|
Quote:
Note: You would have to ignore the part about breaking and entering, vandalism, and the need to pay for regrading. I'm talking about just the change to the card's value in the slab vs out of the slab since technically the card is completely unchanged. |
73' Shell
Shell card has no business in a 10. 3 print marks on back with a print dot in the green emblem on front. Bottom corners do not come to a point. First grade was accurate. 8.5 tops.
I am not sure if the 2nd card is the same card. Possibly a bad scan. Markings do not seem to match up but nevertheless this card is a 7.5 at best. Just from the scan you can tell 3 corners have touches. 7 was an accurate grade. |
In my opinion, the way PSA has continued to handled this debacle has significantly hurt their credibility as a company who provides a quality service.
Also consider this. In my opinion the '73 Shell looks like an 8, so the latest buyer overpaid by about $3100. But there's also another victim. The 1973 Topps Art Shell PSA 10 is now a pop 2. The other PSA 10 card has, at least theoretically, now been significantly devalued since the supply has now artificially doubled. By the way, whether many people know this or not, many deleted CU Board threads do get saved by Google's webcache feature. http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The grading companies have taken a hobby and turned it into a competition. And we wonder why many kids take no interest in this hobby? |
Quote:
What grading companies did was find a way to capitalize on the underlined competition. Some collectors choose to get caught up in this and some not so much, but at the end of the day the very root of all collecting has a competitive side grading companies didn’t create that. You’re giving these guys too much credit. Cheers, John |
Quote:
And a bunch like myself are content getting the cards we like at the prices we can afford. And I'm not sure about the parallel about grading companies being a detriment to kids collecting. I'd give more blame to card companies that retail packs at $5, $10, $20 and higher. |
Jay +1
When I was a kid $10 bucks bought you a full box of packs....I woudl rip packs for hours.... I remember hitting a card shop when I got back from Japan in my early 20's and seeing the prices...saying what kid has $5 bucks a pack? Crazy. Cheers, John |
Let me be devil's advocate for a moment. As I said elsewhere (sort of).
If these registry guys want to collect the number on the plastic, who cares? I think it's great they are having fun and not hurting people. I am very happy with the way I collect and I am sure they are happy how the collect too. It's their money. |
Quote:
I'm in the care less camp as well. Hey knock yourself out if you want to pay 100k for a PSA 10 1978 Topps common enjoy. :) |
I've had the pleasure of speaking with one of the biggest "registry" collectors on many occasions and I can tell you matter-of-factly that he gets the same kid on Christmas morning feeling that the rest of us get when he adds something to his collection.
What's the first thing most collectors will suggest when someone new comes into the hobby? Collect what you like and spend what you can afford. I marvel at the amounts of money these folks spend, but I would never fault them for spending their money however they see fit. As an added bonus, the big money purchases often bring media attention to our hobby which can only be a good thing in my opinion as it often brings new collectors into the hobby. |
As John said collectors have always been competitive, but what the grading companies have done is allow collectors to quantify that competition.
In the old days you and I could have both had raw T206 sets, and maybe I looked at yours and thought mine was better, and you looked at mine and felt your set was the better one. Who knew? We may have both been competitive but we couldn't really determine for sure who had the better collection because there were simply too many variables. Today, if my set averages 5.1 and yours averages 5.3, the discussion is over. According to the rules of the game, you have the better set. And maybe that appeals to collectors a whole lot. They like to take the guesswork out of competing. Quantifying it makes things more precise. Of course, the joke is that grading is so subjective to begin with that this illusion of precision is just that: an illusion that collectors buy into hook, line, and sinker. You can't blame the TPG for coming up with this incredible marketing tool for themselves. |
Quote:
|
Condition of of course is important to everyone in some shape or form, but I was one of those collectors who didn't care if my card was perfect. I didn't and don't comprehend why someone would would pay 3x more for a Mint card over a Nrmt-Mt card. In fact, the obsessive search for 10s sounds like the symptom of a psychological condition to me. I'd like to see a professional psychological profile of people who do this. Maybe something happened to them as children. Maybe a medication could help.
