Good News From PSA on Bumps

[Archive]

Posted By: PAS

4.5?

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Hard to play guess the grade with only a front scan.

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric Brehm

I think it is all about the corners (and edges and surface, i.e. defects related to age and handling) -- for determining the whole grade as a starting point. (And all four corners have to be '7 corners' to get a 7.) Then there is some range allowed within each grade for centering and print defects, which if exceeded will result in a drop in grade or the assignment of a qualifier. I'm suggesting that the half grades are mainly for identifying the cards that qualified for each grade based on corner/edge/surface evaluation, that are particularly strong with respect to centering and print quality. It's not quite all that simple, since many cards have a weird mixture of condition attributes, but I think that's the gist of it.

That yellow Ruth looks like about a 6.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

PSA 4

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard

I agree with Peter - 4.5

Peter - I want my Hutson back!

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Back is clean and centered. There are no minor wrinkles or anything like that.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Was it in a GAI case before? Looks like a 5; corners a little too worn for a 6.

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric Brehm

I suppose you're right, I better change my guess to 5. It's a nicer looking card to me than some PSA 6 Goudey Ruths I've owned however. Really pretty.

[Archive]

Posted By: steve yawitz

5?

http://imageevent.com/yawie99

[Archive]

Posted By: Rhys

I dont know about modern grading standards (IE if there is a pinhead sized stain on the back SGC would give it a 2)

Having said that, that Ruth is the walking definition of a 5 and if it was in a 5.5 holder I wouldn't complain one bit. There is not a person in the hobby who has been around before grading who would call that anything less than EX.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Well only one person got it right. I bought it in a 4 holder at the Chicago National a few years ago, as Quan mentioned. I submitted it for a bump a couple of months ago and it was denied. What to do?
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Jim- that card is better than a 4. Submit it to Sloate's Friendly Grading Service (SFGS) and I will give it a 5.5.

[Archive]

Posted By: PAS

Seems a very low risk proposition.

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Jim - what holder is it in and where did you submit for a bump? It looks like it's in a GAI slab. If both GAI and PSA thought it was a 4, then maybe we're missing something in the scan?

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

It is currently in an SGC 50. It was never in a GAI holder to my knowledge. Maybe I should cross it to Barry's new company.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Jim - SGC has it as a 50 and it was resubmitted to SGC for a bump?

[Archive]

Posted By: quan

i agree with rhys, i wouldn't think twice calling that ruth EX. jim if u ever sell it in the future you'd be leaving money leaving it in an sgc50 holder...u know someone will buy it and it'll end up in a 60/5 holder down the line.

quan

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank B

>>All the cards I submitted were re-holdered with new flips indicating they
had been reviewed for a bump. JimB<<

Jim - are you saying that new holders are standard for a resubmit?

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Frank,
I don't what is standard, but that is what happened with mine. I also submitted my other E93s just to get reholdered out of the condom holders into the ones that fit them properly. Even though these were not reviewed for a bump, they got the new flips too, as if they had been reviewed.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

If I remember right, PSA did say that all cards that were reviewed would be reholdered so that it would be evident that they had been reviewed. That was not the initial plan, but was something they decided to do upon feedback from collectors. I think I read about that here on one of the threads when they announced half grades.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

JimB- i actually thought what PSA "changed" regarding their bump system, was that cards that were newly graded or bumped (basically all new flips), have the digit (6,7,8, etc) below the text (NM-MT, etc)...people complained that you cannot tell if a card had been reviewed (unless it was bumped, then obviously it had a 1/2 grade attached to it) or not becasue the new flip looked like the old flip...so they created that as a way to differenciate between old slabs and fresh ones.

the way i understand it, is that they review a card thru the slab, if it meets the standards for a bump, it will get cracked & re-holdered (new flip). if it doesn't meet the standards for a bump, it is left in the current slab (same flip).

can anyone else confirm this?

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank B

>>the way i understand it, is that they review a card thru the slab, if it meets the standards
for a bump, it will get cracked & re-holdered (new flip). if it doesn't meet the standards for
a bump, it is left in the current slab (same flip).<<

That's the way mine were treated. No bump gets you the same slab/same flip.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

I submitted several cards for review under one of PSA's specials. One of my cards had the old style, very early label. It was reholdered, not per any request of mine, with the new label so it now has the appearance that it's a recent grade. I was pleased as I hate the old labels, and this was done even though the card did not bump.

All cards that bumped received labels with the grade on the bottom line. The cards that did not bump kept the same labels. All cards kept the same cert numbers as well.

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric Brehm

Here are eight PSA 8 cards I recently submitted for review. All were cards that I thought at least had a shot at a half grade bump. I don't have the cards back yet, but I got the results: two out of the eight cards received bumps from NM-MT 8 to NM-MT+ 8.5. Looking at these results, it appears that good centering and print quality for the grade are necessary to get a bump, but not sufficient. Whoever said they are looking closely at corner sharpness when doing the reviews was probably correct.

