Is PSA better since Nat took over?
 

I’m curious what you guys think, I see no major differences yet

For example, we all know there’s still no FIFO policy, but this just killed me…
I sent an email to PSA general info email, asking if they would authenticate (or grade) backstage passes.

A few days later I got a reply that YES they would, and I could email the research team for more info on pop zero items.

I sent a detailed info w pics etc to research team and sent in my items.
Today I received a reply from Beth in the research dept…any guesses?
Well if you guessed she’d say “sorry we don’t authenticate those” then you win! Wtf??

Get yourself together PSA!!

TATs and getting scans with every order are the only improvements IMO.

Everything else is either the same or worse. The biggest decline I see since Nat took over is in shipping logistics. The time from popping to actual shipping is now taking a week (or more) when it used to be within 24 hours and the increased usage of FedEx is a huge negative for me.

No improvements. Grading is all over the map and quality control (damaged cards) is too high. Yes, I know they hired a lot of new staff during COVID, but that excuse can't go on forever.

[QUOTE=yoyosh;18727211]I’m curious what you guys think, I see no major differences yet

For example, we all know there’s still no FIFO policy, but this just killed me…
I sent an email to PSA general info email, asking if they would authenticate (or grade) backstage passes.

A few days later I got a reply that YES they would, and I could email the research team for more info on pop zero items.

I sent a detailed info w pics etc to research team and sent in my items.
Today I received a reply from Beth in the research dept…any guesses?
Well if you guessed she’d say “sorry we don’t authenticate those” then you win! Wtf??

Get yourself together PSA!![/QUOTE]

Absolutely not. And customer service and accountability was pretty horrendous before.

From what I see, it seems like vintage sports cards took a back seat to Pokemon and the modern card market. Call me an old geezer or whatever, but all I collect and submit are vintage hockey and the odd small batch of baseball or football cards. Feels like I'm at the back of the bus.
I want to be sure that only the most professional and senior graders even get to touch vintage, where consistency tightens up, and would like to see them be a bit stricter on centering for 9s and 10s. Just my personal preference.

Finally, it would be great if the graders and QA staff could differentiate between Topps and OPC. I bought a mislabeled 1974 OPC Bobby Orr last year (PSA 7) that turned out to be Topps. Had to ship it back. It happens way too frequently.

customer service is horrible, overall logistics are bad, consistency in grading is nonexistent, and yeah, they are really heavy on pokemon right now.

PSA is utterly horrible. Never thought I would believe in the pop control conspiracy nonsense, but their treatment of junk wax era stuff as if it was vintage 1960s and 1970s material is obscene. They have conveniently adopted the gem mint standards for 2020s Chrome and Prizm products for 1980-90s Topps and 1990s inserts. Although logistically understandable how this could happen, I'll grant that, it is a rather obvious and damning sign of total incompetence and a failure to understand the very material and subject matter in which they are supposed to be experts. They are NOT. They are a bunch of poorly trained, low income earning, mostly non-collector, non hobbyist 20-something-year-olds. And yet, and yet... I still want my PSA slabs. What the hell is wrong with me!?

Lots if not all is true and until their ROI becomes closer to the other MAJOR grading companies, BGS, SGC & CSG, they will have no need to change. We all know this and continue to submit cards to them. Why? Set consistency, registry completions, or and the BIGGEST of the three ROI!

I kinda fear where PSA is going. Zero accountability on the service they provide which isn’t consistent at all. There is no standards at PSA except that they will accept your money.

I think the company plays God with your cards when it should be following a simple process that has 100% integrity. It’s only a matter of time before the next PSA scandal happens or they have a class action lawsuit against them. I’m sorry, if you are showing any type of bias to a particular card, a particular customer, or particular company, it’s terrible business and corrupt considering the type of business you are in and the amount of people’s money you are dealing with.

I hope other other grading companies are intensely watching how all this unfolds and how to act as a business. If humans generally accepted variety and didn’t flock to a single God, psa would have equal ROI or less than all the other companies that grade cards. I’ve never seen so many purchase a slab name over the card inside.

I’m not trying to by biased in my argument here…I’ve only graded with PSA once In my life in late 2019 and received with a hint of everything but since then, I’m A- afraid to send anything else to them for reasons above, B-see PSA complaints much more with customers than any of the other main 2 companies, and C- see customers with zero service or group to turn to for their questions or complaints.

[QUOTE=miscus555;18728039]I kinda fear where PSA is going. Zero accountability on the service they provide which isn’t consistent at all. There is no standards at PSA except that they will accept your money.

[B]I think the company plays God with your cards when it should be following a simple process that has 100% integrity.[/B] It’s only a matter of time before the next PSA scandal happens or they have a class action lawsuit against them. I’m sorry, if you are showing any type of bias to a particular card, a particular customer, or particular company, it’s terrible business and corrupt considering the type of business you are in and the amount of people’s money you are dealing with.

I hope other other grading companies are intensely watching how all this unfolds and how to act as a business. If humans generally accepted variety and didn’t flock to a single God, psa would have equal ROI or less than all the other companies that grade cards. I’ve never seen so many purchase a slab name over the card inside.

