And just imagine. It cost you not one copper penny.

The above was posted by Pat on March 19, 2021 saying that the "Completed Through Date" was August 3, 2020

Today (43 days later) - The Completed Through Date shows as August 4, 2020

So they have manged to process 1 additional day of submissions in 43+ days?

Can't think of any other business that currently displays such a blatant disregard for Customer Service -

When you need a wheelbarrow to haul the cash to the bank - I guess you can afford to say "Yea - eff a whole bunch of Customer Service"

That was the value vintage service that I originally thought this sub was in and
that one is now completed through September 22. This sub is actually in what is
now called the quarterly service and that one has moved 2 days in the past
26 days.

It is painfully slow. And we are definitely one of the oldest subs there.

Quarterly Specials still showing as Completed Thru August 4, 2020

Not moving even a bit over the last couple of weeks

Jumped to Aug 9th today.

I'm not even in this sub but I always check out of interest when checking on my express submission through date.

Good luck, getting close

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I saw that as well. This in unbeleivable.

and 1 week later still holding steady at Aug 9, 2020 - FFS (they cant even gain 1 day in a week?)

I think the backlog excuse is bs when you look at the progress since they
stopped all submissions except the top two services. I think it's something
like they can't get enough holders and for whatever reason they don't want
to say that.

Attachment 459037

The sub is STILL sitting in grading. It is one month shy from being a year.

I will be going on vacation soon. I really hope these pop while I am gone.

I will be retiring in 18 months and really hoping that these come back before then.

......and so it goes....

And once again...still not cost you one copper penny.

I see today where the CTD for "quarterly specials" went from 08/09/2020 to 06/30/2020..... so lost 40 ish days on CTD in the last week or so.

Perfect -

Say's August 9 on my computer.

It's August 9 on my computer.

We have moved to assembly. I am on vacation. More details to come, hopefully soon.

Not even a single day of movement of these since 5/13/2020 - WTF!

And to make matters worse Lonnie, two of my biggest cards that enjoyed huge appreciation while they were sitting around collecting dust over at PSA got graded recently. "Min Size Rqd". I feel like I got kicked in the stomach. These are legitimate cards. It is almost like PSA is turning into slot machine in Vegas. They are choosing whether they want to give you a big win or not.

Yea - it' totally like a crapshoot anymore.

Remember when we were hopin to have them back by Christmas?? :)

Oddly enough I seem to be getting the itch to send in another 25 or so - to someone - just not sure who atm. Even CSG is saying 4 months turnaround now.

I don't think the graded card market will will be the same ever again. And that saddens me. What a roller coaster the hobby has been on.

QA Check #2

9 more days and it will officially be a year since PSA received the cards. I'm dumbfounded.

Bobby I'm just as dumbfounded that they said they closed off the majority of the submissions to catch up and their progress has slowed dramatically since that time.

Looks like CTD has finally moved to August 11 today.....

So not sure why we would be in QA2 yet.....

Isn't QA2 the last phase before return shipping?

OK...Here are the grades, after 1 year. If you want to be surprised, DO NOT CLICK THE LINK!!!!!!!! Here ya go.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...60c1225f#gid=0

Does this mean the Swingin' 60's sub should be done by X-mas 2021?

LOL.........hard to say.......Things are backed up pretty bad right now....bad enough they shut down future business.

Bobby, have you contacted your PSA rep about the elimination of qualifiers in the 'Swinging 60's' sub, and if that decision could be reversed since we submitted under the old rules? It was such a BS move on their part, because it screws over those of us who were fully expecting/hoping for high grades with an OC qualifier pointing out the obvious problems in centering. Now, said centering is going to lower the grade on the label without any explanation, so a card that would've been a PSA 7 OC, for example, is now going to be a straight 5...so anyone looking at it now would think its corners, focus, eye appeal, etc., make it ONLY a PSA 5, PLUS it is off-center, which makes the grade in a person's mind even lower. There is no separation. Ultimately, the card would now seem like a PSA 3 (PSA 5 minus two grades for bad centering) to a normal buyer!!!!!! The addition of the OC has always eliminated all of that. A PSA 7 OC card has all of the other characteristics of a 7, but it is off-centered. No guesswork required. In the scenario I just outlined, a PSA 7 OC card would lose 4 grades (down to a perceived straight PSA 3) for no reason whatsoever...and when we submitted this order, those were NOT the rules we agreed to.

(And please, no one come on here to argue about what I am saying. It doesn't matter if you prefer to have a straight grade that encompasses centering or if you believe it's the right move for PSA to make, that NOT the issue. The issue is we submitted under certain rules, and they changed them. That is not acceptable.)

Couple of things - Looks like these did include "qualifiers" as I received 1 card back with the "MK" designation.

Sent 34 1955 Topps BB in for grading on this go round.

