One idea, likely heavily flawed, for fixing some of the ills in our hobby

[Archive]

Posted By: E, Daniel

Reading and listening as much as nature allows (I clearly like to talk and write down my thoughts), these are just some of the bigger hurdles I feel hurt the hobby:

1. Altered cards passed as original, most problematically when slabbed.
2. Material graded that quite obviously, and sometimes less obviously, has been incorrectly graded, and or labelled.
3. People feeling incentivized to continue to alter cards (in the ways agreed as unreasonable by majority hobbyists - whatever that conclusion may be) because detection is difficult, or so profitable, or a sense that a history of those practices and such widespread effect weaken the stomach of any who would really take them on.
4. Pop. reports no longer have any real meaning, and thus valuing individual cards and or sets monetarily is a shaky practice, and understanding true type scarcity merely blowing hot air.


Soooo, while i really like the idea of a code of ethics, signed on to voluntarily and which begets prestige in the hobby and trust amongst collectors as well as being overseen by some sort of board, and believe it extremely important.....
To mean anything, i suspect there needs to be a trigger, an action which sets forth a new day and gives reason for all to participate and feel positive about the outcomes and possibilities.

This is what I came up with (while showering 20 minutes ago, better than the crapper in my opinion for inspiration ).


The big four grading companies, SGC, PSA, GAI and Beckett, announce that in 6 months time (an arbitrary time period which gives opportunity for the following to take place) ALL registries and pop. reports will be wiped.
At that point, a new holder that has been developed at each grading company which is superior in UV protection and in holdering all issues safely, will be available for re-holdering existing slabbed, and new/raw, cards. No crossovers, just cards already slabbed by that particular company, and raw cards. A set period, say 12 months, will be given to allow for this proces to take place and all collectors will need to act within that period to have their cards so taken care of (for the smaller special fee - see below). After that 12 months, cards will either need to be sent in raw, or be paid for in full for a complete re-grade (which could result in changes of grade downward..).
In performing this act, the companies will undertake to re-examine all cards being moved into new holders for alterations previously missed, and egregious errors in grading. That is, not undertaking the whole grading process anew, but making sure that a PSA5 doesn't have a large paper peel on the front, or an SGC40 be missing the entire corner of a card. In checking for alterations, the companies will employ all methods of detection available at that time - and share that knowledge and equipment between themselves. This could be done through a lead in phase (in the six months leading up) in which the grading co.'s get together and co-devise/explore/develop the very best such detecting methods possible. All the companies will use the new 'industry standard' methods of detection, and continue to work together in the future to keep as much altered material out of slabs.
The cost of the re-slabbing could be set at $5 per card, $1 of which should be set aside to re-compense anyone whose card no longer meets grading requirements, and was thus incorrectly graded originally.
As each card is slabbed anew, pop. reports would begin anew and accurately reflect current populations of cards. With luck, much of the crossing over fad has been exhausted, cards pumped up to their highest likely grade with any one company, and people hopefully happy to keep their cards in the new holders. At least for a while. The new holders could be made to be much harder to crack open, and therefore future crossovers could be accurately recorded and information shared between the companies so that registries are updated.
The new holders could remain relatively the same, but perhaps the flip changed dramatically enough to signify the change in grading era.
Inordinate labelling errors (see PSA mostly) could be corrected, large errors in grades fixed, and the re-birth of a sense of belief in the hobbys ability to maintain an honest playing field for collectors to enjoy.
This done in conjunction with the code of ethics concept, I believe, could perhaps put alot more optimism back into the hobby for both seasoned-but-jaded collectors, and newbies alike.
Of course, the macro-bi-ephemeric collectors - or raw card lovers, could continue to dine leisurely on their favourite players sans plastic, but perhaps would feel a little less contemptuous of those who grade because of the cleaner and more just environment.
Accurate pop. reports would be appreciated by all as well, no doubt.


So, waddya all think.
Feel free to tear it to pieces, maybe a good idea will spring from that process


Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: Cat

Cat's going to pretend like he just didn't read this.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Daniel, your heart is in the right place, and it is good to see that one of the accomplishments of this board is getting collectors to come up with new and innovative ideas to make the hobby better. But some of these will be awfully hard to implement.