I’m not trying to by biased in my argument here…I’ve only graded with PSA once In my life in late 2019 and received with a hint of everything but since then, I’m A- afraid to send anything else to them for reasons above, B-see PSA complaints much more with customers than any of the other main 2 companies, and C- see customers with zero service or group to turn to for their questions or complaints.[/QUOTE]

I stopped reading your post at the bolded. What does "100% integrity" mean to you, at a company thats completely built around one persons opinion in a :15 second window of time.

[QUOTE=The_Reverend;18727930]Lots if not all is true and until their ROI becomes closer to the other MAJOR grading companies, BGS, SGC & CSG, they will have no need to change. We all know this and continue to submit cards to them. Why? Set consistency, registry completions, or and the BIGGEST of the three ROI![/QUOTE]

I think if BGS could figure out how to scale up they could compete with PSA. Right now PSA only wins at ROI, which admittedly is the most important, which is what keeps them going. The main problem in the influencer era is that PSA is the only company that can crank out enough volume to fill up the hype.

Customer Service
SGC>CSG>PSA=BGS

Slab
CSG>PSA=BGS>Rancid Dog Vomit>SGC

Flip
BGS (gold or black)>Csg>PSA>SGC

Grading consistency
SGC>BGS=CSG>PSA

ROI
PSA>BGS>SGC>Used underwear from a thrift store>CSG

[QUOTE=anusinha;18728240]I think if BGS could figure out how to scale up they could compete with PSA. Right now PSA only wins at ROI, which admittedly is the most important, which is what keeps them going. The main problem in the influencer era is that PSA is the only company that can crank out enough volume to fill up the hype.

Customer Service
SGC>CSG>PSA=BGS

Slab
CSG>PSA=BGS>Rancid Dog Vomit>SGC

Flip
BGS (gold or black)>Csg>PSA>SGC

Grading consistency
SGC>BGS=CSG>PSA

ROI
PSA>BGS>SGC>Used underwear from a thrift store>CSG[/QUOTE]

I actually agree with your rankings aside from the slab and consistency rankings. PSA > BGS. BGS slabs are too thick and prone to corner chipping.

I also think the grading consistency across all companies is similar. PSA seems amplified but it’s due to volume alone. For the most part PSA gets things right (as do the others) - see crack and resubmit results for evidence of this.

I love the bgs flips with subgrades and the auto grade on front (when applicable)z is. My only concern with the bgs flips is the lack of consistency from card to card as to whether there’s subgrades or not, and sometimes the auto grade or subgrades are on the back rather than front etc. add in their different line of BAS grading and it’s a major turn off for me.

[QUOTE=anusinha;18728240]I think if BGS could figure out how to scale up they could compete with PSA. Right now PSA only wins at ROI, which admittedly is the most important, which is what keeps them going. The main problem in the influencer era is that PSA is the only company that can crank out enough volume to fill up the hype.

Customer Service
SGC>CSG>PSA=BGS

Slab
CSG>PSA=BGS>Rancid Dog Vomit>SGC

Flip
BGS (gold or black)>Csg>PSA>SGC

Grading consistency
SGC>BGS=CSG>PSA

ROI
PSA>BGS>SGC>Used underwear from a thrift store>CSG[/QUOTE]

SGC has been a better ROI than BGS for a good while now on most cards by a good percentage.

[QUOTE=anusinha;18728240]I think if BGS could figure out how to scale up they could compete with PSA. [/QUOTE]
Beckett's parent company owner continuing to have major legal problems:
[URL="https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=287772"]https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=287772[/URL]

Don't hold out too much hope for the company. I haven't really seen them do anything useful in the past three years.

SGC is #1
 

SGC makes them look foolish.

It is so obvious it hurts to see so many "flock" to them.

SGC rules. The smart money knows.

:)!

[QUOTE=vthobby;18729002]SGC makes them look foolish.

It is so obvious it hurts to see so many "flock" to them.

SGC rules. The smart money knows.

:)![/QUOTE]

I don’t think Nat trims cards to make payroll.

[IMG]https://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/3/9/0/4/2/5/webimg/1125510947_o.gif[/IMG]

[QUOTE=3124508 on COMC;18729034]I don’t think Nat trims cards to make payroll.

[IMG]https://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/3/9/0/4/2/5/webimg/1125510947_o.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE]

…..are you saying that’s Nats card, pre and post trim?

[QUOTE=vthobby;18729002]SGC makes them look foolish.

It is so obvious it hurts to see so many "flock" to them.

SGC rules. The smart money knows.

:)![/QUOTE]


Lollll SGC isnt #1 on this Earth or in 99% of the parallel universes.


You are right about one thing, though: the smart money is with SGC - I buy cheaper priced SGC slabs purely to crack out that cheap middle school dance rented tuxedo and replace it with the finest/purest PSA plastic.

