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

[inaka]

Originally Posted by larry25

The problem is that collectors and dealers then see these grades, ad nauseum on eBay, week after week after motherloving week, and we presume we can still get 10s on similar stuff, too, only to waste our money and time and spirit on a rack of 6s and 8s with a spattering of 9s, as if the 9s were 10s, and, very curiously, no 7s.

Well said in your post!

If you have a card that is on the fence between a 9 and a 10, I get why PSA has no 9.5 so that they can artificially elevate PSA 10s. That plan has worked for them, where 10s are the lottery ticket winner everyone shoots for (for modern). That's part of their posted grading scale.

However, there's a PSA-specific thing that makes no sense that we all just accept, and that's the glaring lack of other half-grades. Why?? They do offer half grades, but realistically for the most part, they rarely issue them. Again, why? If a card that would otherwise be a PSA 8, but has an additional slight blemish, you'll get a 6, bypassing the 7 grade completely, not a 7.5. It's like the graders don't even realize there's an option for a 7.5 or 8.5 in most cases. So that makes their "10 point grading system" even more inconsistent to me.

The cynic in me thinks the PSA graders have a screen like a McDonald's cash register where there's just a picture of food, or in this case a button with a number on it, and the internal PSA software only shows solid numbers. For them to issue a half-grade, they have to right-click or something, and that takes an extra 10 seconds, and they all just say "forget that". So solid grades it is!

I occasionally see a PSA reveal online where some guy randomly and astronomically against all odds gets two 8.5s in one 15 card order, and it's a crazy outlier that makes the results even more perplexing. There's "I got the good grader" or "I got the bad grader" talk, but occasionally some get to say, "I got the weirdo half-grader."

And for no reason, we all just accept it. Strange.

[f2tornado]

Originally Posted by larry25

These days, I try to operate under the rule that if you see something, anything, be it a print dot, a scratch, a micro touch to an edge or corner, then don't submit it. But when the rest of the card is literally pristine, I just can't help myself. Apparently, I just can't help myself from grading 6s and 8s

This is the way. If you see it after 20 seconds, then odds are the grader will see it. If it's something you really struggle to see, then odds are the grader will too.

I also catch a lot of touched corners on white bordered cards when I put the loupe on them. They look perfect to the eye, then look like shat under 10x. If I was a grader, I couldn't in good conscience give those a 10 and I therefore won't expect one either.

Frustrating at times, yes, but it's also helping inflate the value of 10s on the market that should at least partially offset other negative factors.

Yes, I've seen some stuff from 4SC and they've been mocked on CU forums for years (e.g.; 4 Bent Corners), yet they also submit so much shat that there's bound to be some generous grades. I only have control over what I submit.

[yoyosh]

Originally Posted by larry25

It's almost like PSA 10s need to be perfect cards now, whether they are ultra modern or even 1980s and 1990s stuff. This seems true except for massive submitters like 4SharpCorners, whose 10s so often seem outrageously egregiously over-graded. I think part of this is because of the sheer volume they submit, and part is the numbing effect on graders' perceptions working through that volume, and then part is preferential treatment, no question.

The problem is that collectors and dealers then see these grades, ad nauseum on eBay, week after week after motherloving week, and we presume we can still get 10s on similar stuff, too, only to waste our money and time and spirit on a rack of 6s and 8s with a spattering of 9s, as if the 9s were 10s, and, very curiously, no 7s.

These days, I try to operate under the rule that if you see something, anything, be it a print dot, a scratch, a micro touch to an edge or corner, then don't submit it. But when the rest of the card is literally pristine, I just can't help myself. Apparently, I just can't help myself from grading 6s and 8s

This is a well thought out, smart post. Unfortunately, I think PSA is the issue not us.
The SGC 9 that became a PSA 10 had more than 1 flaw that I saw myself. I just wanted it slabbed for my PC. 4 or 5 of the other cards in my submission had zero flaws that I could see with my centering tool or under magnification. It's almost as if it doesn't matter what you send anymore, just spin the wheel of (un)fortune!

[derekd1979]

My last bulk order in Nov was 19/21 gem. All modern.

[Scottish Punk]

Originally Posted by yoyosh

This is a well thought out, smart post. Unfortunately, I think PSA is the issue not us.
The SGC 9 that became a PSA 10 had more than 1 flaw that I saw myself. I just wanted it slabbed for my PC. 4 or 5 of the other cards in my submission had zero flaws that I could see with my centering tool or under magnification. It's almost as if it doesn't matter what you send anymore, just spin the wheel of (un)fortune!

I just picture a lot of low wage, inexperienced graders slamming through stacks of cards to stay on pace. Each card gets a 30 second look and moving on. You are going to get variance in that kind of process.

