The Value of the 8.5 Grade--One of My Largest Trades Ever
 

Since PSA went to the half grade system, I have been sending in my PSA 8s by the hundreds or even the thousands for bumps to the 8.5 grade. I usually get 6-7% bumped on prewar and maybe 1948-52 with 10% as I go through the 50s and sometimes higher in the 1960s.

As I am trying to collect graded sets each card psa 8 or better I listen to any trade offers to my 8.5s or 9s. This past month, I acted upon one of the offers.

One can debate whether I got the better of the deal or not but the deal certainly illustrates how valuable the 8.5s are becoming in the vintage sets.

The offer was for the following 1953 Bowman Color PSA 8.5s.

96 Maglie(pop 1 with 2 higher)
101 Schoendienst(pop 1 with 2 higher)
103 Ennis(pop 3 with 1 higher)
109 Wood(pop 1 with 2 higher)
155 Clark(pop 1 with 1 higher)

In return the collector gave me:

1) PSA 8s of the above 5 cards
2)PSA 8s of two high numbered dodger cards I needed in the 1953 Bowman Color set--Russ Meyer and Bobby Morgan--which Memory Lane had for sale at $5,700 and I valued at $5,000
3)PSA 8 of 1952 Topps Black Back Gil Hodges(my value $3,500)
4)PSA 6 of 1952 Topps low series toughie Wayne Terwilliger red back(my value $1,500)

So in return for accepting PSA 8s of these 5 cards(which I originally had), I got approx. $10,000 worth of cards I needed.

Again not saying I got the better or worse of the trade but it does show in the right situation the considerable value premium that the 8.5s are bringing.

Jim

Whoops--I meant PSA 8 for the Terwilliger not PSA 6.

I'd say you made out like a bandit on the deal, hell some of the cards you got may qualify for the bump. As far as your submissions though, that doesn't seem like a very high percentage for the bump. I've heard that centering is really all they look at when considering the upgrade.

Maybe some of the other guys on this board could add some experiences with the upgrades and centering.

Do you ever get bumped down? If not (and I suspect not -- PSA, to generate the much-needed extra revenue from these re-submissions, has assured re-submitters that all grade changes will be in one direction only (hint-it points to heaven, not hell)), then the tradeoff will be that 8's in time will be regarded by the market place as rejected 8.5's. My prediction for the consequences -- 8's will lose value, the rationale being they were not undergraded as 8's, and possibly overgraded.

Corey is exactly right. Pasteur disproved spontaneous generation. If all the 8s had a certain aggregate value before, the fact that some were upgraded and gained in value means that the ones that weren't upgraded fell in value, so that the total value of the population was unchanged. This whole concept was a revenue grab by PSA, nothing more. PSA may leave the values of 8s unchanged in their SMR, but anyone with half a brain would realize that the new system devalues 8s.

PSA has stated for reviews that they would only upgrade and never downgrade a card. Otherwise, no one would submit cards for review for fear of downgrade.

How many times do you think PSA has probably received the same card a few times for upgrade? It's actually in their best interest to not upgrade. Because every card that remains with a whole grade, still remains possible for re-submission. And I think we all know why they don't do the 9.5's. It's because they wanted to save something new for the future.

I could be wrong about the first part. Does anyone know if PSA adds whether or not a card has been submitted for upgrade to their database? Basically, if you were thinking about buying a card, and looked up the serial number on their website, would it tell you if it's failed the upgrade yet?

PSA 8s are not cards that were between 7.5 and an 8, they are cards that are an 8.00 to an 8.99. Thus why would they go down.

I think 8s are down on average in value but it is due to the general decline in sportscard values--not the advent of half point grades.

It seems to me that a card originally graded 8 would be between 7.5 and 8.5. If it was 8-8.99 wouldn't the grade be NM-MT+ to begin with?
That is the only way it makes sense to me; thus, there should be the option of downgrade but isn't done for obvious reasons (ie. $$$$$$$$$).

I agree they did it for money and to compete with the SGC 92 grade but I believe Joe has said in the past that a psa 8 is 8.00-8.00. Now a psa 8 is 8.00-8.49 and an 8.5 is 8.50 to 8.99

.