Dat butter soft Italian leather

[QUOTE=ggxarmy;18728689]SGC has been a better ROI than BGS for a good while now on most cards by a good percentage.[/QUOTE]

I give BGS an edge because its easier to get a BGS 9.5 than it is an SGC 10, and BGS has the potential to get 10 Pristines and Black labels. SGC does have a better turn around time though, so for new releases SGC would be better before the PSA stuff starts rolling in.

Thread status: hijacked!
Congrats fellas!
I wanted to discuss how PSA has or hasn’t changed since Nat Turner took the helm but here we are discussion ROI of another tpg.
Blowout gon Blowout

[QUOTE=PSA2Pac;18729190]…..are you saying that’s Nats card, pre and post trim?[/QUOTE]

I think that’s exactly what I’m [I]not[/I] saying. :)!

To get back on topic, I'd say it's slightly better overall. You can't go anywhere from up really from the backlog nightmare. I feel like I can see occasions where they are at least somewhat trying to make strides to improve. Customer service has long been a disaster. A few weeks ago I called several hours after opening and to my surprise I was able to still get in the queue and they called me back within an hour. Months ago if you missed getting in line right when they opened, you were out of luck so I was slightly encouraged by that. They still haven't fixed my issue so that's no surprise, but it was at least easier to talk with someone on the phone.

My biggest gripe is the lack of quality control getting cards back with fingerprints, crumbs, boogers, fuzz, and plastic shards inside. It's insane to me that to get those fixed it takes 1-2 months. If they screw that up, I feel like it should be a week turnaround time AT MOST. They are authenticating ebay orders within a day, so there's no reason they can't fix quality screw ups. Those should be a top priority in my books.

I know we all voice our complaints here, but I want to encourage everyone to fill out their PSA pulse feedback survey every month. Who knows if it matters, but at least voice your concerns directly to them.

[QUOTE=3124508 on COMC;18729034]I don’t think Nat trims cards to make payroll.

[IMG]https://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/3/9/0/4/2/5/webimg/1125510947_o.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE]

--------------

Does his brother shill bid his consignments at auction? ;)

Where are the Nat nuthuggers? Everything was going to be rainbows and unicorns when he took over. :coffee::coffee:

Original post should read,

Is[B][U] Nat's PSA Collection [/U][/B] better since Nat took over?

[IMG]https://content.invisioncic.com/r255924/emoticons/jjj-laugh.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=3124508 on COMC;18729278]I think that’s exactly what I’m [I]not[/I] saying. :)![/QUOTE]

I’m an IDIOT.. lol I didn’t see the SGC portion clearly on the top part of the card. My apologies




I also apologize for helping to derail the point of the thread.

While I think PSA is clearly still the #1 grading company (it’s not even close lol), in regards to the question posed, in some ways it’s better but in other ways it’s not. It’s nuanced and not as easy as ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Overall grading times are down considerably at the macro level but digging into the details, there’s no reason items should be in QA states for weeks (especially for Express+ submissions). Stated TAT’s don’t have very much meaning. Some of the cheaper sub levels have seen lightening quick turn around, so that’s a good thing but there’s still no consistency.

Are the different levels in the grading process merely an administrative thing or do they really reflect what stage the card is in?

As stated, customer service is almost non existent and they have a long way to go in this area. No reason a company of this magnitude can’t straighten that department out. If there needs to be any extra hiring it’s surely there.

Logistics and overall work flow should be much more streamlined and customer friendly.


That said, there still isn’t a better option. (Shrug)

No.

They did hire a bunch to get the backlog down. I haven’t seen any improvements other than clearing the backlog, which a monkey could have done.

I'll give Nat credit that he did respond to me when I reached out via social media about PSA #@#@#@#@ing up a simple 1 card submission... but now I'm stuck in PSA Customer Service hell with no end in sight. Sigh...

No, PSA is not better for collectors, flippers, or the hobby as a whole. The PSA service level fees remain exorbitantly high (twice what they were in summer 2020) even though PSA increased capacity, and demand has dropped significantly since the Covid boom, which should have lowered fees for customers.

PSA's bottom line may be better, though. By shifting the "new normal" for grading fees, PSA is thriving off of morons who are spending nearly $20 a card to grade cards that aren't even worth $20 once graded.

Case in point: eBay shows about 3,500 2022 Topps Update Baseball cards sold via auction recently. Over 1,000 of those didn't even sell for $20.

If PSA actually gets back to the $10-$12 Bulk grading fees that Nat once mentioned, it will be a huge positive for the hobby and the company. Whether he ever follows through on that remains to be seen.

Anyone think it’s gotten better? Literally ANYONE?

No. Only an increase in grading inconsistency & card mishandling. Hopefully feedback and time will make things better.

Nat's (and Steve's) intention was never to make PSA better. They saw an undervalued asset and bought it knowing they could raise prices and do nothing else. Nat is not the hobby hero he is portrayed to be.

The only good is removing the backlog. The grading inconsistency and the quality control issues are in need of major improvement.

They're better at grading 100s of thousands of Pokemon cards a month.