[Bosoxfan5990]

Originally Posted by Scottish Punk

I just picture a lot of low wage, inexperienced graders slamming through stacks of cards to stay on pace. Each card gets a 30 second look and moving on. You are going to get variance in that kind of process.

I'm sure they have a specified benchmark number of cards they need to hit per day in order to meet productivity.

[Boostedwrx]

They probably have to write up a 1 page TPS report for every 10 they give out now. So they stopped giving them out.

[SLGSports]

Originally Posted by inaka

If a card that would otherwise be a PSA 8, but has an additional slight blemish, you'll get a 6, bypassing the 7 grade completely, not a 7.5. It's like the graders don't even realize there's an option for a 7.5 or 8.5 in most cases. So that makes their "10 point grading system" even more inconsistent to me.

Yes, PSA has a scale, but they also have "unwritten rules" that I really wish they made more transparent. A gem-mint card with a surface depression, by rule, drops it to a 6. 100% of the surprise 6s are due to surface issues. I've seen very slight depressions get an 8 before, but not sure I've ever seen a 7. 7s seem reserved for cards in really rough shape (dinged corners, off centered, etc.), but no major surface issues.

But they definitely have hard rules. For example, a pinhole, paper loss, etc. will drop an otherwise gem-mint card down to a 1 (by rule).

It's beyond me why PSA can't follow the scale they have on their website. When they're out of whack with customer expectations (e.g., this mysterious PSA 6 problem they have), they need to fix it. If there's a hard-to-see surface issue, it should drop a 10 to a 9. This seems obvious to me. Dropping it to a 6 violates customer trust, because anyone can see it's in better condition that that.

[88horsepower]

Originally Posted by larry25

It's almost like PSA 10s need to be perfect cards now, whether they are ultra modern or even 1980s and 1990s stuff. This seems true except for massive submitters like 4SharpCorners, whose 10s so often seem outrageously egregiously over-graded. I think part of this is because of the sheer volume they submit, and part is the numbing effect on graders' perceptions working through that volume, and then part is preferential treatment, no question.

The problem is that collectors and dealers then see these grades, ad nauseum on eBay, week after week after motherloving week, and we presume we can still get 10s on similar stuff, too, only to waste our money and time and spirit on a rack of 6s and 8s with a spattering of 9s, as if the 9s were 10s, and, very curiously, no 7s.

These days, I try to operate under the rule that if you see something, anything, be it a print dot, a scratch, a micro touch to an edge or corner, then don't submit it. But when the rest of the card is literally pristine, I just can't help myself. Apparently, I just can't help myself from grading 6s and 8s

This post speaks to me in so many ways. I used to submit lower population 80s and early 90s rookie and rookie-related cards. I would go over cards with a fine-toothed comb - easily spending a minute or two per card. If I saw so much as a tiny blemish of any type, I wouldn't bother sending the card in. In the last year, I've seen cards come back with very clear blemishes in at least one corner. Zero chance I would send a card to them with such a clear and obvious issue. Zero. I wouldn't even send them cards if I saw a small printing dot or any white on a single corner. Yet, cards would often come back with some whitening on a corner, which would be easy to inflict on a card from the era I subbed to them.

So, of course, when I found a pristine looking card to send them, especially one I really wanted to get a 10 on for my collection, I would be thrilled to send it off, only to be disappointed and see it grade a PSA 9 or PSA 8 in many cases. This is such a huge deviation from how my results used to look when I would easily get at least half of my order back with PSA 10s. The issue isn't the submitters; it's the company grading the cards. There is so much outcry right now about cards getting damaged, cards getting under graded, inconsistency with grades, people re-subbing cards and getting very different grades.

The problem is very clearly PSA.

Stop grading with them. Stop sending them money. They have no incentive to change if they don't have motivation to do so.

[Dereth]

Originally Posted by SLGSports

Just curious... are folks seeing massive drop in grades on TCG submissions as well?

If yes, then PSA has a procedural issue.

If no, then PSA is intentionally sticking it to sports cards submitters (likely to slow down submissions).

I know that your post was over a month ago, but that's a yes for me.

My most recent PSA TCG order came back with a 19% gem rate. My order before that was 75%. Same types of cards and the same process for reviewing condition as before.

[GodofDisco]

Originally Posted by Dereth

I know that your post was over a month ago, but that's a yes for me.

My most recent PSA TCG order came back with a 19% gem rate. My order before that was 75%. Same types of cards and the same process for reviewing condition as before.

Same experience here and I suspect they damaged my cards but it's not worth the hassle of complaining.

