email to Barry Sloate. That way no one can say that I am making up what was said<br />afterall one could say that they have 2 Wagners.<br /><br /><br />I hope that this now puts this issue to rest.<br /><br /><br />Of course their will be those that will tear his reply apart and ask 10 more questions.<br /><br /><br />I hope I have helped. <br /><br /><br />What they do behind closed doors, again I have no idea.<br /><br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br />

Archive
04-01-2008, 04:14 AM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Steve, I don't mean to split hairs but if PSA finds that an altered card is in one of their holders will they refund the cost of the card to the buyer or will they simply refund SMR value?

Archive
04-01-2008, 05:14 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I responded to Steve's email that Joe's answer was unclear. What exactly is that warranty?

Archive
04-01-2008, 05:52 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />Thank you for following up on that. <br /><br />Does Barry have permission to post the email?<br><br>

Archive
04-01-2008, 06:12 AM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Barry, I suspect that if an altered card in a PSA holder was sold in a Mastro auction for, let's say, 10K, PSA won't be refunding that money anytime soon. Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt it.

Archive
04-01-2008, 07:10 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Barry can do as he pleases.<br /><br />Now it is the warranty that is unclear...............<br /><br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br />

Archive
04-01-2008, 07:27 AM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Steve, I'm sure you can appreciate that a warranty is not a warranty if one purchases an altered PSA card for 10K and PSA offers 2K to take it off your hands.

Archive
04-01-2008, 07:30 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Corey- I deleted Steve's email after I responded to him and for some reason can't find it. It was just a single sentence, to the effect that if PSA finds something on a resubmitted card, the warranty will apply.<br /><br />But I have no idea what that warranty is.

Archive
04-01-2008, 08:00 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I am not sure but I think the warranty is 3 yrs or 36,000 miles, whichever comes first....

Archive
04-01-2008, 08:09 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
04-01-2008, 09:46 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>I'm going to choose to not read into this anything other that PSA intends to act in a completely reputable manner. They will take out of circulation re-submitted cards that they determine are altered and, pursuant to their warranty, offer fair compensation to the card owner. <br /><br />So this being the case, I assume then that anybody re-submitting his/her cards will not only have no problem with PSA checking for and removing from circulation those that are altered, but indeed will insist that PSA do so. It would be the ultimate win-win. The hobby will win because altered cards are being removed from circulation. And the card owner will win because he/she will (i) have the piece of mind that his/her cards (many of which might have been slabbed in grading's early years when grading company's were not as skilled at detecting alterations) are being re-examined pursuant to current standards, (ii) will be fairly compensated for his/her altered cards and thus will not be asked to take a financial hit, and (iii) have the satisfaction of acting in a manner consistent with the best interests of the hobby. <br><br>

Archive
04-01-2008, 10:07 AM
Posted By: <b>Tom Nieves</b><p><i><u>The PSA Financial Guarantee Of Grade & Authenticity</u> <br /><br />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. <br /><br />PSA guarantees that all cards submitted to it shall be graded in accordance with PSA grading standards and under the procedures of PSA.</i><br /><br /><a href="http://psacard.com/verify.chtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://psacard.com/verify.chtml</a><br /><br />//////////////////////////////////////////////////<br /><br />Corey, unlike SGC's guarantee, PSA's is not limited to 30 days and the original submitter. And I'm quite sure you won't find any newspaper articles about Joe Orlando restoring cards. Just something to think about...

Archive
04-01-2008, 10:53 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Thanks for that information.<br /><br />This is the SGC guaranty:<br /><br />"SGC guarantees that all cards submitted shall be graded by SGC grading experts in accordance with SGC grading procedures. In the event the original submitter of an SGC card believes that the card has been overgraded with respect to such procedures, the original submitter may resubmit that card to SGC for a review of the assigned grade. THIS RESUBMISSION MUST BE REQUESTED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF RECEIPT FROM SGC." (sic) <br /><br />I agree with you how it appears to read and I have a call into SGC to request clarification. If in fact their policy is to not stand behind altered cards beyond the 30-day period or if sent in by a non-original submitter, then I have a problem with that. Alterations that get by grading companies by their nature are not readily obvious, and I don't see why somebody relying on SGC's expertise should be without recourse if through no fault of their own either the alteration is discovered outside the 30-day period or the card sent in by a non-original submitter.<br /><br />As to your remarks about restoring cards, please elaborate.<br><br>