Some things are better, but they still employ the grader(s) in the modern wing who kill every card in the order by 1-3 grades. Tough to trust sending large orders that could be dumped in their entirety by a single person. Most are ok—but these (potentially) few people are making the whole company look bad. Subbing modern cards should never be done with them until that issue has been confirmed to be resolved due to the high risk of seeing all your best modern 9’s and 10’s in 6-8 holders.

Also—what is with the holders for smaller cards that look wrinkled??? Is it an inner sleeve? This look is without question the worst looking slab in the hobby currently. It’s awful and not a good look for an “industry leader.”

[QUOTE=FT35;19112239]Some things are better, but they still employ the grader(s) in the modern wing who kill every card in the order by 1-3 grades. Tough to trust sending large orders that could be dumped in their entirety by a single person. Most are ok—but these (potentially) few people are making the whole company look bad. Subbing modern cards should never be done with them until that issue has been confirmed to be resolved due to the high risk of seeing all your best modern 9’s and 10’s in 6-8 holders.

Also—what is with the holders for smaller cards that look wrinkled??? Is it an inner sleeve? This look is without question the worst looking slab in the hobby currently. It’s awful and not a good look for an “industry leader.”[/QUOTE]

Could not agree more with both of your beefs. The 6-8 grades for cards that are clearly 8-9-10 in quality is maddening, and the wrinkled insert is gross. Been an issue of mine for years!

[QUOTE=larry25;19112299]Could not agree more with both of your beefs. The 6-8 grades for cards that are clearly 8-9-10 in quality is maddening, and the wrinkled insert is gross. Been an issue of mine for years![/QUOTE]


Yes! The occasional 6 or 7? Maybe I have missed something. Entire 100-card orders? There’s a fundamental error in the grading scale interpretation on a large scale.

[QUOTE=FT35;19112365]Yes! The occasional 6 or 7? Maybe I have missed something. Entire 100-card orders? There’s a fundamental error in the grading scale interpretation on a large scale.[/QUOTE]

Youve had nothing but 6s and 7s for entire 100 card orders?

[QUOTE=larry25;18727713]PSA is utterly horrible. Never thought I would believe in the pop control conspiracy nonsense, but their treatment of junk wax era stuff as if it was vintage 1960s and 1970s material is obscene. They have conveniently adopted the gem mint standards for 2020s Chrome and Prizm products for 1980-90s Topps and 1990s inserts. Although logistically understandable how this could happen, I'll grant that, it is a rather obvious and damning sign of total incompetence and a failure to understand the very material and subject matter in which they are supposed to be experts. They are NOT. They are a bunch of poorly trained, low income earning, mostly non-collector, non hobbyist 20-something-year-olds. And yet, and yet... I still want my PSA slabs. What the hell is wrong with me!?[/QUOTE]

I am with you.... They are clearly grading things grossly harder than before. paper cards being graded as coated/chrome ultra modern is INSANE.

They want to make the PSA 10 more rare... yet they have decades of grading history and standards backing up what a PSA 10 actually is.

Published specs and business practices for years and then changing them internally without telling the public is deceptive. This is a class action lawsuit waiting to happen.

[QUOTE=FT35;19112239][B]Some things are better[/B], but they still employ the grader(s) in the modern wing who kill every card in the order by 1-3 grades. Tough to trust sending large orders that could be dumped in their entirety by a single person. Most are ok—but these (potentially) few people are making the whole company look bad. Subbing modern cards should never be done with them until that issue has been confirmed to be resolved due to the high risk of seeing all your best modern 9’s and 10’s in 6-8 holders.

Also—what is with the holders for smaller cards that look wrinkled??? Is it an inner sleeve? This look is without question the worst looking slab in the hobby currently. It’s awful and not a good look for an “industry leader.”[/QUOTE]

Like what?
Not arguing, genuinely curious

[QUOTE=OPChockey;18727658]From what I see, it seems like vintage sports cards took a back seat to Pokemon and the modern card market. Call me an old geezer or whatever, but all I collect and submit are vintage hockey and the odd small batch of baseball or football cards. Feels like I'm at the back of the bus.
I want to be sure that only the most professional and senior graders even get to touch vintage, where consistency tightens up, and would like to see them be a bit stricter on centering for 9s and 10s. Just my personal preference.

Finally, it would be great if the graders and QA staff could differentiate between Topps and OPC. I bought a mislabeled 1974 OPC Bobby Orr last year (PSA 7) that turned out to be Topps. Had to ship it back. It happens way too frequently.[/QUOTE]

If you think that's bad, try sending in 1960 Venezuelan Topps.

[QUOTE=mc1;19112602]Youve had nothing but 6s and 7s for entire 100 card orders?[/QUOTE]

For 90s stuff thats entirely possible, they are grading those on some ridiculous scale where microscopic deficits will take 2-3 grades off a card. Then you see the same card graded 10 years ago in a PSA 10 holder with multiple print sports and white on the corners.