First, how do you get all four grading companies to agree with this in unison, when they are in competition and probably don't have a perfect relationship among themselves? Second, how do you get every single collector to agree to do this? Are you suggesting that if a collector chooses not to reholder a card, the grade becomes invalid after one year? There are guys out there with thousands and thousands of graded cards who will now be forced to resubmit all of them. Perhaps these ideas need some refinement. I like the thought that all cards should be examined more closely for alterations, but this may be a bit too ambitious of a plan...But A for effort.

[Archive]

Posted By: bruce dorskind

To Reach The Unreachable Star
No Matter How Distant
No Matter How Far


Whilst the spirit of your idea is wonderful. From a practical perspective
it would be IMPOSSIBLE to implement.

Adminstratively, PSA and SGC ,the only two grading services that
matter (exept for unopened items), are far too slow to meet
the needs of those collectors who submit cards valued at less than
$500. Often it is weeks to receive one's cards. It is not
economically practical to demand next day service if one is
submitting 50 "6s ad 7s" for a late 1950's set.


Secondly, the R&D process of developing the perfect holder
is gong to take quite some time. Just ask SGC about the
length of time it took them to develop large holders.

Thirdly, and most importantly, what incentive would a collector
who has one of two known E93's in a PSA 8 have to participate?

Collectors love looking at their cards, and perhaps enjoy
the process of having a raw card graded. The thought of sending
a "life's work" and a thousand cards to be inspected a new
source of experts and re-holdreed will cause nothing but
discomfort.

How are you going to identify all the regraders who
can assess the "true condition" of 5 million sports cards
in a one year period?

Finally, the structure and economics of your plan would
eliminate the need for more than one grading service,
and the suggested pricing would put all four grading
companies (these are tiny businesses) into bankruptcy.

Sound like Don Quixote needs to consider another path if
he is to save his beloved Dulcinea

Good luck and Happy New Year!


Bruce Dorskind
America's Toughest Want List

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Daniel,

Good thoughts--please join our dinner week of January 22nd and be part of the solution.

This goes to anyone else as well.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: steve f

Sooo, you're the one who used all the hot water... God speed on your dream -It'd be nice.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve M.

"incentivized"? (I'll have to look that one up )

Seriously though, as they point out, this would be impossible to implement.

I've often considered one of the bigger problems to be the inconsistancy of grading. It is disheartening to have a lovely card graded SGC 30 and then see another card likewise graded SGC 30 that has wrinkles, tears, stains or what have you.

More training, quality control and over-sight of the actual grading process is where the companies should be putting their resources.

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

interesting idea, and an A+ for effort but...

asking every collector to resubmit ALL of their cards and expecting ALL of the grading companies to agree to this, simply will NOT happen. that's like asking them to take all of the work & research they have done over the past 15 years and scrapping it in the garbage and starting from scratch...sorry, not happening.


furthermore, i know this discussion has been addressed many times, and not to defend PSA...BUT, they have graded over 10 million cards...over the years, if they messed up, let's say 1000 cards, that is 1% of 1%

.01%

ok, let's even say they have "messed-up" on 10,000 cards (which i think we can all agree is way over what is reality)...

that would still only be .1% (that's POINT 1%)

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I agree that all of this kind of falls in the laps of the grading services. At a time when card altering was both rampant and undetected, an opening was created for the grading companies to come in and closely examine cards with equipment collectors did not have. That is why I think it is critical that they perform the most precise analysis of each card possible, and keep mistakes to an absolute minimum. My take is they could be doing a better job than they are doing now. And I disagree with Michael that the number of altered cards that slip past the graders is .1%. I must tell you, in the strongest possible terms, that you will find out sometime in the future the number of altered cards that make their way into holders is distressingly larger than that. Please don't ask me for a percentage, because it would just be speculation. But .1% couldn't even hit the broad side of a barn.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Great thoughts and like someone said "A" for effort. I am still trying to figure out Michaels percentages....

[Archive]

Posted By: E, Daniel

I know, I was kinda nervous getting up this morning to find out what I had written, and what was being said of it

The only thing I would counter is, that the 12 month 'grace' period is simply the time in which the collector could take advantage of the $5 reholder offer, as opposed to the full cost of re-holdering AND re-grading which would become the cost afterwards. A person's cards would not cease to exist after the 12 months, simply their existance in pop. reports. If you want the card to be reflected in the pops., then you would need to participate in the re-holdering.