This '53 Bowman Mantle was bumped to 8.5, but the '54 Bowman was not:



This '54 Topps Aaron did not receive a bump, but the '54 Topps Kaline did:



Both of these '55 Bowmans were rejected for the bump:



Both of these '62 Topps were also rejected:

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Eric, thanks for the info -- though I have to tell you I can't tell the difference between the 8s that were bumped and those that were not. Regarding the 62 Maris, because the flip shows the grade on a second line, is it possible that card had already been submitted for the bump and rejected? Or does your scan reflect the new flip provided post-review?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Congrats on the bumps to 8.5. Quite honestly they all look the same to me ....take care

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I may be wrong, but it seems that everybody is getting about the same percentage bumped, something in the 20-30% range. If this is true, I wonder how objective this system is.

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric Brehm

Leon -- thanks, they all look about the same to me too.

Jeff -- I haven't gotten the cards back from PSA yet, so I don't know if the rejected ones got new flips. I bought the '62 Maris several months ago on eBay; assuming that rejected cards don't get new flips, it must have either been submitted raw or re-holdered to get the new-style flip (although it could have been rejected on an earlier review after it already had the new-style flip).

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric Brehm

Barry -- I have to believe they are trying to apply an objective standard of some kind, as opposed to filling some sort of arbitrary quota, but it's not quite clear to me exactly what that standard is. In any case, the number of cards receiving bumps, at least in the higher grades, continues to be low, based on the reports we've seen so far.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

By the way, I made a mistake on my Goudey Ruth above. I went back and checked my records. It was a GAI 4.5 when I bought it. I cracked it and sent it to PSA raw hoping for a 5. It came back as a 4. Resubmitted a couple of months ago for a bump and was denied.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

Eric

The Kaline looks like it has a soft corner (TR) Does it?

Also, the Aaron looks sharper to me.



Nice cards.


Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric Brehm

Steve -- yes I think the '54 Kaline is a tad soft in one corner, although I actually haven't looked at the corners that carefully. But the centering is about as good as any I've seen on that card. So maybe one factor compensated for the other when they decided to give it the bump to 8.5. I think the corners on the '54 Aaron are less than razor sharp also, but again I haven't inspected them very closely. Looks like a real nice card to me.

This is the first time I have submitted any cards for review, just to see what I would get, and I haven't seen enough half-graded cards to figure out what the pattern is. It's hard enough to make sense out of the whole grades sometimes.

[Archive]

Posted By: mintauctions

Jim.

What is the cost for PSA to examine each card you submit for possible grade bump? Do they charge a set price or is it based on the value of the card? What is the difference between the cost for a reviewed and declined card and one that is reviewed and bumped (thus reholdered with new higher label).

Thanks

Mike

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

What is the cost for PSA to examine each card you submit for possible grade bump?



It depends on the card.


The fee is charged weather the card bumps or not.


Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric Brehm

The cost for a Review is the same as the cost for Grading, and as Steve said, is charged regardless of whether or not the review results in a higher grade being assigned.

The cost for Grading depends on which service level you select: the higher the service level, the faster estimated turnaround time you receive. However, as the declared value of the card you are submitting increases, so does the minimum service level you are required to select, so because of this, more valuable cards are more expensive to have graded or reviewed.

The current PSA Grading prices are:

Premium $250 (Same Day) -- min level required for $10,000+ card
Walk-Through $100 (Same Day) -- min level required for $5,000 - $9,999 card
Super Express $60 (2 Business Days) -- min level required for $2,000 - $4,999 card
Express $35 (5 Business Days) -- min level required for $500 - $1,999 card
Regular $15 (10 Business Days) -- min level required for under $500 card
Modern Memorabilia Cards $10 (35 Business Days) -- maximum value $500

They also have less expensive Bulk Service pricing for larger orders of cards valued at under $100.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

If there's no risk for a lowered grade, then the whole thing is a sham which results only in artifically-inflated grades.

What happens if they find an altered card? Simply not bump it and send it back in its 8 slab?

[Archive]

Posted By: quan

jim yea i thought it was in a gai4.5 holder also. u'd paid a premium price for it since it looked alot better than a 4...i still say it's a 5. some goudey 5s i've seen had more rounding corners or soiling.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Altered cards are ignored as are cards which are graded too high. Both get sent back to the submitter unchanged. And yes the entire concept is a farce and at best is nothing more than a chance to squeeze more revenue out of the market and at worst illustrates how useless PSA really is.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

What happens if they find an altered card? Simply not bump it and send it back in its 8 slab?


According to Joe "if a grader finds an altered card PSA will stand by its guarantee" And it does not have to be in an 8 slab to qualify ALL cards sent in qualify.


Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

So Steve are you suggesting that PSA, upon finding an altered card during a review, automatically offers to buy back the card at prevailing market prices?

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

Jeff

All I am saying is what Joe said to me, how they pay off I have no idea.


He did not mention that in his email to me.


Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Steve, what do you think is the under/over on cards found to have been altered on review -- and this then communicated to their owners?

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

Zero.


Steve