Of the 34 I had "opinion" graded the vast majority as coming back a 6 with a couple maybe hitting 6.5 and a couple coming back in the 5 range (Dont recall a Mark on the card they designated but will see when I get it in hand)

Had several "shockers" that included a 3 cards coming back below 5 and 11 cards coming back as 7s (or better)

Of the 11 one (Boone) came back as 8.5 - Still scratching my head on this one as I don't know how an EXMT card sitting in my EXMT set along with tons of other 6s could hit that "rare air".

The other 7s (and 4 additional 8s) are somewhat annoying to me for the same reason - didnt look out of place in an EXMT set

Hand picked for centering - Looks like I now get to go out in search of 14 additional 6s. If you have any of the 14 in PSA Holders that are well centered - I would be interested

Thanks

The Boone (8.5)??

<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150864751@N07/51238665199/in/album-72157711330478736/" title="#065 Boone"><img src="https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51238665199_bc9fd3836a.jpg" width="500" height="354" alt="#065 Boone"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


The following results simply reinforce the idea that after all these years - I STILL have no clue when it comes to BB Card Grading. The Mathews is particularly annoying as I was sure it was a 6 all day.....

<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150864751@N07/51238631004/in/album-72157711330478736/" title="Pre 59 Results"><img src="https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51238631004_dbd30583b4.jpg" width="319" height="500" alt="Pre 59 Results"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I am very interested in what comes back from what I submitted. I don't get into things as in depth as you, but to say I am disappointed is an understatement. What is going on over at PSA?? Have the grading standards tightened?? Is there new help grading the cards with very little experience?? Who knows......It has been an eye opening experience for me to say the least.

I know that ALL of these cards were in pretty much identical in condition and they should have all hit the 6 (ish) range.

The cards that came back as below 5 and especially the PSA 8.5 grade makes me think that they don't really have a clue as to what is going on over there....

I would guess lots of brand new "Graders"? Don't know - Reminds of the old "Turkey Shoots" - One shot from a 12 gauge at 25 yards and the guy with the pellet closest to center wins....

OK - Now that I am done bitchin -

Just wanted to say -

Mega Kudos to Bobby for puttin these things together -

Not many guys out there would invest a year of time and tons of paperwork to put something like this together for FREE....

Thanks Bobby!!

+1 on this

I sent in 23 mostly lower grade t206's and they were about what I expected no real surprises either way.

8 - came back the grade I estimated
5 - + 1/2 grade
7 - - 1/2 grade
1 - + 1
2 - - 1 grade

The two that stood out the most to me was a Knabe that came back a 3 that I thought was a 2 and a Leifield that came back a 2 that I thought was a 3 when you look at the two together I don't see how the Knabe is a grade higher than the Leifield.

Attachment 463308
Attachment 463309

when you look at the two together I don't see how the Knabe is a grade higher than the Leifield.

Yes - Exactly my point!

New graders Pat. That is my suspicion.

MK and MC qualifiers are not being eliminated, only the OC, OF, ST, and PD.
https://www.psacard.com/articles/art...date-june-2021
So having a MK in the order doesn't mean anything.

bump so people can see their grades.

So if you go thru and look at all 283 cards - It appears that PSA pretty much hammered everything.

Couple of things come to mind -

What constitutes an "Altered Stock" designation - and this is on a 52 Topps fairly common card?

What is the difference between "Minimum Size" and "Evidence of Trim"?

Just a guess Lonnie but probably the altered stock on a 52 Topps would be because it was in a flat screw down holder at one point.

Altered stock is normally from being in a screwdown holder, because that could change the width of the card and press out creases and wrinkles. Because it could be used to hide alterations, PSA calls it altered stock. Could have also been for something that damaged the surface gloss. Card could have also gotten water damage over time which made the stock thicker than normal.

MinSize means that PSA couldn't detect any trimming, but the card was too small compared to the normal size of that set, outside of its maximum allowable tolerance.

Evidence of Trim means that they did note some part of the card was trimmed.

I didn't read it as those qualifiers are being eliminated, only that they will be used at the graders discretion and that you can not request that they not be used. In this submission I requested no qualifiers and received a MK, a MC, and an OC. The presence of the qualifiers is a major bummer when the rules when we submitted were that you could request no qualifiers; major bummer.

You will still get MK or MC as those are not removable if you select "No Qualifiers"; that's how it's always been and still seems to be with this change. So the only difference you would have seen was a lowered grade (by at least 2 grades) for the OC ones.
However, I thought the "No Qualifiers" was for the entire order, not specific cards. So because you submitted with a group submission, whatever Bobby selected for the submission is what would have mattered to your cards within. Authentic vs. unslabbed Alterations/Minsiz you can select for each card, or at least it was the last time I submitted to PSA.

You can select "no qualifiers" on a line by line basis

correct

Stay tuned....I'll PM with details.

PS - a lot of the cards had "MK" qualifiers. Some I am seeing. A lot of them, I am not. You can argue for the "ST" qualifier on some instead of "MK". Most I am dumbfounded. The low grade is SUPPOSED to incorporate some mild staining. EVERY single 1933 Goudey Indian card got a "MK" qualifier??? I think not. I will send some scans when I get home.

Maybe WST or bleedthrough now being counted as MK?