Centering is NOT all PSA looks at. I submitted a beautiful, perfectly centered T206 Green Cobb PSA 4 (with a VERY slight diamond cut) under the half-grade service couple years back and it was returned with a note on it that said "corners." I'm thinking about resubmitting because the card is so deserving of a bump in my view. I guess that's how they make their money.

PSA's website says "there will be a clear focus on centering."

Near perfect centering on a PSA 4 should equal 4.5 nearly every time...Unless, the centering is what kept you from getting a lower grade in the first place. Which may be the case with your Cobb. I don't know though.

A card isn't perfectly centered if it's slightly diamond cut. It may not get the upgrade because of the slight diamond cut. But then again, if you send it a few times, they'll probably give it to you once they've gotten enough money out of you for it.

Anyways, how much did they charge you for the submission? and does their database have any notation about it having already been submitted for upgrade?

Jim-You are saying it right yourself. Before a PSA 8 was 8.00-8.99. Now a PSA 8 is 8.00-8.49. Therefore, it is, on average, a lower grade card and should be worth less.

The funny thing about this is........downgrading a card that they've graded would be admiting they got it wrong the first time around..........but in a way, bumping it up a half a grade is just about saying the same thing :rolleyes: so much for standing by their grades.

Clayton

Jay, that assumes people are buying the cards for their condition, as opposed to buying the label for set registry purposes. There are people in both categories.

interesting thread which clearly proves one thing to me.....i'm not smart enough to collect graded cards.

Peter-You are wrong. An 8 is worth less in the registry now because you have raised the overall average grade by raising some 8s to 8.5s.

Exactly. Lets say, as an example, you had a psa graded 8 card, that only had 50 higher(9's or 10's). Well now, without your card physically getting any worse, there's a bunch more higher now because of the 8.5's. Without the .5 grades before, the cards that should've been 8.5's were carrying the plain old 8's, and that's just not the case anymore.

Jim.............
 

Without regard to the effect of the value of 8, 8.5 or whatever other factors were involved.

If YOU are happy with the trade that is really all that matters. I think you got a lot of bang for your buck in this trade, essentially leveraging a handful of cards to trade for an even larger group in an almost imperceptible 1/2 grade lower condition in most instances. The value is secondary if in fact you needed or wanted the other cards to add to or complete sets, obtaining cards that otherwise might not have been made available to you.

I think everyone has done a trade to some degree that made others scratch their head. Most of these were done because the person "wanted or needed" what the other had to offer, specific dollar value within reason, was inconsequential, as both parties felt they were receiving equitable trades.

When PSA first announced the new half-grade program, their cards had to be hot because any large group of 8's could potentially contain some candidates for the bump to 8.5. Today, we have to assume most have already been submitted. Thus, it is reasonable to think that any card still in an 8 holder is lacking some qualification needed for a bump. And that's a strike against it.

And has been cited, the fact that cards will only get a bump up, and are guaranteed not to go down, suggests a complete lack of objectivity when cards are being reevaluated.

8.5s are relatively few and far between. I doubt someone collecting 8-type sets would pay less for an 8 that became available because it wasn't an 8.5 and they preferred to hold out for one.

I find it ironic
 

Because IIRC; Jim was one of the leading proponents against the bump to half grades by PSA.

However; that did sound like one heck of a deal for Jim and is a great 1st move to other trades he may want to make. A good buisness person, which Jim obviously is, thinks through 2-3 steps usually

Regards
Rich

I'd be curious to know what percentage of the early graded PSA 8 cards were resubmitted for a bump up after PSA announced the new .5 grading system ?

Answer -- Because they were never 8.0's to start with. How can this be? Well maybe PSA missed a hairline crease, or didn't notice that the card was trimmed. Your question assumes PSA got it right in the first place. Clearly the market does not feel that way because why else would PSA need to give the assurance they will never bump down? If the market was so confident no mistakes were made when the card was originally graded, assurances of no bump downs (which by the way garned PSA a lot of negative publicity) would be unnecessary.

To finish Corey's thought: if this resubmission were done fairly, with cards getting higher or lower grades based on merit, only a small fraction would be sent in. But with nothing to lose except the grading fee, the number of submissions increased dramatically.

