My turn to complain about PSA - Davidson T206

[perezfan]

Anyone sending vintage and pre-war cards to PSA (and SGC) these days should expect a grade 2 points lower than in the entire history of third party grading. They've clearly moved the goalposts, and Collectors (the company) has now dragged SGC into this nightmare as well.

5 years ago, those cards both graded 5 or better. They have effectively rendered the Registry and Pricing Comps meaningless. Go by what your own eyes tell you.... not a fictitious number on a slab.

[Ludington1]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Anyone sending vintage and pre-war cards to PSA (and SGC) these days should expect a grade 2 points lower than in the entire history of third party grading. They've clearly moved the goalposts, and Collectors (the company) has now dragged SGC into this nightmare as well.

5 years ago, those cards both graded 5 or better. They have effectively rendered the Registry and Pricing Comps meaningless. Go by what your own eyes tell you.... not a fictitious number on a slab.

Great perspective… I just recently got back into collecting when my son found my T206 cards that I collected as a kid in the late 80s. We decided that collecting the Indianapolis pre-war cards would be a great way to hunt and not get caught up in the modern madness. The Davidson is the 5th of 5 players in the T206 set for us and we’re working on the Old Judge cards now. So the grade really doesn’t matter at all. Thanks!

Darren

[Ima Pseudonym]

Meanwhile, there's stuff like this floating around out there (this was graded July 2023) lol

[Ima Pseudonym]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Anyone sending vintage and pre-war cards to PSA (and SGC) these days should expect a grade 2 points lower than in the entire history of third party grading. They've clearly moved the goalposts, and Collectors (the company) has now dragged SGC into this nightmare as well.

5 years ago, those cards both graded 5 or better. They have effectively rendered the Registry and Pricing Comps meaningless. Go by what your own eyes tell you.... not a fictitious number on a slab.

I agree with you when it comes to modern grading vs. grading from many years ago; but for the most part, the wife and I guessed pretty accurately on most of the cards in my recent submission.

The only real exception was the 1952 Redman cards, which graded significantly below where we both thought. I was pleasantly surprised on the '55s, but my wife called those ones perfectly.

We both guessed 4 on Rucker because, after thinking about it, we figured the new grader would have the fact that PSA already graded it a 2 in the back of his mind and wouldn't go too far out on a limb to disagree with that previous grade, for fear of making a mistake.

The biggest problem with grading is that its all completely subjective, and the standards vary greatly from one grader to the next. They're like MLB umpires -- some are pretty good at adhering to the standards, while others are Angel Hernandez.

[hammertime]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Anyone sending vintage and pre-war cards to PSA (and SGC) these days should expect a grade 2 points lower than in the entire history of third party grading. They've clearly moved the goalposts, and Collectors (the company) has now dragged SGC into this nightmare as well.

5 years ago, those cards both graded 5 or better. They have effectively rendered the Registry and Pricing Comps meaningless. Go by what your own eyes tell you.... not a fictitious number on a slab.

Completely agree!

[YankeeCollector]

Originally Posted by perezfan

anyone sending vintage and pre-war cards to psa (and sgc) these days should expect a grade 2 points lower than in the entire history of third party grading. They've clearly moved the goalposts, and collectors (the company) has now dragged sgc into this nightmare as well.

5 years ago, those cards both graded 5 or better. They have effectively rendered the registry and pricing comps meaningless. Go by what your own eyes tell you.... Not a fictitious number on a slab.

100%

[Beercan collector]

The card companies are getting us trained - we’re trying to figure out why a card is a PSA 2 - light discoloration ? Tiny print dots ? Hidden wrinkles ?
Microscopic surface wear ? Imperfect centering ? registration ? These are all the things that used to be (& should be) allowed on 5s .. even 6s

[mantleman]

Here is a 1967 "Topps" Mantle graded a PSA 6 with very obvious paper loss on the reverse.

I say "Topps" because the card is actually an O-pee-chee, so it was mislabeled as well.....lol.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by mantleman

Here is a 1967 "Topps" Mantle graded a PSA 6 with very obvious paper loss on the reverse.

I say "Topps" because the card is actually an O-pee-chee, so it was mislabeled as well.....lol.

Guessing this is an old label/grade?

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Guessing this is an old label/grade?

Probably. But even if it is, there's still no justification. Why the need to "move the goalposts" 2 full points in recent years?

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Probably. But even if it is, there's still no justification. Why the need to "move the goalposts" 2 full points in recent years?

Oh I agree with you there. My thought is there must have been some sort of formal or informal decision when cards flooded in during the pandemic to say we need to be harder on grades so we don’t water down mid and high end grades too much. 2 grade points is being generous to the change. Feels like they have moved the goal post 2.5-3 grades down.

[mantleman]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Probably. But even if it is, there's still no justification. Why the need to "move the goalposts" 2 full points in recent years?

Yes, it was an old label!

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Beercan collector

The card companies are getting us trained - we’re trying to figure out why a card is a PSA 2 - light discoloration ? Tiny print dots ? Hidden wrinkles ?
Microscopic surface wear ? Imperfect centering ? registration ? These are all the things that used to be (& should be) allowed on 5s .. even 6s

The only counterpoint to this line of thinking is the frenzy that comes when a buyer around here is trying to negotiate a lower price on something in the BST. The mountain of defects they can suddenly identify in pursuit of that lower price is a real miracle to behold, even on cards that are seemingly pristine.

For that matter, a similar dynamic plays out when we are suspicious that a card has been overgraded or a submitter is getting preferential treatment from the grading companies.

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by raulus

The only counterpoint to this line of thinking is the frenzy that comes when a buyer around here is trying to negotiate a lower price on something in the BST. The mountain of defects they can suddenly identify in pursuit of that lower price is a real miracle to behold, even on cards that are seemingly pristine.

For that matter, a similar dynamic plays out when we are suspicious that a card has been overgraded or a submitter is getting preferential treatment from the grading companies.

When they go to sell that same card later, I wonder how many of those defects are mentioned in the sales post.

"...see pictures for condition..."

[toledo_mudhen]

Originally Posted by Beercan collector

The card companies are getting us trained - we’re trying to figure out why a card is a PSA 2 - light discoloration ? Tiny print dots ? Hidden wrinkles ?
Microscopic surface wear ? Imperfect centering ? registration ? These are all the things that used to be (& should be) allowed on 5s .. even 6s

Yep

[YankeeCollector]

I have come to the point that PSA should only label cards as

Authentic - Let eye appeal determine the price.
Authentic Altered
Not Authentic

Their grading 1-10 sucks and is inconsistent. Their numbers mean absolutely nothing. There are 5s that should be 2s and 2s that should be 5s. Its a joke!
When you pay so much $$ for a grade, they owe a duty to the customer to fairly assess the card. They are cocky, careless and wildly inconsistent.

And now a monopoly since they bought SGC.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by YankeeCollector

I have come to the point that PSA should only label cards as

Authentic - Let eye appeal determine the price.
Authentic Altered
Not Authentic

Their grading 1-10 sucks and is inconsistent. Their numbers mean absolutely nothing. There are 5s that should be 2s and 2s that should be 5s. Its a joke!
When you pay so much $$ for a grade, they owe a duty to the customer to fairly assess the card. They are cocky, careless and wildly inconsistent.

And now a monopoly since they bought SGC.

Could not agree more (with every point you made).