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

[Scottish Punk]

Originally Posted by 88horsepower

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.

Yes, this is likely a huge factor. I also wouldn't discount pop control on select highly publicized cards. Like I mentioned, their process now includes super high res scans. Nat could simply be instructing graders to knock it to a 9 if you find anything on the scan.

[bub838]

Originally Posted by inaka

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.

This doesn't really make any sense. In an upcharge situation it would make more sense to keep the higher grades to collect more money in fees.

I believe pop control (or at the very least some sort of bias) exists, but it wouldn't be at this stage.

[BoSoxFan1999]

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.

Yes, the whole "it's pop control" belief is very tin-foil conspiracy theoristy.
Also, wouldn't it benefit PSA's bottom line to hand out more 10s? Especially on big money cards like '86 Fleer MJ's, Star cards, etc? More 10s = more upcharges = profit?! The pop control theory goes against what is good for PSA's bottom line.

I DO believe that PSA scrutinizes grail-level cards like 86 Fleer MJ a lot more than some 17 year old baseball prospect whose name I can't even pronounce. But PSA imposing hard caps on how many 10's can be given out for certain cards, no way.

[inaka]

Originally Posted by bub838

This doesn't really make any sense. In an upcharge situation it would make more sense to keep the higher grades to collect more money in fees.

I believe pop control (or at the very least some sort of bias) exists, but it wouldn't be at this stage.

It makes perfect sense. That's short-term thinking if PSA was trying to get one extra grading fee, in lieu of the thousands and thousands of cards submitted in the hopes of getting a PSA 10.

PSA has already said that for higher level cards like the 1980 Topps Rickey Henderson rookie, that they need to give these cards extra scrutiny since they are guaranteeing that they are authentic and on the hook for ~$200k if they are wrong. So at the upcharge stage (QA stages as PSA calls it), this is PSA would flag cards over a certain value. They already have to do this to notify the customer. So internally, this would be the time where only a select few graders/people would run a final check to determine the grade, and they'd simply override the original PSA 10 and drop it down to a PSA 9 if pop controlled.

Otherwise when does pop control occur? An edict from the top where even entry-level graders know there are certain cards that they need to grade lower? That would be incredibly difficult to keep under wraps, and also be documented, and easy to expose. The QA stages are literally designed for this "final check" for uncharges, etc.

[bub838]

Originally Posted by inaka

It makes perfect sense. That's short-term thinking if PSA was trying to get one extra grading fee, in lieu of the thousands and thousands of cards submitted in the hopes of getting a PSA 10.

PSA has already said that for higher level cards like the 1980 Topps Rickey Henderson rookie, that they need to give these cards extra scrutiny since they are guaranteeing that they are authentic and on the hook for ~$200k if they are wrong. So at the upcharge stage (QA stages as PSA calls it), this is PSA would flag cards over a certain value. They already have to do this to notify the customer. So internally, this would be the time where only a select few graders/people would run a final check to determine the grade, and they'd simply override the original PSA 10 and drop it down to a PSA 9 if pop controlled.

Otherwise when does pop control occur? An edict from the top where even entry-level graders know there are certain cards that they need to grade lower? That would be incredibly difficult to keep under wraps, and also be documented, and easy to expose. The QA stages are literally designed for this "final check" for uncharges, etc.

QA comes after assembly, it's already slabbed and graded. It's rare that a grade would change at that state, and would likely be from damaged at encapsulation. Upcharges are driven by AI and mostly automated with a human agent handling the communication with the customer.

The extra scrutiny comes from being reviewed by experienced graders. Entry level graders aren't even a part of the discussion. I don't think it's an edict from the top down, I think it's the same handful of senior graders seeing the same high end cards year after year having a conscious or subconscious bias toward giving them a ten.

[inaka]

Originally Posted by bub838

QA comes after assembly, it's already slabbed and graded.

But upcharge emails don't always come before Assembly.
PSA sometimes sends upcharge emails after assembly in the QA stages. So I guess if you declined the upcharge, they'd crack it out?

They're also not going to have a stage called "Pop Control Check".

