PSA bulk services. Ever worth putting a high value card in?

[ozenigma]

@Pbali

@ozenigma

You are really clutching at straws here.

The above examples used $400+ cards to submit at the sub $100 service level.

Everyone knows that 400% of anything is significant. Personally I wouldn’t allow more than 10-20% of variance in my own values.

Again, if people want to do this, it’s up to them, but it’s really unethical.

What you may deem as significant may not be the same as what PSA deems significant. Insurance would not increase by such a magnitude in price from a $500 insured package to a $1000 package that PSA may even care to address.

I think you a personally trying to justify being deceitful in your own mind. That’s cool if you are, but you’re not going to sway me.

If you go by the actual letter of the law according to PSA, the deem significant to be $1.

That is the difference between under $100 being eligible for bulk rates, and over $100 requiring normal rates.

How and how often PSA polices this problem is likely unknown. But they’d be totally entitled to take action against your account if you were consistently deceitful I would assume.

[Pbali]

@ozenigma

@Pbali

What you may deem as significant may not be the same as what PSA deems significant. Insurance would not increase by such a magnitude in price from a $500 insured package to a $1000 package that PSA may even care to address.

I think you a personally trying to justify being deceitful in your own mind. That’s cool if you are, but you’re not going to sway me.

If you go by the actual letter of the law according to PSA, the deem significant to be $1.

That is the difference between under $100 being eligible for bulk rates, and over $100 requiring normal rates.

How and how often PSA polices this problem is likely unknown. But they’d be totally entitled to take action against your account if you were consistently deceitful I would assume.

Id appreciate if you didn’t make snide remarks about me

Also, I can’t find where they say what dollar amount is significant to them.

[ozenigma]

@Pbali

@ozenigma

I think you a personally trying to justify being deceitful in your own mind. That’s cool if you are, but you’re not going to sway me.

If you go by the actual letter of the law according to PSA, the deem significant to be $1.

That is the difference between under $100 being eligible for bulk rates, and over $100 requiring normal rates.

How and how often PSA polices this problem is likely unknown. But they’d be totally entitled to take action against your account if you were consistently deceitful I would assume.

Id appreciate if you didn’t make snide remarks about me

Also, I can’t find where they say what dollar amount is significant to them.

I’d appreciate you bringing facts to your argument, but I’m still waiting

The dollar amounts are listed on their site, it’s their pricing. Declared values are listed beside them. Given the average bulk price is around $6 per card and the normal rate is $18, it would be safe to consider that a 66% loss on income is significant.

@fazool

% isn’t a good metric here, as 10 dollars to 40 dollars is a 400% difference but obviously does not matter.

insurance rates are effected at different brackets of value. 1000$ and 2000$ aren’t that much of a difference in price to insure.

I feel like this practice comes into play with extremely valuable sports cards

Oh here we go…

The % metric only applies to the maximum value in the bracket here, because the discussion isn’t based on low value items.

Please make this relevant.

Otherwise, 400% of anything is significant compared to 100% in ANY comparison.

@peacock

If I claim my car is worth $5 on my insurance forms and then let a stranger drive it across the country for 30 business days, it’s not fraud, it’s just stupid.

Your insurance company wouldn’t accept that though, because you are being deceitful. You’re relying on the service provider to be stupid. If you think an insurance company is stupid, you’re going to have a bad time.

I know in Australia, I can vary the value of my car between a reasonable low and a reasonable high.

[cullers]

@ozenigma

If the item is found to be worth significantly more than your Declared Value based on the evaluation we provide, we will contact you to pay the difference in service fees and shipping fees, which are adjusted to properly insure and handle your item(s).

This is the line I’ve always interpreted as they use it to determine your insurance rate. For me I know PSA isn’t going lose my card, I haven’t even heard of this happening, so the only reason I would need their insurance is for damages. I haven’t had PSA damage my cards, but I also know the hasstle it is to get PSA to even admit they have if they did. Couple that with my knowledge that I’m not going to get into any legal trouble and hopefully won’t have people angry at me for doing it. I don’t forsee me not using the lower service rates. If that makes me unethical so be it.

[fazool]

*deleted my post as I felt it was over the top and uncharacteristic of myself. My apologies*

On topic, while I feel like drastically undervaluing your card can be a little unethical I agree that it is a gamble you are taking yourself. I don’t see it as a horrible practice, or even that bad of one personally as the pricing for insuring something are not drastically different until it hits in the thousands

[peacock]

At the end of the day, either side can come out benefiting from undervalued submissions. It is dishonest if done intentionally, but if PSA doesn’t care to look into value of your cards or call you out, you’ll just have to be able to face yourself in the mirror each day knowing the dark deeds you’ve committed and accept taking a loss if something happens to your cards.

