PSA Grading really reliable?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by bnorth

They have been very reliable for me. Besides one complete debacle that after 3 tries they still mislabeled my card every time while charging me every BLEEPING time they screwed up. Seriously they have given me better grades on almost every card I have ever sent in than they deserved. They have turned many a $20 card into one that sold for several hundred to a few thousand. I have just been extremely lucky as I have only sent in cards through group submissions or had friends let me add a few cards to their PSA submissions.

You should also probably state the fact that you have only sent cards in for grading with PSA a handful of times at most in recent years. Because there is simply no chance whatsoever that you could hold this opinion otherwise.

[Zach Wheat]

These stories don't really surprise me. IMHO, it seems after their "new" standards came out, cards were consistently undergraded. More recent submissions have been more in line with what I anticipated, but still more strict than the "old" standards. Again, JMHO.

[Snowman]

Unfortunately, PSA has recently started giving high-end submissions to at least two of their newbie bulk vintage graders that have no idea what they're looking at. We're all used to 4s being graded as 2s by the bulk graders who stare at modern cards all day, but rarely did the high-end stuff come back with that much of a delta before. Saddle up folks!

[Kutcher55]

I would argue that PSA’s struggles with consistency is actually a good thing for the knowledgeable collector because it contributes to market inefficiency, which is the best friend of any discerning investor.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Kutcher55

I would argue that PSA’s struggles with consistency is actually a good thing for the knowledgeable collector because it contributes to market inefficiency, which is the best friend of any discerning investor.

I certainly get your point, but this philosophy just assumes that cards NEED to be graded (when in reality, they don't).

[Kutcher55]

I don’t think cards need to be graded. I collect both graded and raw.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Unfortunately, PSA has recently started giving high-end submissions to at least two of their newbie bulk vintage graders that have no idea what they're looking at. We're all used to 4s being graded as 2s by the bulk graders who stare at modern cards all day, but rarely did the high-end stuff come back with that much of a delta before. Saddle up folks!

I find it irresponsible that PSA would allow newbie graders anywhere near high value pre-war cards, which suggests, given current grading results, they are applying the same grading criteria to pre-war as modern. I am glad I no longer have the frustration that currently arises by their unprofessionalism, as I simply refuse to deal with them. And now that SGC is part of Fanatics, I worry about them going the way of PSA.

[Brent G.]

Like most companies these days, they have people who are good at their jobs and others who suck. I assume they don't fire many people and that there's a lot of turnover due to pay that's not enough for someone to live on in that region of the country. I'd say we'd be horrified to know the actual capability of the average employee -- it's a lot closer to McDonald's drive-thru than someone with a jewelry loop.

I only get autographs authenticated by PSA and grades from SGC. I assume the later will only get worse now that they're under the same overlord.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Yoda

And now that SGC is part of Fanatics, I worry about them going the way of PSA.

SGC is owned by Collectors (PSA), not Fanatics.

[GasHouseGang]

I look forward to AI machine grading that will consistently give the same result time after time and won't be swayed by who submitted the cards. At least I hope it will be transparent and much more consistent than hand grading.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

I look forward to AI machine grading that will consistently give the same result time after time and won't be swayed by who submitted the cards. At least I hope it will be transparent and much more consistent than hand grading.

Where's the incentive to regrade any existing slabbed cards by AI?????? Otherwise I feel the % of unslabbed vintage is small compared to the % already graded.

[Leon]

LOL...

But to the first question, are PSA reliable graders? PSA isn't a grader; some unknown person is. So, they might be reliable and might not be. Grades are only an opinion at that moment of that grader's mind. It could be a half a grade either way, almost every time. And many times, more than a half grade difference, on the same card (*and maybe by the same grader at a different time.) "Reliable" is sort of subjective.

Originally Posted by Snowman

You should also probably state the fact that you have only sent cards in for grading with PSA a handful of times at most in recent years. Because there is simply no chance whatsoever that you could hold this opinion otherwise.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Leon

LOL...

But to the first question, are PSA reliable graders? PSA isn't a grader; some unknown person is. So, they might be reliable and might not be. Grades are only an opinion at that moment of that grader's mind. It could be a half a grade either way, almost every time. And many times, more than a half grade difference, on the same card (*and maybe by the same grader at a different time.) "Reliable" is sort of subjective.

Oh, they're reliable alright. Reliably inconsistent. Resubmitting the same card 4 different times and getting it back in 4 different grades is... let's go with "informative".

[gregndodgers]

Vintage cards that were once graded near mint 7 by PSA are now 5.5s and 6. Terrible. Consistency is the main problem.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by gregndodgers

Vintage cards that were once graded near mint 7 by PSA are now 5.5s and 6. Terrible. Consistency is the main problem.

It's actually worse than that, unfortunately.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Snowman

It's actually worse than that, unfortunately.

I was going to say the same. Must be really confusing for newer collectors to see cards that have recently been re-slabbed into PSA's modern holders. "Why is there an obvious "3.5" in a slab that says "6"?