PSA backlog

[vthobby]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

PSA still owns the Market, this will not change one bit.

Johnny,

Respect your views but they might have the market for backlogs maybe. I agree they have alot of advantages including the Registry and their sales BUT SGC has figured out the market, took a huge backlog, uses flex pricing, and gets your cards back in a month. Bottom line. Their cards are catching up and just try to buy an SGC T206 for a bargain. Not happening.

SGC is running the show right now. Who really wants to wait a year or more? ugh

Mike

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by vtgmsc

Johnny,

Respect your views but they might have the market for backlogs maybe. I agree they have alot of advantages including the Registry and their sales BUT SGC has figured out the market, took a huge backlog, uses flex pricing, and gets your cards back in a month. Bottom line. Their cards are catching up and just try to buy an SGC T206 for a bargain. Not happening.

SGC is running the show right now. Who really wants to wait a year or more? ugh

Mike

I agree with you Mike, SGC is catching up, definitely in the vintage market.

[conor912]

I heard today that some guys who sent in giant submissions a year ago, and PSA is finally getting around to grading, are getting hit with 6 and 7 figure fees that they now can’t/refuse to pay because the cards aren’t worth the grading fees. Look out.

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by conor912

I heard today that some guys who sent in giant submissions a year ago, and PSA is finally getting around to grading, are getting hit with 6 and 7 figure fees that they now can’t/refuse to pay because the cards aren’t worth the grading fees. Look out.

I’ve never understood this. What is the business advantage for PSA not collecting upfront fees like SGC? You pay SGC upfront before you even mail it your cards. Who doesn’t like getting paid before the work is even done?

Just think how much money in interest alone PSA could’ve made off upfront fees this past year. Even when submissions were running at just 20 days, why wouldn’t any company want to receive all the money upfront and then earn interest on that money, or use it for other business aspects?

Plus, when the cards are graded, there is not any extra waiting to finally receive the bill, which delays shipping. With SGC, the cards are graded and then shipped. There is no extra invoice step (absent up charges), etc. PSA submitting a bill after grading, takes more time, increases overhead, and is just more work. Surprised Nat hasn’t figured this out. The float is your friend if your a business!

Seems like

[glchen]

Originally Posted by conor912

I heard today that some guys who sent in giant submissions a year ago, and PSA is finally getting around to grading, are getting hit with 6 and 7 figure fees that they now can’t/refuse to pay because the cards aren’t worth the grading fees. Look out.

This isn't correct. I was just hit with a surcharge for a grading submission to PSA. However, to be honest, PSA was correct in their value estimates for the cards I submitted. It was more that in the past, PSA was more lenient in allowing cards that were over the declared value limit to pass without adding a surcharge, and now they are lot stricter. You are also able to negotiate with them on the fees to come up with something somewhat more palatable. I'm not happy with paying these significant fees, which will impact how I submit to PSA in the future, but to be honest, they were correct in this situation.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by glchen

This isn't correct.

MARX cards, very large bulk submitter, is defaulting on the million(s) it owes to PSA. But they took cash up front from their customers and seem to have frittered it away, and can no longer pay for the subs now that the bill came due.
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1503473

Josh from PCSportscards (another bulk submitter) posted in that thread that some of his clients have also been stiffing his company by walking away from worthless slabs. The "base card revolution" seems to have crashed less than 2 years after it began.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by swarmee

MARX cards, very large bulk submitter, is defaulting on the million(s) it owes to PSA. But they took cash up front from their customers and seem to have frittered it away, and can no longer pay for the subs now that the bill came due.
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1503473

Josh from PCSportscards (another bulk submitter) posted in that thread that some of his clients have also been stiffing his company by walking away from worthless slabs. The "base card revolution" seems to have crashed less than 2 years after it began.

Originally Posted by Pat R

Did they use their Value guide in determining this? In Bobby's most recent sub ($500 and under declared value) there was an upcharge on 6 cards and using PSA's own guide on the values they were all under $500. Was your card over their value on it?
https://www.psacard.com/priceguide/b...card-values/13

I used this from PSA's site when the declared value is understated: Link.

The relevant text is as follows:

"If you refuse, or are unable, to pay PSA for the accurate Service Level, then PSA will return the item to you unprocessed at your cost, and you will be charged for the Service Level at which you submitted the item."

Therefore, I still had to pay the upfront fee for the service level that I submitted the cards at, but I did not have to pay the upcharge. The cards were returned to me unslabbed. Saying that, this had to go through approval at PSA, and they told me this would be a one-time exception.

When I spoke with the PSA rep, we didn't go into how they were valuing my cards, so I can't say with certainty what methodology they were using. I'm pretty sure they were not using the PSA price guide. It seemed more that they were googling the card and checking latest prices for the card at that grade. However, I really am not sure on this part. They could be using VCP for all I know.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by glchen

I used this from PSA's site when the declared value is understated: Link.

The relevant text is as follows:

"If you refuse, or are unable, to pay PSA for the accurate Service Level, then PSA will return the item to you unprocessed at your cost, and you will be charged for the Service Level at which you submitted the item."

Therefore, I still had to pay the upfront fee for the service level that I submitted the cards at, but I did not have to pay the upcharge. The cards were returned to me unslabbed. Saying that, this had to go through approval at PSA, and they told me this would be a one-time exception.

When I spoke with the PSA rep, we didn't go into how they were valuing my cards, so I can't say with certainty what methodology they were using. I'm pretty sure they were not using the PSA price guide. It seemed more that they were googling the card and checking latest prices for the card at that grade. However, I really am not sure on this part. They could be using VCP for all I know.

PSA recently acquired CardLadder.com. I'm pretty sure the primary reason for teh acquisition was to be able to have a real-time price guide for them to use for stuff like this.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by glchen

This isn't correct. I was just hit with a surcharge for a grading submission to PSA. However, to be honest, PSA was correct in their value estimates for the cards I submitted. It was more that in the past, PSA was more lenient in allowing cards that were over the declared value limit to pass without adding a surcharge, and now they are lot stricter. You are also able to negotiate with them on the fees to come up with something somewhat more palatable. I'm not happy with paying these significant fees, which will impact how I submit to PSA in the future, but to be honest, they were correct in this situation.

Did they use their Value guide in determining this? In Bobby's most recent sub ($500 and under declared value) there was an upcharge on 6 cards and using PSA's own guide on the values they were all under $500. Was your card over their value on it?
https://www.psacard.com/priceguide/b...card-values/13

[Directly]

Selling some basketball and football cards for the maximum return timing was crucial. A flipper sent cards to PSA a year ago expecting 20,000 in profit. Just now receiving them back now lost the potential 20,000 gain---even with a few great basketball cards a high grade Bird RC sell prices went from 75,000 down to 30,000. I know a Pokémon collector he breaks out graded cards and resubmits to Beckett, because he likes their holders--its all ones preference- --

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Did they use their Value guide in determining this? In Bobby's most recent sub ($500 and under declared value) there was an upcharge on 6 cards and using PSA's own guide on the values they were all under $500. Was your card over their value on it?

https://www.psacard.com/priceguide/b...card-values/13

They are probably using their APR value, which is the recent average sales price for reported PSA sales. The PSA value is just the old SMR price, which is updated every 10 years or so.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

They are probably using their APR value, which is the recent average sales price for reported PSA sales. The PSA value is just the old SMR price, which is updated every 10 years or so.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Even using their APR value there shouldn't have been an upcharge on some of the cards.
One of the cards was a Mathewson white cap in a PSA 2 the APR on that card is $449.99

https://www.psacard.com/auctionprice...ummary/2092813