[QUOTE=mc1;19865493]If you can find raw cards that will break even at 8 and profit nicely at 9, then youve found a true winner. That way even if you get all 9s youve come out way ahead.

I usually get 30-50 % gem but once did only get one 10 out of about 15 cards. That was a rough sub.[/QUOTE]

It's always ideal to find clean looking older cards that fit those criteria, though it's also more time consuming vs seeking out ultra modern. However, the roi is usually better on the former. One year my gem rate was close to 100 on newer cards where I didn't settle for the first grade (usually a 9). And, to be clear, I resubmitted those to reward myself financially, not them, but the math for those cards made sense. (Incidentally, I haven't done nearly as well buying other people's 9's online).

Has your PSA 10 Gem rate for modern bulk submissions changed dramatically this year?
 

Hard message to us being sent by PSA. If you’re a commoner, your modern cards are 8’s. If you’re an enterprise-level submitter, yours are obviously 10’s despite noticeable flaws.

To those who love going through collections to find 10’s: The pristine cards we come across are just our imagination—they are actually 7’s and 8’s and we must be going through the wrong kinds of collections. 4SC? They are going through the right kind of collections. They know what they are doing, we don’t. They get the 10’s in masses, we get 2 10’s per 100 cards submitted because we don’t know what a 10 should be (even though we’ve been doing this for years).

Your perfect 1997 card can’t be a gem because it falls in the “modern” category. That same card with “2022” on the back? That’s 90% more likely to be a 10 with zero changes to the condition. The rules only changed for the commoners. The enterprise submitters can continue doing what they have always done and expect the same gem rates as always.

PSA grading is a joke. 3 orders
21/35 PSA 10’s on 1st edition Team Rocket submission before change
0/21
0/19
1st edition Team Rocket submission after changes.

I will not be sending them any vintage from now on.

[QUOTE=The_Reverend;19869994]PSA grading is a joke. 3 orders
21/35 PSA 10’s on 1st edition Team Rocket submission before change
0/21
0/19
1st edition Team Rocket submission after changes.

I will not be sending them any vintage from now on.[/QUOTE]

That's obscene, man. I'm really sorry to read this. I've had quite a few that are the same. My gem rate has plummeted from 50% on average last year to maybe 3% this year. And on several orders 0%.

PSA has to have their own internal numbers to see what's going on.

The question is, do they care?

Are cards 25+ years old considered modern? I would have never considered cards from 1975 as modern in the year 2000.

[QUOTE=larry25;19870260]That's obscene, man. I'm really sorry to read this. I've had quite a few that are the same. My gem rate has plummeted from 50% on average last year to maybe 3% this year. And on several orders 0%.

PSA has to have their own internal numbers to see what's going on.

The question is, do they care?[/QUOTE]

No.

They have more cards than ever coming in

[QUOTE=anusinha;19870286]No.

They have more cards than ever coming in[/QUOTE]

For sure and they extended the time and increased the price to get those numbers down. I don’t think a lot of collectors/investirs went through the COVID years. 65 days, likely more is too many to wait for cards. That number is likely to go higher with JT and DR cards likely ti be massive.

I have redirected some modern and will some vintage toward CGC. I know people blast them for the play set issue, rightfully so, but they are #2 in thE TCG space by a lot. They are not common, but Pristines have a higher ROI than PSA 10.

If you are grading exclusively modern, and your gem rate is ~60% or less, you are more than likely losing money and wasting your time.

[QUOTE=The_Reverend;19870459]
I have redirected some modern and will some vintage toward CGC. I know people blast them for the play set issue, rightfully so, but they are #2 in thE TCG space by a lot. They are not common, but Pristines have a higher ROI than PSA 10.[/QUOTE]

CGC is where I am headed also. Why not? $150 for the premium membership. You get the entire amount back as grading credits, then it's less than $11 for a bulk order. I think we definitely see some more of the market shift towards CGC in the TCG space and possibly a smaller gap between PSA and CGC normal gem mint 10.

[QUOTE=TXRunner;19870487]CGC is where I am headed also. Why not? $150 for the premium membership. You get the entire amount back as grading credits, then it's less than $11 for a bulk order. I think we definitely see some more of the market shift towards CGC in the TCG space and possibly a smaller gap between PSA and CGC normal gem mint 10.[/QUOTE]

Highly possible and for TCG They are solid. For TCG they also only made one label change, for the better.