On the other hand, this board is primarily about Pre-War cards where Mints or Near Mints often don't exist for an issue. A different outlook than if you were trying to finish a 1984 Topps set. Though I have to admit way back when when someone said he was going to try and finish an entirely graded SGC 1977 Topps set, my first thought was "Are you insane?" And the first time I heard someone use the term 'Gem Mint' I thought he was trying to be funny. |
Quote:
Flip-collecting can really throw off the fun of letting your own personal tastes and creativity get involved. I hear people say they are looking for '3's, '4's, etc., and while not true for all, there are some collectors who really only care if the flip has the number that they are looking for. Not my way of collecting, but to each his own. |
if they collect the number, then take the card out of the holder and sell the numbered holder.
i have the number 6 on sale right now, only 3,000 dollars. pretty cheap considering. buying any modern card produced in enormous qty, most in superb collectable condition , just because of the number 10 on the holder, and buying it for 10's of thousands of dollars is stupid. It used to be everyone knew what stupid was. now we disagree because everyones feelings are hurt at the drop of a hat? |
Quote:
There's no dispute that there's an abundant amount of truth to what you wrote. But it's my opinion that a lot of collectors have bought into the marketing aspect of third party grading without scrutizing all the "technical" aspects of this type of service to the extent of what has been revealed on this message board over the years. Here's one example of a quote from PSA's website: "By providing the advantage of protection of impartial, third-party grading, PSA has created a market in which collectors can participate with complete confidence and trust." What I highlighted in bold speaks volumes in itself. I believe there are collectors who buy 10s and even don't bother scrutinizing the condition of the card since they base all of their trust and confidence in PSA anyway. Undoubtedly some will say, "If PSA says it's a 10, then it is". http://www.psacard.com/about/why_psa_and_psadna.chtml I don't think there's any question there are collectors who do have complete trust and confidence in PSA as the result of beng indoctrinated into this intense, on-going marketing campaign. PSA devotes a lot of their energy bragging about how many record sales were attained, but I don't recall ever reading anything regarding how they've improved their methods of alteration detection, etc. But as I've said before, nobody has ever graded the graders. What's the measurable reliability of how good they are at what they do? Are they 99.9% accurate or only 75% accurate? Obviously when there is a lot of money involved it makes a difference - at least to me. |
The good news, if there is any, is that from talking to guys who submit a lot, PSA tends to undergrade a lot more than they overgrade. And the frequency with which grades change on resubmission suggests to me that multiple graders are NOT looking at each card.
|
I don't know if PSA is accurate 99.9% of the time or 75%, and suspect it is somewhere in between. But what I do feel is they have to be better at what they do. There's no shame in that, every company strives to put out a better product.
I don't know Joe Orlando personally but I know he reads this board. If he's truly committed to having PSA do the best job possible, he might want to start by taking a look at the Art Shell PSA 10 and see if he can figure out why that card was so badly misgraded. Perhaps he could find the grader who gave it a 10 and try to understand why it happened. Even Joe would have to agree that 10 was a mistake, and that PSA needs to try to avoid these issues as much as possible. Graders simply need to do a better job. All businesses face that problem at some point. |
Barry -- PSA is actively denying there is any issue with the Wagner. Addressing that would seem a bigger priority than an Art Shell card.
|
Fair point Peter. My guess is they will address it down the road. However, that's a complicated issue, the Art Shell is a simple matter of quality control. It's a good starting point, not an end all.
|
Quote:
"Each grader receives the order and they will enter the order number into the computer. Once that is done, the contents of that order will appear on the PSA grading screen. Grader #1 will then enter his grade for the card in question (and for each card within the order until the order is completed if there is more than one card) and close the order on his screen. Once that is done and after redistribution of the order, Grader #2 will do the same – not knowing the opinion of the first grader on any of the cards within that order.Then there is the verification step in which yet another person has to agree with the grade: "After the cards have been sealed in the PSA holders, they are then sent to the Grading Verification stage. As mentioned earlier, this is where another grader will check the orders for accuracy and consistency in relation to PSA standards. If the cards appear to meet PSA's guidelines, the order is then sent on to the next step in the process. If any of the cards do not appear to meet the standards, the card is then removed from the holder and re-evaluated by our staff."I know that they do a tremendous volume, but policy is policy and steps shouldn't be skipped even when cards are being evaluated at a convention. This probably goes doubly for cards graded a ten. Unless I'm reading it wrong, the process and policy states that for a ten to be assigned, encapsulated and returned to the submitter, at least four PSA graders have to agree that the card is a 10. |
Quote:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us |
Quote:
|
Thanks Dan, and I really think it is no more than a quality control issue. Too much is at stake financially to be this careless. When a grader has the ability to turn a $50 card into a $3000 card, he really needs to be absolutely certain he can justify the grade. Frankly in this situation I don't think he can. It was plainly and simply a mistake.
|
So what's being done about this? Nothing is all I hear. Just shut your mouths and accept it is what I get out of this. Am I wrong here:confused:
|
Quote:
|
Threads like this ironically encourage resubmissions -- gee, maybe I can get a 10,too! -- and probably up PSA's bottom line.
