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

[FT35]

Originally Posted by bub838

I've been around 70% and that hasn't changed with recent subs. I don't use a loupe and I'm lenient with what I'll send in.

Ultra modern? Or pre-2010 ish?

[bub838]

Originally Posted by FT35

Ultra modern? Or pre-2010 ish?

Ultra modern, I should have noted that.

[ahbaker]

Originally Posted by DaBaddestHic

I just got back the grades for my first ever solo submission to PSA (or any grading company). I've done a few group orders before through BGS, and sent some cards to PSA through nashville sports cards a few years ago.

I sent in 12 cards for value bulk. 11 mint, 1 gem. Not great.

To compare, the five cards I sent in a few years ago came back 3 gems, 1 mint, and one near mint. The 8 being a cryotocurrency card from 2018 A&G X, which is a tough card to grade.

Look, I'm a realist. I didn't expect 12 gems. And I tried to be cautious. I listened to advice to only submit cards that were worth at least $100 as a 9, so that saves me some. But a 8% gem rate is still really bad.

I'm obviously not a seasoned grader, but I spent a lot of time picking out cards, researching their sale prices in 9/10 grades, and then examining them for flaws. I think I rejected around 10 of the cards I originally picked out for flaws myself. Pretty much, I refused to send in anything I could see a flaw in, as I expected PSA would find things I didn't, and I didn't want two or more strikes against a card. The one exception was a 2015 Topps Chrome Update black refractor of Francisco Lindor that I knew was off center but I still wanted slabbed.

The best thing I can think is that the new stricter centering standards really hurt me. A lot of my cards were on the edge of 55/45, at least the best I could tell. Which sucks, because if I'd sent these cards in last year I might have done better.

This was mainly an experiment to see if grading was worth my time. And with these results, it's not. I don't have a lot of free time these days, and I sunk a lot into doing this submission. I had two cards I didn't send in because they would need a higher grading level and I didn't want to pay that until I saw how I did with the other cards. Might as well just assume those would be 9s as well and not bother lol.

In the end, I don't even like grading that much. As in, I buy raw cards for my PC in most cases. And I prefer BGS cases if I have to have a slab, and having subgrades, but that's a waste of money these days. I only graded these cards because I wanted to sell some of them and didn't want to leave money on the table. Maybe a 9 still sells better than a raw in some cases, and at least I don't have to deal with people complaining about condition later. But having my cards held up at PSA for 3-4 months is bad too.

Overall, 1/10 experience. I'll leave grading to you experts with the 50% gem rates. I'm pretty much out of cards worth sending in now anyway haha.

Similar experience.

I'm not a pro but have learned a lot and started getting a good gem rate with the other companies. I normally *buy* PSA slabs because I don't agree with upcharges just because my card received a certain grade. But they sent a $50 coupon and I had a specific card from the 2003 40 Man set from Upper Deck that hasn't hit the market in 5 years... figured why not.

Pulled the card and couldn't find a single blemish. The card was a Pop 8, all 10s..... I got a 9.

Centering is the only thing that I can think of. (Even though I have other cards from this set in PSA 10 that are identical)

[gowizards0]

Originally Posted by hausem06

I usually mail my submissions and they go to California. This time I dropped my sub off at a show directly to PSA and it went to New Jersey. Got beat up. Went 9/20 on 10’s. Even got a PSA 6.

I’m usually 70-90% 10’s

Never dropping my sub at a show again. I’ll take my chances at the California PSA site.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was going to do drop off at CSA show for my next sub, now thinking twice about it

I just had a 'successful' sub from California, not sure if I want to test new jersey

[yoyosh]

8 card ultra modern sub just popped, not a 10 in the bunch.

All cards checked under magnification for surface issues and wiped w microfiber cloth.
All cards measured with centering tool.

PSA gon’ PSA

[Blake050]

Originally Posted by yoyosh

8 card ultra modern sub just popped, not a 10 in the bunch.

All cards checked under magnification for surface issues and wiped w microfiber cloth.
All cards measured with centering tool.

PSA gon’ PSA

Wow, I'm sorry. Is there any indication if they went to Cali or NJ for grading?

[f2tornado]

Will see how my next order goes which should pop in couple of weeks. It seems like I've been hitting 75% on most orders. I do use the loupe but not on every card. It comes in most handy for paper. I'm picky but not afraid to submit a card that I perceive as 50/50 between a 9 and 10.

[metsandweezer]

Last order was 47%. Most recent ultra modern bulk order today was 29/32 (90%). Similar cards in both orders. PSA is clueless as always.

[thewesdub]

In April and May my gem rate dropped below 50% for UM over about 30ish submissions. This month has seen a dramatic uptick and I'm hovering back around 80-85% on the last 10 orders.

I'd like to re-sub a lot of those April and May cards to see how they'd do now.

