![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
That's right. Here's why. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ken McMillan
scarry if you ask me |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Shawn Chambers
Actually, many cards are graded over and over again. NOT once. Either in hopes of bumps or because some slab cracker (hi Frank!)hated a slab and later sells the card raw to a person who re-entombs it. I'm sure certain cards have probably been graded dozens of times. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
Yes, many are graded over. That's why I said "primarily". |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Rhett Yeakley
I have never understood why one needs to "belong" to get their cards graded by PSA, this isn't necessary by any of the other TPG companies. It seemed like a stupid business model to be so exclusionary. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Shawn Chambers
Rhett hit the nail on the head. I'm not anti-PSA, I just prefer SGC. I think the membership fee is a scam and just not worth it. I don't want to pay money just for the privilege of...paying money. I just don't think it is a good business model and I bet they would see subs increase without the membership fee. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: joe brennan
"Plus, don't forget that card grading is NOT a consummable." |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: rand
some terrific points are made. when i had to choose a grading company it took me 4 months. the reason i went with sgc primarily was a great conversation with sean skeffington, no membership fee, at the time i was getting sgc graded cards on ebay cheaper than psa, their submission prices were cheaper than psa, and it was much less complicated to me to submit cards. 5 years later i never looked back. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Fred C
News alert... if you haven't done it already you better get those half-grade upgrades while the gettins good... |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth
David Hall continues to add to his holdings. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/it?s=CLCT |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jay
You are assuming a cash burn of $6+ million per year. Since CLCT has eliminated it's cash dividend the burn rate is more on the order of $2 million per year. You need to get your facts correct before you start posting like this. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Many people don't like the $99 admission fee, but it does get you six free submissions, a one year subscription to the SMR Report, and a free gift (mine was a PSA tote bag when I first joined). When you add all that up, you are getting something for that $99. In fact the cost of six submissions plus the magazine is worth nearly all of that $99. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joann
It's not a membership fee, but it does create an effective minimum annual volume of 6 submissions per submittor. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dan Paradis
Joann, PSA requires you to send all of your "free" submissions at the same time. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Shawn Chambers
Barry, |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joann
Ohhh. You're right. The last time I had an annual membership was 2006, so I forgot about that. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Eric B
Jay, dividends are not part of the calculation of profit/loss. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Shawn Chambers
Joann, |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Martin Neal
I usually wait until I have some relatively high dollar cards and then send them in with my renewal fee ( I think it is only $89.00). You usually receive the free submissions back pretty quickly and at $15.00 per card it is not that bad. I have also received a couple of pretty nice books. Overall, I think it is a little better than a wash. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Shawn- you are correct that $99 is more than you typically pay for six submissions, and not everyone wants that journalistic classic the SMR Report. However, I was making the point that it doesn't actually cost $99 to join. You send them $99 upfront, then get most of it back in services and product. And yes, the unused portion of that $99 does go into their pockets. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve
I still think it's a ripoff. The $99 for six subs is over $16 per sub not including shipping both ways. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Shawn Chambers
Hey Steve, |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steven Finley
I'm not entirely sure you have to pay a $99 dollar membership fee just to submit. If I'm correct, you can still submit to PSA at the normal going rate, you just won't have access to the pop report and set registries. Like I said I'm not entirely sure sure I'm accurate on that because since getting back into collecting in the past year I've only submitted to BVG and SCG. I do however own many PSA slabbed cards ranging from N28's to 2008's and readily have absolutely no need for the pop report. I have a feeling that is true for many collectors also. There aren't very many people who can afford the "Second highest graded" of a species like say American Caramel or very many auctioneers who frequently have said cards up for grabs, but to those people the pop report is a wonderful tool. For the average Joe like me though, the "set fillers" of other collections become my cornerstones. A big giant A makes me smile just as much as a 7 or 8. I'm sure PSA understands this and allows for individual submissions without the membership fee. It's just hard to imagine such a company would deny itself that much additional business. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steven Finley
Actually sorry, I am the weakest link. I think I was incorrect. The membership fee may be standard. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Doesn't the $99 fee also get you free burial in the PSA National Cemetery in Bismark, North Dakota? |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe D.