[QUOTE=mc1;19112602]Youve had nothing but 6s and 7s for entire 100 card orders?[/QUOTE]


No—entire orders where every card is 1-3 grades lower than they should be. 8’s in 6 slabs, 9’s in 8, 7 or even slabs, 10’s in 8 or 9 slabs, etc. It’s a grader who is misinterpreting the scale and under-grading cards that their co-workers are correctly grading much higher. These aren’t just dice roll “resub and see” cards—they are clearly high-grade examples that get dumped in bulk.

I don’t have a single issue in the world with a 6 or 7. What bothers me is giving them $19 to put a MINT 9 card in a 6 or 7 slab. Then having to crack it out and give them another $19 for someone else to correctly get it in a 9 slab.

[QUOTE=FT35;19113502]No—entire orders where every card is 1-3 grades lower than they should be. 8’s in 6 slabs, 9’s in 8, 7 or even slabs, 10’s in 8 or 9 slabs, etc. It’s a grader who is misinterpreting the scale and under-grading cards that their co-workers are correctly grading much higher. These aren’t just dice roll “resub and see” cards—they are clearly high-grade examples that get dumped in bulk.

I don’t have a single issue in the world with a 6 or 7. What bothers me is giving them $19 to put a MINT 9 card in a 6 or 7 slab. Then having to crack it out and give them another $19 for someone else to correctly get it in a 9 slab.[/QUOTE]

Youre assuming only one person grades each card and also that nobody is doing a QA check on each card to verify the grades.

When the WhatIf trick was working I saw numerous cards go from 10 to a 9 or a 9 to an 8 after the QA stages.

Is PSA better since Nat took over?
 

[QUOTE=yoyosh;19113140]Like what?
Not arguing, genuinely curious[/QUOTE]

The order processing speed has improved. I also think the stuff they’ve done with the app is a positive. Order notifications are nice to keep traffic off the site from people refreshing their order page for updates. The new “reveal” is a neat way to sort of add to the viewing experience of getting cards back. I like having images taken of the raw and graded cards. I also think releasing the grades earlier—essentially after assembly, is a nice plus.

On a lesser scale—I like the new longer boxes they put the slabs in. And—there are a few cards that are in different feeling slabs. Those slabs should be the standard. They feel slightly heavier and made from almost a softer feeling plastic. They don’t scratch as easily and I would think they wouldn’t chip as easily. You can see a full row of slabs on their side and easily pick out the ones made from the “new” material. Please make the switch to these for all cards!

Some good things happening. They just need to get everyone on the same page with their grading scale (in particular the modern era graders) and bring back a $12 under $100 level ASAP.

[QUOTE=mc1;19113588]Youre assuming only one person grades each card and also that nobody is doing a QA check on each card to verify the grades.

When the WhatIf trick was working I saw numerous cards go from 10 to a 9 or a 9 to an 8 after the QA stages.[/QUOTE]


I remember that what if trick too. BUT…the QA folks…Are these the same people who “verify”the same cards in 9 slabs a few months later?!

[QUOTE=FT35;19113609]I remember that what if trick too. BUT…the QA folks…Are these the same people who “verify”the same cards in 9 slabs a few months later?![/QUOTE]

Youre also assuming that a card graded a 9 is truly a 9 when perhaps it was always a 6. If it was initially graded a 6 and you crack and submit until you get a 9 or 10 then you got a grader that overlooked the flaws that made it a 6.

[QUOTE=mc1;19113694]Youre also assuming that a card graded a 9 is truly a 9 when perhaps it was always a 6. If it was initially graded a 6 and you crack and submit until you get a 9 or 10 then you got a grader that overlooked the flaws that made it a 6.[/QUOTE]


Comes down to this. It’s ok for someone who doesn’t grade cards for a living to know what a 6 looks like. I know what a 6 looks like. I might miss one every now and then, but I’m not going to miss them in mass. I grade too much to do that. Others might? Those new to grading might?

Let’s just say that I am that clueless and have no idea what a 6 looks like. So we can toss out my claim that I know what I’m talking about. The fact that graders in their own company can have frequent 2-3-grade discrepancies on multiple cards from the same order IS saying that there are in fact different interpretations of that grading scale. Call it “missing something” or whatever sounds plausible—the fact is, the variance is huge among the graders. Like a Toyota dealership not knowing the difference between a Corolla and a RAV4 with different employees calling each the other on different days. I’m sorry, that’s genuine failure and exclusively on PSA.

Best way to silence pop control claims is to put cards in the slabs they deserve. Get it right the first time maybe with an occasional 1-grade variance or margin of error. That’s completely acceptable, a 2-3-grade difference is not.

I don't have any good things to say about PSA under Nat, so I'm not going to say anything at all.

[QUOTE=FT35;19113502]No—entire orders where every card is 1-3 grades lower than they should be. 8’s in 6 slabs, 9’s in 8, 7 or even slabs, 10’s in 8 or 9 slabs, etc. It’s a grader who is misinterpreting the scale and under-grading cards that their co-workers are correctly grading much higher. These aren’t just dice roll “resub and see” cards—they are clearly high-grade examples that get dumped in bulk.