And as for incentive for the guy with an E93 in an 8 holder........
I think his incentive comes from his card being altogether more valuable and rare after accurate counting and recording of all E93's holdered is achieved. Right now, an E93 collector probably thinks 2000 exist in the issue, but because of all the cracking of slabs and crossovers - the true total number extant might only be 700 or so including much smaller numbers at all grading tiers - increasing the rarity of the cards, and therefore their value...


I don't know, I apologize to Cat and all.
Just trying something new.


Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

The problems that exist are a simple function of collector preferences, economics, and human nature. Unlike (from what I understand anyhow) collectors in the past, a large percentage of today's collectors (myself included) are obsessed with condition -- not in the sense that we all want high grade cards, but rather in the sense that we buy cards BECAUSE they are in the condition we want, be it low mid or high grade. In an internet economy, that means many of us inevitably are going to spend a lot of money based on the grade a third-party "neutral" assigns to a card. In turn, that creates huge incentives for people to "improve"/"present" cards in order to achieve the maximum grade from the third-party neutrals, and human nature being what it is, inevitably there are going to be people with a combination of certain skills and questionable scruples who will seek to profit from what ultimately is demand driven by collectors.

In my cynical opinion, short of things that collectors and/or dealers would find abhorrent (such as eliminating set registries which in my opinion are partially fueling the demand cycle and incentivizing (you can look it up) people to "improve" cards), or making the identity of submitters transparent, or "outing" known card doctors and/or doctored cards, there isn't a hell of a lot to do about it except for each collector to become as informed as he/she can and not blindly rely on third-party grading.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

Regarding the percent mistakes at PSA:

By using the total universe of the 100 million cards that they have graded as the divisor, we are understating the percent defective. Say they missed the ball on 10,000 cards. The problem with calculating success rate is that we don't know if those 10,000 mistakes were spread evenly over all of the cards and types they grade. I suspect they are not.

I really do believe that vintage cards present a slightly different challenge to graders - there are fewer of them in number, they are less familiar in type, and they tend to occupy the lower grading tiers that are probably less frequently used and less well known to the graders.

So if half the mistakes are in vintage, and the total number of vintage cards graded is more like 100,000 then it would be 5000/100,000 or 5%. I'm just making these numbers up - I have no clue how many they grade or how many mistakes there are.

I'm just saying that the success rate that we are concerned with here should be expressed as mistakes per opportunity within the vintage category and not mistakes in vintage compared to all 100 million cards of all types that they grade.

Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

yeah, i know, i know...i deserve the criticism, but i was merely taking a shot at it...no one knows for sure, we are all guessing...my point was that PSA, SGC, etc. grades Millions upon Millions of cards...so even if 100,000's are mistakes (which i obviously do not endorse), it is such a very small percentage...my numbers could be way off, was just trying to illustrate a point.

Best-
MS

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

No Mike - it wasn't at all meant as criticism. It comes up on this board occasionally that someone tries to provide context to the issue of mistakes in grading by pointing out that they comprise a very very small portion of the whole. I was only pointing out that the rate should be considered as to vintage cards only - if not by actual numbers then at least conceptually.

Truly, it was meant to add to the general discussion of mistakes and the context, not to criticize or single anyone out.

Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Michael- fair enough, nobody knows the number. But if you buy an expensive card and it turns out to be one of the bad eggs, a lot of money could be at stake. That's why it is imperative to try to get them all right.

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

no sweat guys...this always seems to be a sensitive subject, but obviosuly no one wants to get that "bad egg"...that's why collectors should buy the cards, not the holders, look at scans first, look for fat borders, great eye appeal...etc.

the answer to all of this is for each of us to be our own "card police" and make sure you thoroughly examine a card you are about to buy...

Michael Sarno

[Archive]

Posted By: steve f

I agree with Joanne, There is likely a disproportionate number of 'Altered' or OG's, 1800'5-1920 vs 1920's-2000.