[cardmike]

Originally Posted by metsandweezer

Last order was 47%. Most recent ultra modern bulk order today was 29/32 (90%). Similar cards in both orders. PSA is clueless as always.

Are you going to resubmit cards from the 47% order? Sounds like they might be over correcting in the other direction now. But it's PSA and inconsistency is maddening.

[newfiesig]

Ok, so fairly obvious that PSA is currently tougher on modern and/or higher grades. But what about vintage or grades 8 and below. Any noticeable changes?

[thenightman]

Originally Posted by cardmike

Are you going to resubmit cards from the 47% order? Sounds like they might be over correcting in the other direction now. But it's PSA and inconsistency is maddening.

If they’re overcorrecting I’d like that as they currently have 3 orders from me in their pipeline.

[The_Reverend]

Originally Posted by yoyosh

8 card ultra modern sub just popped, not a 10 in the bunch.

All cards checked under magnification for surface issues and wiped w microfiber cloth.
All cards measured with centering tool.

PSA gon’ PSA

That is crazy. The more bad grades that people get, will that reduce graders willingness to use them? PSA seems to be doing something strange. I know you have a great pre-grade, looking at your history of grades you have posted about.

[The_Reverend]

Originally Posted by thenightman

If they’re overcorrecting I’d like that as they currently have 3 orders from me in their pipeline.

I have three in the queue as well:

One in the last phase
One in grading
One in assembly

[yoyosh]

Originally Posted by yoyosh

8 card ultra modern sub just popped, not a 10 in the bunch.

All cards checked under magnification for surface issues and wiped w microfiber cloth.
All cards measured with centering tool.

PSA gon’ PSA

6 cards in another sub, 1 Gem. Again all cards ultra modern and checked under magnification for surface issues and wiped.
I've reduced spending on wax by a about 75% since 2020, guess grading is next!

[DaBaddestHic]

Originally Posted by The_Reverend

That is crazy. The more bad grades that people get, will that reduce graders willingness to use them? PSA seems to be doing something strange. I know you have a great pre-grade, looking at your history of grades you have posted about.

I'm insignificant to PSA but I certainly am in no rush to send them anymore cards. I haven't even recouped my grading fees from my submission in March yet, which would have been a lot easier to do with just a few more gems.

Then I saw an article yesterday talking about PSA's numbers through June and that sports cards had a 34% rate. Just pissed me off even more haha.

But alas, as I said, I'm insignificant. For people that make a living off of grading/selling cards I don't see them stopping. What are their other options? Personally I prefer BGS, but that's just leaving money on the table unless you can get a pristine. And that's harder than gemming with PSA...

[88horsepower]

I have been subbing and collecting with PSA since the 2010s and I'm at a point where I am strongly considering turning away from PSA altogether. I also used to get a much higher Gem rate on my modern 80s and 90s orders. These days, it's far less certain. I am not a flipper, I'm a collector. That said, when it's already very expensive to keep up with the sets I started years ago, it's made even more challenging when cards I feel should be 10s come back 9s and that has happened quite a bit in the last three years since the pandemic.

To be clear, I don't expect all of my cards to grade 10s. In fact, I send some cards from sets that I am not as familiar with to test the waters before committing to a set and have almost no expectations for what grades come back. Sometimes I send cards knowing they will 9 to see if they will grade a 10. But there is a cache of cards throughout the years where I fully expect a strong gem rate and find myself totally at a loss for words when almost all of them come back 9s, or even worse in some rare cases.

It has gotten to a point where I have abandoned working on some sets because PSA seems to refuse to grade cards a PSA 10 anymore. 1990 Pro Set, 1987 Donruss, 1987 Donruss Rookies, 1988 Donruss Rookies, 1989 Donruss Rookies, 1992 Pinnacle, just to name a few. And while the crack and re-sub game is real (that Pokémon video posted earlier is a chilling example) some of us cannot afford to keep sending back 9s at $20 a card plus shipping.

These are all from a recent PSA order from late in 2024. I bought a 15-set case of 1987 Donruss Rookies at a card show. It's a set I've been passionate about collecting. I have about a 1/3 of the set in PSA 10s and had past success with grading these and getting a strong 10 rate. In fact, last year I sent a single card from this set that I plucked off of COMC because of how well it presented and received a PSA 10. In the aforementioned sub from late in 2024, despite exhaustive research, checking under a loupe, using a centering program, wiping the surface of any particles (common for 1987 Donruss Rookies sets), not a single card in the order came back a 10. These were just a handful of the cards from that order, and despite my best effort to re-check the cards, I still cannot see what's wrong with them.











This experience with PSA is one of many where I have all but abandoned projects, which means PSA loses my potential money from those sets. We're talking thousands upon thousands of dollars that PSA won't be getting from me. Perhaps its sounds juvenile, but I'm rather grief-stricken about this, as collecting and grading has been such a joy for such a long time now. But experiences like the ones I described are taking the fun out of it. I used to get excited for my PSA orders to pop. Now, I brace for impact and the cumulation of those experiences may result in me terminating my membership with them. It's not fun anymore.

