PSA/SGC guarantee; how long before revisions?

[Beastmode]

The SGC Guarantee

SGC guarantees that all cards submitted shall be graded by SGC grading experts in accordance with SGC grading procedures. In the event the owner of an SGC card believes that the card has been overgraded with respect to such procedures, the owner may resubmit the card to SGC for a review of the assigned grade.

If the grade determined under such review is lower than that originally assigned to the card, SGC shall, at SGC's discretion, either replace the card or pay the difference between the current fair market value of the card at the newly established grade and the current fair market value of the grade originally assigned to such card, in the form of either cash or grading credit. Due to the volatile nature of the sportscard market and Internet auctions/sales, the selling prices in these auctions do not necessarily represent the current fair market value of any particular sportscard. SGC will determine the current fair market value of a card which is assigned a lower grade on review, based upon what SGC believes to be reliable current market information. Clerical errors with respect to the description or grade of the card(s) which would be obvious upon inspection shall not be subject to the SGC guarantee stated herein


The PSA Financial Guarantee of Grade & Authenticity

"The PSA Financial Guarantee of Grade & Authenticity (“Guarantee”) is fundamental to PSA's concept of third-party grading. Subject to the exceptions noted below, the Guarantee ensures the accuracy of the grade assigned to any PSA-graded card.

PSA guarantees that all cards submitted to it shall be graded in accordance with PSA grading standards and under the procedures of PSA.

If PSA, in fact, concludes that the card in question no longer merits the PSA grade assigned or fails PSA’s authenticity standards, PSA will either:

Buy the card from the submitter at the current market value if the card can no longer receive a numerical grade under PSA's standards or,

Refund the difference in value between the original PSA grade and the current PSA grade if the grade is lowered. In this case, the card will also be returned to the customer along with the refund for the difference in value.

The current market value is determined by PSA, based in part on Sports Market Report and SMR Online values and/or recent prices realized from the marketplace. PSA will be the sole determiner of the current market value.

Certain exceptions to the Guarantee apply, including, but not limited to, the following: the Guarantee does not apply to any card as to which an obvious clerical error has been made with respect to the assigned grade or description; the Guarantee does not apply to any card that has been removed from the PSA holder or any card for which the PSA holder shows evidence of tampering; the Guarantee does not apply to any card that has been environmentally damaged due to improper storage or natural disasters, such as fire and flood; the Guarantee does not apply to cards exhibiting environmental deterioration subsequent to initial grading; the Guarantee applies only to the grade assigned to the card and does not apply to the authenticity of any autograph nor the grade assigned to any autograph; and the Guarantee does not apply to, and cannot be utilized by, the original submitter (or the original submitter’s agents, employees, affiliates or representatives) of the graded card"




Clearly TPG's can no longer keep up the the card doctors, so why would they guarantee against trimming, flatterning, conservering, coloring, stretching, etc. for as little as $8. Appears we are headed for a two tiered grading system, one that is cheap and similar to what you have now, and one that does an in-depth review of previous examples, and uses latest technology to measure and review cards (exactly what BODA is doing). There would be two different warranties, and two very different price structures. Suggesting to the customer that the current guarantee applies to all graded cards, is bad business.

The top tier grading system will make money hand over fist if done correctly. BTW, stock holders are clearly not listening to the chatter about PSA, their stock is up this month.

[swarmee]

Good question. BGS doesn't have a guarantee and their nonguaranteed bulk service is now stretching to 16 MONTHS to get back and YOU PAY UP FRONT!!!

I think if PSA did it, they would have to grandfather in all currently graded cards or face lawsuits.

I think it's inevitable; too much liability now with internet sleuths and worthpoint, PSA APR, VCP, and PWCC scan repositories.

The big question is whether or not they have to increase their prices, or whether eliminating or restricting the guarantee will kill off their customer base.

[joshuanip]

Guarantee is in the process not the card grade - devils in the details.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

Guarantee is in the process not the card grade - devils in the details.

If PSA, in fact, concludes that the card in question no longer merits the PSA grade assigned or fails PSA’s authenticity standards, PSA will either ETC.

How is that limited to the process?

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If PSA, in fact, concludes that the card in question no longer merits the PSA grade assigned or fails PSA’s authenticity standards, PSA will either ETC.

How is that limited to the process?

If PSA, in fact, concludes...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

If PSA, in fact, concludes...

As opposed to what? That would be implicit anyhow. I don't really follow the point. Of course they aren't going to refund anyone unless they reach a conclusion, it's a tautology or whatever. I think you were focused before on the prior sentence, but maybe not.

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As opposed to what? That would be implicit anyhow. I don't really follow the point. Of course they aren't going to refund anyone unless they reach a conclusion, it's a tautology or whatever. I think you were focused before on the prior sentence, but maybe not.

The point is that it’s in psa determination, far different from a grade guarantee, which is what some unfortunate people are probably experiencing right now.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

The point is that it’s in psa determination, far different from a grade guarantee, which is what some unfortunate people are probably experiencing right now.

True, they control the decision, but that's true of SGC too and probably anyone who issues a warranty, at least until it gets into dispute resolution. I am still not sure I understand what in your mind a true grade guaranty would be other than this?