[MavsRChamps]

Originally Posted by 88horsepower

This post speaks to me in so many ways. I used to submit lower population 80s and early 90s rookie and rookie-related cards. I would go over cards with a fine-toothed comb - easily spending a minute or two per card. If I saw so much as a tiny blemish of any type, I wouldn't bother sending the card in. In the last year, I've seen cards come back with very clear blemishes in at least one corner. Zero chance I would send a card to them with such a clear and obvious issue. Zero. I wouldn't even send them cards if I saw a small printing dot or any white on a single corner. Yet, cards would often come back with some whitening on a corner, which would be easy to inflict on a card from the era I subbed to them.

So, of course, when I found a pristine looking card to send them, especially one I really wanted to get a 10 on for my collection, I would be thrilled to send it off, only to be disappointed and see it grade a PSA 9 or PSA 8 in many cases. This is such a huge deviation from how my results used to look when I would easily get at least half of my order back with PSA 10s. The issue isn't the submitters; it's the company grading the cards. There is so much outcry right now about cards getting damaged, cards getting under graded, inconsistency with grades, people re-subbing cards and getting very different grades.

The problem is very clearly PSA.

Stop grading with them. Stop sending them money. They have no incentive to change if they don't have motivation to do so.

Not to beat a dead horse but +1 on PSA damaging cards. I had an order a couple years ago where I am positive they damaged some of my cards. What is frustrating similar to you a couple were PC cards so I was like - Though I'm not selling, let me just pay for the guaranteed 9 or 10 grade ... Instead I got 7 and 8's with like yourself, corner damage that was 100% not there when I sent it. Ray Lewis Exquisite 2008 Auto in particular - One of my favorite cards and was in immaculate condition when I sent it, razor sharp corners which is rare for Exquisite, got a "7" w/ corner damage.

PSA should damage ZERO % of cards. Anything higher is unacceptable. It is very easy to avoid damaging cards if PSA is training graders correctly - Meaning of course someone picked off the street may damage a card or 2, but you can create a 30 minute training for new employees on how to take cards out of card savers, place on table etc etc. and anyone can handle cards without damaging them.

I wish the company would fix these very solvable issues.

[Bosoxfan5990]

Originally Posted by MavsRChamps

Not to beat a dead horse but +1 on PSA damaging cards. I had an order a couple years ago where I am positive they damaged some of my cards. What is frustrating similar to you a couple were PC cards so I was like - Though I'm not selling, let me just pay for the guaranteed 9 or 10 grade ... Instead I got 7 and 8's with like yourself, corner damage that was 100% not there when I sent it. Ray Lewis Exquisite 2008 Auto in particular - One of my favorite cards and was in immaculate condition when I sent it, razor sharp corners which is rare for Exquisite, got a "7" w/ corner damage.

PSA should damage ZERO % of cards. Anything higher is unacceptable. It is very easily to avoid damaging cards if PSA is training graders correctly - Meaning of course someone picked off the street may damage a card or 2, but you can create a 30 minute training for new employees on how to take cards out of card savers, place on table etc etc.

I wish the company would fix these very solvable issues.

Do we think it's the graders damaging the cards, or the encapsulation process?

[larry25]

Originally Posted by Bosoxfan5990

Do we think it's the graders damaging the cards, or the encapsulation process?

The robots, no question. So absurd it's both sad and laughable. You send your mint cards to this professional grading company to be protected for posterity, and they come back mangled.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit if the cheap plastic they are sourcing from China turns out to be corrosive as well.

Nothing surprises me with this sh*t show.

BOW LOW TO YOUR GOD$$$$$

[inaka]

Originally Posted by Bosoxfan5990

Do we think it's the graders damaging the cards, or the encapsulation process?

The correct answer is both.
When PSA damaged my card, here's the line PSA told me in their cut/paste email:

"Upon receiving your item back from our director of grading, it has come to our attention that it has incurred damage during our operational process. Please accept our sincerest apologies for this inconvenience."

I know mine was damaged before grading because the card was graded a 7, and they told me the "Original Unverified Grade" should have been a 9 since it was damaged before grading.

But that doesn't mean PSA isn't also damaging cards during encapsulation.
It's both.

[MavsRChamps]

Originally Posted by Bosoxfan5990

Do we think it's the graders damaging the cards, or the encapsulation process?

I don't know.

I actually regret not even saying anything to PSA about it when it happened to get some explanation at least. I just figured they wouldn't do anything and I didn't have any proof/pictures of the cards before they were sent. Perhaps if I said something they would have idk looked into it ... A top tier company would know the EXACT grader who grades your cards and ideally have a system in place that tracks the % of time customers say their card was damaged from each grader, or cards were under-graded from each grader, or if that grader's average grade is disproportionally low, etc. etc. all to ensure max efficiency and the best, most accurate graders possible. Heck a simply feedback form to fill out once you get your cards back would be so easy to implement and help PSA so much to ensure they have the best graders, and procedures possible.

