Some great points, and great examples, Mike. They need to be brought to account! If you've watched the B.B.C. show 'Fake or Fortune' (which I'd highly recommend, esp. if interested in art), they often go to established art 'gate-keepers' (particularly those located in France) to get their final verdict, because if they deem it authentic then, in the eyes of the art world, it is. Once they come to a consensus, they often don't explain their reasons... it's just a 'no', and 'we don't find it to be an authentic example'. If they've deemed a piece as not being authentic in the past, then they rarely change their minds - lest they admit they were wrong. They don't appear on camera, and the 'brains trust' come to a consensus behind closed doors. All this, despite new technology and new research, seemingly, proving the item's authenticity. Bringing this back to grading... there needs to be openness (in why the grade received the grade it did - grading notes, for starters), flexibility (in admitting they were wrong in the past, and adjusting the grade accordingly), consistency (that each and every card submitted with those specifications will receive that grade - new technology can help here), and accountability (they appear to act as their own authority, without an overarching body correcting them... who is 'gate-keeping' the 'gate-keeper'?). All this should be EXPECTED of them, without any additional cost being borne by the consumer.
The grading market is a joke. I sent in a ticket to Beckett to be graded and included exactly the info I wanted printed on it. The info was spot on correct. They sent it back to me without what I wanted written on it. They graded it an 8. I sent it back with full documentation of what the info I wanted printed on it. A simple google search would have done this by them but nope they had to slab it, send it back and make me have to send it back to them wasting time and money. They sent it back to me two months later with the info I wanted on it but dropped the grade to a 5. I'm done getting stuff graded. It's a waste of money and only frustration.
Mike: I really appreciate your logical approach on this topic. You are absolutely correct in that the consistency and quality of grading and the grading process needs to be addressed by the grading companies. These is not sufficient consistency in grading of cards of similar quality, Also there definitely needs to be more transparency of the process and standards. With the industry now being one of millions of dollars changing hands based on grading, the grading process and standards on which it is based is extremely poor. Ands quite frankly could result in lawsuits if thousands of dollars are at stake. There needs to be significant investment in the grading process and standards if grading is to be sustainable. There also needs to be automation applied to the inspection and grading process. I worked in an industry that used inline scanners for inspecting metal flowing down a production line at 100 FPM and the process detected and found deviations in quality at the granular level. This technology has existed for 10-15 years. It seems very apparent that the grading companies have no interest in upsetting a goose that provides golden eggs and serious profits based on antiquated processes and knowledge.
I dont see PSA as a scam.I just think they are bad at their jobs and their standards are all over the place. I think PSA is just too big for their own good and they dont have enough quality graders to accurately grade a bazillion cards a month. I dont have any confidence that most card sent to PSA are graded by an actual expert.
It's hard to say if the grade is correct without being able to look at it with a magnifying glass. Other than the print line I'd be curious to know what else the graders notes said. Because it was a bit off center on both the front and the back and who knows what else might be wrong with it under magnification. I've had many conversations/arguments over the years with people who swear that they got the wrong grade, then I ask them if they looked at it with a magnifying glass and they always say "No, but I have good eyes." Then I take out my magnifying glass and point out 4 things they couldn't see with their eyes.
This has nothing to do with our feeling about the grade. I laid out the case: PSA told him it was because of the mark, and a lot of higher grades have the mark. I’m not asking you to assess the grade.
@@JunkWaxHero You're asking if there's consistency in the grading because other cards with the line got 10's and this one didn't. You're calling out the consistency of their grading without actually having examined the card yourself. Sure, if the only thing wrong with this card was the print line then yes, it should've received a 10 like the other cards. But as I stated before you can clearly see that the card is also off center both front and back, and who knows what else is wrong under magnification. If were were gonna judge it just based off the pictures I'd say that cards an 8 because of the print line and off centering. You say you're not asking us to assess the grade......but you are. By asking if there's consistency with the grading we have to assess the grades given to the cards, that's the only way to know if their consistent or not.
@@Sandman60077 I am not assessing the card, Sandman. I am not asking you to. PSA told him the reason for the grade. I don’t know how I can be more clear about that. PSA: “You got a 6 because of this print mark.” TJ: “But these 9s and 10s have this same print mark.” That’s literally it.
More info is needed. When PSA says the reason we gave it a 6 is due to the print line. But, the crucial piece of info not shared here is they gave it a 6 as opposed to what other grade? Meaning, was it considered to be a 6.5 or 7? And the print line made it a 6? Cus that would absolutely make sense. A print line on a perfect conditioned card of a 10, is a world a part from a print line on a mid grade card of a 6-7. The grade of the card is the determining factor of how much a print line will have an effect. So the question is what was the other grade being considered by PSA. Did they say it was an 8 but the print line made it a 6? Or is it a 6.5, possibly a 7 and the print line took it down to a 6. If that's the case, then it makes sense.
Great comment! The grader notes told to me didn’t mention other aspects of the card. Look at the card in Mike’s video & PSA scans. It’s a really sharp card even with the back print line / mark. Plus PSA didn’t penalized the line so drastically even a few years ago . I’ll post a video tomorrow on my IG page.
I am encouraged to hear from the recent interview between Geoff Wilson and the PSA president and from recent grade reveals that PSA appears to be getting more consistent in applying its grading standards. But, hearing incidents like this with the PSA grade of 6 on the Michael Jordan Fleer 1986 basketball card, it seems that graders should be reading the grading standards before assigning a grade; to me, that is an element that is lacking and needs to be communicated to PSA.
Should cards just be graded authentic, poor, mid-grade, near mint, mint, and gem? I think that is the solution. I notice in videos that 33 Goudy Ruths in the same grade of a 2 have different values due to eye appeal. I feel like that would be the case if a card was just marked mint. You would know it's in the 8-9 range and can bid accordingly If that were the case I would put the Jordan in the near mint category with the marking on the back, and a mint without the marking. An Authentic would be the same and plus the 1's. Poor would be 2's and 3's, mid grade would be 4's and 5's, near mint, 6 and 7's, mint 8's and 9's, Gem 10's. They would probably still screw it up. lol.
Because the usual success rate (e.g. BGS 8 to PSA 8) direct crossover is low especially for popular cards. Better to go w/ raw cards in most cases. Many auction houses & popular online consignment sellers estimate BGS / BVG graded cards to worth 1 to 2.5 grades lower than PSA (for value).
The facts I would need to know- Do all the ‘86 Jordan backs have the print mark? Had any of these three graders ever grade a ‘86 Jordan before? The answer to those questions, in my opinion, determines the culpability of PSA. It’s complicated. Great topic, Mike! 👍❤️
Shocking that a service based on opinions, as stated by the president of PSA recently, will find variations of opinion on every card they have ever graded. Also shocking that nobody has ever complained when an opinion of their card comes in higher than they expected. We can all agree there should be some standards or the service provided is worthless and it appears comsumers give credence to PSAs opinions as evidenced by high grades selling above average comps. Will occassional examples of 'wrong' opinions move the needle downward and lead to PSA's demise?
What's crazy is that at least one of the 10's you showed had a bottom white corner that was obviously white, and it wasn't tiny. So, I have gotten fairly good at this PSA thing when it comes to 1986 Fleer. I have a PSA 8 or above of every RC in '86, including Jordan. I sent in another Jordan that I felt was a 9 and outside shot at a 10, but it was better than my 8. They gave this 2nd Jordan a PSA 8. It was easily better than all the 8's I could find. It literally had no issues that could be seen with the naked eye or under magnification that I could find. I just figured it wouldn't 10 because they just don't 10 them often. What is hysterical is that I had a 3rd Jordan that I sold cheap because the top-back of the card was horribly stained. It was dark brown all across the top. Mostly just dust/dirt from being stored for years. The guy I sold it to was a friend and he graded it and we both thought it would be like a PSA 3-4. Yeah, it came back a PSA 8!!! I agree that PSA need to include graders notes. They don't need to be long, just something quick that explains why something is the way it is. Just circle an area on the generic picture of a card and write a word or two. Something. For what we pay, it's not too much to ask.
Very likely another surface issue. The Bgs review had a 7.5 for surface. Similarly to your additional psa examples, there are many bgs examples with that print line and high surface scores.