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

True, they control the decision, but that's true of SGC too and probably anyone who issues a warranty, at least until it gets into dispute resolution. I am still not sure I understand what in your mind a true grade guaranty would be other than this?

I am answering the post, it was intentionally written as such to limit liability. So no change is needed from their perspective. I have made no direct opinion on a grade guarantee, which if you can tell from my posts, my belief is that it is far from it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

I am answering the post, it was intentionally written as such to limit liability. So no change is needed from their perspective. I have made no direct opinion on a grade guarantee, which if you can tell from my posts, my belief is that it is far from it.

Again, tell me what you think a true grade guaranty would look like.
Let's see some language.
I am not seeing the limitation here.
I don't understand how it could be drafted so as to be broader.
Nobody is going to say, if you the owner don't agree with the grade just send it back for a refund.

[swarmee]

Nobody is going to say that "before and after pictures aren't evidence" either... or would they?

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Again, tell me what you think a true grade guaranty would look like.
Let's see some language.
I am not seeing the limitation here.
I don't understand how it could be drafted so as to be broader.
Nobody is going to say, if you the owner don't agree with the grade just send it back for a refund.

I think we’re getting off point. My point is that it’s not going to be revised because this is the best we’re going to get, which is not a guarantee.

A true guarantee would include transferable dispute resolution procedures that would involve a third party intermediary to determine resolution and equitable judgment. And have this guarantee bonded. But that would only work if a company doesn’t care about unlimited liability.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

I think we’re getting off point. My point is that it’s not going to be revised because this is the best we’re going to get, which is not a guarantee.

A true guarantee would include transferable dispute resolution procedures that would involve a third party intermediary to determine resolution and equitable judgment. And have this guarantee bonded. But that would only work if a company doesn’t care about unlimited liability.

OK, but one can always sue for breach whether or not the language provides for it. And if the breach is in bad faith one might even be able to claim unfair/deceptive trade practices.

PS companies who include those provisions in their standard form agreements usually do so in their own self interest to stay out of court.

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

OK, but one can always sue for breach whether or not the language provides for it. And if the breach is in bad faith one might even be able to claim unfair/deceptive trade practices.

PS companies who include those provisions usually do so in their own self interest to stay out of court.

I hope someone materially wronged would do this, but we are unfortunately attacked with death by a thousand cuts, which doesn’t justify the cost of civil litigation. I would really hope someone would and win, because I think that legal precedent is the only thing that would motivate them to change.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

I hope someone materially wronged would do this, but we are unfortunately attacked with death by a thousand cuts, which doesn’t justify the cost of civil litigation. I would really hope someone would and win, because I think that legal precedent is the only thing that would motivate them to change.

Some pretty high rollers could be affected by this, if PSA stiffs them with one of their "the graders stand by the grade" things it would not surprise me if they sued.

[Bill77]

Another thing that I noticed is that both of those guarantees both state that the grading company will determine the fair market value for the cards, not you and not the market. Just another thing to keep in mind when bidding for cards in either of their holders would be just what are the cards worth to the TPGs if issues like this come up again in the future.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Bill77

Another thing that I noticed is that both of those guarantees both state that the grading company will determine the fair market value for the cards, not you and not the market. Just another thing to keep in mind when bidding for cards in either of their holders would be just what are the cards worth to the TPGs if issues like this come up again in the future.

I am surprised they didn't just write it in such a way as to obligate them to make you whole by refunding your purchase price. With cards so far up from where some were purchased, they stand to take a bigger hit than necessary.

[swarmee]

Exactly. For the cards purchased in the last couple of years, like the Green Cobbs, they might have been purchased for $4,000 in 2015 and sell for $15,000 now.

[drcy]

There should be no guarantees beyond competency in the graders and authenticators. They are offering third party opinions and the hobby should treating grading as such.

Grading and authenticating companies should not be, and never should have been, in the insurance business, as that corrupts the authentication and grading process and opinions.

[swarmee]

The toothpaste is not going back in the tube, drcy. This is the topcover reason they have had for many years for charging exorbitant amounts for grading the most valuable cards, and is a promotional reason to choose their company over BGS or others. If they are self-insuring (which PSA is), they caused their own risk. PSA oddly enough does not cover autograph authenticity opinions under their guarantee.
And we all know the SGC does not guaranty any card slabbed by the previous owners.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by drcy

There should be no guarantees beyond competency in the graders and authenticators. They are offering third party opinions and the hobby should treating grading as such.

Grading and authenticating companies should not be, and never should have been, in the insurance business, as that corrupts the authentication and grading process and opinions.

Why in your view does it corrupt anything? All they're doing is standing behind their work, to me if anything it creates incentives to do the best job possible. Wouldn't it create more problems if there were no consequences to being wrong?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Some pretty high rollers could be affected by this, if PSA stiffs them with one of their "the graders stand by the grade" things it would not surprise me if they sued.

Here’s a guarantee: PSA is getting sued.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Here’s a guarantee: PSA is getting sued.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

A true guarantee would include transferable dispute resolution procedures that would involve a third party intermediary to determine resolution and equitable judgment. And have this guarantee bonded. But that would only work if a company doesn’t care about unlimited liability.

Or, if a company was confident in their own product...