Oh let me stop, you can't possibly expect all that from a multi-billion dollar company. My bad

[metsandweezer]

Originally Posted by Bosoxfan5990

Do we think it's the graders damaging the cards, or the encapsulation process?

Research & ID/unpacking people also damage cards by rolling over them in chairs. My source worked at the NJ office and said a card would drop on the floor all the time and people would “accidentally” run them over and put it back into the pile.

[Bosoxfan5990]

I haven't graded in years, but I vividly remember sending a Jordan Love Silver Prizm rookie I thought would Gem that came back with a 9 and an indent on the back that was not there when I submitted.

That was my last grading submission.

[Scottish Punk]

For those of you getting damaged cards. Are they all in the same spot. I firmly believe it is the result of more automation during the process. Don't know if is during scanning or encapsulation. First guess would be during some scanning/AI portion before the graders otherwise I would think there would be 10's with a dinged corner.

Somebody mentioned that all of his dings were he same upper left corner for example. That would be part of an automation process of the dings were all the same.

[larry25]

Originally Posted by Scottish Punk

For those of you getting damaged cards. Are they all in the same spot. I firmly believe it is the result of more automation during the process. Don't know if is during scanning or encapsulation. First guess would be during some scanning/AI portion before the graders otherwise I would think there would be 10's with a dinged corner.

Somebody mentioned that all of his dings were he same upper left corner for example. That would be part of an automation process of the dings were all the same.

Ding, and, ding.

[Alyndara]

I watched a video several months ago, unfortunately I cannot remember who it was, that had the opinion that they make 'runs' of cards - they run all the TCG in a batch for a given day or week and then the sports. Their theory was the machine can get out of calibration during the TCG run, but due to the rounded corners on the cards, it doesn't show up until the next 'run' of sports cards, and a few corners get trashed before they catch the issue and calibrate the machine. Food for thought.

[f2tornado]

Originally Posted by Scottish Punk

For those of you getting damaged cards. Are they all in the same spot. I firmly believe it is the result of more automation during the process. Don't know if is during scanning or encapsulation. First guess would be during some scanning/AI portion before the graders otherwise I would think there would be 10's with a dinged corner.

Somebody mentioned that all of his dings were he same upper left corner for example. That would be part of an automation process of the dings were all the same.

I had a Pokemon order come back with a number of cards that had damage in the upper right corner several years ago. I bet I spoke with a women named Karen (and not the name stereotype) over there for a good 20 minutes. While they didn't fully admit it was their fault, we came to a resolution on the issue.

[88horsepower]

Originally Posted by Scottish Punk

For those of you getting damaged cards. Are they all in the same spot. I firmly believe it is the result of more automation during the process. Don't know if is during scanning or encapsulation. First guess would be during some scanning/AI portion before the graders otherwise I would think there would be 10's with a dinged corner.

Somebody mentioned that all of his dings were he same upper left corner for example. That would be part of an automation process of the dings were all the same.

I've seen them in both the upper right and upper left corner. But I do agree, this is likely happening at the start of the process before grading.

[BraveAtlanta]

What did PSA do for you? I have a Ladd McConkey patch auto that was a definite gem come back a 6…with a new crease on the back. 100% on psa. It’s in “review.”

Originally Posted by inaka

The correct answer is both.
When PSA damaged my card, here's the line PSA told me in their cut/paste email:

"Upon receiving your item back from our director of grading, it has come to our attention that it has incurred damage during our operational process. Please accept our sincerest apologies for this inconvenience."

I know mine was damaged before grading because the card was graded a 7, and they told me the "Original Unverified Grade" should have been a 9 since it was damaged before grading.

But that doesn't mean PSA isn't also damaging cards during encapsulation.
It's both.

[inaka]

Originally Posted by BraveAtlanta

What did PSA do for you? I have a Ladd McConkey patch auto that was a definite gem come back a 6…with a new crease on the back. 100% on psa. It’s in “review.”

PSA makes you sign an NDA via DocuSign before accepting any payment resolution, so you're not allowed to post specifics about what they did specifically to resolve the issue. They even say in the agreement they can go after you to return the money if you say say or post anywhere what they offered even after the check has been cashed.

So in theory, hypothetically, if they offered me the full insured value of my card under value grading ($500) along with the grading fee refunded ($24.99), and the card in the slab returned back to me, I wouldn't be able to tell you.