[larry25]

It's called pop control. They don't want to give out 10s anymore on older sets because they want them to appear rare, even though they obviously aren't.

It's also called incompetence. PSA judges these cards compared to 2025 laser prizm chrome metal perfect off the line cards.

Sorry for your suffering, but it's very much of a refrain here that PSA has totally lost so many of us who love our 80s and 90s cards.

A part of me wishes they actually cared, but that's a farce. They are grading MILLIONS of cards every single month that were literally printed just a few months ago.

[Scottish Punk]

Those cards look perfect. I agree with larry25, probably don't want to hand out 10's unless you are a special member. I also wonder if they are using super high res scans that pick up a minute scratch or something. Even then, cards deserve a 10 if that is all that is wrong.

[RKH916]

Pop control is real. Just look at Jordan insert #'s.

[Ehawk89]

Pop control is definitely real when it comes to modern cards too.

Just got back an order back where the most expensive cards in the order were 9'd and looked perfect including a Caleb Williams silver prism.

[88horsepower]

I have a hard time believing that Nat Turner is telling Ryan Hoge to send lists of what sets and cards to create population control with. That’s just too much tinfoil hat wearing for me. I’m far more likely to believe that graders are being rushed into the assembly line and are hastily grading without adequate training. I also believe that certain players, like Michael Jordan, have far more people sending his cards with less scrutiny before submitting them, hoping to cash in, hence more sub-Gem grades.

[larry25]

Originally Posted by 88horsepower

I have a hard time believing that Nat Turner is telling Ryan Hoge to send lists of what sets and cards to create population control with. That’s just too much tinfoil hat wearing for me. I’m far more likely to believe that graders are being rushed into the assembly line and are hastily grading without adequate training. I also believe that certain players, like Michael Jordan, have far more people sending his cards with less scrutiny before submitting them, hoping to cash in, hence more sub-Gem grades.

I think it's more these inexperienced graders getting schooled in essentially perfectly printed ultra modern base and chrome and prism cards and then taking those standards to the older stuff, which was never remotely that sharp and clean. It's still pop control in this sense, or bias, no tin foil hat needed.

[inaka]

Originally Posted by 88horsepower

I have a hard time believing that Nat Turner is telling Ryan Hoge to send lists of what sets and cards to create population control with. That’s just too much tinfoil hat wearing for me. I’m far more likely to believe that graders are being rushed into the assembly line and are hastily grading without adequate training. I also believe that certain players, like Michael Jordan, have far more people sending his cards with less scrutiny before submitting them, hoping to cash in, hence more sub-Gem grades.

When you think about it, the pop control stage is already built into the system we know about. It would be the same system that flags cards for uncharges.

PSA already does an upcharge check, so it would be simple for them to flag cards that are graded a PSA 10 (like the 100% most definitely pop controlled Rickey Henderson 1980 Topps #482 for example.) If any grader gives this card a PSA 10, instead of just sending the standard upcharge email to the customer, it is then sent to a senior grader for review, who re-evaluates it, and (shocker) it gets a PSA 9. The original grader would never even know about it, or know any pop controlled aspect of their job. They don't need to.

Look at the number of times a card gets a PSA 9 vs a PSA 10. That's the 9/10 ratio, and it dismisses the any theory that people are just sending in any old junk card in hopes of a PSA 10, because MINT vs. GEM MINT is such a fine line in grading. If cards from the same set have wildly different 9/10 ratios only for the most coveted cards, you can pretty much assume correctly that it's pop controlled.

This video is old, and I'm sure may here have seen it, but this video breaks things down as clear as day that pop control is a real thing:



Pop control is most definitely a real thing. No doubt about it.

[88horsepower]

Originally Posted by larry25

I think it's more these inexperienced graders getting schooled in essentially perfectly printed ultra modern base and chrome and prism cards and then taking those standards to the older stuff, which was never remotely that sharp and clean. It's still pop control in this sense, or bias, no tin foil hat needed.

This is where we're in agreement. I do think it's a lack of proper training with inexperienced graders not properly discerning the nuances that each set has. No grader can grade 1987 Donruss Rookies the same as 2024 Prizm. I don't think all graders suffer from this, but considering how slammed PSA got after the pandemic, an issue they still have not consistently been able to handle, I would bet that the process to get graders on the assembly line has been faster than the ideal and that a lack of training, and a rush to get cards graded, creates all kinds of problems.


And, at the end of the day, we're talking about the human element of it all. Humans make mistakes, whether a grade is determined based on a grader's mood, a lack of knowledge, or anything else, they are humans. Until we get computers that do all of the grading, the human element, just like umps in baseball, will always be a factor.