About a 70% gem rate on my last several orders. No noticeable change on results over the last couple years. That said, I'm more picky than ever for what I submit, so it's quite possible they've tightened the screws a bit.

With current pricing and sluggishness of orders, I'll be throttling back the number of subs and quantity contained within each. Probably one ~50 card order every three to four weeks versus the two 80+ card orders I've been doing for a while. Most of the stuff I submit sells well but a lot of it really isn't worth the risk at $20 a card. I don't mind sitting on boxes full of likely gem Harper, Betts, Verlander, Pujols, Altuve, etc. refractors I got on the cheap. The stuff is only likely to be worth more in time.

[QUOTE=The_Reverend;19870494]Highly possible and for TCG They are solid. For TCG they also only made one label change, for the better.[/QUOTE]

This is true. I think for Comic collectors who collect Marvel cards, the label change would drive me crazy. Not matching comic labels is an OCD nightmare. CGC is doing well with Pokemon. I am a bit surprised that they are just nothing when it comes to sports cards. I get why vintage hasn't caught on. They get Broome from Beckett where Beckett vintage grading is crap than early returns from CSG grading were the same crap, so collectors just wrote it off. You would think they could have made some strides in modern shiny sports cards where SGC isn't as strong. Must be the label changes and shutting down the sports card division just told collectors to not take them seriously.

[QUOTE=Scottish Punk;19870517]This is true. I think for Comic collectors who collect Marvel cards, the label change would drive me crazy. Not matching comic labels is an OCD nightmare. CGC is doing well with Pokemon. I am a bit surprised that they are just nothing when it comes to sports cards. I get why vintage hasn't caught on. They get Broome from Beckett where Beckett vintage grading is crap than early returns from CSG grading were the same crap, so collectors just wrote it off. You would think they could have made some strides in modern shiny sports cards where SGC isn't as strong. Must be the label changes and shutting down the sports card division just told collectors to not take them seriously.[/QUOTE]

3 label changes definitely hurt their uptick in sports. My PC is in CGC and unfortunately I have 3 labels cards.

[QUOTE=The_Reverend;19865212]Just had a 21 card vintage order pop and it was crazy 8 city. The thing is, I sent similar cards in from 1st edition team Rocket before and got 21 10’s of 35 cards. Same quality sent. No way I all of a sudden stopped knowing how to look at cards. I have one more vintage order popping next week. I am done sending vintage to PSA. I WILL see how the 2 modern orders fair. I am holding off sending anything to them now.[/QUOTE]

CA or NJ graders? Seems like NJ grades vintage pokemon easier than CA in my limited experience.

[QUOTE=imbluestreak23;19870461]If you are grading exclusively modern, and your gem rate is ~60% or less, you are more than likely losing money and wasting your time.[/QUOTE]


Sadly this is true. Very, very unfortunate, as they are doing a lot of damage to arguably the hobby’s most popular era, but true. If a card is a 10, it shouldn’t matter if it’s modern or ultra modern.

I remember the days of a universally understood grading scale. You could look through your cards and decide whether you wanted them slabbed based on the grade they would receive—aside from a few surprises, we knew the grade prior to sending them! Now, you find cards to submit and have no clue what grade they will come back with. I’m only talking MODERN here. Ultra Modern can still get somewhat more predictable results. Now PSA decides what “non-10” grade they want to assign the card on a particular day, not what grade the card is according to the grading scale we’ve all used for decades.

[QUOTE=The_Reverend;19869994]PSA grading is a joke. 3 orders
21/35 PSA 10’s on 1st edition Team Rocket submission before change
0/21
0/19
1st edition Team Rocket submission after changes.

I will not be sending them any vintage from now on.[/QUOTE]

I’m sitting on quite a bit of 1999 and 2000 never-played Pokémon and have been sending in 20-card batches since 2017. My Gem Rates were always in the 60-75% range until this year. 3 straight submissions with zero Gems. Their change of direction is absurd. PSA will never receive Pokémon from me again. It’s going to be hard for anyone to take older graded 10’s seriously going forward. If those same cards are now 8’s why pay a premium?

I like to keep up w/the pop report of rookie QBs Silver Prizms.
Considering the prices of PSA 9s lately, we might just want to save our grading $ and sell raw!

