New SGC grading fees

[Section103]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

There is a guy that is active in the hobby who had a 1970 Topps Nolan Ryan bump from a PSA 9 to a PSA 10. A $36,000 increase at the time simply because PSA rendered a different and more favorable opinion. When he got the email or call that they were going to charge his credit card more because the value of the card was higher than what service level it was submitted under you really think the first thing that crossed his mind is man I am sucker. You have to be kidding with this statement.

I don't have any cards in this price range but I promise you this that if I ever send in a card and get contacted by PSA saying I owe them more money, the first thing out of my mouth is going to be Woooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!

Everybody in the hobby will turn a blind eye to this because so many chase grades and because - hey, we can be the beneficiary as well - but ultimately the situation you just described is a text book definition of conflict of interest.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by Section103

Everybody in the hobby will turn a blind eye to this because so many chase grades and because - hey, we can be the beneficiary as well - but ultimately the situation you just described is a text book definition of conflict of interest.

Please elaborate. The person I am referencing is just a collector who was fortunate enough to buy a card they felt was under graded and paid money to have PSA look at it again. It worked out in this case. There are plenty of cards that get sent in and returned with the money kept.

[Section103]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

Please elaborate. The person I am referencing is just a collector who was fortunate enough to buy a card they felt was under graded and paid money to have PSA look at it again. It worked out in this case. There are plenty of cards that get sent in and returned with the money kept.

Its quite simple. PSA graded a previous 9 as currently 10. As such, they gained financially by being able to charge more than if it had stayed a 9. They had clear, direct financial incentive to increase the grade and benefitted monetarily because of it. The grade may or may not have been warranted - but it matters not in the least. The conflict of interest is there.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by Section103

Its quite simple. PSA graded a previous 9 as currently 10. As such, they gained financially by being able to charge more than if it had stayed a 9. They had clear, direct financial incentive to increase the grade and benefitted monetarily because of it. The grade may or may not have been warranted - but it matters not in the least. The conflict of interest is there.

Agreed!! Even more so in the fact, that if you were to cover up the flips, I doubt very seriously you can spot out a '9' vs a '10'.

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

Agreed!! Even more so in the fact, that if you were to cover up the flips, I doubt very seriously you can spot out a '9' vs a '10'.

And this is where the grading industry starts to stink. We're talking minuscule details that lead to a card being a 10 instead of a 9, and vice versa. You can't tell me those minuscule details warrant the $$$ asked of the customer, even if the card being a 10 jumps the value of it astronomically.

I will say this, though. If they are combining turn-around time with value, it ultimately makes sense to charge more. As previously stated by others in this thread, there is more risk in handling a more expensive card. However, I think the ball is dropped from a customer service/integrity stand point when A) the customer is asked to pay up front, and B) when a card has a 2-3 grade increase, the customer is asked to pay more. Regarding "A", what person in their right mind would pay someone up front for a service? I wouldn't even recommend that if you're working with a family member, let alone a stranger. In regards to "B", I think a system should be developed to have the customer provide their grade assumption of each card. If the card comes back with a 1-2 grade difference, they should not be asked to pay more. But if there's an obnoxious attempt to screw over the company, yeah, pay more. Forgive me if such a system is already in place, as I have never submitted a card for grading, just my thoughts.

[BobC]

Leon,

I knew you weren't defending the practice, which is why I apologized up front in case you thought i was responding specifically to what you said. You are also correct in that what the TPGs are doing is not illegal. As with being a CPA, if I do a job and charge a contingent fee to someone, I could potentially be brought up before the Accountancy Board of whatever state I am in and lose my license to practice for doing that. I could also be sued if something goes wrong or bad in a deal that then relied upon my opinion.

CPAs self-regulate and have to undergo peer review every so often to keep and maintain our licenses to practice, as we supposedly adhere to one, common set of rules that all practicing CPAs are supposed to follow. This is where the TPGs really differ, they can all make up their own rules and grading criteria however they want, because no one else forces them to follow anything else. Wouldn't it be interesting if TPGs had a similar peer review requirement and every so often one TPG would have some of their people go over to another TPG and review their work to see if they did it properly and followed the rules. That is where accountability and transparency starts to come in to a practice like this.

BobC

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by BobC

Leon,

I knew you weren't defending the practice, which is why I apologized up front in case you thought i was responding specifically to what you said. You are also correct in that what the TPGs are doing is not illegal. As with being a CPA, if I do a job and charge a contingent fee to someone, I could potentially be brought up before the Accountancy Board of whatever state I am in and lose my license to practice for doing that. I could also be sued if something goes wrong or bad in a deal that then relied upon my opinion.

CPAs self-regulate and have to undergo peer review every so often to keep and maintain our licenses to practice, as we supposedly adhere to one, common set of rules that all practicing CPAs are supposed to follow. This is where the TPGs really differ, they can all make up their own rules and grading criteria however they want, because no one else forces them to follow anything else. Wouldn't it be interesting if TPGs had a similar peer review requirement and every so often one TPG would have some of their people go over to another TPG and review their work to see if they did it properly and followed the rules. That is where accountability and transparency starts to come in to a practice like this.

BobC

Can have a company that reviews the reviews as well...and do a IGR 'independent grade review'

as far as regulations and having universal procedures in place, its all all about regulation...and freedom from regulation. People differ on that issue in many areas besides baseball cards