So this is a semantics argument of the stage names in the first place. Whether the pop control happens before Assembly or in the QA1/QA2 stages it really doesn't matter, the process would be the same. If they can use AI to flag upcharges, they can also use AI to flag cards valued at over $100k (or whatever), and then have a second senior grader review them (maybe this is also still considered "Grading") and then the second grader knocks it down from a PSA 10 to a PSA 9, within "grading" or "QA"...aka "pop control". Easy.

The stage name is really irrelevant because frankly, to me, all of these "stage" definitions are just silly/false. Especially when they have "QA1" and "QA2" PSA states that cards are given an additional review to ensure it's been graded and encapsulated correctly. Riiiight. And then after QA1/QA2 cards have still arrived upside down or with the completely wrong flips, etc.

[mc1]

I’ve been using COMC to submit to PSA. Got back another sub… Im not sure Im going to be grading anything anymore. People had been complaining about PSA being stricter for a couple years now but I was still doing well until the last few months. I’ve said that before. They are grading tougher or damaging cards somewhere along the whole process. If this is the new “normal”, I wont be wasting my time or money.

[88horsepower]

Originally Posted by mc1

I’ve been using COMC to submit to PSA. Got back another sub… Im not sure Im going to be grading anything anymore. People had been complaining about PSA being stricter for a couple years now but I was still doing well until the last few months. I’ve said that before. They are grading tougher or damaging cards somewhere along the whole process. If this is the new “normal”, I wont be wasting my time or money.

The damaging cards thing is a real concern. It wouldn't shock me if, in the process of trying to move cards in bulk through the assembly line, some cards inevitably get damaged due to lack of carefulness. I've had cards come back that were absolutely not in the condition I sent them in. Some cards have come back with corner dings that, if I saw those during my initial assessment, would never have been sent to begin with. But other than taking my own high-resolution scans prior to sending them, there's no recourse. And since I'm a collector and not a flipper, the cards I'm sending aren't worth the money to complain about, but the hours of work it took to find the right looking copy of a given card is what hurts more than the potential financial loss.

[TeeBee12]

Originally Posted by 88horsepower

The damaging cards thing is a real concern. It wouldn't shock me if, in the process of trying to move cards in bulk through the assembly line, some cards inevitably get damaged due to lack of carefulness. I've had cards come back that were absolutely not in the condition I sent them in. Some cards have come back with corner dings that, if I saw those during my initial assessment, would never have been sent to begin with. But other than taking my own high-resolution scans prior to sending them, there's no recourse. And since I'm a collector and not a flipper, the cards I'm sending aren't worth the money to complain about, but the hours of work it took to find the right looking copy of a given card is what hurts more than the potential financial loss.

It is 100% happening. And your frustrations are echoed here 100% as well. From corner dings, hunting for examples to sub, shouldn’t have to scan for proof, all of it. Getting charged $20 to damage my babies and bruise my subbing ego is currently been on hold until I hear otherwise.

[Delta5]

I really think you guys are overthinking it. Vintage has their own separate graders so no inexperienced graders handle them, it's been proven that they are different department, one is fast food service churning ultra modern card and the other is vintage which is more scrutinized

[88horsepower]

Originally Posted by Delta5

I really think you guys are overthinking it. Vintage has their own separate graders so no inexperienced graders handle them, it's been proven that they are different department, one is fast food service churning ultra modern card and the other is vintage which is more scrutinized

What’s the proof you speak of?

[kipgen]

Makes me wonder when the other shoe drops when it comes to the whole PSA 9/10 dichotomy. Right now for modern/ultra modern purposes a PSA 9 essentially = raw and the "grading" process might as well be pass/fail. Outside of a few special cases where the card supercedes the grade like an ohtani rookie auto or something like that people basically treat PSA 8s like they should be destroyed.

When you can instantly increase the value of a PSA 8 by cracking it out and having it raw, that should be a sign that something is wrong. (Obviously everything I'm saying only applies to modern/ultra modern)

[bub838]

Originally Posted by kipgen

Makes me wonder when the other shoe drops when it comes to the whole PSA 9/10 dichotomy. Right now for modern/ultra modern purposes a PSA 9 essentially = raw and the "grading" process might as well be pass/fail. Outside of a few special cases where the card supercedes the grade like an ohtani rookie auto or something like that people basically treat PSA 8s like they should be destroyed.