Most likely, when these cards were originally graded, I imagine the technology wasn't as good as it is now. Meaning they can catch more things now. Cracking older cards in slabs is probably more iffy due to yellowing and better technology. I could be wrong, but some of my 30 year old cards are slightly yellowed, and they've been out of the light and in plastic for 30 years. Not in air-tight containers, though, but there wasn't as godd of quality of cards built back then, until upper deck came along. I'm still amazed how white the upper deck cards still are after all these years.
That’s totally F’d up that there are 9’s and 10’s with the same line on the back and now new graders don’t follow the ones that have already hit the 9’s and 10’s.
I’ve seen a number of videos recently of people cracking 8s or 9s from BGS and them coming back PSA 6-8s. Another example, should have left the card alone and been satisfied with the BGS grade/slab. Just my 2 cents. Appreciate the video/videos you always have a lot of helpful information and insight 🤙🏼
Well for one, grading is obviously subjective, but also - this is what happens when you have "professional graders" that aren't qualified to grade cards pre-2000 or they're ignorant to flaws, and other nuances that are exclusive to particular cards and sets... I mean, you have to keep in mind that sets generally (not all, but most) pre-1990 or so are unique and they have unique flaws that are exclusive to most (or some particular) cards in the set, and generally speaking those flaws are often overlooked if the card would otherwise grade a 7, 8 or even 9 - in other-words - an educated grader wont penalize the card for having a particular flaw that is found in 95% of the cards (or card) from that particular set if the card will grade a 7,8 and sometimes 9's) - which is why of course 10's are so difficult to get pre-junk wax era, because 10's are really reserved for those cards that would not only grade a 9.5/10 but DON'T have that particular flaw that are found in 99% of the cards in the set.. Of course that's for high-grade, but when you're talking a 7 or 8 - no educated "professional grader" is going to "penalize" a card for having a flaw that 99% of the cards in the set have... So with that said - I think whomever graded that card clearly took the print lines into account and penalized the card for that reason, when that flaw should have been ignored since the card was only going to physically grade a 7-8. Look, these grading services really need to STOP having their graders grade "just anything".. They need professionals with many moons of experience grading cards from eras they're experienced, highly familiar with and are comfortable and confident in grading... Point being - a grader experienced in ultra modern cards SHOULD NOT be grading vintage and vice-versa unless they've proven they're qualified... I mean there are worlds of differences between cards produced between eras.... Look, I'm a "vintage guy" and I generally specialize in cards from 1950-1980 - more specifically baseball and hockey - I know the era inside and out - and would feel more than comfortable grading cards from the era but if you put an ultra-modern card in my face and tell me to grade it, I wont have the confidence I would if you put a 1973 Topps Mike Schmidt Rookie in my face. I mean I'm sure I could grade the ultra-modern card on par with other graders that deal in ultra-modern, but it would take me much longer, that and I would have a lot of questions. lol. And yes, absolutely - these professional grading services SHOULD provide grading notes. I mean if I thoroughly examined a card with the same equipment these grading services use and I determined the card should grade no less than an 8, then the card comes back a 6 - I would love to know why it graded a 6 - especially since I have nearly 40 years of experience in the hobby, and at least 30-years grading cards or accurately "determining grades" (there were no grading services back in the day - cards were on a scale of good/fair/poor to mint). Also, I think grading services should mandate that graded cards go though 2 different phases of grading - a grader that grades the card and another grader (preferably with more experience) that approves or denies the grade.
They need to apply technology that already exists for measuring to standard deviations. There could still exist some human evaluation in exception situations but 99%+ of cards could be graded with a technical system at a much lower inconsistency of grades of similar cards.
Graders don't take time to grade them if they are grading that many cards a day, week or month. Rush them through, give a grade and get repeat business when you aren't happy with the grade they give you the 1st time. How many cards a day does a grader have to grade if there are 200 graders doing 1.3 million cards per month. 300 graders???
PSA President on Geoff Wilson show said they will be providing grading notes going forward starting this summer. They've been doing notes for months but haven't released them yet. Wonder if they will release the notes from when they started or starting for submissions this summer. Agree with comments he should have gone with PSA crossover service. But hindsight is 20/20. PSA president did say they have cracked hundreds of thousands of cards so they are pretty good at it. 🤷♂
Your video speaks as if this guy had this Jordan in his collection for years, and decided to slab it to PSA after having this for a long time. His Beckett card was only graded by Beckett just 6 months ago (Cert #0016189788 graded in October of 2023.) It also has a 7.5 for surface sub grade on the Beckett label. The back print line isn't the only flaw of this card, as even the Beckett surface grade of 7.5 shows. This guy gambled and lost, trying to maximize profit, but there's risk there. This is why there's a Crossover service option as well.
Direct crossover from BGS to PSA (e.g. 8 to 8) have a low success rate. The BGS 7.5 sub grade was for the surface (the back semi transparent print mark). The other subs were 9, 9, & 8.5. Those are strong grades even w/ the 7.5
Grader are just an opinion, usually after looking at the card for a minute. When I went to graders school, every card reviewed has graded notes. Grader states why the grade, that I agree should be shared with the customer
The industry needs to move beyond opinions for grades. They need to be made more quantitative based on technology and deviation measurements to standards.
Stories like this are great news if you collect cards. Yes, I wrote, "great news." It shows that there are still great deals to be had if you BUY THE CARD and not the grade. Nice video, Mike. Good job.
The problem is if PSA start giving graders notes, then they will devalue older slabs without notes. They have already devalued older slabs by grading tougher now (I constantly see newer slabs more expensive on eBay than older slabs).
My own opinion,, is PSA ,, doesn’t what to devalued the grades,,, with the amount of Cards they grade very month ,,, I notice that with recent cards graded ,, it’s become lower grade .. of mint cards,, years back a card could have minor crease marks, would grade a psa 3 , today ,, it would be a psa 1…
From PSA's perspective if they don't allow an actual conversations about individual cards out of the 1million cards/month then they are sparing themselves a huge headache... I'm amazed that they even entertain the request... 'Eye appeal' and 'Grader's opinion' and other weasel words allow them to hide behind subjectivity when it suits them...
Grading companies change their standards sometimes. I know PSA recently got a bit more strict with some things and this is probably just a result of that.
It’s all about population control if their is scarcity with the higher grades it drive the prices up on them and people see PSA 10’s get way more on the market, so more people submit their cards to PSA. And on very popular card like that, with every high grade it diminishes the value of all the graded Jordan and makes it harder to advertise the high value of a PSA grade. Plain and simple
I agee with you'll the card looks good but it comes down to the graders were they new employees were they having a bad day we don't know but were always looking into them from a window thats aways blacked out for reasons. They will always come up or make up something to offset the grade so another words they don't care. But it is something to bring up and start chats about maybe the graders forgot about the manufacturers defect rule that day. Maybe he can resubmit card and see if it comes back higher. Maybe different graders second time around. Great topic mike.
I am currently putting together a set of 1986 Fleer Basketball in PSA9, and have graded a ton of cards from the set. When I first started putting together the set, most of my PC cards were in BGS holders, but I decided to do the set in PSA because of the differences in how PSA and BGS grade them. PSA is MUCH tougher on this set, particularly on corners when pursuing higher grades of 8+. I have seen some BGS8+ cards for 1986 Fleer that look downright embarrassing compared to PSA cards of the same grade because of how lenient that BGS is and strict that PSA is on corners. The set's red borders really highlight the differences in how the two companies grade. Based on my experience in grading the set, I think that getting a PSA8 for the card in this video was pretty unlikely given the tipped corners. I don't know about a 6, but I definitely wouldn't have guessed an 8.
@@JunkWaxHero I did watch the video. I understand what they told him, and that may be their real reasoning or it may just be what they threw at the wall to see if the reason would stick, I can't really say. All that I'm saying is that, based on my experience in grading the set, that card was very unlikely to cross over from a BGS8 to a PSA 8.
@@DerethACexactly. PSA is grading this set tougher than others which is ironic that means PSA isn’t grading using their standard definitions per grade A BGS 8 to PSA 8 crossover in a slab success rate is very low. That is why I had it graded raw.