I don’t have a single issue in the world with a 6 or 7. What bothers me is giving them $19 to put a MINT 9 card in a 6 or 7 slab. Then having to crack it out and give them another $19 for someone else to correctly get it in a 9 slab.[/QUOTE]

You, sir, seem to know what you are talking about. Makes me think *most* other posters on here grade 20-50 cards a month, if that.

[QUOTE=FT35;19114256]Comes down to this. It’s ok for someone who doesn’t grade cards for a living to know what a 6 looks like. I know what a 6 looks like. I might miss one every now and then, but I’m not going to miss them in mass. I grade too much to do that. Others might? Those new to grading might?

Let’s just say that I am that clueless and have no idea what a 6 looks like. So we can toss out my claim that I know what I’m talking about. The fact that graders in their own company can have frequent 2-3-grade discrepancies on multiple cards from the same order IS saying that there are in fact different interpretations of that grading scale. Call it “missing something” or whatever sounds plausible—the fact is, the variance is huge among the graders. Like a Toyota dealership not knowing the difference between a Corolla and a RAV4 with different employees calling each the other on different days. I’m sorry, that’s genuine failure and exclusively on PSA.

Best way to silence pop control claims is to put cards in the slabs they deserve. Get it right the first time maybe with an occasional 1-grade variance or margin of error. That’s completely acceptable, a 2-3-grade difference is not.[/QUOTE]


Guys need to face facts,graders are basically min wage workers,same as the fast food workers.and we get about the same results.no secret PSA is not very good at much at all,but as long as guys still use them in mass they have zero incentive to change/fix the problems.if your submitting to PSA and complaining at the same time your part of the problem.as with pretty much everything the people have the power to force change,but very few have the will.

[QUOTE=Gary;19116365]Guys need to face facts,graders are basically min wage workers,same as the fast food workers.and we get about the same results.no secret PSA is not very good at much at all,but as long as guys still use them in mass they have zero incentive to change/fix the problems.if your submitting to PSA and complaining at the same time your part of the problem.as with pretty much everything the people have the power to force change,but very few have the will.[/QUOTE]


I disagree with this. When done right, PSA offers a pretty great service. It’s unique and valuable to a lot of people. I can’t change them, but would hope they use people’s feedback to shape the product over time. I also can’t speak for all, but I use them for many reasons. I also use them less than in the past for reasons I’ve stated in this thread.

I think there is A LOT of room for improvement at PSA, but there’s a lot of room for improvement in my own business. Sometimes when I hear feedback I roll my eyes. But if I hear the same feedback repeatedly, it starts to set in that a change should be made. We keep talking about it—you know Nat reads these threads, he’s a member here. Be respectful & be specific in both positive and negative feedback. It may just land in the right ears.

-Grading scale interpretation (especially with Modern) Old cardboard is imperfect—doesn’t always mean it’s flawed. Bubbles? Yes—flawed. Larger “pores?” Not a flaw.
-under $100 tier at a low price point—better yet read last 2 points on this list)
-keep going with the slab upgrades—better plastic
-dump that ugly baggie inside undersized slabs—don’t care if there’s a reason for it, rethink it so there’s not.
-rethinking/eliminating declared value system
-up charges…for the love…get rid of them. These last 2 add unnecessary steps to the process and unnecessary points of contention. All other companies do without. It’s possible—make it happen.

Keep the dialog going.

Ive personally never seen a 5/6 and after looking at it thought it should be 3 full grades higher. I have seen many returns where they definitely graded multiple cards one grade harsher than I expected. Ive also submitted many cards that I thought received generous grades.

It is hard to pin the inconsistent grading on just their graders. I keep saying their QA is also responsible for downgrading many cards and also for not catching cards that are graded too strictly.

.......
 

No they are not.

The operational aspect has improved 100%! Of course we all expect 10s doesn't always work out. I love the PSA ap we know so much more about our orders being processed. I love the pics after the cards are graded easy to upload to auction. Nat has done a ton of good for PSA. Everytime I have reached out to him on Instagram he has got back to me! Very impressive for how busy he is! True collector running the best grading company that's what you're looking for!

While they’ve scaled their operations, they haven’t been able to reach the point of $10 grading. That is a bit of a disappointment, yet part of it is still demand rather than PSA being able to make a profit at the $10 mark.

I sent in a raw 1991 Topps Desert Shield Chipper Jones RC to PSA. It was slightly OC, 3 corners had wearing, and the bottom edge was ate up. It got a 6, so I don't know how a modern card can get a 6.

The plastic baggie/sheet thing is still being used, so no

Regrading a 6 and getting a 10.

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmCiqoWiFh8[/url]

[QUOTE=anusinha;19124747]Regrading a 6 and getting a 10.

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmCiqoWiFh8[/url][/QUOTE]

This one strikes me as odd. He showed the original video in which he got the 6 and showed the card up close with the fuzz on the corner. When he displayed the 10, he never showed the corner to show the fuzz. And when he had the slab somewhat close to the camera, he had his thumb on the case in that same corner to block the view. So is it really the same card or is he just posting that vid to get more views?