Also, I'm repetitive here. Just another hurdle for scammers perhaps... It would be helpful that branding a universal and acceptable invisible watermark, similar to a VIN beneath the L dashboard, that could serve as an industry standard.

Another unrelated concern, SGC and PSA holders are too simple to crack open and I'd imagine easy to reseal. Seamless holders would be another deterrant.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bobby Binder

I think it would be easier for some one to start a website that tracks all the PSA cards by there registration number. A member joins and enters the number and the card and description shows up and then states if the card is correctly graded or not. Can have some red flags whether or not it is suspect of being altered or not. My hands are full with my current project but this would be a good idea only if you can get quality scans to see the card inside the holder.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

Mr. McGuire: I want to say one word to you. Just one word.
Benjamin: Yes, sir.
Mr. McGuire: Are you listening?
Benjamin: Yes, I am.
Mr. McGuire: Plastics.


Obviously, all slabbed cards should be reslabbed by a reslabbing company that slabs the slab, ie double slabbing, and they insure the reslabbed card to be what it is, and using UV proof material, kinda like what the robot in Day the Earth Stood Still was encased in, and that way the reslabber's population reports would be good because folks like me couldn't bust 'em out.

So I think the entire line of this is nutz, as I think slabbing is in the first place. Best line I read in this mess was about how altered cards that are in slabs and offered as unaltered genuines are one of the biggest problems of the hobby. I agree, and it is a big problem for folks that collect slabs. It is not a problem for me. Folks need to learn what they're collecting.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

No--you are wrong.

Thank God for PSA and SGC. Without the grading companies it would really be the wild wild west.

The grading companies are central to the solutions here as it is clear that all cards of value will eventually be graded.

Dave believes that his graders can detect the sophisticated microtrimming/reshaping that the card doctors are doing today. The hope for the industry is that the grading companies can stay ahead of the crooks.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

More likely, the prices for high grade material would be much lower as there simply wouldn't be the "1 of 1" or "1 of 2" mentality.

Actually I think all card prices would be lower if we could magically get rid of slabs and a certain percentage of "collectors" wouldn't be collecting the material - hence all cards being relatively cheaper. Grading is in itself subjective and I could grade my own purchases before PSA and can still do so.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

Yes, Scott. You are correct!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: Noel

Daniel,

Your thinking is certainly in the right place and i commend you for the effort you put into this. I wish more people had your morale compass and code of ethics. However, there are so many intangibles that just do not make this feasible or even reasonable.
First you would have to start with people who care about the good of the hobby rather than how much money they can make. Once we understand that most everything (including this hobby) is predicated upon individuals making every last possible cent to be made, it isnt hard to envision the absurdity of this. Imagine some of (or any of the major auction houses) or grading companies agreeing to something like this (possibly downgrade cards for the betterment of the hobby). I dont care how many times i hear that auction houses run a great auction, i have no doubt but what they are personable people as long as they are cashing in on 15-20% of profits. I wish more of the hobby could be back in collectors hands. I do believe that grading has helped the hobby more than hurt but it is a shame that it has also opened up another can of worms. The most logical conclusion and possible ending that we can hope for is Bobby's reasoning which includes a database of serial numbers for the pop reports.

I couldnt wait to hear Franks comments when i first read this and must admit i am starting to see quite a lot of validity here. The inherent practice of sending in cards to be slabbed and reslabbed to companies who made the mistakes and are so unwilling to admit/fix such mistakes does seem to be quite absurd. To me it seems nothing more than an exercise in futility.

[Archive]

Posted By: E, Daniel

Ok.


Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Okay Guys,

So the grading cos. and the auction companies won't take the necessary steps. The Courts obviously won't take baseball cards seriously. All we have left is to appeal to MLB and Bud Selig to act in the best interest of baseball and baseball cards to establish a governing body...yeah right.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

Daniel- As much as I would like to see consistency in grading and as much as I like your ideas, primarily wiping out pop reports which are totally misleading with "crack-outs" and cross-grading, I would hate to have to submit entire sets of cards and have to pay for regrading. I have close to 150 E94s, for example, and that would require at least $1500 of slabbing fees. Ugh! With that money I could buy some nice cards instead of plastic.
Great idea, but for the middle of the pack card collector, financially not feasible.
tbob