@@TJ_Is_Online Whether it was graded raw or as a true crossover isn’t relevant to my point. Judging from the pictures of the card from the video, the card was unlikely to get a PSA8 grade due to the tipped corners. If it got a PSA6 because of the print line on the back, and that is really the only reason, then yes that’s an inconsistency. Just my opinion, but I doubt that it’s as straightforward as that. The lesson here is that trying to grade a BGS card to PSA is asking for disappointment because of what they each emphasize, particularly with 1986 Fleer.
I'll bet that within the next 2 years it will come out that psa is purposely giving low grades to force people to resubmit, especially on more valuable cards like this.
I looked over the pictures you showed very closely, and noticed there is a lot of fiber around all the edges out and away from the card, when the call was made I think the person they spoke with gave back a very fast direct quick answer on the grade and then why the grade. .... He / she should have mentioned any other defects picked up and maybe added the line on back as a maybe 3rd defect found after other defects. It looks to me like all your friend has to do is have the card cleaned and the edges softaned and pressed so they don't show the fiber leaving the card edges. A little buff on the face of the card and very little nano sized warm mist with distilled water on the back where the line is would smooth that line out some blending color, then press card but the edges at the cleaning stage with the warm nano sized mist would pull the edges together when pressing the card up against some type of a flat surface. He'd get the (9). Possible 10. (When graders detect something on a card they tend to look further for more. ... the fiber around the edges is enough to make them slow down and look further giving them a felling they do have to note all with the card if they did find something there fore they have to fully slow down on said card and inspect and properly grade the card for its defects and not let anything go as it might be questioned later. With this said, always have your cards CLEANED and pressed.)
Does he regret cracking it? This will only stop when people resist the temptation of cracking it. In this case, assuming the best he could have gotten was a PSA 8, after fees, his potential upside was quite low, and the risk was high.
The potential upside was an extra 35% to put toward another card. No I don’t regret cracking it. If you were selling your home and the realtor (who did their homework) suggested doing a cosmetic renovation to your bathroom to likely get an extra xx% on the selling price, wouldn’t you do it?
@@TJ_Is_Online And in your same scenario, if that same cosmetic renovation could also have your home LOSE up to 35% based on the whim of one company, would you also still do the same renovation? You're only touting the upside, and not equally factoring in the downside risk.
People say “PSA has gotten stricter” and it seems like that’s the case but the problem is their grading rubric hasn’t changed and they have never come out and announced that they would start grading more strictly. There is no value to grading if they are just going to change their standards internally while maintaining the status quo externally. Will that PSA 6 become a PSA 4 in a few years when they switch over to AI grading or whatever new technology comes along?
@@JunkWaxHero Ironically, the PSA 9 with the cert 72885305 is incredibly off-center. Check out the front left/right centering on the cert lookup. Extremely surprised it got a PSA 9 in the first place. Not all 9s are the same and that's somewhat understandable.
Everyone knows that PSA is extra stubborn on huge cards like this. For some reason they want to keep the POPs low on 9s and 10s. It happens on the 89 Griffey and 80 Henderson all the time. Send in an 86 McGriff and get a 9 or 10 no problem.
I wonder if the level of service you submit it at makes a difference. If you submit an 86 Jordan it might get a higher grade if you submit it at the $499 service level rather than the $79.
My understanding is that the grader is not supposed to know the service level, but who knows? I’ve heard anecdotally that the higher level doesn’t mean higher grades.
Cracking a graded card is a risk. Everyone that cracks and resubmits a card wants the value of their card to go up. Sometimes it does and sometimes it goes down. No one cries when the grade goes up - they only cry when the grade goes down.
Maybe you didn’t watch the video… this is about what PSA claimed was the reason for the grade, which coincides with the same card in much higher grades many times.
I have a hard time feeling bad for someone who cracks a perfectly fine slab for profit. PSA is inconsistent. This is not new news. You crack it, you take the risk. In the is case it didn’t even cost him that much since a PSA 6 and BGS 8 are still pretty close in price. He fucked around. He found out.
BGS isn’t considered a strong slab when selling anymore. Doesn’t matter how strong the card is inside. Cracking a strong card for resub to another grader isn’t usually risky. Unfortunately, it becomes risky when graders don’t cross-reference the card’s attributes to their own grading definitions. Even by their own definitions, this is at least a “near mint” / 7. Look at the all the psa 8s, 8.5s, & 9s that have the same line.
Geoff Wilson Show channel just had a video posted (around the same time this video was posted) with an interview with Ryan Hoge and he was saying that they are looking at making grader notes available for some service levels.
A PSA 10 graded 5 years ago compared to a PSA 10 card graded today, are actually very different grading standards. Grading standards have tightened as PSA (and other grading companies) grade more cards and buyer's expectations have evolved on what makes a GEM MINT 10. Comparing older PSA 10's that have a cert numbers starting with a "0", "1", "2", "3", "4", etc typically dictates this is an older graded card with the far more loose standards. This person should have sold it as-is or attempted a crossover service instead of cracking since this is a marquee card. Beckett has lower standards, especially older graded Beckett cards, and newly graded PSA marquee cards have the highest standards, so this was a recipe for disaster, especially knowing it has a flaw (print line) that Beckett overlooked, and PSA maybe have only overlooked many years ago. If you saw a many *recently* graded PSA 8s that had these same print lines, then maybe it's worth a risk, but again, this person was trying to crack/submit solely in order to make more money, and they gambled and lost. This probably is a PSA 6 based on the new grading standards and a known print defect on the back.
@@JunkWaxHero Gotcha, but please note this is why I mentioned it "typically" means a cert starting with "1" was an older graded card. In a couple of years, newly graded cards will likely start with a "0" or "1". There are many old PSA graded cards with a cert starting with "8", and if you get them re-holdered with the lighthouse slab, there's no real way to tell. SGC however, tells you when the card was graded when you lookup the cert number. PSA does not. They really should.
If it was me I would crack it again and resend it to PSA a second time. Yes this gets costly. I bet you get a different grade. Maybe send it in under someone else's name like your wife or girlfriend. My serious guess is that you get a different grade. IMO PSA bulked up with a bunch of new graders and ones that didn't know what you just presented on the print mark being a common feature. I recently sent in a PSA 1997 Baseball refractor of Ken Griffey that I got previously graded as a PSA 6 about 2 months ago. I studied that card well and could not see anything that would keep it from being graded at least a PSA 8. I decided to resend it in to PSA to grade again, a second time and this time it came back graded a 9. I wasn't attempting to game the grading system. I really thought the PSA 6 grade was wrong. I think PSA is suffering from an expansion of the hobby and they are human and make mistakes. Regrade the card again.
PSA is ALL over the place! I cracked a PSA 5 & resubmitted it (since I didn't think it was a 5) and it came back as a PSA 9. Obviously a different grader
How far do people want to go. Reasons for how a grade will start a debate. Phone lines will be jammed. Bottom line there is a group who is only interested in the net worth. I have said this before that authenticity of a card is number one(forgeries, trimming). After that I think any collector who has been collecting for a reasonable time can look at a card and determine where it falls on condition scale. The collector doesn’t need a company to tell them if a card has rounded corners or not.
Beleive me the same card can het graded multiple times and get different grades each time. They spend very little time on your grade. Trying to decode them will drive you crazy. Dont like your grade? resubmit it. Thats all.
I don't see why it would be all that difficult to provide grader notes, especially since all companies have a digital component. A lot of it could even be check boxes by the grader... check, check, check, uncheck, submit. Bam you have a better idea of your grade. It makes no sense with the technology we have, and the media we use, not to have these companies disclosing why they gave the collector/dealer the service they gave. Grading is a service, and should be treated as such by PSA. It shouldn't be some kind of state secret on why a card got an assigned grade. My two cents.
PSA likely looks at all aspects of the card, and arrive at a grade decision, so no it wasn’t just the print line - it was that plus centering, edges, corners, etc. And any surface marks that aren’t visible unless inspecting in person. Its good that they collaborate and it’s not one person in isolation making these decisions (at least when close). The real lesson here is that cracking and submitting, to same or worse different company is a risk and you can get a lower grade.
PSA is brutally inconsistent. I have his card up next to mine in the registry (I have an 8). Here's what I see. His card has a lot of surface scratches in the upper crowd. Past that, his centering is an easy 8 and edges and corners look very good. I think they got him on those scratches. The print line is something PSA must not care AT ALL about because I've seen 8s that are half yellow on the back, newly graded. Just my thoughts. And I thought mine was a 9 to be honest.