I rarely post on videos but I had to try to call that out this time around. I am more so curious to see if it is actually the same card vs just calling him out. Just extremely how he presented it and comes off as shady without showing us it is in fact the same card with the fuzzy corner.

Edit: Neo cards did respond and told me to look at the card on PSA. I guess I can see it when zoomed in but doesn't look as prominent as what he called out in the original video with the 6.

Not to beat this horse, but i watched the video again and the guy said he shaved off the fuzzy part of it by running his finger over it. So yes, a card would most likely no longer grade a 6 if the card was modified. Silly call out video that really has no warrant I feel.

[QUOTE=anusinha;19124747]Regrading a 6 and getting a 10.

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmCiqoWiFh8[/url][/QUOTE]

This is nothing new. PSA has been slabbing mint modern and ultra modern as 6s left and right, and most of those could and should be 8s and 9s with apparently some 10s.

Bottom line, PSA graders can be 2-3 grades off any day of the week.

[QUOTE=thenightman;19122117]I sent in a raw 1991 Topps Desert Shield Chipper Jones RC to PSA. It was slightly OC, 3 corners had wearing, and the bottom edge was ate up. It got a 6, so I don't know how a modern card can get a 6.[/QUOTE]

A wrinkle is basically an automatic 6.

[QUOTE=anusinha;19113276]For 90s stuff thats entirely possible, they are grading those on some ridiculous scale where microscopic deficits will take 2-3 grades off a card. Then you see the same card graded 10 years ago in a PSA 10 holder with multiple print sports and white on the corners.[/QUOTE]

I love grading to see results, but the last few grading has put me no urgency to send anymore cards. The past orders, I've gotten N95s or the no grade because of size, or something altered. These are cards that are directly from me opening packs to boxes. The one that drives me nutty is 90s cards that I sent in after the pandemic, none of them ever got a PSA 10 yet on my modern I hit 80% Gem. If low pop, it likely will stay low pop. Until they go back to $9 to grade a card, no interest. Seeing my spending power grow is much better than wasting time and energy depends on graders good, or bad days.

[QUOTE=prospectorgems;19124774]This one strikes me as odd. He showed the original video in which he got the 6 and showed the card up close with the fuzz on the corner. [B]When he displayed the 10, he never showed the corner to show the fuzz.[/B] And when he had the slab somewhat close to the camera, he had his thumb on the case in that same corner to block the view. So is it really the same card or is he just posting that vid to get more views?

I rarely post on videos but I had to try to call that out this time around. I am more so curious to see if it is actually the same card vs just calling him out. Just extremely how he presented it and comes off as shady without showing us it is in fact the same card with the fuzzy corner.

Edit: Neo cards did respond and told me to look at the card on PSA. I guess I can see it when zoomed in but doesn't look as prominent as what he called out in the original video with the 6.

Not to beat this horse, but i watched the video again and the guy said he shaved off the fuzzy part of it by running his finger over it. So yes, a card would most likely no longer grade a 6 if the card was modified. Silly call out video that really has no warrant I feel.[/QUOTE]

literally explained this very clearly to where it's a non topic.

[QUOTE=prospectorgems;19124774]This one strikes me as odd. He showed the original video in which he got the 6 and showed the card up close with the fuzz on the corner. When he displayed the 10, he never showed the corner to show the fuzz. And when he had the slab somewhat close to the camera, he had his thumb on the case in that same corner to block the view. So is it really the same card or is he just posting that vid to get more views?

I rarely post on videos but I had to try to call that out this time around. I am more so curious to see if it is actually the same card vs just calling him out. Just extremely how he presented it and comes off as shady without showing us it is in fact the same card with the fuzzy corner.

Edit: Neo cards did respond and told me to look at the card on PSA. I guess I can see it when zoomed in but doesn't look as prominent as what he called out in the original video with the 6.

Not to beat this horse, but i watched the video again and [B]the guy said he shaved off the fuzzy part of it by running his finger over it[/B]. So yes, a card would most likely no longer grade a 6 [B]if the card was modified[/B]. Silly call out video that really has no warrant I feel.[/QUOTE]

wait, what? he didn't "say" he "shaved" anything. that's your wording... at the 4:40 mark he shows what he does. you're just being intentionally unfair due to some weird bias.

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kvJgpY7B80&ab_channel=NEOCards%26Comics[/url]

to then go on to say he modified it. you know good and well the card isn't modified.

the heck?

[QUOTE=prospectorgems;19124774]This one strikes me as odd. He showed the original video in which he got the 6 and showed the card up close with the fuzz on the corner. When he displayed the 10, he never showed the corner to show the fuzz. And when he had the slab somewhat close to the camera, he had his thumb on the case in that same corner to block the view. So is it really the same card or is he just posting that vid to get more views?

I rarely post on videos but I had to try to call that out this time around. I am more so curious to see if it is actually the same card vs just calling him out. Just extremely how he presented it and comes off as shady without showing us it is in fact the same card with the fuzzy corner.

Edit: Neo cards did respond and told me to look at the card on PSA. I guess I can see it when zoomed in but doesn't look as prominent as what he called out in the original video with the 6.