Here's my beef with the whole thing: if a grader were reassessing a card and he felt it was a tad overgraded, closer to a 7.5, and was still forced to put it back in an 8 holder, I'm okay with that. Grading is subjective enough that a 7.5 is about the same as a weak 8. But invariably the grader is going to find cards that were altered, the alteration having been missed the first time around. To recirculate such a card back into an 8 holder is plain unethical. But according to the rules, that is what he has to do.

I know this has absolutely nothing to do with Jim's question, Did I make a good trade? But sometimes I like to vent.

"To finish Corey's thought: if this resubmission were done fairly, with cards getting higher or lower grades based on merit, only a small fraction would be sent in. But with nothing to lose except the grading fee, the number of submissions increased dramatically"

QUOTE]

Barry & Corey, does any other grading company lower the submitted cards when sent in for review?
I have sent in a few cards for review w/ various grading companies & only ones that I thought would warrant a higher grade as I though these were undergraded.
No way would I expect them to lower the grade when I felt the exisiting grade was too low.

Just to correct a couple of things that I think Barry said:

1)Most PSA 8s have been submitted for bumps. I have sent in 8200 and have about 20,700
To go.

2)Reza will pull the card out of the holder if he believes it is altered.

Most alterations are subtle and are not going to be obvious in the holder especially if one is not looking hard for them. I seriously doubt many cards have been pulled by Reza or anyone else at PSA, or by any other grading company for that matter, in a resubmission process.

Jim- I am very glad to hear that they won't reholder an altered card. That's great.

Regarding your point that you have 20,000+ 8's and have only sent in about 8,000...well, most people don't have nearly that many.

Certainly is one way to accumulate cards but I am glad I am not beholden to the high grade flip. I am also very skeptical that Reza has PSA buy back much of anything but especially anything material.

When the half grade was initially introduced PSA gave written assurance that the card either bumped or it was returned in the holder it was submitted. Those were the only two options. The assumption was that everything they had graded was either right on or too conservative.

my only comment
 

First of all, congrats to Jim for what looks to be a great trade he made. I always am happy when other collectors get excited about collecting. That is, to me, what collecting is all about.

As for the PSA half grade debate. Anyone with half a brain can see it was a money grab, pure and simple. More great marketing by PSA if you ask me. Kudo's to Joe and gang for that. Honestly, when that money grab peters out I wouldn't be surprised to see some other great revelation in their grading. I am thinking that if they could go to .25 of a grade, they will make even more money!! The possibilities are really almost limitless.

Why doesn't PSA just go to a 1-100 grade scale ? :D

You mean like SGC? Where there is a 20 point gap between EX and EX/MT, and a 4 point gap between NM and NM/MT? :D

For someone better at math than I am....
 

I usually get 6-7% bumped on prewar and maybe 1948-52 with 10% as I go through the 50s and sometimes higher in the 1960s.

PSA 8s are not cards that were between 7.5 and an 8, they are cards that are an 8.00 to an 8.99
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If an 8 was between 8.00 & 8.99 shouldn't we expect a significantly higher percentage of resubmissions to be bumped than just 6-10%? It seems odd to me that just 6 to10 out of every 100 8s are judged to be between 8.5 & 8.99 but 90+ are judged to be between 8.00 & 8.49.

I attempted a bump submission on a PSA 8 1966 Topps Pete Rose from my own 1966 Topps set registry that looked like an easy PSA 9. The card was centered with no corner wear. It came back in the PSA 8 holder (3 cards were bumped from the 20 card submission) I decided to crack the card out and submit in a regular submission. It came back trimmed. I attempted once more a month later and it came back trimmed again. Must have been a fairly obvious trim job to two different graders, I guess Reza missed that one.

The ultimate act of courage would be cracking out a large number of PSA, or SGC, 8s or 9s.

BBeck,

Or else the card was graded in the pre-Reza era. Although I think Mike Baker is an excellent gradfer, things were so frantic in this era I think a number of altered cards slipped through.

Howard38,

There are dramatically fewer vintage 10s than 9s. There are dramaticaLly fewer 8s than 9s. So it would stand to reason that there are a lot more 8 to 8.49s than 8.50s to 8.99s.

That is almost as funny as Jim's comment to BBeck:

Or else the card was graded in the pre-Reza era. Although I think Mike Baker is an excellent gradfer, things were so frantic in this era I think a number of altered cards slipped through.

Greg,

Just so I can be in on the joke do you not think Mike Baker is an excellent grader?