a bit of a reckless title for a thread. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: joe brennan
A heads up for anyone planning a 100+ card bulk sub - the rates will be changing from $6 per card to $7. This was from a letter that was returned with my last submission. It didn't mention any other changes for cards, just some $50 surcharge for premium psa/dna items valued at $1500 or more. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jay
Eric B--Your calculation is still wrong. Dividends were about $8 million per annum, not $2 million. That would get your burn rate correct. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: rand
when i first started in the hobby i joined psa and was thrilled to recieve the pamphlets, smr, ect... i never did send in my free subs. i decided to go with sgc and only used SMR as a base for me to work with on buying cards on ebay, as i got more knowledgeable SMR wasnt the crutch i needed anymore. i did not renew my subscription after the first year. i have a good friend that submits to psa so i send him the occassional card that i am selling if psa is a better venue. i can buy a terrific card for $99 instead of giving it to psa for a magazine subscription. there is so much psa material available now, i dont see the need (for me) to ever have to send psa a card for grading. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Alan
PSA offers a really nice lunch for members on one of the days during the National !!! |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: dan mckee
That $99 fee was done away with at one time. That is when I mailed them 26 T206 cards. They quickly added it back thinking to keep the low life's out like Dan Mckee from falsely accusing them of losing cards. The $99 can now be called the Dan Mckee fee! |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
Jay, I used the wrong line and 2008 was incorrect. Here are the new numbers. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jay
Eric--I am focusing in on cash used in operating activities. Last year they burned $2.2 million and for 2009 they are projecting a similar figure (per the conference call). The reason for the higher cash burn in the past was the cash dividend, the startup expense for the gemstone grading business and collateralized loans to dealers. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: rand
why did you send cards to psa if you were/are so against grading. what if they graded a card lower than your opinion, what did you do with it? |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: dan mckee
Rand I use grading to sell with. Yes it is true I am not a fan of grading though the internet fraud has driven a need for it. I had purchased a large collection of tobacco and sent the first 26 cards to them. They only logged 25 cards and the rest is miserable history. SGC got the other 650+ cards and did a great job on the collection. I sold most but saved a few South League cards in 6 and 7 holders. Dan |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jason L
I would be bummed because I have enjoyed participating in the Registry wars to some extent, and I have overpaid on recent post-war stuff to do so (A 1984 PSA 10 Ron Cey for $5-10 is overpaying)... |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
I hear you Jay. I'm not really disagreeing. My point is the CLCT company is falling apart, therefore it is my opinion the PSA portion will be sold. I do believe it can be a viable stand-alone entity but it would be extremely difficult for the new owners to keep grading standard EXACTLY the same. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jay
Barry--One of the perks (if you were Racoon of the year) for being a member of the Racoon Lodge |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bob
How is GAI doing these days, anyone heard any rumblings? I used to use them quite a bit but since the debacle have used SGC 100% for pre-war cards. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Thanks Jay for seeing my quiz. And of course you won the prize! |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Craig W
Barry & Jay, |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
I remember Alice said: now that I know that, I don't know if I would rather live or die (I am paraphrasing). |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: David M
It's hard to believe where the economy has gone in the past year - actually ever since 9/11. First the airlines, then the banks and mortgage companies, the auto industry and now PSA. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Peter
As a collector (although not in the league of many of you on this board), I think it is best for PSA, SGC, BVG & GAI to be as strong as possible. I hope all of them have successful registries and I think it is good for all card collectors if these companies are strong. The registries are fun an dit is interresting to do crossovers etc. It is also good for the promotion of the hobby and the value of our collections. Just my opinion |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: T206Collector
Registries provide an irrational demand for cards that artificially raises prices. Consider this: if PSA ever does truly go bankrupt, the value of their registry will decrease and the cards along with it. In my opinion, card values should be based on supply and demand, absent such considerations. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dean H.
http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=11&threadid=692768 |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: leon
I guess it did get some attention. I think the title of the thread was an eye catcher and somewhat inappropriate....regards |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
Would you like me to change the title? |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: leon
That is up to you if you want to change it. I try to not tell people what to say or post, per the forum rules...and this wasn't against the rules. I do think it was a bit unfair for PSA....It's your call....It is an interesting discussion.....regards |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
There we go. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
PSA Likely to be Sold...Then Out of Business? - Part 2 | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 59 | 02-20-2009 03:32 PM |
MJ Roop out of business? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 01-24-2007 05:57 PM |
Fleer just went out of business | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 21 | 07-15-2005 04:11 PM |
PSA Respone to Better Business Bureau Complaint | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 08-03-2003 11:37 AM |
PSA Better Business Bureau Report and AG | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 07-08-2003 09:28 AM |