@JunkWaxHero Ohhhh, I thought we were assuming that! That makes no sense then. I looked at PSA 8 Jordans for 15 months straight and that line is consistent.
If 1/10th of 1 percent of all PSA submissions are mis-graded, you get about 1,100 cards per month in which PSA didn’t do their job. I’m not sure that’s so bad.
It all depends on how much money you spend. If you spend less than $20 per card to get graded gaurantee no tens. If you pay $300-$600 to get a card graded… sure you get a 10… it’s all about the money
Until grading becomes something other than subjective, this is always going to happen. Just like people who get upset over scores given for ice skating, gymnastics, diving, etc. It's all subjective. Trying to figure out why TAG hasn't caught on more since they have taken a lot of the subjectivity out of the equation.
Subjective is the perfect word to describe one person's opinion. My 12 year old nephew could grade cards. He can find any flaw. He's never graded a 10 with any of my cards. His standards are ridiculously high. I love it! Lol
They'd never come out and say that they made a mistake. They'll just try to justify it by saying anything and stand behind it. Over many years, they have shown who they are. Accept it and move forward. Stop giving them our hard earned money if you feel that way. It's up to us consumers.
I left a comment on another video which I'll paraphrase here: "What % of these graders are also collectors themselves? If I'm an underpaid grader that has a PSA graded (whatever card) at home, and a really good looking copy of that card comes across my workspace, am I more likely gonna give that card a higher grade, or lower? Gotta protect my 'investment'" -Something to think about. Now this theory is either a nothingburger, or holds some merit. The latter is definitely not good.
Same happened to me.. and never again will I pay the tier I think it will grade as… I will let them up-charge me! Boy did they screw me!! Lesson learned! 🤬🤷🏻♂️ But I would for sure buy that 6 from you! 😉
First mistake was to send to PSA..., if you want to appeal to a wider mark for resale go with Beckett... Asia and Australia love BGS.. we don't really buy psa
Grading has its place but is over used. Absolutely notes would be helpful. I thunk we are already in the down turn era for the excessive attention grading gets
PSA 6 is short for "we don't care, it's graded now shut up" Recent submission of some TCG cards came back ALL 6s. And there were wild variations in the quality of the cards. Two cards same TCG, one mint one with tons of wear...both a 6. I'm not saying the good one was a 10, but no way they are BOTH 6s.
I thought about this prior to the PSA sub. it’s thought in the hobby that PSA grades certain cards far more harshly than others (e.g. 1980 Rickey Henderson, ‘52 Topps Mantle, & ‘86 Fleer MJ) Didn’t think it would impact a possible “near mint to mint” aka 8 MJ card… 👀
im done with psa. i graded over 1,000 card with them and carried about 53% gem 10 rate. then the last 3 orders of about 75 cards i got 2 10s...yes, you read that right, 2 fuggin 10s out of 75 cards. obviously something fishy going on...some extreme fishy shit. as you might figure, i was fired up. i was livid. not only did i only get 2 10's...but had a couple 5s, several 6's, and several 7s...and the rest 8's and 9s....out of the previous 1,000 cards i graded i probably only got 5 7's total. And most of those i figured would 7. i got more 5,6 and 7s in these last 75 cards then i did total of the first 1,000. its like they just randomly assigned grades is what it seemed like to me. like they were so slammed and pressed to get cards out that they just randomly assigned grades as it is obviously much quicker to do that then to actually grade the cards. management has these guidelines that the graders must fall into. They cant have too many 10's. id bet money on it. it has to something like that. the graders numbers have to fall into certain perameters. it has to be something like that.
@@JunkWaxHero Grading a million cards a month, I think someone accepted it. Thats where the saying buy the card not the grade comes in at. PSA is successful from this very model they follow. If you want a grade that comes with a report then use the companies that give reports and have consistency. Should ve just accept it? Done deal its accepted. People have been pointing this out since I can remember but yet they are still used.
@@JunkWaxHero you know I would love to share my stories. The ones where I resubmit and get different grades. The bewilderment I go through is untethered. Its just not anything I havent heard about though. Im not sure if beating the dead horse is effective or not. I feel like if PSA makes changes, they will lose market share. They do what works. The mystery works very for them. Its a sellers tool that just may level out one day. The collector has to stop buying the number. The majority is worried about resale and has to cooperate with the beast once they get in bed with them. This is where that foothold comes in.
It’s not about asking for sympathy or making you happy because grade came back lower than deserved. As members of the hobby, we all should all cordial. It’s about holding graders accountable for cross, referencing the card against their defined grade definitions & consistency. Personally, I’m indifferent to grading companies as a buyer. Eye appeal of the card is the only thing that matters along w/ cost. When it comes to selling & trading cards from our collections to subsidize other hobby purchases, we all want to be informed and fairly maximize value. That is why I cracked it out of the BGS case. What I did is no different than doing a quick cosmetic bathroom renovation before selling a house to increase value because people like nice bathrooms
What do you think?
I sent out a few cards to psa and one of them got a six when it was pack fresh a ten of that card I sent off would of been over hundred dollars
@@sightfulmedia2629 pack fresh doesn’t mean mint.
@@JunkWaxHero Pack fresh is a statement that has nothing to do with card quality. It only means it recently came out of a pack.
I think they have a ton of inexperienced graders who have no business touching a jordan rookie.
Some great points, and great examples, Mike. They need to be brought to account!
If you've watched the B.B.C. show 'Fake or Fortune' (which I'd highly recommend, esp. if interested in art), they often go to established art 'gate-keepers' (particularly those located in France) to get their final verdict, because if they deem it authentic then, in the eyes of the art world, it is. Once they come to a consensus, they often don't explain their reasons... it's just a 'no', and 'we don't find it to be an authentic example'. If they've deemed a piece as not being authentic in the past, then they rarely change their minds - lest they admit they were wrong. They don't appear on camera, and the 'brains trust' come to a consensus behind closed doors. All this, despite new technology and new research, seemingly, proving the item's authenticity.
Bringing this back to grading... there needs to be openness (in why the grade received the grade it did - grading notes, for starters), flexibility (in admitting they were wrong in the past, and adjusting the grade accordingly), consistency (that each and every card submitted with those specifications will receive that grade - new technology can help here), and accountability (they appear to act as their own authority, without an overarching body correcting them... who is 'gate-keeping' the 'gate-keeper'?). All this should be EXPECTED of them, without any additional cost being borne by the consumer.
The grading market is a joke. I sent in a ticket to Beckett to be graded and included exactly the info I wanted printed on it. The info was spot on correct. They sent it back to me without what I wanted written on it. They graded it an 8. I sent it back with full documentation of what the info I wanted printed on it. A simple google search would have done this by them but nope they had to slab it, send it back and make me have to send it back to them wasting time and money. They sent it back to me two months later with the info I wanted on it but dropped the grade to a 5. I'm done getting stuff graded. It's a waste of money and only frustration.
FK EVERY SINGLE GRADING COMPANY IN THE WORLD...each bogus racket of scumbags & swindlers.....
Haha
Mike: I really appreciate your logical approach on this topic. You are absolutely correct in that the consistency and quality of grading and the grading process needs to be addressed by the grading companies. These is not sufficient consistency in grading of cards of similar quality, Also there definitely needs to be more transparency of the process and standards. With the industry now being one of millions of dollars changing hands based on grading, the grading process and standards on which it is based is extremely poor. Ands quite frankly could result in lawsuits if thousands of dollars are at stake.
There needs to be significant investment in the grading process and standards if grading is to be sustainable. There also needs to be automation applied to the inspection and grading process. I worked in an industry that used inline scanners for inspecting metal flowing down a production line at 100 FPM and the process detected and found deviations in quality at the granular level.
This technology has existed for 10-15 years. It seems very apparent that the grading companies have no interest in upsetting a goose that provides golden eggs and serious profits based on antiquated processes and knowledge.
This is why we need tag or another company to take over for psa. I’m tired of this inconsistency from psa.
This is why I put my cards in a 1 touch. I am not paying anyone to tell me what I should think of my card.
I dont see PSA as a scam.I just think they are bad at their jobs and their standards are all over the place. I think PSA is just too big for their own good and they dont have enough quality graders to accurately grade a bazillion cards a month. I dont have any confidence that most card sent to PSA are graded by an actual expert.
