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

Curious if anyone else is getting his butt kicked on modern bulk submission from 1990 to 2010 or so over the last 4-5-6 months. My gem rate used to be 50% or more on most orders. Some random orders would be 10-20%, but for most of those, I'd also get orders that were 70-80% or even more. This year, just about every one of my twenty or so 25-50 card bulk orders are averaging 5-10%. I even had a few that went 0% or had that one single gem.

I know that grading standards sort of wax and wane a little bit over time--I've been doing this since the 1990s--but what the serious heck is going on here?

Am I alone in this? Or are others that deal in modern (not ultra modern) seeing the same thing?

YES. Initially it was noticeably lower for orders sent to NJ for grading, to the point that I could tell from the grades which facility it would be shipping from. But now it's brutal from CA as well. And not just less 10s, but 8s and lower as well. Someone on IG said they heard PSA was testing out computerized grading in NJ which may account for the harsher grades. If that's the case I wonder if it's now been rolled out to CA as well.

[QUOTE=hammertime;19864074]YES. Initially it was noticeably lower for orders sent to NJ for grading, to the point that I could tell from the grades which facility it would be shipping from. But now it's brutal from CA as well. And not just less 10s, but 8s and lower as well. Someone on IG said they heard PSA was testing out computerized grading in NJ which may account for the harsher grades. If that's the case I wonder if it's now been rolled out to CA as well.[/QUOTE]

Wow, that doesn't sound good. It hasn't just been noticeable for me, it's totally night and day. I don't exaggerate my % rates. I used to say I was solid 50%, but I tamed that down in my OP to say 30-50%. Literally now it's 5% on like almost 1,000 cards already this year. Brutal. Just not worth it. Not remotely.

It has indeed. I was always in the 75-90% Gem range but I have been below 50% in every order this year. In related news…my PSA rate has exploded. I’ve had more through 3 submissions in 2025 than the previous 10 years combined. Throw in my first 2 PSA 6’s ever and a lack of bulk specials offered, it makes me not want to play any more.

I dont do a ton of 90s stuff but that stuff has been getting progressively tougher for me as well. 10-20% gems if lucky. The new stuff is what gets me, I used to be 70-80%, now its maybe 50-60 with the occasional 20%.

At the mercy of graders also...A couple years ago I bought (100) 2004 in the Game Ovechkin pre rookie cards knowing he was gonna break the record soon for about $1.50 each...PSA 10s are selling around $100-$150....I picked out the best 30 and sent two batches of 15 of them in to PSA..First batch I received 13 !0s and 2 9s...The second batch of 15 which I got back last week was all 15 PSA 9s....that is all you need to know...the first grader actually graded them and the second guy just slapped all 9's.....There is no way that one batch was any better or worse than the other.

This for me as well and why I am keeping more of my 10’s and selling my non-10’s, especially of hard to grade cards. Their change to a 55/45 standard killed lots of cards that were actually submitted under the 60/40 standard.

I am done with submitting cards to PSA and my last submission was 2 years. New graders and new standards, no thank you, PSA. If I want a PSA 10, I just buy it graded.

[QUOTE=hammertime;19864074]YES. Initially it was noticeably lower for orders sent to NJ for grading, to the point that I could tell from the grades which facility it would be shipping from. But now it's brutal from CA as well. And not just less 10s, but 8s and lower as well. Someone on IG said they heard PSA was testing out computerized grading in NJ which may account for the harsher grades. If that's the case I wonder if it's now been rolled out to CA as well.[/QUOTE]

The computerized grading is my assumption on how things were progressing. It is the only way for PSA to keep up and moving forward with 1.3 million cards per month. We all know a large chunk of that is ultra modern and pokemon. Cards that they can blast through the process the fastest and make the most return.

Forcing all cards to be put into card savers is a requirement for cards to be moved through the machine process. They probably have robots picking up and moving card along an assembly line. The new centering rule can be adhered to since that is easier to calculate with modern cards.

For everybody who is screaming for AI grading, it is possible that this is a taste of what that would look like. Super enhanced computer imaging will pick up and knock cards down for very small blemishes which weren't really calculated in before.