Valuing PSA 10s so high is a market-based phenomenon. Until collectors stop looking at 10s like they're finding hidden gold, why would PSA change a thing? If I'm PSA, I apologize for quality control issues, say all the right things publicly. And then go right back to doing the same darn thing. |
If having a T206 Honus Wagner in an 8 holder that a high percentage of the hobby thinks is trimmed has not hurt PSA, then having an overgraded Art Shell in a 10 holder is certainly not going to hurt PSA. I don't think PSA is going to do anything, and if it does, it will simply point to its guarantee and say that if the owner has a question he can always have the card reviewed by the graders.
|
Quote:
|
Peter- overgraded cards never ever get resubmitted. And undergraded cards always do, sometimes more than once. That's the grading game.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
You sent them in to get a lower grade? |
I would say the number of people looking to get a high grade card lowered is very small indeed.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
tiger8mush
they will not give refunds simply because you may have different standards. PSA will allow a 6 with hairline winkles or creases. i agree on cards that otherwise look mint i dont on cards with any wear or other problems
|
It is impossible to determine how 'accurate' TPGs are because grading is inherently subjective, especially when counting the angels on the pinhead that differentiates between grades or between half-grades. It is all subjective.
I once tried to measure my cards for technical compliance with PSA standards to cherry pick the best possible grade. All I could think to do was to measure the cards as closely as possible. I put a metric ruler on 1980 Topps cards looking for evenness of borders and lack of tilt on the card fronts. I found one card that was almost perfectly centered [less than a millimeter variation in size of white borders side to side and top to bottom] and not tilted [less than a millimeter variation from one end of the colored band on the card to the other. Razor sharp, perfect printing, clean everywhere, no discernable flaws. It got a 9 from PSA. Why a 9 and not a 10? I have no idea. And just to spread the love around, I sent in this card to SGC and got a 98, again I have no idea why 98 and not 96 or why a 98 but not a 100: http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...%20Jackman.jpg There's no logic to it and no reasonable rational explanation. On that day, at that time, the card was a 10 but not a "10+" in the view of the grader(s) who looked at it. As for people who wish to collect based on the subjective opinions of third parties, doesn't bother me as long as they respect the rights of others to not collect that way. When they start running down collectors who prefer their cards in slightly 'loved' condition for whatever reason, then we can talk about how they are being manipulated. |
I don't believe that cards go through all those hands, no way and PSA can say what they want. I have proof that this just does not hapen these days.
Quote:
|
the thread is dead
Quote:
|
bump the thread is dead
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Paul's best song post-Beatles.
|
Quote:
|
I think part of the problem is that it was not two cards that got upgraded but like 6-7 and all from the same ebay account pang21, the Shell was just the worst of the bunch but the 76 Ryan from a 9 to a 10 was just as bad imo. I can understand PSA making a mistake on a grade, it happens, but one person getting a bunch like that and on an in person service at the National makes me a little uneasy.
|
Paul's best song post-Beatles:
Maybe I'm amazed. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
http://i.ebayimg.com/t/1961-Topps-57...Wpg~~60_57.JPG http://i.ebayimg.com/t/1961-Topps-57...!SQ~~60_57.JPG |
Dan are you sure those are the same card, I think I see some different markings.
|
Grading shouldn't be done by humans, but by computers.
