PSA reholder issues - warning to submitters

[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.

1973schmidtrc615PSA8PD:STbeforeafter.jpg

[Fred]

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

Does the age of the slab/time of encapsulation have any bearing on how people view the card? I've heard/read that cards in obviously older slabs may not be viewed with as much regard as the same card in a newer slab.

Bottom line, if the slab appears to be older, does that "ding" the value of the card to collectors?

[Seven]

Originally Posted by Fred

Does the age of the slab/time of encapsulation have any bearing on how people view the card? I've heard/read that cards in obviously older slabs may not be viewed with as much regard as the same card in a newer slab.

Bottom line, if the slab appears to be older, does that "ding" the value of the card to collectors?

I've heard stories about people valuing the newer slabs vs the older slabs more. I care little about the slab that it's in, and more about the eye appeal of the card. "Buy the card, not the grade." is something I've heard many times, and believe in as well.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by Fred

Does the age of the slab/time of encapsulation have any bearing on how people view the card? I've heard/read that cards in obviously older slabs may not be viewed with as much regard as the same card in a newer slab.

Bottom line, if the slab appears to be older, does that "ding" the value of the card to collectors?

It definitely could when herd mentality takes over, but collectors need to look at each card individually and make a determination for themselves. With the Schmidt rookie (stains aside), it definitely belongs in an 8 holder, IMO.

And then there's this...

401. Flipper-Swiffer
A person getting a long-ago graded card reholdered in a clean new slab, for the express purpose of tricking potential buyers into thinking it was newly graded under ‘stricter’ guidelines.

[notfast]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

It definitely could when herd mentality takes over, but collectors need to look at each card individually and make a determination for themselves. With the Schmidt rookie (stains aside), it definitely belongs in an 8 holder, IMO.

And then there's this...

401. Flipper-Swiffer
A person getting a long-ago graded card reholdered in a clean new slab, for the express purpose of tricking potential buyers into thinking it was newly graded under ‘stricter’ guidelines.

No one with eyes should ever be “tricked” by this.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

It definitely could when herd mentality takes over, but collectors need to look at each card individually and make a determination for themselves. With the Schmidt rookie (stains aside), it definitely belongs in an 8 holder, IMO.

And then there's this...

401. Flipper-Swiffer
A person getting a long-ago graded card reholdered in a clean new slab, for the express purpose of tricking potential buyers into thinking it was newly graded under ‘stricter’ guidelines.

Originally Posted by notfast

No one with eyes should ever be “tricked” by this.

That is true no one should ever be tricked with the old flip # on the new flip. Then again there are many in the hobby who still can't figure out the grading scale on BCCG graded cards even though it is clearly on the flip.

[gonefishin]

I know it may sound like a stretch, but what about the SGC Mantle 9.5 that sold for 12.5 or so. What if a few years down the road the case becomes damaged and SGC decides to re-grade to put in a new holder and the rocket scientist that's doing the grading decides it is now a 9? Could the .5 of a point cost the owner a Million or so?

When a grading company charges a fee to grade a card - they should stand behind that grade and not arbitrarily decide to regrade it at a later date - period. Maybe start putting the date of grading on the label?

What if, like Beckett, the data is compromised, lost, or manipulated in some way? Where's the liability?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by gonefishin

I know it may sound like a stretch, but what about the SGC Mantle 9.5 that sold for 12.5 or so. What if a few years down the road the case becomes damaged and SGC decides to re-grade to put in a new holder and the rocket scientist that's doing the grading decides it is now a 9? Could the .5 of a point cost the owner a Million or so?

When a grading company charges a fee to grade a card - they should stand behind that grade and not arbitrarily decide to regrade it at a later date - period. Maybe start putting the date of grading on the label?

What if, like Beckett, the data is compromised, lost, or manipulated in some way? Where's the liability?

To be fair after being in a SGC holder for a few years it could become a 6. Just hope that the black insert doesn't harm the card from being cut horribly. I have got away from grading mostly but when I was addicted SGC was my drug of choice. I have had a few cards harmed by a badly cut insert.

Not sure if they stand behind their product harming a card. I just took it as a learning experience and moved on.

[perezfan]

They seem to have no culpability or liability whatsoever (all of the TPGs, that is).

I wish they'd be hit with a class action suit, that would ultimately force some accountability and make for even footing between the 3rd party and the customer. I won't use any of them until something like that happens.

[55koufax]

AGREED!

I recently sent in one card for a label correction. Came back to me within about two weeks. Corrected and of course n/c.

I have done dozens of re-holders over the years mostly for damaged cases. Never one single issue. Obviously, they can not change the grade on a re-holder order, only a review, and it can only stay the same or go up. Doesn't everyone know this?

[gonefishin]

Originally Posted by 55koufax

AGREED!

I recently sent in one card for a label correction. Came back to me within about two weeks. Corrected and of course n/c.

I have done dozens of re-holders over the years mostly for damaged cases. Never one single issue. Obviously, they can not change the grade on a re-holder order, only a review, and it can only stay the same or go up. Doesn't everyone know this?

I'm glad you haven't had a problem.

I've never submitted a re-holder to PSA or anyone else. However, when the CS representative at Beckett told me that my card was subject to regrading it gave me pause. My Braun was initially graded in 2002 - that's a long time ago. Why would it be subject to regrade if the case hasn't been tampered with, no sign of manipulation in any way, and it was there error in the data base compromise? Should they not have done due diligence at the initial time of grading? Isn't that why people have cards graded?

Maybe I'm missing something here. If a legitimate graded card owner simply wants to re-holder their card - which they pay for - why does it become questionable at all. Why not just simply re-holder the F'n card!

