![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: FreddyMercury
I have had it!! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matt
Once PSA gave you a 5 on the Gehrig, why did you crack and resubmit it? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Are you saying you sent the same card in eleven times, or am I misreading your post? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: FreddyMercury
The card appears EXMT. It never got a 6. This whole grading test got out of control. It wasn't about getting the 5. It just amazed me a card can go from, trimmed, to a 2 and then to a 5. Something was strange. So I continued the experiment. Hundreds of $$$ later, I am very disappointed with the inconsistency. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: leon
Moral of the story? Stop when you get a 5...... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matt
I would love to see the card that went on this magical ride. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: FreddyMercury
yes, the exact same card sent in 11 times. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jim Dale
I know this a silly comment and its ment in jest please...but look at the consistency. Its either a 5,2,3, or trimmed the vast majority of the time |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve Murray
"I would prefer to remain anonymous in this post for good reason." |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
I don't think PSA really hires people that know what they are doing. They grew big too fast. My guess is that the only qualification for being a grader is that you must have a pulse. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: dennis
save the money from grading and buy cards. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Kyle
1. Sent to PSA, trimmed. Value = $400.00 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve
I would have stopped after the 3rd time. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Despite the fact that the poster should have been satisfied with the 5 and stopped right there, assuming all this is true, it is a terrible indictment of the grading services. I can't see how the graded card market can sustain itself with such an inconsistent performance. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve
Barry |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: DD
Either the card measures short or it does not. Unless the experiment included shaving off miniscule amounts of a border to push the envelope, I see no reason why it should be deemed trimmed one time (more than 1 in this case), and grade other times. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Red
So 11 times the card had to be popped out of the holder and slid in and out of the plastic holder by you, the graders, and sealers. Just the wear and tear on that alone has to have some affect on different grades. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe D.
the grading industry will do just fine - even with inconsistency. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: boxingcardman
"I know this a silly comment and its ment in jest please...but look at the consistency. Its either a 5,2,3, or trimmed the vast majority of the time" |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anthony S.
It's these kind of situations where PRO never seems to receive the props it deserves for consistency. That card would have come back in a PRO 9 holder every single time you sent it in. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
David- I do have a card in my current auction where I state it was graded a bit optimistically, so I will try to point out obvious errors. I also have a card coming up on ebay that is graded VG-EX but has back damage. In my description I stated the card was clearly misgraded. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve Murray
Now my question is "no matter what holder this card ends up in, when time comes to sell, will the seller disclose it's checkered history?" |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Mark Evans
Glad to see Freddy Mercury lives. Agree with others that this just shows how zany third-party grading can be. Mark |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Phil Garry
Well, one thing seems certain, the submitter must be very good at cracking cards out of PSA & SGC holders since the resubmission gardes do not seem to suffer the more times the card was handled. Maybe the real money is in offering to crack people's cards out of their current PSA & SGC holders for resubmission purposes. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jim VB
Red- "It looks like it's a consistently hard card to grade. Why not try GAI?" |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: DD
Kudos to you as well Barry. It is truly the only way to promote consistency. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: davidcycleback
Grading is an inexact science, and there will always be variations. This is why a collector shouldn't take the number on the label too seriously. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: FreddyMercury
It would have been in my best interest as far as sale value to keep the 5 and move on. But it went beyond selling for maximum profit. I stopped after the third attempt to get a higher grade. I just wanted to see the differences the card would grade. We all know that grading companies are not perfect but inconsistency this extreme is a big problem. This is a true Grading Horror Story. I'm not trying to change the topic but heres is a much scarier true horror story that happened a year and a half ago. I'll be as brief as possible. I friend of mine has a collection. He purchased 3 boxes each of 1993 and 1994 SP baseball. It may seem like BS to you pre-war guys but listen. One of the boxes is Arods Foil RC and the other is Jeters Foil RC. Both card in PSA 9 are huge but in PSA 10 are $10,000+ in some instances. My friend opened the boxes and got 4 Jeter and 5 Arod. All cards were Gem Mint with no chipping. I advised he send the cards in to grade. 2 weeks later we get the grades on line. Of the 9 total cards, he got (1) PSA 9, (6) PSA 8 and (2) PSA 7. How can this be. Well when the cards were mailed back it was obvious. Either PSA's professional graders dinged every corner taking it out of the case or they switched the cards out with lesser grades. Switching cards out seems impossible right, think again. A grader could have those exact cards in his pocket and as soon as a Mint one comes through the door, he does the old switch a-rroo. I do not claim to be a professional but I have graded hundreds, maybe thousands of cards. I look at cards under loupes and magnification before I send them off and I can tell you the Jeter and Arods were Mint, the ones that came back defiantly were not. The moral of the story is PSA is either, crooked, stupid or just clumsy. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Kyle