Or do you think as many cards slip through under Reza?

You know I respect your views and you are a tell it like it is guy so please elaborate.

Jim

Jim,

You've state that you've sent in 8,000 card for review and that Reza will remove any cards from their holders that he believes to be altered.

So my question is this. How many cards out of your 8,000 have been returned as altered?

Jim, I think what Greg was trying to say is that there are an extraordinary amount of trimmed cards that get by PSA yesterday, today and tomorrow. There are many people who earn a great living trimming cards and getting them past PSA yesterday, today and tomorrow.

Beware the low pop common.

Jim,

Exactly what Jeff stated. I will add that there is no incentive for SGC or PSA to take slabbed altered cards off the market for the average collector barring a lawsuit or the threat of one. I think Baker is/was a great grader but I think grading companies, SGC included make more errors (by negligence, inexperience or...) than collectors are willing to acknowledge.

I don't know what the review process is that you are using but I would not be 100% sure that it is Reza who is looking at every single card you have submitted. My point is that when Baker was grading at PSA he was not the only one looking at cards. Now that Reza is in charge he is not the only one. Any grading company is only as good as its "worst" grader. By worst I mean the one(s) who intentionally or accidentally miss alterations.

Greg

Just a thought...
 

If I have a really nice trimmed card, as opposed to a beater, would they consider an "A.5" grade? Or would it be an "Aa" instead?

Cheers,
Geno

.

Thank you Greg,

I respect your opinions greatly. As usual, you have good points.

Thanks again for what you have done for the hobby.

Jim

The Pete Rose card I was referring to was actually graded during the Reza Era as the back of the slab had the dark blue labeling on the flip. Absolutely post Mike Baker. What is the incentive for PSA to pull out of circulation low pop high end trimmed pre-war cards (or any big money cards for that matter) as that would result in a lot of expensive buybacks not to mention a large hit with high end collector confidence. Both main stream grading companies get a lot right and they make some mistakes. I find it difficult to believe that they would pull out all their mistakes when they see them.

Exactly. There would be a zero upside and a horrendous downside incentive-wise for any grading company to proactively buy back doctored cards and acknowledge they messed up - especially in times like this when a company president recently writes an article acknowledging we are in a "market slowdown" but assures his readers we are not in a "market paralysis".

BBeck,

I have had cards bought back for full market value that I submitted that were deemed altered after they were resubmitted.

JIm

It's hard to imagine PSA could afford to buy back all doctored cards in its holders. That combined with their lack of incentive to do so even it was affordable leads me to believe that most of those cards will remain in PSA holders, but in time will require a cross-over certification to retain their value. Yes, I understand that there are a number of registry owners who care only what's on the slab (as opposed to what's in the slab). And for a time they will continue to largely prop up the high-grade slabbed market. But what about the next generation of collectors, collectors who at present have little invested in such slabbed cards and who have little economic incentive to keep their heads in the sand about the risk that a substantial number of these cards are doctored.

There have been a number of threads on this board over the years about the numbers of slabbed high-grade prewar cards that are doctored. My opinion, at least for certain issues (e.g., T206s) is that a substantial percentage, quite possibly the majority, of 8s and higher have been doctored in some way. My collecting days go back to the 1960s and never in those times do a recall such a quantity of nrmt/mt and mt cards, and such a dearth of oversized cards. If I am anything close to correct about this, then I simply don't see how that day of reckoning can be put off forever. Think about it. All it would take is for one collector with a significant number of such high grade slabbed prewar cards to be willing (or feel the need) to have them examined by an IMPARTIAL third party authenticator. And if that was done and a significant number come back doctored, in effect the market value for slabbed cards of those issues that either lack provenance or "impartial third party" re certification will be decimated.

In many aspects of life wishful thinking often trumps reason. So too with some collectors.

The above commets by Benjulmag are some of the most ridiculous I have seen in my life.

please
 

I am sure that eventually folks will remember to put their names by their posts or just put it in your signature and never worry about it. Jim- would you like me to do that for you, since I know your techy skills aren't that of an IT guy? You are welcome to say almost anything you want to, your name just needs to be by it...lmk and I will put it there for you....or you would need to edit out your comments. Corey has his name out there as I do....and many others..nothing personal......regards

Sorry did not know-you can use my name..