Completely agree.
And ....it's a scam....🎉
It's hard to say if the grade is correct without being able to look at it with a magnifying glass. Other than the print line I'd be curious to know what else the graders notes said. Because it was a bit off center on both the front and the back and who knows what else might be wrong with it under magnification.
I've had many conversations/arguments over the years with people who swear that they got the wrong grade, then I ask them if they looked at it with a magnifying glass and they always say "No, but I have good eyes." Then I take out my magnifying glass and point out 4 things they couldn't see with their eyes.
This has nothing to do with our feeling about the grade. I laid out the case: PSA told him it was because of the mark, and a lot of higher grades have the mark. I’m not asking you to assess the grade.
@@JunkWaxHero You're asking if there's consistency in the grading because other cards with the line got 10's and this one didn't. You're calling out the consistency of their grading without actually having examined the card yourself. Sure, if the only thing wrong with this card was the print line then yes, it should've received a 10 like the other cards. But as I stated before you can clearly see that the card is also off center both front and back, and who knows what else is wrong under magnification.
If were were gonna judge it just based off the pictures I'd say that cards an 8 because of the print line and off centering.
You say you're not asking us to assess the grade......but you are. By asking if there's consistency with the grading we have to assess the grades given to the cards, that's the only way to know if their consistent or not.
@@Sandman60077 I am not assessing the card, Sandman. I am not asking you to. PSA told him the reason for the grade. I don’t know how I can be more clear about that.
PSA: “You got a 6 because of this print mark.”
TJ: “But these 9s and 10s have this same print mark.”
That’s literally it.
More info is needed. When PSA says the reason we gave it a 6 is due to the print line. But, the crucial piece of info not shared here is they gave it a 6 as opposed to what other grade? Meaning, was it considered to be a 6.5 or 7? And the print line made it a 6? Cus that would absolutely make sense. A print line on a perfect conditioned card of a 10, is a world a part from a print line on a mid grade card of a 6-7. The grade of the card is the determining factor of how much a print line will have an effect.
So the question is what was the other grade being considered by PSA. Did they say it was an 8 but the print line made it a 6? Or is it a 6.5, possibly a 7 and the print line took it down to a 6.
If that's the case, then it makes sense.
Great comment! The grader notes told to me didn’t mention other aspects of the card.
Look at the card in Mike’s video & PSA scans. It’s a really sharp card even with the back print line / mark. Plus PSA didn’t penalized the line so drastically even a few years ago .
I’ll post a video tomorrow on my IG page.
PSA will always hammer certain cards of certain players. I've learned that the hard way. The most consistent is SGC. MY OPINION..
I am encouraged to hear from the recent interview between Geoff Wilson and the PSA president and from recent grade reveals that PSA appears to be getting more consistent in applying its grading standards. But, hearing incidents like this with the PSA grade of 6 on the Michael Jordan Fleer 1986 basketball card, it seems that graders should be reading the grading standards before assigning a grade; to me, that is an element that is lacking and needs to be communicated to PSA.
I’d say this was your best video yet, for many reasons. It would be nice to see more like this.
Glad you enjoyed it!
As usual, Mike did a great job with the video. His presentation of facts was A+ and I’m glad the Rickey Henderson card did not suffer damage.
Should cards just be graded authentic, poor, mid-grade, near mint, mint, and gem? I think that is the solution. I notice in videos that 33 Goudy Ruths in the same grade of a 2 have different values due to eye appeal. I feel like that would be the case if a card was just marked mint. You would know it's in the 8-9 range and can bid accordingly If that were the case I would put the Jordan in the near mint category with the marking on the back, and a mint without the marking. An Authentic would be the same and plus the 1's. Poor would be 2's and 3's, mid grade would be 4's and 5's, near mint, 6 and 7's, mint 8's and 9's, Gem 10's. They would probably still screw it up. lol.
Why didn't he just keep it in the bgs 8 and send it to psa using their crossover service
Because the usual success rate (e.g. BGS 8 to PSA 8) direct crossover is low especially for popular cards. Better to go w/ raw cards in most cases.
Many auction houses & popular online consignment sellers estimate BGS / BVG graded cards to worth 1 to 2.5 grades lower than PSA (for value).
The facts I would need to know- Do all the ‘86 Jordan backs have the print mark? Had any of these three graders ever grade a ‘86 Jordan before? The answer to those questions, in my opinion, determines the culpability of PSA. It’s complicated. Great topic, Mike! 👍❤️
Thanks Rob. Not all, but many do. And some are more visible.
Shocking that a service based on opinions, as stated by the president of PSA recently, will find variations of opinion on every card they have ever graded. Also shocking that nobody has ever complained when an opinion of their card comes in higher than they expected.
We can all agree there should be some standards or the service provided is worthless and it appears comsumers give credence to PSAs opinions as evidenced by high grades selling above average comps.
Will occassional examples of 'wrong' opinions move the needle downward and lead to PSA's demise?
What's crazy is that at least one of the 10's you showed had a bottom white corner that was obviously white, and it wasn't tiny. So, I have gotten fairly good at this PSA thing when it comes to 1986 Fleer. I have a PSA 8 or above of every RC in '86, including Jordan. I sent in another Jordan that I felt was a 9 and outside shot at a 10, but it was better than my 8. They gave this 2nd Jordan a PSA 8. It was easily better than all the 8's I could find. It literally had no issues that could be seen with the naked eye or under magnification that I could find. I just figured it wouldn't 10 because they just don't 10 them often. What is hysterical is that I had a 3rd Jordan that I sold cheap because the top-back of the card was horribly stained. It was dark brown all across the top. Mostly just dust/dirt from being stored for years. The guy I sold it to was a friend and he graded it and we both thought it would be like a PSA 3-4. Yeah, it came back a PSA 8!!!
I agree that PSA need to include graders notes. They don't need to be long, just something quick that explains why something is the way it is. Just circle an area on the generic picture of a card and write a word or two. Something. For what we pay, it's not too much to ask.
PSA go home...
Very likely another surface issue.
The Bgs review had a 7.5 for surface. Similarly to your additional psa examples, there are many bgs examples with that print line and high surface scores.
Then they should say that instead of pointing to the print mark.
@JunkWaxHero Absolutely. Notes that are incorrect (if they were) are just as bad as an incorrect authentication/grading.
I wonder if they do it intentionally to keep the higher grade pops suppressed to keep their prices higher...
graders notes are coming from PSA, sooner rather than later on high end cards first and then will trickle down to the lower grading levels.
Most likely, when these cards were originally graded, I imagine the technology wasn't as good as it is now. Meaning they can catch more things now. Cracking older cards in slabs is probably more iffy due to yellowing and better technology. I could be wrong, but some of my 30 year old cards are slightly yellowed, and they've been out of the light and in plastic for 30 years. Not in air-tight containers, though, but there wasn't as godd of quality of cards built back then, until upper deck came along. I'm still amazed how white the upper deck cards still are after all these years.
That’s totally F’d up that there are 9’s and 10’s with the same line on the back and now new graders don’t follow the ones that have already hit the 9’s and 10’s.
I’ve seen a number of videos recently of people cracking 8s or 9s from BGS and them coming back PSA 6-8s. Another example, should have left the card alone and been satisfied with the BGS grade/slab. Just my 2 cents. Appreciate the video/videos you always have a lot of helpful information and insight 🤙🏼
Marty, I think you missed the point. He knew there was a risk. But they told him it was a 6 because of a print mark that is on 9s and 10s.
@@JunkWaxHero ahhh I see. Thanks for the clarification 👍🏼
Well for one, grading is obviously subjective, but also - this is what happens when you have "professional graders" that aren't qualified to grade cards pre-2000 or they're ignorant to flaws, and other nuances that are exclusive to particular cards and sets... I mean, you have to keep in mind that sets generally (not all, but most) pre-1990 or so are unique and they have unique flaws that are exclusive to most (or some particular) cards in the set, and generally speaking those flaws are often overlooked if the card would otherwise grade a 7, 8 or even 9 - in other-words - an educated grader wont penalize the card for having a particular flaw that is found in 95% of the cards (or card) from that particular set if the card will grade a 7,8 and sometimes 9's) - which is why of course 10's are so difficult to get pre-junk wax era, because 10's are really reserved for those cards that would not only grade a 9.5/10 but DON'T have that particular flaw that are found in 99% of the cards in the set..
