![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Paul Grubor
I sent in 45 absolutley gorgeous cards, and as an authorized dealer, I pretty much know exacly how to number them and write them up (not that difficult). |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve
I had a recent card rejected for "recoloring". I'd personally pulled this card from a fresh pack and immediately slid into a top loader never to be touched again -16 years ago... Just resub and hope for a different pair of peepers. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jason
The only real confusion of grading that I received was a 33 Goudey Foxx that I sent to PSA and it got graded a 1. I usually don't gripe about grades and when they do surprise me I can usually figure out what they noticed and can live with the grade. This one I couldn't. So I sent it to SGC and it came back as an SGC 40. This was about 4 years ago or so. I haven't sent a card to PSA since. (Not because of the Foxx episode, plus I still buy PSA cards and am usually happy with them) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Rob
the two stories about that show PSA incorrectly deeming cards as altered can't make you feel good about them at all. Steve, why would you give them MORE money to grade your card that you already know is legit/authentic/unaltered? What if they return it as altered again? Its obvious that they don't know what they're doing. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve
Rob, I couldn't care less about numerical grades, my stuff is mostly Poor-Fair-Good ... I slab mainly for authentication and as I shouldn't need to sell to retire, this provides legitimacy for my unknowledgeable heirs who will drop my collection like a bag of dirt. Also, the holders prevent my armpit cardboard from additional damage. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: paul grubor
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Brad Larson
I would rather have them be over cautious than let undersized cards fly through without question. I think if they find a slightly undersized card, they should do some research (as there are tell tale signs of trimming like paper color, etc.), before deeming them trimmed. On the other hand, I understand you're frusteration, but since the card is actually undersized, I don't think you can put all the blame on them. Like we all know, grading is done by humans, so we're gonna experience some errors no matter which company you decide to go with. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: James Gallo
I had them return a 1993 Derek Jetter Rookie that I pulled from a sealed set. I knew it was fine, after I sent it back in, it got a 9. You could call them up and request a review, I don't think they will charge you for this, but I am not sure. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bill
Should then translate to approximate prices. Meaning, if they cannot get the card graded in the timespan you checked off and paid for, you get a credit/refund for each day past that service requested. A small percentage but something to help with customer service. They can keep the customers and get a fire under their butts to grade on time. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Brian
While I was putting together a 1915 and 1914 Cracker Jack set, I bought several raw cards, I checked dimensions as they came in and everything checked out. I sent them to PSA, and out of a lot of 6 cards that I sent, 2 were graded, 4 came back "evidence of trimming". I was bummed, but forged on. I made the decision to register the set with PSA, so I crossed a ton of cards over, and resubmitted these cards with the request of holdering them in "authentic" cases, IN THE HOLDERS THAT STILL HAD THE "EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING" STICKERS ON THEM. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: James Gallo
PSA is HORRIBLE with Cracker Jack grading. I think the biggest issue they have is with card that have diamond cuts. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jason
Well to be fair. To get grades on cards you asked to be put in authenticated "Trimmed" holders implies they realized the error of their ways the first time around. Probably someone with more experience with CJ's saw them the second time. Of course, there should be some sort of checking or second opinion before stuff like that is deemed altered. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Brian
My thoughts as well, a more experienced eye falls on the cards and they are graded as non altered cards, it just seemed funny to get such a different result out of 2 times through the grading process. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What Happened here? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 03-02-2006 06:55 PM |
What's happened to PSA? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 34 | 06-19-2005 01:15 PM |
whatever happened to... | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 02-06-2005 07:31 AM |
what happened | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 08-09-2003 03:42 PM |
Anyone know what happened to...... | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 08-18-2002 08:49 AM |