A PSA 8 from the Harris Collection, auctioned by REA with Rob expressing his opinion that the card was trimmed.

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/.../2009/248.html

.

Jim-I am curious, who sets the market value? If you own a PSA 8 or PSA 9 T206 (common) that is a 1/1 and another 1/1 sells for $10,000 in a major auction, is that considered the market value if yours is deemed trimmed on a bump atttempt, or an aberration? When my 1966 Rose came back trimmed the first thought that crossed my mind was how many trimmed cards reside in my own collection and I have many sets on the registry. I am a pro PSA guy although I own SGC cards also. I was point blank told by a PSA rep after the Rose episode, "when you crack out a card it is a big risk". The risk should be pertaining to the grade, not card doctoring. The holder is supposed to remove the doctoring risk, we are paying for peace of mind. I have to believe that cards in your collection as well as mine have been tampered with. I keep tab on many ebay sellers who I stay away from because I have a gut feeling regarding their cards. The pre-war cards I really cherish are the ones I purchased during my infancy of collecting back in the mid to late 70's when I was a kid. They are clean and untampered, some I have graded and some I do not have the heart to entomb. I am a realist regarding my collection, I have to have trimmed cards that reside in holders. I am still pro PSA but I would be fooling myself to believe otherwise, even if every card I own was submitted for a bump review. -Bob Beck

.

This is a great post !!

Sincerely, Clayton

they weren't
 

It wasn't there. I put it there for him. Had it been there I wouldn't have asked, though infrequently I could miss a name....I guess....

.

I know this board is very supportive of SGC but as someone who breaks out thousands of SGC and PSA graded cards each year I can tell you the percentages of cards which do not grade again is pretty close to equal. Even if you have a great eye for detecting alterations sometimes you do not know a card is really altered until it gets rejected upon resubmission.

Maybe so. But at least it can be said I'm making them with no economic stake in whether I am right or wrong. The only high grade PSA's I own are N28's and they have an impeccable provenance. By your own admission you have 20,000 high-grade slabbed PSA cards. In addition, I have the perspective of knowing first hand what existed many years ago before there was an economic incentive to doctor. I believe there is a sound basis to believe a significant percentage of high-grade PSA's of certain issues are doctored. And if in fact that is the case, I believe the wishful thinking is believing that some day the s@@@ will not hit the fan.

As to the insightful comments by shimozukawa, I can forsee a day when there will come into being a company whose sole purpose will be to re-certify grades by PSA and SGC. Market forces will compel the creation of such a company because its certifcation will be the best way for a slabbed card to retain its value, especially a card that did not receive the half-grade bump up (signaling that PSA was not willing to reconfirm that the card was not doctored). After all, if you're considering buying one of two PSA 8's of the same card, wouldn't you be willing be to pay more for the card (all other things being equal in regard to centering, registration, etc.) that comes with additional credible certification that the card has not been doctored. Not being a grading company in the sense of providing any other service other than opining whether PSA or SGC got it right in regard to doctoring, such a company will have considerably less economic incentive than PSA or SGC to be anything but impartial. And that is the key -- getting an opinion from someone who derives no economic benefit from what he is opining. That stands in contrast to the grading companies. PSA will have an economic incentive to confirm a card in its holder has not been doctored because that way they will not have to buy back the card. Likewise, one can credibly argue that SGC will have an economic incentive when reviewing PSA slabbed cards to want to find doctoring.

That a majority or even a substantial minority of psa or sgc graded cards that have been altered is a figment of your imagination and perhaps a few more people with active imaginations here. Apparently it is based solely on that you didn't see many high grade vintage cards when you were younger. Well there aren't many--that's why they are worth so much. I also find it near impossible to believe that someone would pay extra to have an independent review of a psa or sgc graded card.

As to whether if you break out a card to resubmit and it come back altered, you might have a tough time convincing psa that it is the same card. If a grading company reviews a slabbed card in the slab and considers it altered, I think its a negotiation. I had a T206 Evers Portrait that upon review by the grading company was deemed as trimmed and the company gave me back my full value. Of course I am a pretty good customer.

.

Jim- I know you are one of the biggest PSA collectors in the hobby, and I do have a lot of respect for you, but I'm not sure the statements by Corey and others are such a figment. I never dealt in as many high grade cards as some of the bigger dealers, but in the years I conducted auctions I handled my share. And I have to say what I saw all too often was quite alarming. I think the quality control of the grading companies could be a lot better. And I'll leave it at that.

