PSA reholder issues - warning to submitters

[toledo_mudhen]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

My only experience with a reholdering went pretty swimmingly (as there was no slab damage to contend with). Bought a 1973 Topps #615 Mike Schmidt RC that was graded a PSA 8 PD, but there was obviously a stain on it and NOT a print defect. I wanted it rectified so Schmitty wouldn't be living a lie inside of his plastic prison. After a bunch of back and forths, they switched out the PD slab to properly make it an ST (at no charge and shipped both ways on their dime). I got the feeling they wanted it quickly corrected to forever remove this blatant error from their resume.

Attachment 551803

is it just me or does the PD version of this look better?

[bobbyw8469]

That is like grading 101 type stuff. A print defect is caused by something in the printing of the card. A stain is something spilled on the card. This is elementary type stuff and should not happen.

[ZiggerZagger]

Originally Posted by Snowman

This is a pretty straight-forward policy. I don't understand the confusion. If a slab shows any signs of damage, it is more than reasonable to think that the card inside may have been damaged as well. If you drop a card in a PSA holder and it lands on a tile floor, cracking the corner of the slab, there's a pretty decent chance that the card inside might have sustained damage as its edges were jolted against the bumpers inside. I've seen countless cards inside PSA holders where the edges were damaged by the bumpers. If PSA receives a damaged slab from a customer, regardless of the extent of that damage, they are more than within their rights to want to examine the card again. And once they crack it out, the card just goes into grading without the bias of the label. A grader receives it raw just like any other card and gives it a grade.

The real problem here is that PSA has moved its own goalposts, not that they regrade cards in cracked slabs.

Just one more reason I own ~0 PSA holders with old certs. I buy the cards, not the holders. And nearly every single card in an old holder has been over-graded even by yesterday's standards, let alone today's.

Travis, you make excellent points. The policy is pretty clear to my eyes as well.
Absent details from the OP about these 3 examples, I'm not sure there's any real evidence to disprove the rule on Reholdering here, as you've laid out.

No doubt PSA has toughened up their grading of raw cards generally, since late 2019/2020. For those of us who have submitted for many years, there were always palpable shifts in grading 'toughness' that would occur every so often. But the latest shift was really significant.

That said, If a submitter is careful in selecting what to send in, he could do very well with PSA Reviews.
For fun, I have some examples here (top row of pic) of PSA being fair, if not very lenient -- but only the Reggie was submitted in 2022. The Ruth was maybe 2018, and the Jordan probably 2016 or so?
All were submitted in-holder, not cracked out.

To your point about nearly every old holder being weak for grade, I've actually had a lot of success as above getting half-point (or with the MJ a full point) bump with nice cards in holders from the years when PSA didn't do half-grades.
It is successful less of the time than it should be these days, but to my eye I think that the Old Holder cards in the lower row would/should all get a 1/2 point bump if sent in.
|
|

[luciobar1980]

Wow. Just wow. It's truly Stockholm Syndrome with some people and PSA

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

Wow. Just wow. It's truly Stockholm Syndrome with some people and PSA

I always looked at it as they are just trying to protect the value of their collection.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by toledo_mudhen

is it just me or does the PD version of this look better?

It's just the scan, man, just the scan.

[parkplace33]

Interesting video from yesterday about a lawsuit brought against psa for reholdering a fake slab:

https://youtu.be/4iLQK1zcB3o

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

Interesting video from yesterday about a lawsuit brought against psa for reholdering a fake slab:

https://youtu.be/4iLQK1zcB3o

Yeah, it was linked up above

[Lorewalker]

We may have talked this one to death but I wonder how eBay's Authenticity Guarantee, specifically for PSA graded cards, factors into this whole confusion with PSA's Reholder service apparent vulnerabilities.

Per eBay https://pages.ebay.com/authenticity-...-tradingcards/:

For graded cards, a PSA authenticator will verify that the case and label are authentic to the grade and check for any tampering and verify that the case and label are authentic to the grader. Cards will not be regraded.

Per the Terms and Conditions:

Description of the Authenticity Guarantee Service.

After the purchase of an Eligible Item (description in Section 5(a) below) on eBay.com, the item is shipped to a vetted third-party authentication partner (“Authentication Partner”) to carefully inspect the item for authenticity and accuracy against the item listing. Upon confirmation of the item by the third-party authentication partner, it is properly packaged and securely shipped to the buyer. If the item’s authenticity cannot be verified or the item is significantly not as described, the item is returned to the seller and a refund is issued to the buyer.

AUTHENTICITY GUARANTEE FOR TRADING CARDS DOES NOT INCLUDE GRADING SERVICES.

If the item condition or any other aspect of the trading card does not match the listing, the trading card will be returned from the Authentication Partner to the seller, with the purchase canceled and payment price returned to the buyer. By listing for sale or purchasing an Eligible Item, you acknowledge and agree that the Eligible Item will be sent to the Authentication Partner to perform the Services. More information about the Authentication Partner and Services may be found here (This is a link to the FAQ).

And under the FAQ:

What happens at the authenticator?

For graded cards, this involves inspecting the sealed plastic holder for signs of tampering and verifying that the case and label are authentic to the grader. Then they confirm the item is consistent with the listing title, images, and listing description.

Who is authenticating the cards?
For graded cards, Professional Sports Authenticator (PSA) is authenticating the sealed plastic holder, not the underlying card.

[Jenx34]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I wouldn't believe these stories at face value without evidence or more information.

I agree at least in the sense that more information would be required. I have talked to people who have gotten money back from PSA's guarantee, though those circumstances may be different. But without full details, it's too vague to really make much of a judgement.