[B][U]2024[/U][/B]
Jayden 12% gems
Nix 29%
Caleb 19%
Penix 21%

[B][U]2023[/U][/B]
Stroud 39%
Bryce Young 48%
Anthony Richardson 32%

[B][U]2022[/U][/B]
Kenny Pickett ZERO gems!!
Malik Willis 59%
Desmond Ridder 53%

[QUOTE=yoyosh;19873109]I like to keep up w/the pop report of rookie QBs Silver Prizms.
Considering the prices of PSA 9s lately, we might just want to save our grading $ and sell raw!

[B][U]2024[/U][/B]
Jayden 12% gems
Nix 29%
Caleb 19%
Penix 21%

[B][U]2023[/U][/B]
Stroud 39%
Bryce Young 48%
Anthony Richardson 32%

[B][U]2022[/U][/B]
Kenny Pickett ZERO gems!!
Malik Willis 59%
Desmond Ridder 53%[/QUOTE]

not a fair comparison tbh. This year prizm are notoriously rough in QC. That's why the premium for PSA 10 is way higher than previous years

[QUOTE=yoyosh;19873109]I like to keep up w/the pop report of rookie QBs Silver Prizms.
Considering the prices of PSA 9s lately, we might just want to save our grading $ and sell raw!

[/QUOTE]

If tcg submission levels had stayed where they were a year ago, we probably would have seen a sub-$15 sports special by now. We'd certainly have $15 specials. Not sure how much the bump to $19 slows that crowd down, but no one should be surprised if today's $50 ultra modern psa 10 is going for $30 or less in a few months after they clear their current backlog. And that's without a recession.

PSA has TCG by the boo boos. I don’t know why they’re cheaper to sub anymore.

[QUOTE=thenightman;19873612]PSA has TCG by the boo boos. I don’t know why they’re cheaper to sub anymore.[/QUOTE]

PSA has the whole grading sector by the coconuts. Until there is a mass exodus from them and an adoption of other companies, there will be no change. ALT, TCG Player, The Collector app and other price tracking platforms all use PSA as their default. Vendors will not touch CGC/SGC/TAG when it comes to buying. BGS is the only other grading company the vendors don’t sneer at!

Had a few orders with much better gem rates since I originally posted my concerns only 2 weeks ago. Not 50-75% great, but 25% on a few, which sure beats 0% to 3%. Thought it important to say something. So there's hope! ��

Some interesting things have been shared here, perhaps most importantly the various impacts of TCG on sports and the argument that they should be graded separately with their own graders, own standards, own rates, own building, own vault, own shows!

[QUOTE=larry25;19874281]Had a few orders with much better gem rates since I originally posted my concerns only 2 weeks ago. Not 50-75% great, but 25% on a few, which sure beats 0% to 3%. Thought it important to say something. So there's hope! ��

Some interesting things have been shared here, perhaps most importantly the various impacts of TCG on sports and the argument that they should be graded separately with their own graders, own standards, own rates, own building, own vault, own shows![/QUOTE]

Happy to hear about those orders. I have 2 orders there all TCG. ONE IS in assembly so fingers crossed. The other in research, but since 02/13. So it takes 2 months to research modern/ultra modern Pokemon?!!!!

YTD My gem rate is 42%, although I've only gotten 126 graded this year so far so the sample size is small. But 9s and 10s make up 80% of the grades I'm getting back so I have no idea what the hell is happening. All sports, btw.

I think it will be interesting to see how the sub I have in R&ID right now will fair. I subbed a 1/1 back in September that graded a 10, and this batch I sent the rest of the rainbow in to get graded. I compared that encased 1/1 to all of the other variations that I was submitting, and I [I]should[/I] have at least 14/18 get 10s based on how they look compared to that 1/1. One I absolutely know will not probably even get a 9 (retail rack pack that always seems to get surface scratches, and this one definitely has them), one I wasn't 100% sure of the back surface on (has what looks like some factory vertical marks, even though they are super faint - I have an SGC 10 of this version already in my possession as an alternate for it), and one that's just going to have to be whatever it's going to be (super rare, non 1/1 hobby version that I have the only copy I've seen in the wild since it came out in 2014, although I think I might have saved it from being an 8 as it had some stuff on the front that looked like a scratch, but ended up being.. something.. left by whomever I bought it from that thankfully rubbed off with a microfiber cloth). Hopefully if my ability to see the flaws on some of them compared to the 10 I do have, I'll have good luck with these and the others subbed with them that I'll be trying to sell, and I'm hoping that I won't be too surprised when it's all said and done.