A computer can scan a card, plot 10,000 points of data, plot all the tobacco stains, plot the creases, paper loss, centering ratio, and come up with a numerical grade. Accurate 100% of the time. |
Quote:
I can't say positively either way. This was originally posted on Post#130 by "vintagetoppsguy". It would help a lot if we could see the backs of both cards. |
Corners look different to me, and the 9 has a prominent black speck just in from the border on the top left that does not appear to be there on the 8.
|
Quote:
They are definitely the same card. Here are the bottom right corners blown up. PSA 8 http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x...guy/Mays8A.jpg PSA 9 http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x...guy/Mays9A.jpg Notice two things. 1.) How the bottom corners hook down on both cards. 2.) The two indentions on the right border in the same spots. You can only see so far up the right border because it's hidden by the slab on the 9, but you can see enough of it to know they are the same card. Also look at the same corner ding on the bottom left border in the scans Dan posted above. |
The top one looks like it has a slight rounding at the very tip of the corner that the bottom one doesn't have?
|
There was a computer grading company
there was a computer that graded cards, don't remember the company. I think they had more fakes in their holders than anyone. Percentage wise anyways. The computer would only grade as accurately as it was programmed. PSA needs to work on QC in my opinion. Also the individual that thinks Joe O should look at all the 10s? That is completely irrational and is not his job. You want to say Reza should, Id kind of agree on high dollar or vintage 10s, but this still is probably not feasible due to their high volume, the isn't SGC's submission totals PSA gets waaaay more cards to grade than SGC.
|
Quote:
You can't ever replace the human eye though. The machine can't tell if there is good trimming or authenticity of a card. A 25x scan of the card for graphing like a finger print for identifying the card and any alterations. You never know if the card night get stolen and cracked then submitted later. This will detect if the card has been reported stolen or not. A 10x scan for grading reasons as well as a dimension scan with the factory/know variances for the particular cards. A backlight scan for alteration detection. Once the grade is given the slab will be barcoded for information log. If the card is determined altered it will also have a 2-3 digit code below the graded area for use to know what was done and where it was found. For crossover cards there will be and area on the back of the flip stating company and previous grade. Someday I will work in the hobby but until then............ |
it was a company called CTA.
Computer grading |
Quote:
But as David pointed out, there are a lot of identical edge imperfections. Also, the words "Willie Mays - CF" are dead matches when observing the white snow on those letters on both scans. What most disturbing is that, in my opinion, the corners have been improved. The bottom two corners on the 9 appear to be sharper than the 8. So with that said, subjectivity of assigning accurate grades isn't the only problem with TPG. |
Right edge looks like it has a rougher cut in the top card than the bottom card.
|
Re: Computer Grading
I'm sure the optical algorithims can be modified to higher accuracy. As far as detecting if a card is authentic or not, I think that's what a grader's job should be. When a card is sent to PSA, an authenticator first determines if the card is indeed real, then scans the card into the grading computer for final analysis and numerical grading. In essence, the professional grader's job is now limited to determining if a card is real or not before a computer does the actual grading.
I also think computer grading can put a stop to resubmissions over and over for grade bumps. If a computer can scan a card and determine that it has been submitted before, it can reject that submission, or at the very least, not double count the pop report. Somehow the conspiracy theorist in me thinks that grading companies want people to submit cards over and over, and may actually prefer inaccurate grades. |
the mays 9 is back
|
Quote:
I think I stated all that already in what I am working on. |
PSA Grading and CU Forums
A very, very interesting thread.
I am grateful that it remains uncensored here on net54. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I've pondered the idea of developing image processing software to look at centering, registration, corners, edges, and to look for creases, paper loss, fading, etc. It would be a monumental task, and would require custom code (or a template of some sort) for each type card. |
IMHO, the Mays cards are not the same. If you look at the photo the printing flaws in the picture vary from card to card.
|
Just my guess but if you look the same buyer purchased the PSA 8 from Probstein123 and then when it was upgraded to a PSA 9 and relisted they win the card again from Probstein123, sure looks like a consignor bidder/shill won his own card the second time so then they decide to consign it over to PWCC and they now know the ceiling bid of the two underbidders ($701.77 and $575) from the last auction. I wonder if they tried a second chance offer on the underbidder and they declined so just relist it with another consignor. This is getting old.
First sale won by - p***e http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...ht_1070wt_1038 Second sale after the upgrade from PSA to a 9, winning bidder is - p***e http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...ht_1050wt_1038 Now listed again by PWCC...... |
So it's ok for a consignor to buy his cards back from an auction???? This is not considered shilling as long as they pay the premium? I always assumed I was bidding against other potential buyers in an honest auction.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:07 AM. |