[Zach Wheat]

I had one recently. It was reholdered with no issues.

[toledo_mudhen]

Originally Posted by 3-2-count

I’m surprised to hear that some would actually doubt this could happen.

You realize it’s PSA we’re discussing here, don’t you?

Yea - Never underestimate the ability of PSA to disenfranchise it's customer base.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

In the last 3 months, three different vintage collectors (including one I know personally) have had issues reholdering their cards with PSA. Each story is a bit unique but here is the gist:

Collector has a higher dollar vintage PSA card they want reholdered. They do not want it reviewed, only reholdered. The original slabs are not damaged nor tampered with.

Collector sends the card to PSA. Collector gets the card back in a new holder but it is now a lower PSA grade. Collector is not offered monetary value for the lower grade. Of course, all three collectors are not happy.

Has any net54 members had similar experiences? With these recent issues, I would be leery of sending a card back for reholder.

Bumping this post… anyone have any recent reholder issues? Or were these three examples one offs?

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

Bumping this post… anyone have any recent reholder issues? Or were these three examples one offs?

Bumping this up again. Last week, I saw two examples on social media about reholders coming back in lower grades.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Zach Wheat

Agree with Peter. It seems the grading standards are more strict today. I submitted a 1952 Topps Campos red star/black star for re-holdering and had no issues. Same grade.

Hi Mike, was this sent in for review, reholder, or CrC? (Label correction)

This might be the issue.

Since shipping sucks, I sent in a card for "review" that was mislabeled. I figure let me get a bump and a new holder. Currently says crc assembly, so I believe they would not review it in the mislabeled slab. Hopefully they wont charge me! It will be tied for highest graded copy as is, a .5 will be highest, any lower and I'm looking for boku bucks

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

Bumping this up again. Last week, I saw two examples on social media about reholders coming back in lower grades.

Could you share links to those posts?

[jimq16415]

[QUOTE=Republicaninmass;2329494]Hi Mike, was this sent in for review, reholder, or CrC? (Label correction)

I have a newer Clemente card that I think is overgraded, it was also mislabeled. I sent it in to have the label corrected and it came back with the same grade. Maybe they don't re-grade the CRC cards?

[Republicaninmass]

[QUOTE=jimq16415;2329533]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Hi Mike, was this sent in for review, reholder, or CrC? (Label correction)

I have a newer Clemente card that I think is overgraded, it was also mislabeled. I sent it in to have the label corrected and it came back with the same grade. Maybe they don't re-grade the CRC cards?

That's my guess. Mine I had sent specifically for review...with the notation to relabel correctly and I was moved from review to crc

[G1911]

Still awaiting evidence that PSA is lowering grades on cards when people are using the reholder service.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by G1911

Still awaiting evidence that PSA is lowering grades on cards when people are using the reholder service.

I know there are some on this board that are doubting this, but I know for a fact this has happened, especially recently. I never said all, just that there are examples and that it can happen.

[Neal]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I wouldn't believe these stories at face value without evidence or more information.

Agreed

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

[G1911]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

I know there are some on this board that are doubting this, but I know for a fact this has happened, especially recently. I never said all, just that there are examples and that it can happen.

If you know it for a fact it should be very easy to post the evidence.

You could find a handful of people on Twitter who post that Bigfoot kidnapped their grandma. That doesn't mean anything. I have little but contempt for PSA and their incompetency, but there should be some reasonable basis here for a charge levied. I am unable to find one.

[trambo]

Originally Posted by G1911

If you know it for a fact it should be very easy to post the evidence.

You could find a handful of people on Twitter who post that Bigfoot kidnapped their grandma. That doesn't mean anything. I have little but contempt for PSA and their incompetency, but there should be some reasonable basis here for a charge levied. I am unable to find one.

+1 here. As I said a few months ago, the only examples I have seen are where there were case issues or obvious issues (like a card submerged in water while in a slab). As has been asked numerous times, show the examples. Not hard to prove it exists if it in fact does exist.

[Johnny630]

I wonder if cards sent in for reholdered service count towards their stats of total cards graded per month?

[Jay Wolt]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

I wonder if cards sent in for reholdered service count towards their stats of total cards graded per month?

But that shouldn't change the Pop report, unless they use a new cert #

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Jay Wolt

But that shouldn't change the Pop report, unless they use a new cert #

No that's SGC who does that on reholder service.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

What a racket

The collecting public is the biggest enabler.

If you're not on the inside, you're on the outside looking in. With all the crappy service and subjectivity (accepting trimmed cards and looking the other way), the collecting public keeps begging for more and continues to pay for it.

Think about this - if a company doesn't honor their original subjective opinion and stiffs the public without any compensation by re-holdering with lower grade, then they're going to continue to do it because the collecting public (as a whole) allows/enables them to do so.

Until the collecting public gets their collective shittt together and boycotts, they're going to continue to get their asses handed to them.

I can almost recall "when it was a hobby". It hasn't for a long time now.

Every thread should have a picture of a card:

PSA8 Wagner T206.jpg

[glynparson]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

Bingo!!! Someone who gets it!

Because the holder could have been damaged and this could damage the card thereby changing its condition. That is the only time I have had an issue with a reholder. Otherwise it’s a simple procedure like you’d expect. But to answer your question of hy it might not go simply, maybe they made an error the first time that is discovered in reholder They are human as shocking as that is they make mistakes. Expecting perfection is asinine. Of course that should be the goal but it’s not a reality. I know what would half this board do if they couldn’t complain about PSA and spout nonsense.

[BobbyStrawberry]

If it's just rumors, I understand the skepticism. If people have evidence, please share...