This is all speculation of course, PSA isn't likely to come out and state changing standards, procedures, etc.

Although not exactly in line with the original question, I can definitely weigh in with my recent returns.

I grade mostly 1970's vintage cards, and have been doing so in bulk for the past 6 years. I have a very strict and thorough process where I pre-grade, sleeve, and place the cards into Cardsavers noting a 2 grade spread with a sticky label (so 7~8 or 8~9 etc.). When I begin to put together a submission I then pull each card and look it over again for anything I may have missed the first time, which does happen. Once I have the submission all picked out I will wait a few days and then give every card a third look as I input everything into the PSA system, just to be sure of my grading. Over the course of many 150 card bulk submissions, my grading has been pretty much spot on for every order. I will normally miss no more than 1~2 cards out of 150.

Having said that, on my last two submissions from October 2024 and December 2024, I missed 150 out of 150, with every single card grading 1~2 grades below expected. I even had one card which I had graded 6~7 come back PSA 2 MC!

I put it down to either new graders grading 1970`s vintage cards like 2025 chrome cards, or some kind of computerised/a.i. grading. It is obvious that they are using completely different standards than they have previously. (Just as an aside, I emailed PSA customer service about this, and received an extremely condescending email basically insinuating I have no idea what I am doing, and I am free top resubmit and pay again if I think PSA is incorrect......)

I have put a complete stop to any type of submissions right now, especially without any type of discounted monthly special. What I am considering is a small, 10 card submission at a higher service level just to see if that makes any difference or not.

As someone else mentioned above, this may have a dramatic impact on values of cards already graded. If PSA 10's on modern (or PSA9's on vintage) are going to be next to impossible to receive going forward, then existing cards could see a large jump in value.

Those have been my observations.

I attribute it more to the size of their grading staff, and the constant influx of new graders, than ai grading.

There's too much variance between orders for it to be due to technology (which should increase consistency). I've had more multi-grade bumps in the last few years than in the prior decade.

It might just be anecdotal with my personal submissions, but it seems like whenever PSA gets backed up - there's a much higher chance of a lower gem rate. Then when they need people to submit more, the grades tend to be more lenient. Not 100% of the time, just in general. I don't know why that would be - if they are backed up they give bad grades to temporarily discourage submitting, lazy grading due to a massive workload, new people who don't know what they're doing (we know QA is trash at PSA)? I have no idea why but it seems to go this way. I think one thing we can agree on is PSA is completely incompetent.

I don't mind waiting a little extra longer while they work through this backlog, but if PSA's new tougher mystery standards are permanent, then I will be cutting back on submitting since it won't be worth it.

Yep. I stopped grading with PSA about 3 months ago. There's no ROI anymore... and they aggressively do upcharges as if there is.

65% 2024 down to 62% in 2025 but low sample size. PSA still has many cards hostage

I don't have the numbers in front of me, but my gem % has been noticeably lower in the last year. My membership was set to auto renew at the end of the month, but I'll hold off until they run a bulk modern sport special, as that is 99% of what I submit.

I am 90% TCG now, but throw in a few sports here and there. Who are you guys grading with having made the change? I am not concerned about the play set issue with CGC, since they handled it. I like the fact their slabs are much better and their Pristine slabs sell for more than PSA 10’s if you can get them. At shows, they are viewed negatively, but on eBay they sell very strong.

[QUOTE=The_Reverend;19864917]I am 90% TCG now, but throw in a few sports here and there. Who are you guys grading with having made the change? I am not concerned about the play set issue with CGC, since they handled it. I like the fact their slabs are much better and their Pristine slabs sell for more than PSA 10’s if you can get them. At shows, they are viewed negatively, but on eBay they sell very strong.[/QUOTE]

In that big show observation thread, someone mentioned that CGC TCG sells well at shows

I got a membership for no other reason than to take advantage of specials. Now there are no specials...