[ozenigma]

@peacock

At the end of the day, either side can come out benefiting from undervalued submissions. It is dishonest if done intentionally, but if PSA doesn’t care to look into value of your cards or call you out, you’ll just have to be able to face yourself in the mirror each day knowing the dark deeds you’ve committed and accept taking a loss if something happens to your cards.

Spot on.

Although I think in the grand scheme of things, this would rate very low on the list of “poke no-no’s”

(God I’ve been waiting a long time to use that again)

@cullers

@ozenigma

This is the line I’ve always interpreted as they use it to determine your insurance rate. For me I know PSA isn’t going lose my card, I haven’t even heard of this happening, so the only reason I would need their insurance is for damages. I haven’t had PSA damage my cards, but I also know the hasstle it is to get PSA to even admit they have if they did. Couple that with my knowledge that I’m not going to get into any legal trouble and hopefully won’t have people angry at me for doing it. I don’t forsee me not using the lower service rates. If that makes me unethical so be it.

Again, what you do is your own business. Not like anyone here would report you or anything, that would be ridiculous.

I can appreciate your honesty here though in saying what you do. Ultimately doesn’t affect what I do.

I think this is a discussion on what you feel comfortable with.

@fazool

it is relevant. you even said “If you go by the actual letter of the law according to PSA, they deem significant to be $1.” Which is a preposterous statement, you are not needed to be anywhere near that accurate when making your estimation for insurance. In your given scenario of 1 dollar value over, you would never determine your card to be worth $101 vs $99.

you have this curious trait that you just need to be a rude snob huh. no need to go on a warpath with me just because you disagree with me. it’s possible to disagree with someone and be civil. me contributing to a post and having you type, “oh here we go…” is just childish. grow up. look at the shit you yourself have written before you say something is irrelevant, and solve some of those attitude issues my man.

Seriously, you come in here making comparison to a $10-40 card when it’s obvious this discussion is about cards valued over $100.

In the specific example, it was $400. I’ve said 400% of $100 is significant. Again you’ve ignored the content of my post, to try and draw out wild claims that PSA care about accurate to the dollar valuations. All I’ve said is that according to the wording, $1 can make a difference. My opinion is that significant difference would be 15-20% which would be $15-20 on a $100 card. That’s what I would use personally, I know others are far more relaxed in this regard.

Read it again. Otherwise stop making such ridiculous posts. You only think I’m rude because I’ve called you out twice in the last few days. Twice now you’ve seemingly taken things way off the original discussion. You’ve only come in this thread to try and poke me. It hasn’t worked.

And you have the hide to call me a snob when you are throwing around the insults. Smh.

[fazool]

nice, right after I retracted my rude statement too. I won’t bother the thread anymore with this nonsense between us but I think it far from ridiculous to say that you are indeed being rude. If you remotely think I came here to poke you, I don’t even have a response besides that it is absolutely ridiculous.

“calling me out” yesterday is also pretty laughable. I was involved with that thread from before the announcement was made, and continued discussing it afterward. I think I my criticism quite valid regardless of if you personally disagree with it.

[ozenigma]

@fazool

nice, right after I retracted my rude statement too. I won’t bother the thread anymore with this nonsense between us but I think it far from ridiculous to say that you are indeed being rude. If you remotely think I came here to poke you, I don’t even have a response besides that it is absolutely ridiculous.

“calling me out” yesterday is also pretty laughable. I was involved with that thread from before the announcement was made, and continued discussing it afterward. I think I my criticism quite valid regardless of if you personally disagree with it.

Regardless of whether you retracted it, it was read by many including the intended target: me.

I’ll leave the other thread laugh itself out, but your comments were just so ridiculous I couldn’t even bother replying.

If you think I’m rude because I’m quoting PSA, and using examples and my opinion to define what I consider significant, then geeeeeeee.

Let’s not forget this discussion dissolved into “how can we twist what PSA says into making it what person X believes”.

[RayquazaTCG]

Family Guy - OMG, WHO THE HELL CARES! (HD)

[joseph88]

Thanks for your thoughts and opinions everyone. Seems to be a personal choice with a correct answer here.

It is a 45 day turnaround paying in bulk. Whereas for the up to $500 insurance $18 per card, it’s a 10 day turn around. So you get better service included in the price as well.

I only really asked if it was worth the risk. As I do live in the England. I was contemplating whether to get a PSA international membership and ship myself. Or go through senders like Ludkins. As shipping could be expensive. However I would get 15 graded cards for free with the membership.

Anyway I’ll decide later on that. Thanks again guys.

[KingPokemon]

The “we’ll contact you” disclaimer noted earlier is simply a prompt so PSA has something to point to if a problem arises. I have never rec’d nor heard of anybody receiving this personal contact. This is true even though I’ve sent in hundreds of orders with waaaay under valued amounts.

There’s a significant difference between declared and actual value. I’ve never noticed an actual value request though one can assume it based on the disclaimer. Still wouldn’t hold up in court I dare say:)