I am not smart enough to follow shimozukowa's math, but I think it may not take into account that people will resubmt doctored cards of high value again and again until they get slabbed. Does anyone have a copy of REA's email, I think it may have been 2006, concerning auction house practices of "working on" cards before submitting, that might be interesting to re-read in this context.

When you have the largest third party grading company turning a blind eye on re submissions to bump downs, the entire concept of third party grading has failed, and IMO in time the market will reflect that. I will not consider buying a high-grade slabbed card without either knowing the provenance or seeking another opinion the card has been recently re examined and confirmed not to be doctored. I do this not to give myself extra work, but rather because I believe it is prudent to do so. If I had a stack of PSA 8 T206's known to have been slabbed in the early days of grading that I was looking to sell, and I knew I could get a letter from an individual/entity respected in the hobby opining that the cards, upon re examination, have not been doctored, I believe that stack of cards would fetch a higher price with such a letter than without. IF that is correct, then the market forces are in play for the creation of such a service.

EDITED to add that I'm talking here not about a bump down from an 8 to a 7.5, where the loss of value would not necessarily be significant. I'm referring instead to a bump down from an 8 to an A, where the value of the A would be a small fraction of the 8. Unless a prospective purchaser truly felt the chances of the 8 being altered is very small, the weighted value of the card after the perceived risk of alteration is taken into account would be materially less than the card valued as an 8. Under such a scenario, it would be prudent for the prospective purchaser to demand some new corroboration the card is unaltered. And if the seller refused to obtain it, he would be at a competitive disadvantage to another seller of the same card who was willing to provide such a corroboration.

a few thoughts
 

Well, so far no one has been maimed or harmed physically so I think we are off to a good start in this debate. On the high grade card / trimming debate, I too think a lot are tainted, and I won't try to quantify except to say maybe more than 10%, of highly graded (8s and up) cards probably have issues. That is just a seat of the pants feel and a low estimate on my part. Again, just from my bit of experience in the hobby. As for the govt. shutting down a company that would potentially grade the graders....nah, as long as they don't break a law they could do it. It's been done for years in the coin hobby already...CAC-

http://www.caccoin.com/

KNOWING THE GRADE ISN’T ALWAYS ENOUGH.

SETTING THE STANDARD FOR QUALITY.

A LITTLE STICKER MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE.

Due to today’s selective collector/dealer, an ever increasing number of certified coins on the market are considered low end for their grade. CAC holds coins to a higher standard so you can be confident in the value of yours. We verify previously graded coins and award our sticker only to those coins that meet the standard for today’s sophisticated buyer

WHAT THE CAC STICKER MEANS:

• Verified. Your coin has been verified as meeting the standard for strict quality within its grade.

• Guaranteed. CAC stands behind our verification by making markets in most actively traded coins.

THE CAC STICKER IS BACKED BY EXPERIENCE.

CAC was founded by leading members of the numismatic community, including John Albanese, a respected authority on coin grading and the rare coin market.

In theory, third party grading and authenticating is a wonderful thing. If it works right it provides a tremendous level of confidence to buyers and sellers alike. But in the real world it desperately needs an overhaul.

That is the Catch 22. In the holder both SGC and PSA will almost always stand behind the grade. The more expensive the card the less likely they are to consider a buy back. Ultimately a buy back is going to be determined by one's stature in the hobby or likelihood to file suit. And I doubt anyone is filing suit.

If one breaks out the card, which in most cases is really the only way to prove a card is altered, they void the guaranty and most certainly the TPG would have to disclaim any liability in having initially assigned a grade. That is why they can offer that fabulous guaranty--they rarely have to use it.

It is a good thing that most collectors do not want to know if their SGC and PSA graded cards are unaltered. It would change the landscape of the hobby if collectors actually considered it.