I'll be switching to KSA. Incredible CS (with my limited experience), much less expensive, much quicker turnaround times, more consistent grading, and just recently they switched their slabs to (IMO) the best innocent industry. And they've been around since 1996.

The only thing PSA has going for it, besides the registry which I personally don't care about, is resell value. However with all of the bad press recently, I can see that changing like it did with the old industry leader, BGS.

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=anusinha;19864927]In that big show observation thread, someone mentioned that CGC TCG sells well at shows[/QUOTE]

I did not see that. After the order that just popped with my vintage, posted above, I am done for a while with PSA.

I had a CGC modern soccer order pop tonight.

30 cards only 1 got an 8.5, a lot were 9.5 or 10 and took less than 3 weeks for $13/pop. Very happy with results and grades were as expected.


CGC has taken over the TCG market and if PSA wants to keep messing around with their grading standards they will continue to lose business.

The only reason anybody sends cards to PSA is for their insane resell value, but that doesn’t matter one bit if your order gets slapped with a bunch of PSA 8’s which seems to be happening a lot recently.

I just purchased a lot of about 300 Pokemon cards that had a bunch of cards that I am going to send in for grading. I was going to send the bigger value cards to PSA and the mid tier cards to CGC, but now thinking that maybe CGC is the better play. I may still take a handful to Gamestop and see how that turns out. My recent GS submission went very well, 5 week turnaround and 11/14 came back as PSA 10. So may still test those waters, but still thank that CGC may be the best play based on what is going on with PSA right now.

I've never stuck to this, but the safest way to approach grading is to only target cards where the potential margin is worth 2 trips. If you're experienced, then that process should win out pretty well in the long run. For lower margin stuff, you probably need a contract/price break.

[QUOTE=waytoomanycards;19865457]I've never stuck to this, but the safest way to approach grading is to only target cards where the potential margin is worth 2 trips. If you're experienced, then that process should win out pretty well in the long run. For lower margin stuff, you probably need a contract/price break.[/QUOTE]

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=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]

All the 8’s are first edition team Rocket of popular characters and should break even on those. The 9’s should profit as a couple are 1st edition Alakazam, but it is obvious there is something going on with PSA and giving them more money to grade a card again is ludicrous. We shall see what happens with the next order.

[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.

I have one submission in assembly and the other went into grading. Both are TCG Pokémon. They are modern and ultra modern. I have no clue what to expect with PSA anymore and that is concerning.

[QUOTE=jimz;19875216]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.[/QUOTE]


What era? That’s low for ultra modern but a little higher for modern.

LOL, group sub with mainly new pokemon just pooped, 61 cards 5 10s.

[QUOTE=anusinha;19875607]LOL, group sub with mainly new pokemon just pooped, 61 cards 5 10s.[/QUOTE]

That's brutal. Did you check how the surrounding certs made out? My guess would be that the japanese cards gemmed and everything with nuance was torched.

Reminds me of columns Joe Orlando wrote about how tough it was to find qualified graders, and that was when they were grading a few hundred thousands cards per month. I don't think they've increased the pay much since then either.

[QUOTE=waytoomanycards;19875660]That's brutal. Did you check how the surrounding certs made out? My guess would be that the japanese cards gemmed and everything with nuance was torched.

Reminds me of columns Joe Orlando wrote about how tough it was to find qualified graders, and that was when they were grading a few hundred thousands cards per month. I don't think they've increased the pay much since then either.[/QUOTE]

hmmm.... dont have the slab numbers yet but good idea, ill check when I do. No japanese in this sub, mainly 2023-2024 stuff with a few older ones tossed in.


The ad they have out says they start at $17/hr in Orange County CA, where I think In-n-out pays $20/hr. Soooo...... yeah, that's who's grading your cards.

[QUOTE=anusinha;19875722]hmmm.... dont have the slab numbers yet but good idea, ill check when I do. [B]No japanese in this sub[/B], mainly 2023-2024 stuff with a few older ones tossed in.


The ad they have out says they start at $17/hr in Orange County CA, where I think In-n-out pays $20/hr. Soooo...... yeah, that's who's grading your cards.[/QUOTE]

Oh, I meant that the cards around yours may have been japanese, making the order totals look reasonable to anyone who might review them since those usually gem.