Not to beat this horse, but i watched the video again and the guy said he shaved off the fuzzy part of it by running his finger over it. So yes, a card would most likely no longer grade a 6 if the card was modified. Silly call out video that really has no warrant I feel.[/QUOTE]

Corner fuzz does not and has not ever warranted a massive grade deduction from PSA. The merit of the video is justified and fits in with other examples seen on this site and youtube.

[QUOTE=atk825;19124895]A wrinkle is basically an automatic 6.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Seems everyone ignores surface issues like these and claims those cards should be an 8 or 9. Most folks also like to ignore the back.

It seems the likely scenario was that it graded a 9 and was mis labeled/typo and got past quality control. Having a 9 flip to a 10 happens thousands times a day for modern at PSA.

[QUOTE=prospectorgems;19124774]This one strikes me as odd. He showed the original video in which he got the 6 and showed the card up close with the fuzz on the corner. When he displayed the 10, he never showed the corner to show the fuzz. And when he had the slab somewhat close to the camera, he had his thumb on the case in that same corner to block the view. So is it really the same card or is he just posting that vid to get more views?

I rarely post on videos but I had to try to call that out this time around. I am more so curious to see if it is actually the same card vs just calling him out. Just extremely how he presented it and comes off as shady without showing us it is in fact the same card with the fuzzy corner.

Edit: Neo cards did respond and told me to look at the card on PSA. I guess I can see it when zoomed in but doesn't look as prominent as what he called out in the original video with the 6.

Not to beat this horse, but i watched the video again and the guy said he shaved off the fuzzy part of it by running his finger over it. So yes, a card would most likely no longer grade a 6 if the card was modified. Silly call out video that really has no warrant I feel.[/QUOTE]
If "Shaving off" means a loose piece of fuzz falls off when you run your finger over it than guilty as charged.

[QUOTE=NEOSportscards;19125719]If "Shaving off" means a loose piece of fuzz falls off when you run your finger over it than guilty as charged.[/QUOTE]

Don't worry, his post says you "said" you shaved it off.

He's clearly lost all credibility and has some sort of vendetta against you. Jealously? Dunno ,but sure sounds like it.

It's good for people to question stuff he's not wrong I should I have shown the corner better in the 6 to 10 video but in the back of my mind I was like I did a 10 minute deep dive on this card when I cracked it but I shouldn't assume people saw that one. This is also why I record pretty much everything I can so I can always point back to it. No need to put words in mouth I say enough stupid stuff on my own.

In today's market $19 just does not make sense to me. Alas, volume persists.

[QUOTE=imbluestreak23;19125820]In today's market $19 just does not make sense to me. Alas, volume persists.[/QUOTE]

yeah i dont get it…. where are the 1.2 mill cards a month coming from? I get its half pokecrap, but modern stuff is either really rare, really worthless, or really condition sensitive, it doesnt seem like there would be enough cards to send in.

I used to send in 2-300 cards a month, now maybe 50 or so.

[QUOTE=anusinha;19125879]yeah i dont get it…. where are the 1.2 mill cards a month coming from? I get its half pokecrap, but modern stuff is either really rare, really worthless, or really condition sensitive, it doesnt seem like there would be enough cards to send in.

I used to send in 2-300 cards a month, now maybe 50 or so.[/QUOTE]

I don't either. The backhalf of the year so far has been the least that I've participated in the hobby since 2015. I don't know where the 1.2M cards is coming from, nor understand how people rationalize it.

[QUOTE=anusinha;19125879]yeah i dont get it…. where are the 1.2 mill cards a month coming from? I get its half pokecrap, but modern stuff is either really rare, really worthless, or really condition sensitive, it doesnt seem like there would be enough cards to send in.

I used to send in 2-300 cards a month, now maybe 50 or so.[/QUOTE]

I just wait for $15 specials and I still feel like I'm overpaying.

[QUOTE=anusinha;19125879]yeah i dont get it…. where are the 1.2 mill cards a month coming from? I get its half pokecrap, but modern stuff is either really rare, really worthless, or really condition sensitive, it doesnt seem like there would be enough cards to send in.

I used to send in 2-300 cards a month, now maybe 50 or so.[/QUOTE]

I am shocked as well. I was convinced last year it would have died down a bit, but PSA has been steady with 1-1.2 million every month. I was convinced SGC would need to drop their price down to $10 to keep up submissions. They have also been steady this entire time. Most of this stuff is modern and I figure we are past the "grade all rookie base" stage. I still see a lot of that and non numbered (even some which are) color from veterans being graded. Think Aaron Rodgers select parallel from 2022. Those can't be worth a ton.

I do think (probably wrong on this as well) that gradeable vintage is getting really hard to find. You need to buy out local collections off the grid to get them.

Lastly, I just don't understand Pokemon at all. 500 thousand in PSA and the bulk of all the monthly CGC subs are Pokemon. I get that it is a huge franchise. How many sets are actually released each year? Do people just grade the entire set? This is millions of Pokemon being graded each year. Is there really that much rare stuff being produced?

so ... much ... plastic!!