Of course that's for high-grade, but when you're talking a 7 or 8 - no educated "professional grader" is going to "penalize" a card for having a flaw that 99% of the cards in the set have... So with that said - I think whomever graded that card clearly took the print lines into account and penalized the card for that reason, when that flaw should have been ignored since the card was only going to physically grade a 7-8.
Look, these grading services really need to STOP having their graders grade "just anything".. They need professionals with many moons of experience grading cards from eras they're experienced, highly familiar with and are comfortable and confident in grading... Point being - a grader experienced in ultra modern cards SHOULD NOT be grading vintage and vice-versa unless they've proven they're qualified... I mean there are worlds of differences between cards produced between eras.... Look, I'm a "vintage guy" and I generally specialize in cards from 1950-1980 - more specifically baseball and hockey - I know the era inside and out - and would feel more than comfortable grading cards from the era but if you put an ultra-modern card in my face and tell me to grade it, I wont have the confidence I would if you put a 1973 Topps Mike Schmidt Rookie in my face. I mean I'm sure I could grade the ultra-modern card on par with other graders that deal in ultra-modern, but it would take me much longer, that and I would have a lot of questions. lol.
And yes, absolutely - these professional grading services SHOULD provide grading notes. I mean if I thoroughly examined a card with the same equipment these grading services use and I determined the card should grade no less than an 8, then the card comes back a 6 - I would love to know why it graded a 6 - especially since I have nearly 40 years of experience in the hobby, and at least 30-years grading cards or accurately "determining grades" (there were no grading services back in the day - cards were on a scale of good/fair/poor to mint).
Also, I think grading services should mandate that graded cards go though 2 different phases of grading - a grader that grades the card and another grader (preferably with more experience) that approves or denies the grade.
They need to apply technology that already exists for measuring to standard deviations. There could still exist some human evaluation in exception situations but 99%+ of cards could be graded with a technical system at a much lower inconsistency of grades of similar cards.
Graders don't take time to grade them if they are grading that many cards a day, week or month. Rush them through, give a grade and get repeat business when you aren't happy with the grade they give you the 1st time.
How many cards a day does a grader have to grade if there are 200 graders doing 1.3 million cards per month. 300 graders???
You control the pop on a card grade by not giving a correct grade. It’s done the same way with comics
Big TJ fan here, and if you can help get that unjust grade changed Mike, more power to you.
You couldn't pay me to have PSA grade anything older than 2010
PSA President on Geoff Wilson show said they will be providing grading notes going forward starting this summer. They've been doing notes for months but haven't released them yet. Wonder if they will release the notes from when they started or starting for submissions this summer. Agree with comments he should have gone with PSA crossover service. But hindsight is 20/20. PSA president did say they have cracked hundreds of thousands of cards so they are pretty good at it. 🤷♂
Your video speaks as if this guy had this Jordan in his collection for years, and decided to slab it to PSA after having this for a long time. His Beckett card was only graded by Beckett just 6 months ago (Cert #0016189788 graded in October of 2023.) It also has a 7.5 for surface sub grade on the Beckett label. The back print line isn't the only flaw of this card, as even the Beckett surface grade of 7.5 shows. This guy gambled and lost, trying to maximize profit, but there's risk there. This is why there's a Crossover service option as well.
Direct crossover from BGS to PSA (e.g. 8 to 8) have a low success rate.
The BGS 7.5 sub grade was for the surface (the back semi transparent print mark). The other subs were 9, 9, & 8.5. Those are strong grades even w/ the 7.5
Grader are just an opinion, usually after looking at the card for a minute. When I went to graders school, every card reviewed has graded notes. Grader states why the grade, that I agree should be shared with the customer
Thanks for this perspective Orlando. 3 different people reviewed this card, and apparently all cited the mark on the back.
Thanks Orlando
The industry needs to move beyond opinions for grades. They need to be made more quantitative based on technology and deviation measurements to standards.
I’ll buy something already PSA slabbed, but I don’t submit cards to PSA. Your newsletter is great. Thanks for your efforts.
Thanks Ken!
Stories like this are great news if you collect cards. Yes, I wrote, "great news." It shows that there are still great deals to be had if you BUY THE CARD and not the grade.
Nice video, Mike. Good job.
100 %
The problem is if PSA start giving graders notes, then they will devalue older slabs without notes. They have already devalued older slabs by grading tougher now (I constantly see newer slabs more expensive on eBay than older slabs).
Yeah they announced today that they’re releasing graders notes. I saw after I posted this video.
You can always send card in old slab to be put in new holder
Pop control for their buddies
My own opinion,, is PSA ,, doesn’t what to devalued the grades,,, with the amount of
Cards they grade very month ,,, I notice that with recent cards graded ,, it’s become lower grade .. of mint cards,, years back a card could have minor crease marks, would grade a psa 3 , today ,, it would be a psa 1…
He could have sent it to PSA as a "crossover," leaving it in the BGS slab while requesting a min grade of 8, or don't crack it.
@@scottstuber5857 those kind of requests of a minimum grade is possible?
From PSA's perspective if they don't allow an actual conversations about individual cards out of the 1million cards/month then they are sparing themselves a huge headache... I'm amazed that they even entertain the request... 'Eye appeal' and 'Grader's opinion' and other weasel words allow them to hide behind subjectivity when it suits them...
Grading companies change their standards sometimes. I know PSA recently got a bit more strict with some things and this is probably just a result of that.
It’s all about population control if their is scarcity with the higher grades it drive the prices up on them and people see PSA 10’s get way more on the market, so more people submit their cards to PSA. And on very popular card like that, with every high grade it diminishes the value of all the graded Jordan and makes it harder to advertise the high value of a PSA grade. Plain and simple
I agee with you'll the card looks good but it comes down to the graders were they new employees were they having a bad day we don't know but were always looking into them from a window thats aways blacked out for reasons. They will always come up or make up something to offset the grade so another words they don't care. But it is something to bring up and start chats about maybe the graders forgot about the manufacturers defect rule that day. Maybe he can resubmit card and see if it comes back higher. Maybe different graders second time around. Great topic mike.
I am currently putting together a set of 1986 Fleer Basketball in PSA9, and have graded a ton of cards from the set. When I first started putting together the set, most of my PC cards were in BGS holders, but I decided to do the set in PSA because of the differences in how PSA and BGS grade them. PSA is MUCH tougher on this set, particularly on corners when pursuing higher grades of 8+. I have seen some BGS8+ cards for 1986 Fleer that look downright embarrassing compared to PSA cards of the same grade because of how lenient that BGS is and strict that PSA is on corners. The set's red borders really highlight the differences in how the two companies grade.
Based on my experience in grading the set, I think that getting a PSA8 for the card in this video was pretty unlikely given the tipped corners. I don't know about a 6, but I definitely wouldn't have guessed an 8.
Maybe you didn’t watch the whole video… they told him it got a 6 because of the print line that exists on 8s, 9s, and 10s.
@@JunkWaxHero I did watch the video. I understand what they told him, and that may be their real reasoning or it may just be what they threw at the wall to see if the reason would stick, I can't really say. All that I'm saying is that, based on my experience in grading the set, that card was very unlikely to cross over from a BGS8 to a PSA 8.
@@DerethACexactly. PSA is grading this set tougher than others which is ironic that means PSA isn’t grading using their standard definitions per grade
A BGS 8 to PSA 8 crossover in a slab success rate is very low. That is why I had it graded raw.
@@TJ_Is_Online Whether it was graded raw or as a true crossover isn’t relevant to my point. Judging from the pictures of the card from the video, the card was unlikely to get a PSA8 grade due to the tipped corners.
If it got a PSA6 because of the print line on the back, and that is really the only reason, then yes that’s an inconsistency. Just my opinion, but I doubt that it’s as straightforward as that.
The lesson here is that trying to grade a BGS card to PSA is asking for disappointment because of what they each emphasize, particularly with 1986 Fleer.
@@DerethAC 100%
I'll bet that within the next 2 years it will come out that psa is purposely giving low grades to force people to resubmit, especially on more valuable cards like this.