Archive
04-01-2008, 10:54 AM
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>PSA has always had a guarantee. It used to be on their website in several different places with a simple explanation. It was also footnoted in their financial statements. I am not sure if the guarantee is still in either of those places. However, present or not, I am very confident that Joe's claim as to a warranty, is nothing more than empty words. <br /><br />Does anyone actually believe that Joe would actually put in writing that they did not have a guarantee or warranty? Or that upon resubmission for the 1/2 grade that they will not look for altered cards and remove them from circulation? PSA is a business and no different than SGC and they will buy back cards when they have to or are made to. <br /><br />On several instances I have submitted the same card multiple times to GAI, SGC and PSA and all too frequently results in completely inconsistent grading results. Not only do the grading companies not agree with one another but upon resubmission to the grading company the card was originally slabbed by, the card comes back a different grade or is then rejected. Grading companies are merely issuing an opinion which is not the same as an absolute. That gives them a lot of wiggle room for making "judgment errors" which may not be able to be proved. And certainly not easily proved while a card is sealed. <br /><br />Bottom line is the buy back policy for any company for altered or over graded cards is employed ONLY when one of the two scenarios exist (1)not buying it back is not economically feasible or (2)not buying the card back had certain and sudden adverse effects on public opinion. <br /><br />I don't see any grading company actively looking to buy back cards, expensive or not, in order to clean up the hobby. If it makes all of you more comfortable to think that a real guarantee is in place because it is printed someplace, great. With the sheer number of cards I see floating around that appear altered or at best significantly over graded, my guarantee is that more than 99% of them would never be reacquired by the grading company who graded them.<br /><br />Greg

Archive
04-01-2008, 11:15 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Jeff I agree with you.<br /><br /><br />My only problem with this was how some people jumped to conclusions<br /><br />stating that PSA would not take cards out of circulation that they found to be<br /><br />altered/counterfeit during this resub program. <br /><br /><br />The fact of the matter is that they never said any such thing and that is what<br /><br />I as trying to convey all along. Will they? Who knows? <br /><br />Saying your card(s) will not be downgraded means simply that. It certainly does not mean<br /><br />that if they find a card that they now feel is altered/counterfeit that they would <br /> <br />send it back with a wink.<br /><br />And it was clarified by Joe in his return email to me in which he answered my simple and straightforward question.<br /><br />" Joe what happens if PSA finds during this resub program an altered/ counterfeit card?<br /><br /><br />Anyway, BOTN as usual is correct too.<br /><br /><br />Both SGC and PSA keep the warranties vague.<br /><br />Both are the best we have in 3rd party grading.<br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
04-01-2008, 12:04 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>One of the things I don't understand about the warranties is that if a grading company is forced to buy back a card, at what level will it be?<br /><br />Let's say you bought a card years ago for $200 and today it is fairly worth $1000. If that card is subsequently deemed altered, what can you reasonably expect to recoup?

Archive
04-01-2008, 12:20 PM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>"PSA guarantees that all cards submitted to it shall be graded in accordance with PSA grading standards and under the procedures of PSA."<br /><br />Those words, as posted by Tom, are part of PSA's guaranty. Clearly there is potentially a big loophole -- they can always argue that they graded the card in accordance with their standards and under their procedures, and still missed the alteration. So tough luck.<br /><br />I don't think though it would end there, though. Inasmuch as many alterations are black and white matters that can be proven as a matter of law, PSA would have a heck of a hard time explaining how they missed such an alteration in this instance but caught it in others. And, even if they could explain, that would be a "win the battle, lose the war scenario" because what they would be arguing is that their standards and procedures are inadequate to catch scientifically detectable alterations.<br /><br />So, bottom line. If I had altered PSA cards that I could PROVE are altered, I'd return them to PSA and invoke the guarantee. <br><br>