Why test with such a valuable Gehrig? Why not test with an Arod or Jeter? I don't believe you when you say you stopped for a higher grade when you got the first five, yet you then got your five back and you still decided to crack it out again. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Paul S
12. Accept your own low-ball offer as a "trimmed". |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: leon
We will point out inconsistencies in grading in our auction just as Barry does. We will have very large scans of front and back too. Just because a card has a number on a holder doesn't mean it deserves that number....We have all seen mistakes made and as an auctioneer we will point those out when we see them. Any decent auction house will do that....The best surprise is no surprise when buying a (graded) card. As for my response here it was in jest....Yes, I think it's pathetic that a card can get that many different evaluations by the same company......and that is why, if you notice, this anonymous post was let go.... regards |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Chuck
This is probably the most puzzling about PSA and all the allocades that they garner. How can both of these be the same grade ? |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
I know there will be inconsistencies with grading- it's an art, not a science, and it is clearly subjective- but that is not a satisfying answer for me. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: cmoking
"It's these kind of situations where PRO never seems to receive the props it deserves for consistency. That card would have come back in a PRO 9 holder every single time you sent it in." |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Mark
95% of my cards are either raw, or were cracked out of their slabs (by me) to display better, and without unsightly bar codes. I never valued someone else's opinion on how my cards graded. And even though I detest the "professional grading" of cards (in its current form) I've been tempted on occasion to go that route... |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Paul S
...yet the person willing to spend that much on the card is putting tremendous faith in the veracity of that 9. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matt R
I thought PRO always gave out 10's. Maybe it is GEM that I'm thinking of. Anyway, I feel better about my Ruth card after reading this post. Maybe I just haven't invested enough in grading fees. I thought I'd quit at $200 trying to get it crossed over. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Darren
Any evidence to support these specific allegations? |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: DD
Went over my head Leon. As always, you are an upstanding guy. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: MW
I'm with Darren. Let's see some large scans of the front and back of the card and some invoices. I'm not saying that everything that has been written by an anonymous dealer isn't true, but I find it difficult to draw any reliable conclusions from this type of "evidence". |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: quan
is it april 1st all over again? |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bill Cornell
From the forum rules: |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bob
I hear the faint, tinny voice of reason in the background, one which has been echoed time and time again, "buy the card, not the frigging holder!" |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matt R
I'm trying to figure out how you put the card back together after the first time you trimmed it. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: ChuckMontoya
I was just checking out some cards on Ebay and came across some nice cards in PCG slabs. I went to their website and was somewhat impressed with what they say. They claim that if there is a real problem with a card they've graded that with a receipt of the price paid, that they will buy it back at that price. They claim to be around since 1996.Has anyone here any experience with this company? |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve
That seller had 2 names last week get NARU. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Red
Chuck. Some of the obscure "grading companies" are just dealers grading their own cards. Instead of putting the card in a toploader it gets sealed inside a fancy holder with a label. Maybe they accept no submissions and only do this for their cards that they sell. If they offer a buyback guaranty then it’s no different than any other raw card dealer that offers a return privilege on cards they sell you. No idea if that's the case here. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matt R
Steve, what does NARU mean? |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve Murray
Not A Registered User |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: dan mckee
"if a card measures short" well 90% of pre war cards come in various sizes so measuring is as meaningless as having some punk kid tell you the condition of your cards. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1953 Howell RC PSA 7 1961 DeJordy RC PSA 7 1965 Cheevers RC PSA 7.5 For Sale | Archive | Everything Else, Football, Non-Sports etc.. B/S/T | 0 | 01-15-2009 10:30 AM |
FS-T207's Mullin No D PSA 6 (highest graded),McDonald PSA 6 (1 higher), Henry PSA 3 | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 2 | 12-03-2007 05:30 AM |