I looked over the pictures you showed very closely, and noticed there is a lot of fiber around all the edges out and away from the card, when the call was made I think the person they spoke with gave back a very fast direct quick answer on the grade and then why the grade. .... He / she should have mentioned any other defects picked up and maybe added the line on back as a maybe 3rd defect found after other defects. It looks to me like all your friend has to do is have the card cleaned and the edges softaned and pressed so they don't show the fiber leaving the card edges. A little buff on the face of the card and very little nano sized warm mist with distilled water on the back where the line is would smooth that line out some blending color, then press card but the edges at the cleaning stage with the warm nano sized mist would pull the edges together when pressing the card up against some type of a flat surface. He'd get the (9). Possible 10. (When graders detect something on a card they tend to look further for more. ... the fiber around the edges is enough to make them slow down and look further giving them a felling they do have to note all with the card if they did find something there fore they have to fully slow down on said card and inspect and properly grade the card for its defects and not let anything go as it might be questioned later. With this said, always have your cards CLEANED and pressed.)
Does he regret cracking it? This will only stop when people resist the temptation of cracking it. In this case, assuming the best he could have gotten was a PSA 8, after fees, his potential upside was quite low, and the risk was high.
The potential upside was an extra 35% to put toward another card. No I don’t regret cracking it.
If you were selling your home and the realtor (who did their homework) suggested doing a cosmetic renovation to your bathroom to likely get an extra xx% on the selling price, wouldn’t you do it?
@@TJ_Is_Online And in your same scenario, if that same cosmetic renovation could also have your home LOSE up to 35% based on the whim of one company, would you also still do the same renovation? You're only touting the upside, and not equally factoring in the downside risk.
People say “PSA has gotten stricter” and it seems like that’s the case but the problem is their grading rubric hasn’t changed and they have never come out and announced that they would start grading more strictly. There is no value to grading if they are just going to change their standards internally while maintaining the status quo externally. Will that PSA 6 become a PSA 4 in a few years when they switch over to AI grading or whatever new technology comes along?
And two of the 9s are recent grades.
@@JunkWaxHero Ironically, the PSA 9 with the cert 72885305 is incredibly off-center. Check out the front left/right centering on the cert lookup. Extremely surprised it got a PSA 9 in the first place. Not all 9s are the same and that's somewhat understandable.
A fool and his money are soon parted. Never stray from the best advice : Buy The Card, Not The Grade!
Everyone knows that PSA is extra stubborn on huge cards like this. For some reason they want to keep the POPs low on 9s and 10s. It happens on the 89 Griffey and 80 Henderson all the time. Send in an 86 McGriff and get a 9 or 10 no problem.
I wonder if the level of service you submit it at makes a difference. If you submit an 86 Jordan it might get a higher grade if you submit it at the $499 service level rather than the $79.
My understanding is that the grader is not supposed to know the service level, but who knows? I’ve heard anecdotally that the higher level doesn’t mean higher grades.
Cracking a graded card is a risk. Everyone that cracks and resubmits a card wants the value of their card to go up. Sometimes it does and sometimes it goes down. No one cries when the grade goes up - they only cry when the grade goes down.
Maybe you didn’t watch the video… this is about what PSA claimed was the reason for the grade, which coincides with the same card in much higher grades many times.
I have a hard time feeling bad for someone who cracks a perfectly fine slab for profit. PSA is inconsistent. This is not new news. You crack it, you take the risk. In the is case it didn’t even cost him that much since a PSA 6 and BGS 8 are still pretty close in price. He fucked around. He found out.
BGS isn’t considered a strong slab when selling anymore. Doesn’t matter how strong the card is inside.
Cracking a strong card for resub to another grader isn’t usually risky.
Unfortunately, it becomes risky when graders don’t cross-reference the card’s attributes to their own grading definitions. Even by their own definitions, this is at least a “near mint” / 7.
Look at the all the psa 8s, 8.5s, & 9s that have the same line.
Make grader notes for regular service level and above for all PSA orders.
Geoff Wilson Show channel just had a video posted (around the same time this video was posted) with an interview with Ryan Hoge and he was saying that they are looking at making grader notes available for some service levels.
Nothing PSA is doing makes sense. Grades don’t mean anything. I have been shocked at what I’ve gotten back.
that jordan looks real good. it looks centered and corners and edges are crispy
Yes!
A PSA 10 graded 5 years ago compared to a PSA 10 card graded today, are actually very different grading standards. Grading standards have tightened as PSA (and other grading companies) grade more cards and buyer's expectations have evolved on what makes a GEM MINT 10. Comparing older PSA 10's that have a cert numbers starting with a "0", "1", "2", "3", "4", etc typically dictates this is an older graded card with the far more loose standards. This person should have sold it as-is or attempted a crossover service instead of cracking since this is a marquee card.
Beckett has lower standards, especially older graded Beckett cards, and newly graded PSA marquee cards have the highest standards, so this was a recipe for disaster, especially knowing it has a flaw (print line) that Beckett overlooked, and PSA maybe have only overlooked many years ago. If you saw a many *recently* graded PSA 8s that had these same print lines, then maybe it's worth a risk, but again, this person was trying to crack/submit solely in order to make more money, and they gambled and lost. This probably is a PSA 6 based on the new grading standards and a known print defect on the back.
There’s a 9 with a cert starting with 8. I meant to mention this but the certs were also all displayed.
Another 9 with cert starting with 7.
Another 9 with cert starting with 8. You get the picture.
It's called "HYPOCRISY"
@@JunkWaxHero Gotcha, but please note this is why I mentioned it "typically" means a cert starting with "1" was an older graded card. In a couple of years, newly graded cards will likely start with a "0" or "1". There are many old PSA graded cards with a cert starting with "8", and if you get them re-holdered with the lighthouse slab, there's no real way to tell. SGC however, tells you when the card was graded when you lookup the cert number. PSA does not. They really should.
The issue is a psa 2020 might be a grade 8-9, 2024 might be a grade 6. That’s an issue.
Several of the 9s I cited were very very recent. 2023-2024.
If it was me I would crack it again and resend it to PSA a second time. Yes this gets costly. I bet you get a different grade. Maybe send it in under someone else's name like your wife or girlfriend. My serious guess is that you get a different grade. IMO PSA bulked up with a bunch of new graders and ones that didn't know what you just presented on the print mark being a common feature. I recently sent in a PSA 1997 Baseball refractor of Ken Griffey that I got previously graded as a PSA 6 about 2 months ago. I studied that card well and could not see anything that would keep it from being graded at least a PSA 8. I decided to resend it in to PSA to grade again, a second time and this time it came back graded a 9. I wasn't attempting to game the grading system. I really thought the PSA 6 grade was wrong. I think PSA is suffering from an expansion of the hobby and they are human and make mistakes. Regrade the card again.
Great comment. I agree about the resub. Just gets costly especially w/ this card.
PSA is ALL over the place! I cracked a PSA 5 & resubmitted it (since I didn't think it was a 5) and it came back as a PSA 9. Obviously a different grader
How far do people want to go. Reasons for how a grade will start a debate. Phone lines will be jammed. Bottom line there is a group who is only interested in the net worth.
I have said this before that authenticity of a card is number one(forgeries, trimming). After that I think any collector who has been collecting for a reasonable time can look at a card and determine where it falls on condition scale.
The collector doesn’t need a company to tell them if a card has rounded corners or not.
Difficult to do with surface issues when purchasing online - apart from authenticity, it is the only real value added a grading company can give you.
You should do a review on TAG grading
It looks cool. I like it.
@@JunkWaxHero the human element is eliminated. no bias
Beleive me the same card can het graded multiple times and get different grades each time. They spend very little time on your grade. Trying to decode them will drive you crazy. Dont like your grade? resubmit it. Thats all.
Any high value cards i have i live two hrs away from atlanta im taking them there to have them submit high value vintage cards
I don't see why it would be all that difficult to provide grader notes, especially since all companies have a digital component. A lot of it could even be check boxes by the grader... check, check, check, uncheck, submit. Bam you have a better idea of your grade. It makes no sense with the technology we have, and the media we use, not to have these companies disclosing why they gave the collector/dealer the service they gave. Grading is a service, and should be treated as such by PSA. It shouldn't be some kind of state secret on why a card got an assigned grade. My two cents.