Archive
04-01-2008, 12:24 PM
Posted By: <b>James Gallo</b><p>I have been keeping up with this thread and in my opinion this would solve all the problems.<br /><br />Upon resubmition of any card if PSA finds the card to be altered they buy it back at an agreed upon cash price based on what the card was graded at the first time around. It would not be hard to make a few phone calls to some of the big dealers and auction houses and get some numbers for a card and then agree to a price. EVERYONE knows that the SMR is a joke price wise and that PSA does not care to put any work into it.<br /><br />PSA should desire that all there cards are correctly graded and so should the owner of the card. I bought 5 cards back to PSA last year at the national because I thought they were OVER graded!!! They found none to be over graded which I still find to be laughable. Regardless if there was a risk of your cards going down a grade or up wouldn't that be what you would want. Do you want your cards to be graded correctly I know I do.<br /><br />The final solution to this is that if any card is down graded PSA compensates you with submission credits. This would put a minor burden on them capital wise and would only encourage you to submit more cards.<br /><br />In the end it is all about consumer confidence and if that does not exist then there is a big problem.<br /><br />I have talked to SGC in the past about a misgraded card. Although it was not with Dave F and it was not in great deal it seemed clear to me that if a card was found to be misgraded they would fix it and compensate the owner.<br /><br />The end result is that I feel both companies will deal with the guanentee on a case by case basis and both leave a lot to interpretation.<br /><br />Lastly, I see PSA losing ground to beckett in modern cards and SGC in pre war, so they many continue to hold the 40-70's era's but the rest are not as impacted by the registry and the prices are adjusting so that psa card do sell for either less or about the same as SGC and BGS cards of the same grade.<br /><br />James G<br /><br />PS Has Joe called Leon back yet? IMO that is really bad as Leon is not some no name and also rather rude of Joe.<br><br>Looking for 1915 Cracker Jacks and 1909-11 American Caramel E90-1.

Archive
04-01-2008, 12:31 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Corey <br /><br /><br />I have a minor question, how many PSA graded cards do you own and how many<br /><br />cards did you resubmit?<br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br />

Archive
04-01-2008, 12:38 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Joe O never called me back. Some might say that it was a stacked deck and I wouldn't be fair or objective and it was a no win for him. That is far from the truth. I would have reported back as to exactly what he said and would have even made sure by reading back his quote(s) to him to be addressed on the board so as NOT to misinterpret anything. I am not sure how I could have been more fair. Also, this board is very open and Joe could even come onto this board and make one statement about their company policies......It can be done effectively and has been done in the past....best regards

Archive
04-01-2008, 12:38 PM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Your damages would be to put you in the same position you would have been in had the grading company not missed the alteration when you first submitted the card. That would be then $200 plus accrued interest thereon (and the grading company would be entitled to sell the card and retain the proceeds). You would not be entitled to lost profits (i.e., the difference between what you paid for the card and what it is worth today). The reason for that is if the grading company had detected the alteration at the outset, you would never have purchased the card and therefore would never have had the opportunity to earn that profit. In regard to an argument that you would have put the $200 into another card that would have similarly appreciated, damages such as that would be regarded as too speculative and therefore unawardable. <br><br>

Archive
04-01-2008, 12:56 PM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />To answer your question, I own one card that is in an altered holder. And I own a N28 set of 50, only the baseball of which are slabbed. I have not re-submitted those cards. The provenance of that set is that it came from a long-time collector who had it in his possession for many years, so I have a high comfort level none of the cards have been altered. <br /><br />EDITED to add:<br /><br />James, interesting though that in regard to the Lionel Carter collection, arguably the most significant offering of high grade post-war cards in recent memory, Mastro chose to go with SGC over PSA.

Archive
04-01-2008, 01:50 PM
Posted By: <b>Bruce Babcock</b><p><img src="http://homepage.mac.com/thurber51/.Pictures/Grading%20Mishaps/1895Shindle.jpg"> <br /><br />Sorry to interrupt this thread with a scan. <br /><br />PSA. Aren't they the guys we trust to detect evidence of trimming?<br /><br />Are there specific written criteria, invariable from day to day, which the PSA graders will use to differentiate 8s from 8.5s?<br /><br />Or do they just wing it? <br /><br />Seems like a pretty small distinction to make.<br /><br />Can the difference between an 8 and an 8.5 of the same card be seen by looking at scans? Can the difference be seen in an auction catalog? Can the difference be seen inside the holder? Can the difference be seen outside the holder? Are these distinctions worth paying for?<br /><br />Can these tiny distinctions be trusted when other more easily detectable differences are sometimes missed?<br /><br /><img src="http://homepage.mac.com/thurber51/.Pictures/Grading%20Mishaps/honusheiniewagnerpsa.jpg"><br /><br />Each to his own, I guess.