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by gonefishin

I'm glad you haven't had a problem.

I've never submitted a re-holder to PSA or anyone else. However, when the CS representative at Beckett told me that my card was subject to regrading it gave me pause. My Braun was initially graded in 2002 - that's a long time ago. Why would it be subject to regrade if the case hasn't been tampered with, no sign of manipulation in any way, and it was there error in the data base compromise? Should they not have done due diligence at the initial time of grading? Isn't that why people have cards graded?

Maybe I'm missing something here. If a legitimate graded card owner simply wants to re-holder their card - which they pay for - why does it become questionable at all. Why not just simply re-holder the F'n card!

Bingo!!! Someone who gets it!

[BobC]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

Bingo!!! Someone who gets it!

+1

If enough people got together to bring action against things like this, it would be very interesting to see how a TPG would answer in court when asked to explain how someone that they charged to perform a service could later be told that the work they had previously done was now no good anymore. In other words, the original service those people paid for is basically being deemed worthless by the very party that originally performed the service/work.

Would be interesting to then see these same customers now asking for their money back from the TPG, through the courts, since the TPG itself is apparently admitting their work and original assigned grades cannot be relied upon. Would love to see an impartial jury made up of mostly non-collectors weigh the basic issue of charging people for something that is basically not worth anything then. The snake-oil salesman aspect of TPGs, and what they actually do, would hopefully become even more apparent to the public at large, especially those in the hobby itself.

But unfortunately, this will likely never happen, at least not anytime soon. Too many people/players in the collecting industry, supported by their lawyers, have too much money and value tied up in TPG graded cards and the concept of grading to let this happen. But on the other end of the spectrum, not enough money and value is involved for any government to see a potential risk to our overall economy, and therefore be willing to step in to actually regulate and correct the issues we're seeing and experiencing in the collecting hobby today. Just look at what is happening in the crypto-currency realm today, and the number of people now being negatively affected (ie: the amounts they're losing), and how it is actually starting to impact some of our overall economy. And even so, the governments are still somewhat slow to start acting to do something about it, that they should have jumped on to do something about a while ago.

I can't believe I'm going to say this, but I actually have to applaud China and their central bank for refusing to accept or allow any transactions in digital currencies, and banning all digital tokens, such as Bitcoin, effectively making crypto-currencies illegal in China. Had the same previously been done in the U.S., there would probably be a lot more happy people around today, including the likes of Robert Kraft, Giselle Bundchen, and Tom Brady, along with countless others.

Having said all that, it seems the only real possibility for any true correction of abuses in our hobby can only now be achieved by those that are in the hobby (true hobby collectors) banding together to form an overriding group/organization to force the other players in the hobby industry to now abide by the rules that the collectors propose and set down, not the other way around like it has been for decades now. But again, as I said earlier in this post, that will never happen any time soon either as too many people have too much money/value tied up in their graded card collections to want to chance that being negatively affected by something like that. The parties that have stepped into the hobby industry to manipulate the people involved so as to make money, have at least done one very, very smart thing, whether it was intentional or just pure dumb luck on their part. They allowed enough of the profit being made from the manipulations and such in the hobby to also be passed on or pour over to many people that are actual true collectors in the hobby, and thus make them liable for personal losses if the hobby industry "players" were to suddenly become subject to rules and regulations they did not set for themselves. By sharing a little bit of the wealth, so to speak, they effectively protect and preserve their own way of doing things, and the control they have over it.

[bnorth]

Just in case anyone would like to read my PSA reholdering fiasco with before and after pictures.
https://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=323198

[BobC]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Just in case anyone would like to read my PSA reholdering fiasco with before and after pictures.
https://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=323198

Ben,

That sucks. And also, once again demonstrates the arbitrariness a TPG can exhibit towards their customers. How can they explain with a straight face that they originally graded a card a certain way (w/blue streak designation), then suddenly decide not to grade it that way (which they did with your card's initial submission), and then suddenly change back again to how they grade it (including the blue streak designation again)? That makes absolutely no logical sense, and appears to show how no one at such a TPG really knows what they are doing, and/or that there isn't any centralized, common order or control over how things are done, and absolutely shows their lack of any consistency and inability to accurately perform services they claim to be experts in.

Yet they had absolutely no problem or consistency issues in asking you for $25 for something they should have done correctly in the first place. Would love to see how a TPG would respond in court, under oath, if enough people having experienced the disregard and mistreatment you experienced got together and decided to take them to court, and ask for all their money back from the useless, worthless, and redundant services they were originally sold. Companies, like this, count on the fact that they are only getting $25, or some other somewhat nominal amount for things like this, and figure that no single individual will bother trying to go through the time and expense to fight them (and their corporate/business mercenaries....errrrr, lawyers) to try and get their money back. The trick is having companies like that, pissing off and taking unfair advantage of enough people, at a bad enough level, to the point that those people being harmed and taken advantage of finally decide to get together and do something about it. One can only hold out hope that that point is reached sooner, as opposed to later.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Just in case anyone would like to read my PSA reholdering fiasco with before and after pictures.
https://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=323198

This seems like a pretty simple case of PSA not being able to get their act together when it comes to the blue streak print variation. And it’s disappointing that they can’t figure it out.

Disclaimer: please don’t hate me for the following thoughts. I promise I’m not trying to suggest, promote, or celebrate the notion that PSA is somehow amazing and/or even merely competent.

At the same time, this specific situation seems to be less about PSA reholdering in general generating serious problems with potential re-grades, and instead seems to be more about PSA’s schizophrenic approach to this print variation, which happens to be wrapped up in a reholdering scenario.

[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...

[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.

[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.