PSA has lost quite a bit of authenticity lately and rightly so
PSA likely looks at all aspects of the card, and arrive at a grade decision, so no it wasn’t just the print line - it was that plus centering, edges, corners, etc. And any surface marks that aren’t visible unless inspecting in person. Its good that they collaborate and it’s not one person in isolation making these decisions (at least when close). The real lesson here is that cracking and submitting, to same or worse different company is a risk and you can get a lower grade.
Then they should have cited all of those reasons and not just the print line, right?
PSA is brutally inconsistent. I have his card up next to mine in the registry (I have an 8). Here's what I see. His card has a lot of surface scratches in the upper crowd. Past that, his centering is an easy 8 and edges and corners look very good. I think they got him on those scratches. The print line is something PSA must not care AT ALL about because I've seen 8s that are half yellow on the back, newly graded. Just my thoughts. And I thought mine was a 9 to be honest.
Except PSA only cited the print line when asked why it was a 6
@JunkWaxHero Ohhhh, I thought we were assuming that! That makes no sense then. I looked at PSA 8 Jordans for 15 months straight and that line is consistent.
If 1/10th of 1 percent of all PSA submissions are mis-graded, you get about 1,100 cards per month in which PSA didn’t do their job. I’m not sure that’s so bad.
It all depends on how much money you spend. If you spend less than $20 per card to get graded gaurantee no tens. If you pay $300-$600 to get a card graded… sure you get a 10… it’s all about the money
Until grading becomes something other than subjective, this is always going to happen. Just like people who get upset over scores given for ice skating, gymnastics, diving, etc. It's all subjective. Trying to figure out why TAG hasn't caught on more since they have taken a lot of the subjectivity out of the equation.
Subjective is the perfect word to describe one person's opinion. My 12 year old nephew could grade cards. He can find any flaw. He's never graded a 10 with any of my cards. His standards are ridiculously high. I love it! Lol
thing is PSA would look just as bad if they admit they made a mistake
They'd never come out and say that they made a mistake. They'll just try to justify it by saying anything and stand behind it. Over many years, they have shown who they are. Accept it and move forward. Stop giving them our hard earned money if you feel that way. It's up to us consumers.
@@williampotts7205 you’re not wrong
Crack it again, send to Kurt, then send it back in for the 9
Kurt only works on his own cards not others 🤷♂️
He's not going to get rid of that print discoloration. Resubmitting is an option, or SGC.
if the value is over the $500 upcharge value then yes i agree
They have changed their standards over time to control the pop report
Apparently warm nano mist is the way to go…….
PSA... biggest scammer out there!!!! It would be a better sport if they went belly up!!!!!!!!!!
They pop control that jordan card. Period
I left a comment on another video which I'll paraphrase here:
"What % of these graders are also collectors themselves? If I'm an underpaid grader that has a PSA graded (whatever card) at home, and a really good looking copy of that card comes across my workspace, am I more likely gonna give that card a higher grade, or lower? Gotta protect my 'investment'"
-Something to think about. Now this theory is either a nothingburger, or holds some merit. The latter is definitely not good.
It’s an interesting thought. Of course, with 3 people grading this one, they’d all need to agree to some extent.
@@JunkWaxHero 3 'supposed' graders as told by damage control (Cust Service). I dunno Mike, it just doesn't seem to pass the smell test
Iconic cards get the Hubble Telescope treatment
I think they should take responsibility for the bullsh AND I’ve always thought all slabs should come back with explanation of grade.
They said today after this video came out that they’re rolling out graders notes!
@@JunkWaxHero ok?? We’ll see
Same happened to me.. and never again will I pay the tier I think it will grade as… I will let them up-charge me! Boy did they screw me!! Lesson learned! 🤬🤷🏻♂️
But I would for sure buy that 6 from you! 😉
Thank you
People, I am not a fan of PSA, but trying to grade a card via a scan is foolhardy.
Thank you
First mistake was to send to PSA..., if you want to appeal to a wider mark for resale go with Beckett... Asia and Australia love BGS.. we don't really buy psa
Grading has its place but is over used. Absolutely notes would be helpful. I thunk we are already in the down turn era for the excessive attention grading gets
PSA 6 is short for "we don't care, it's graded now shut up"
Recent submission of some TCG cards came back ALL 6s. And there were wild variations in the quality of the cards. Two cards same TCG, one mint one with tons of wear...both a 6. I'm not saying the good one was a 10, but no way they are BOTH 6s.
Exactly since PSA doesn’t subgrade I think they should send an invoice with the card indicating its fault and why it got the grade it did!
Two words: pop control.
I thought about this prior to the PSA sub.
it’s thought in the hobby that PSA grades certain cards far more harshly than others (e.g. 1980 Rickey Henderson, ‘52 Topps Mantle, & ‘86 Fleer MJ)
Didn’t think it would impact a possible “near mint to mint” aka 8 MJ card… 👀
I would send the card back again giving a different name and address how inconsistent PSA is I'm sure you'll receive a different grade 🤔
You got hosed. I would give that card a PSA 8.5 grade.
Consistency. Yes, there is. Go to TAG!
im done with psa. i graded over 1,000 card with them and carried about 53% gem 10 rate. then the last 3 orders of about 75 cards i got 2 10s...yes, you read that right, 2 fuggin 10s out of 75 cards. obviously something fishy going on...some extreme fishy shit.
as you might figure, i was fired up. i was livid. not only did i only get 2 10's...but had a couple 5s, several 6's, and several 7s...and the rest 8's and 9s....out of the previous 1,000 cards i graded i probably only got 5 7's total. And most of those i figured would 7. i got more 5,6 and 7s in these last 75 cards then i did total of the first 1,000. its like they just randomly assigned grades is what it seemed like to me. like they were so slammed and pressed to get cards out that they just randomly assigned grades as it is obviously much quicker to do that then to actually grade the cards.
management has these guidelines that the graders must fall into. They cant have too many 10's. id bet money on it. it has to something like that. the graders numbers have to fall into certain perameters. it has to be something like that.
PSA pumps out cards and doesn't care. I know I'm one of few but I think PSA is pretty meh.
Hope PSA see's this video
They will and not care
Mike - Did i sent that email to tge right place?
Yes, sorry, I’m just swamped and slow. I’ll get to it!
@JunkWaxHero All good. Making sure it didn't go to the wrong address.
Love your show,graded cards are a joke,been collecting since 1962,another way to make money.
Cracking is gambling.
This video reminds me of someone first diacovering PSA. This is just how it is.
So we should just accept it?
@@JunkWaxHero Grading a million cards a month, I think someone accepted it. Thats where the saying buy the card not the grade comes in at. PSA is successful from this very model they follow. If you want a grade that comes with a report then use the companies that give reports and have consistency. Should ve just accept it? Done deal its accepted. People have been pointing this out since I can remember but yet they are still used.
@@JoeKyser I’ll never be critical of PSA again
@@JunkWaxHero you know I would love to share my stories. The ones where I resubmit and get different grades. The bewilderment I go through is untethered. Its just not anything I havent heard about though. Im not sure if beating the dead horse is effective or not. I feel like if PSA makes changes, they will lose market share. They do what works. The mystery works very for them. Its a sellers tool that just may level out one day. The collector has to stop buying the number. The majority is worried about resale and has to cooperate with the beast once they get in bed with them. This is where that foothold comes in.
PSA it's all about card population control too many high number grades value goes down Kickbacks go back
No sympathy here. I hate when people crack and resubmit. When they get lower grades it makes me happy. 🤷🏻♂️
It’s not about asking for sympathy or making you happy because grade came back lower than deserved. As members of the hobby, we all should all cordial.
It’s about holding graders accountable for cross, referencing the card against their defined grade definitions & consistency.
Personally, I’m indifferent to grading companies as a buyer. Eye appeal of the card is the only thing that matters along w/ cost.
When it comes to selling & trading cards from our collections to subsidize other hobby purchases, we all want to be informed and fairly maximize value. That is why I cracked it out of the BGS case. What I did is no different than doing a quick cosmetic bathroom renovation before selling a house to increase value because people like nice bathrooms
And you are an a hole...with statements such as this...
Mana grading uses AI and sends you an image of flaws
Mana? That’s a new one
They only grade Anime cards. Pokemon, One Piece, Magic, etc.