I agree 100% that PSA would have major difficulties believing customers stating their resubmitted cards were once in high grade holders and are now doctored (Although they did believe me). Besides yourself, I may be one of the most pro PSA supporters on this board. I have had many positive experiences with PSA and think the company has one of the most accessible Presidents you will ever find. He does a good job in a very difficult business. I also believe their are many shady characters in this business who are very good at what they do. I think I have a handle on some but do not know them all. I have collected since 1975 and owned my own store since 1991. The Rose card opened my eyes and I knew who I purchased it from. It was a small monetary hit but nevertheless a hit and a disappointment. I have followed the buying patterns of a few ebay dealers who deal in low pop or consistently high end cards. I will not buy from them on gut feeling. Others, I feel comfortable with. The problem is, who knows how many times these cards have changed hands or what auction houses have them in their current offering. I do not think I have an active imagination, just a realist. I am fortunate that I have submitted a fair amount of my own material. The rest I put my faith in the grading company. I think Barry's comments are right on the nose.

We seem to be re-hashing old conversations here, which is fine. It is probably healthy to discuss them periodically.

One issue that has not come up yet in this round is that it is not ONLY high grade cards that are altered. It is any card that the doctor finds it worth his/her time to doctor. In other words, if there is financial incentive to work a PSA 3 card like a T206 Cobb into a PSA 4, doctors will do it. If one only looks carefully at PSA 8s, people are going to miss a big part of the altered card community. It is about financial incentive and nothing else. If a doctor can take a light wrinkle out of a '33 Goudey Ruth and it becomes a 5 rather than a 3, there is a big payoff.

Some people enjoy singling out high-grade cards in this discussion, but the truth is that it happens on all levels.
JimB

What JimB says is undoubtedly true, but in my opinion trimming -- which probably most of us consider the most offensive type of alteration -- probably affects higher grade cards more than low to medium.

Jim is right that mid-grade cards are altered too, but it probably entails removing a crease or something like that. If a card is trimmed, it surely will end up with square corners, hence a high grade.

Wherever there is easy money to be made there will be someone out there figuring out the best way to do it. If spooning a crease can turn a 3 into a 4, there's plenty of incentive to do it.

no doubt
 

I absolutely agree with this....no doubt some lesser graded cards are altered but not the extent of the more highly graded ones. I worry very little about my 1's-3's.....though understand they could have had one of their many creases removed or one of their super rounded corners trimmed at one time....I am very comfortable the way I collect just as I hope everyone else is too. I think Corey made a good point about provenance too.

How many of the people defending high grade cards would be comfortable owning a mini-T206 from the Harris collection, in a high grade holder?

Fact: there are a ton of graded cards which have been trimmed, the majority in high grades.

And hearing that Jim seems to get special treatment from PSA I shudder to ask: does anyone think it possible that PSA grader/graders have ever taken a bribe?

I would reiterate my opinion that the view that a substantial percentage of pre-war cards graded psa 8 or sgc 88 have been altered is a view that is limited to a few people on this board and buy in large they don't buy high end graded cards. So for the sake of argument who cares what they think when it comes to the market. Furthermore, the idea that that an independent third party grader needs to come in and authenticate the graded cards is crazy because the people who are buying the high end graded cards don't see it as a problem.

I would not pay more for a card that is authenticated by a third party and I doubt if anyone else who is truly buying cards would either. I really don't want to know how many of my 30,000 cards are altered in some way. I believe not many. I remember sending an e-mail a couple of years ago to a huge buyer of vintage 8s and 9s and asking him if he was concerned. He relied that he did not care if the cards that were 8s or 9s were altered or not and that PSA gets it right the vast majority of the time and if there were some altered cards in psa 8 or 9 holders big deal.

I also am of the belief that if one includes all types of alteration, that low-to-mid grade cards have a higher percentage altered than high grade. Although as I remember in the past Greg told me I was wrong here so if he says I am perhaps I am?

Lastly, and forgive me Leon if I am misrepresenting a private conversation, but at the National Leon asked me why don't you come back to net 54--the board needs a little life and you could provide it. I replied that I was sick of the arguments. Leon said it was a whole different board and everybody got along. So I'm back :) and this is fine. I know I bring a different point of view than most people on this board who have hated graded cards from day one but thats the way I collect and I love it. And I agree with Leon who says in effect "its all good".

JUeff,

I think you're wrong but you are right about so many things on your radio show I will let this slide. :)

What I can't let slide is your comment I get special treatment from PSA--as you know they give different rates to all submitters depending on volume and to resubmitters as well. If you are referring to the Evers card that was with SGC not PSA.