When you can instantly increase the value of a PSA 8 by cracking it out and having it raw, that should be a sign that something is wrong. (Obviously everything I'm saying only applies to modern/ultra modern)

Going a step farther, you can take that PSA 8, crack it, resub and get a 10. But, as long as the market values 10/9/8's the way they do, nothing is going to change.

[TeeBee12]

Originally Posted by Delta5

I really think you guys are overthinking it. Vintage has their own separate graders so no inexperienced graders handle them, it's been proven that they are different department, one is fast food service churning ultra modern card and the other is vintage which is more scrutinized

Nope. And nope.

[towerymt]

Originally Posted by kipgen

When you can instantly increase the value of a PSA 8 by cracking it out and having it raw, that should be a sign that something is wrong. (Obviously everything I'm saying only applies to modern/ultra modern)

I cracked out an 8 and sold it raw. (ultramodern)

Here's my test:
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...9&postcount=14

I cracked out an 8 and sold it raw. I sold a slabbed PSA-9 at the same time. The raw outsold the graded 9.

I explained that it was previously a PSA-8. I explained why the 8 got an 8. I showed photos of why it got an 8.

[kipgen]

Originally Posted by towerymt

I cracked out an 8 and sold it raw. (ultramodern)

Here's my test:
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...9&postcount=14

I cracked out an 8 and sold it raw. I sold a slabbed PSA-9 at the same time. The raw outsold the graded 9.

I explained that it was previously a PSA-8. I explained why the 8 got an 8. I showed photos of why it got an 8.

Seems like that's where things are headed

Might as well remove the scale and have a big green check or a big red X for every card you get graded

[Delta5]

Originally Posted by 88horsepower

What’s the proof you speak of?

I know firsthand someone who has got a tour to the facility

[yoyosh]

Originally Posted by yoyosh

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!

I know this stuff just comes off as being whiney, but I've now had
1 Gem Mint 10 out of my last 20 ultra-modern cards submitted. I take time to wipe surfaces and check centering, and DON'T send more cards than I actually do submit.
What are we even doing anymore?

[Icollectstuff]

Originally Posted by yoyosh

I know this stuff just comes off as being whiney, but I've now had
1 Gem Mint 10 out of my last 20 ultra-modern cards submitted. I take time to wipe surfaces and check centering, and DON'T send more cards than I actually do submit.
What are we even doing anymore?

What type of cards are you sending? Is it like pokemon, marvel, sports or what?

[TeeBee12]

Originally Posted by Delta5

I know firsthand someone who has got a tour to the facility

Which facility and when? There’s been a ton of changes both in physical renovation to the in take process. Per the card grading side, there are two separate grading rooms (could be considered three w/auto) however the cards are not divided by “vintage & modern” on the intake like you are thinking.

It’s more divided by a “declared value” hierarchy. The higher valued department obviously has more security features & additional equipment necessary to make calls. Now, would most of the graders in the HV room be light years ahead on vintage knowledge? Sure. But it could be vintage and modern could be completely separate within the HV room. But that’s different from all vintage subs here, all modern there. I didn’t get to ask every grader to cite their cardboard credentials on vintage/modern within each separate space. There’s also a ton more behind the curtain & process that wasn’t revealed both in trade secrets & time constraints. It’s seriously reminded me like a brand new Post Office sorting space where the mail just keeps coming and coming. “It never stops” and one hiccup in the process causes bottlenecks all the way down the line.

[yoyosh]

Originally Posted by Icollectstuff

What type of cards are you sending? Is it like pokemon, marvel, sports or what?

Ultra modern sports. Optic/Prizm stock.
Looked at under magnification and a centering tool before going in the "grading pile"

[yoyosh]

Originally Posted by yoyosh

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!

2024
Jayden 12% gems
Nix 29%
Caleb 19%
Penix 21%

2023
Stroud 39%
Bryce Young 48%
Anthony Richardson 32%

2022
Kenny Pickett ZERO gems!!
Malik Willis 59%
Desmond Ridder 53%

I know I'm doing this mostly for myself, but updated today.
These #s are crazy to me

Jayden 13% 10s
Nix 27%
Caleb 20%
Penix 21%

(Caitlin Clark is 8.2% for silver prizm #22)