Compare the names

[the 'stache]

Steve, if you will remember the conversation to which I am referring, Matt Miller had a very high end PSA graded 1960 Topps Hank Aaron which he sent in for review, along with several other valuable cards. He contacted PSA in advance of his submission, and Joe Orlando promised to personally oversee the entire process for him.

When he checked the grades online a week later, the PSA 8.5 (which had a population of 2) was now listed as a 7. PSA had damaged the card, and when Matt next spoke to Orlando, he told Matt that no reviewed card had ever been damaged by PSA previously. Obviously, Orlando was not being truthful.

Put yourself in Matt's place. PSA compensated him for the lost value of the card, and then Orlando became indignant when Matt expressed how upset he was. That's where the "you're sick over a baseball card. They're just baseball cards, give me a break" line came from.

Respectfully, I don't see any way this statement could be a good thing. When the President of PSA says a customer should not be upset when one of their valuable cards is damaged, it's a big problem.

[steve B]

Sorry for any confusion, sometimes I don't explain my ideas well.

I wasn't referring to Matts situation. Expressing "It's just cards" to a customer whose card you've damaged IS wrong, AND lousy PR and customer service.

My point is that for objectivity someone who doesn't know a lot about cards will usually be a more accurate grader overall. I've tried it with friends and it works. I give them the standards and a handful of cards - a few commons and a star rookie that's a bit worn. Not looking for a precise technical grade, just G,VG,EX, NM, they're nearly 100% accurate.
People who are baseball fans or know a little about cards are typically less accurate, giving the star a better grade than it deserves.
More experienced collectors are better at it- maybe being a bit jaded. But that breaks down at some point for most of us. (and those that are beyond that have a bit of admiration from me. )

The point about a need to take more time on more expensive items rather than less isn't an opinion I'll change easily.

Steve B

[ullmandds]

I think taking longer to grade more valuable cards makes perfect sense. I mean we have to pay significantly more to have these cards graded...shouldnt we receive a higher level of service? Like a better holder? High def recorded scans? Maybe even a comparison of other previously graded like cards?

It makes sense!

[Leon]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

I think taking longer to grade more valuable cards makes perfect sense. I mean we have to pay significantly more to have these cards graded...shouldnt we receive a higher level of service? Like a better holder? High def recorded scans? Maybe even a comparison of other previously graded like cards?

It makes sense!

It does make sense. TPGs charge more, generally, to grade more valuable cards so why not spend a couple extra minutes on them?

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

I think taking longer to grade more valuable cards makes perfect sense. I mean we have to pay significantly more to have these cards graded...shouldnt we receive a higher level of service? Like a better holder? High def recorded scans? Maybe even a comparison of other previously graded like cards?

It makes sense!

Originally Posted by Leon

It does make sense. TPGs charge more, generally, to grade more valuable cards so why not spend a couple extra minutes on them?

Agreed 100%. With modern cards, which until recently has made up the majority of my collection, where a card's value will go is an unknown. That Bowman Chrome prospect refractor auto could be the next Mike Trout, or Greg Jefferies. So it is important to grade those cards accurately without spending an inordinate amount of time on them.

However, if I sent in a Eddie Plank T206 to grade (I can dream!), they better spend a little longer examining it than they do a 2013 Stephen Strasburg Topps common.

[Dario7707]

I