OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>what are they doing? the new slabs, which have the tobacco brands listed (i.e. T206 polar bear), now ALL have seperate lines on the pop report page...in other words eddie collins, for example, has 15+ line entries now, one for each brand, it is a mess to figure out, much like SGC's pop pages...<br /><br />what's worse is that if you enter a new cert # into your set reg page, it will only register as 1/2 let's say, meaning 1/2 eddie collins polar bears graded, rather then giving you the TOTAL pop...major problem.<br /><br />does anyone else have opinions about this?

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>I have not looked recently, but that sounds like a disaster. I don't go to the PSA boards, but it might be worth letting them know how bad this is. I don't know who would be a good person to call there.<br />JimB

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>rand</b><p>Why has it taken PSA 15 years to recognize the reverse advert on the front label since its been an integral part of T206 collecting for 90 years? Maybe one day they will also make sure they have the correct size holders for the cards to. Now the POP Report is screwed up, I'm sure a quick call to customer service will straighten it right out. They are a mess!

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>JP Cohen? He can get things done over there.

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>i will try to explain this to cosseta robbins on tuesday (she is always very responsive) and if that doesn't help, i'll talk to Joe, who in the past has actually responded to me right away regarding questions. i'll keep you guys posted...

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I don't collect cards in PSA holders so this doesn't affect me at all really, but I'm guessing it was done because the registry folk want to see where their cards rank by backs. Who has the best Eddie Collins polar bear back, et cetera. Just another way to create more competition.

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>yeah, but the pain in the butt is that, there probably have already been 20 eddie collins polar bears graded that won't show up as such, because they were graded during the old days. only the new slabs have the brands listed, any cards graded before just register with no specific back designation in the pops...

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Even better for PSA. Now they will get a ton of resubmissions for new labels.

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>jay wolt</b><p>Mike - how would you want PSA to rectify it?<br />For years they graded all T206's the same way<br />then submitters wanted the backs to be recognized <br />and they did that.<br />So if one wants to see the Sovereign cards graded they <br />have that ability. Since PSA never noted the backs before<br />they cannot add them into the mix. Is it confusing?<br />Yes! But is there a better way to handle the myriad of backs<br />that are now added to the pops?

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>Jay, as you know, i am a PSA supporter, but i never endorsed PSA doing this, i always knew it would be a disaster...<br /><br />the only thing i ever pushed for, and they did, was to meld the Harris T206 pop into the main T206 page...

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>Dave F</b><p>Definately alot of things screwed up....My Jimmy Collins PSA 3 is a 1 of 1 with none higher.

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>dave- i know some set reg guys that would pay an arm and a leg for that card, being 1/1...<img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14>

OH $#%@!!! PSA's POP Report is a mess...
 

Posted By: <b>Eric Brehm</b><p>The new PSA T206 population reports are indeed confusing. I get the feeling that PSA is still tinkering with this. Again using Eddie Collins as an example, I see 5 line entries for Eddie Collins in the current report:<br /><br />* 259 total graded with all back types combined (blank entry in the 'Company' column)<br />* 26 total graded with Piedmont back<br />* 3 total graded with Sweet Caporal back<br />* 1 total graded with Sovereign back<br />* 1 total graded with EPDG back<br /><br />Are the 31 that are identified by specific back type included in the 259 total? My guess is that they are not, that these are ones that were graded before PSA began recording back types.<br /><br />In any case, since there probably is no way to 'disaggregate' the old combined data with respect to back type, there appears to be no way to merge the old data and the new back-specific data into a meaningful whole, as others have pointed out.<br /><br />Thus, PSA should probably continue to tally the totals for each subject with all backs combined, and publish those figures in the pop report as well as in the set registry entries for each card (e.g. 30 PSA 5's with 32 graded higher, not 1 PSA 5 with none higher). As currently configured, the registry entries don't indicate what back type each card has anyhow. Perhaps PSA intends to add a Company column to the set registry listings, as they already have in the pop reports, but this would still be very confusing, since old data will appear for some cards in a registered set, while the new back-specific data will appear for others that are more recently graded. It would be apples and oranges.<br /><br />Since the back-specific population data is now being accumulated for newly graded examples, I suppose there is no harm in providing these numbers in the pop reports along with the aggregate totals -- it will give an idea of the relative scarcity of different back types -- but it will take years for the back-specific data to reach the magnitude of the old combined data for each card.<br />