At most, that hourly rate is maybe $2 more per hour than it was several years ago. Now think about how many cards they grade an hour and how much more we're paying per card.

Here is a video I did with Custom data from Gemrate.com showing Gemrate %'s over time.

[url]https://youtu.be/FxHCJ8GUl1w[/url]

5/27 on ultra modern baseball. Seems like every paper card got an 8. Fricken looked like 10s under microscope. It seems like they don’t even look at cards.

[QUOTE=anusinha;19875607]LOL, group sub with mainly new pokemon just pooped, 61 cards 5 10s.[/QUOTE]

I am very afraid of this happening more frequently from PSA. Another way to decrease submissions of Pokemon is to screw people with grades. I know most of us knew how to look at cards and the percentages are becoming atrocious. As many problems as CGC and BGS have had, inconsistent grading WILL move more cards to them.

[QUOTE=The_Reverend;19875982]I am very afraid of this happening more frequently from PSA. Another way to decrease submissions of Pokemon is to screw people with grades. I know most of us knew how to look at cards and the percentages are becoming atrocious. As many problems as CGC and BGS have had, inconsistent grading WILL move more cards to them.[/QUOTE]

In my experience, PSA already has the most inconsistent grading. Seen too many 5s resubmitted for 9s and have 10s that should be 8s, at best.

Crazy how people put so much stock into what some random person (have you seen the requirements to work there?!) sitting in a dark room has to say about your cards. It wouldn't be AS bad if PSA didn't receive a multiplier based on the label.

Found a PSA 10 of a card that I own in a 9 (I'd argue my 9 is overgraded). Looked at the 10 and noticed it's in worse shape than my 9 (corners and edges). Guy shrugged it off and said "meh, it's a 10".

Prob is, we all know that to maximize profit you need the PSA holder, and no one is willing to take the first step (understandably) to go to another company to take the power away from PSA.

[QUOTE=The_Reverend;19875344] I have no clue what to [B]expect [/B]with PSA anymore and that is concerning.[/QUOTE]

The problem with the current collector mindset is everyone [B]"Expects"[/B] PSA 10's on everything. There are a lot of times where things get 10's and don't truly deserve it. Not everything is a 10. I do agree that there are inconsistencies in Grading. Right now I am about to submit one that was a CSG 8.5, then I sent to SGC where it got an SGC 4 grade, and going to submit to PSA to see what they say.. Its an interesting experiment for sure.

[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]

Got these back yest
[url=https://postimages.org/][img]https://i.postimg.cc/Y9g3cBWv/IMG-2275.jpg[/img][/url]

[QUOTE=halldogg;19876157]The problem with the current collector mindset is everyone [B]"Expects"[/B] PSA 10's on everything. There are a lot of times where things get 10's and don't truly deserve it. Not everything is a 10. I do agree that there are inconsistencies in Grading. Right now I am about to submit one that was a CSG 8.5, then I sent to SGC where it got an SGC 4 grade, and going to submit to PSA to see what they say.. Its an interesting experiment for sure.[/QUOTE]

Very interesting experiment. I never expect all 10’s and at time will put multiples in a submission that a couple are less than perfect to show the difference. Because I am mostly grading POKEMON, a 9 is not bad, but for modern/ultra modern getting 7’s and 8’s is a head scratcher. Vintage is a different animal.

Got hosed badly on my last two ultra modern sun after years of steady ~70% gem rates with occasional outliers above and below. If I hit 3 in a row I'll have to seriously consider whether the grading game is worth it any longer.

[QUOTE=MyckKabongo;19880156]Got hosed badly on my last two ultra modern sun after years of steady ~70% gem rates with occasional outliers above and below. If I hit 3 in a row I'll have to seriously consider whether the grading game is worth it any longer.[/QUOTE]

I have 2 in the final stages. It will be interesting what they get.