Archive
04-03-2008, 06:28 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>I agree with you how it appears to read and I have a call into SGC to request clarification.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Corey any word on your call into SGC?<br /><br /><br />Bruce <br /><br />I seem to recall that SGC also has blundered big too. <br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br /><br />

Archive
04-03-2008, 10:37 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Dave Forman and I had been playing telephone tag and we finally spoke this morning. He has authorized me to post the following information.<br /><br />The SGC guaranty quoted earlier is the guaranty SGC had when he bought the company. It is not indicative of their current policy and they will update their website to reflect this. Under the current guaranty, there is no 30-day period and it will apply to non-original submitters. In fact, Dave described to me a recent situation where SGC honored the guaranty and bought back a number of trimmed cards that were slabbed in 1999.<br><br>

Archive
04-03-2008, 11:22 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>That is great to know, btw didn't he buy this company almost 3 years ago?<br /><br />I would have thought something as important as a warranty would have been updated long ago.<br /><br />Better late then never I guess.<br /><br />For the life of me I can't even find the current PSA one.<br /><br />Steve<br /><br />

Archive
04-03-2008, 11:27 AM
Posted By: <b>Anthony N.</b><p>&lt;&lt;James, interesting though that in regard to the Lionel Carter collection, arguably the most significant offering of high grade post-war cards in recent memory, Mastro chose to go with SGC over PSA.&gt;&gt;<br /><br />In most cases, but the '41 Goudeys were in PSA holders. Were they fishing for one particular whale? And if so who were they counting on to be the underbidders?<br />Or were they grade shopped?

Archive
04-03-2008, 11:34 AM
Posted By: <b>CoreyRS.hanus</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />Can't disagree with you on that. I know people have been privately expressing surprise to me the guaranty read that way because to their knowledge SGC (at least since Dave took it over) has never tried to deny its coverage based on the 30-day period or that the card was sent in by a non-original submitter. So maybe, never being a point of contention, it slipped under the radar. But bottom line the website should reflect current policy and I told Dave that, and he agreed.<br><br>

Archive
04-03-2008, 12:09 PM
Posted By: <b>Glyn</b><p>We stand behind EVERY card in our holders, and the guarantee is not just for 30 days nor is it limited to the submitter of the card. The website will be ammended to reflect the current policy as soon as we possible. We thank everyone for there support of SGC and if you have any other questions please give me a call.

Archive
04-06-2008, 12:23 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Corey<br /><br />I wonder how many people (Over the years) read the guarantee had a problem card and didn't try<br /><br />to reconcile figuring they did not qualify? I find it disheartening that even if it happened to one person it is one person too many.<br /><br />Steve

Archive
04-06-2008, 05:18 AM
Posted By: <b>LetsGoBucs</b><p>Well this is certainly a tough thread to keep track of <br /><br />I'm fairly uninterested in graded cards per se, but economics and pricing does interest me.<br /><br />Over time I think you won't see additional value created by the new policy PSA has....perhaps in the short term there will be those that generate additional value by getting an 8.5 and then selling. But I would tend to believe that after a couple of years that the 8.5 cards will be selling for more than an 8 used to sell for....but that 8's will sell for less than they used to sell for - and perhaps significantly less. By not lowering any grades I would have to assume that some 8's are actually 7.somethings that were missed and over time people will adjust there purchases in line with that. Not to mention that I think that if your collecting 8's today that tomorrow you'll want 8.5's.<br /><br />I think that this will be especially true with lower grade for EX and EX/MT - I assume 5's and 6's? A 5.5 will be a true EX and a 5 will become EX- (which looks incredibly familar to how grading used to be done by the amateurs!!) And buyers will pay the EX price for the 5.5 but something less than today for the 5.<br /><br />Just my discounted two cents worth

Archive
04-06-2008, 06:29 AM
Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>&lt;&lt;not one of the 500 largest holders of psa graded cards has or would submit their cards with the sole purpose of ridding the hobby of altered cards&gt;&gt;<br /><br /><br />Jim, can you post the list of 500 largerst holders of psa graded cards? No need to rank them, I'd just like to see the 500 names.

Archive
04-06-2008, 06:36 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Brian,<br /><br />People would pay me a lot of money for that information and you want it for free?<br /><br />Lets Go Bucs,<br /><br />I disagree on 8s going down because there are so few 8.5s being given out.<br />Likely that over time that PSA cards will sell somewhat in line with their SGC counterparts with PSA getting a premium due to the registry for 1948-1975(all sports) and SGC getting a premium for many issues prewar.<br /><br />Also disagree that 8.5s will be the "new 8" as again there are so few 8.5s being given out making collecting a set in 8.5 near impossible.<br /><br />

Archive
04-06-2008, 06:42 AM
Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>I am sure some might pay for it but not me. I don't believe for a second you have an accurate list of the top 500. And I certainly don't believe you know each of those 500's collecting strategy and/or criteria by which they might resubmit.<br /><br />I do agree with you that most collectors wouldn't martyr themselves to clean up the hobby. A better hobby is great, as long as it doesn't hit one's bottom line it seems.<br /><br />But stating as fact that you know the top 500, you know what they have/haven't done and what they will do is a stretch.<br />