[QUOTE=FT35;19875400]What era? That’s low for ultra modern but a little higher for modern.[/QUOTE]

Modern/ultra

Not related to grading, but the rate at which PSA is mislabeling US issue vintage cards as Venezuelan issue, is going up. I've been collecting and grading Topps Venezuelan cards since 2019.

Thankfully I can email errors that appear on Ebay to my rep and they fix the pop report on the backend, but it's still floating around in the wild in a wrong flip.

And some of these are not small errors. This Mantle is a US issue Topps card, comps around $400. The Venezuelan Topps version in a PSA 3 is worth 10x.

[url]https://www.psacard.com/cert/105498114/psa[/url]

[QUOTE=here2havefun;19887074]Not related to grading, but the rate at which PSA is mislabeling US issue vintage cards as Venezuelan issue, is going up. I've been collecting and grading Topps Venezuelan cards since 2019.

Thankfully I can email errors that appear on Ebay to my rep and they fix the pop report on the backend, but it's still floating around in the wild in a wrong flip.

And some of these are not small errors. This Mantle is a US issue Topps card, comps around $400. The Venezuelan Topps version in a PSA 3 is worth 10x.

[url]https://www.psacard.com/cert/105498114/psa[/url][/QUOTE]

Good lookin' out. :)!

The worst part is that if someone buys that card for $10k, the PSA guarantee doesn't apply, as PSA will claim "Mechanical Error" and say that they can fix the problem by sending the card back in for the correct flip. Buyer is out $9600 but at least they'll get a "sorry for the inconvenience" email from PSA so that should make things right. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=inaka;19887418]Good lookin' out. :)!

The worst part is that if someone buys that card for $10k, the PSA guarantee doesn't apply, as PSA will claim "Mechanical Error" and say that they can fix the problem by sending the card back in for the correct flip. Buyer is out $9600 but at least they'll get a "sorry for the inconvenience" email from PSA so that should make things right. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]


If only the right person was on here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This doesn't directly fit the thread topic, but it's pretty funny.

[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMV0ki2GZwU"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMV0ki2GZwU[/URL]

[QUOTE=waytoomanycards;19887632]This doesn't directly fit the thread topic, but it's pretty funny.

[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMV0ki2GZwU"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMV0ki2GZwU[/URL][/QUOTE]

Crazy. Eighty-one 9’s came back as 10’s (out of 200)

[QUOTE=seanbros55;19887966]Crazy. Eighty-one 9’s came back as 10’s (out of 200)[/QUOTE]


There’s the missing 40% gem rate drop we’ve all seen AND some of the backlog problem! They are all there—you just have to resubmit and pay thousands extra just for them to put the right grade on the slab instead of having them accurately assess them as the 10’s that they are the first time. This guy had to pay close to $4,000 extra to get his cards in correct slabs.

This is complete BS.

[QUOTE=waytoomanycards;19887632]This doesn't directly fit the thread topic, but it's pretty funny.

[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMV0ki2GZwU"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMV0ki2GZwU[/URL][/QUOTE]
That video was wild. Thanks for sharing. :)!

I have long contemplated doing this and posting the data and what has held me back is the fear of retribution from PSA on future subs. May be time for a burner account....

[QUOTE=FT35;19888070]There’s the missing 40% gem rate drop we’ve all seen AND some of the backlog problem! They are all there—you just have to resubmit and pay thousands extra just for them to put the right grade on the slab instead of having them accurately assess them as the 10’s that they are the first time. This guy had to pay close to $4,000 extra to get his cards in correct slabs.

This is complete BS.[/QUOTE]

And you can probably take 40 of the 9's and get back another 15 10's on a 3rd try. I have said before, with PSA not having a 9.5 plus the difference in graders plus factor in how quickly these get pushed through the system. Add that up, it is a bunch of coin flips between a 9 and 10 on millions of cards. It is up to you on how many times you want to flip to see if it comes out on top.

I still to this day don't get the big price differential between a 9 and 10. There are a bunch of deserved 9's for sure. There are just as many 9s and 10s that look exactly the same. Even more when you consider the centering change now on 10's.