Ryan Hoge 2025 Interview Throwback and Highlights

I rewatched this interview recently and it is bonkers. Hoge is generous with his answers and gives a lot of insight into topics that we often discuss about PSA.

A Few Highlights:

Grading

  • Submitted cards get wiped down with microfiber cloths at PSA by the graders
  • The New Jersy branch focuses on TCG and ultra-modern [sports]
  • Typically cards are reviewed by 2-3 graders, QA checks happen with the card in the holder
  • computer software automatically measures border of pre-grade images. software flags known counterfits with notes of what to look for
  • New graders spend several months as an apprentice before they’re allowed to freely grade submissions
  • most of the graders were trained on modern sports and tcg, few vintage sports graders and those submissions take longer
  • Starting in 2024 PSA began tracking which graders grade which cards and can review misgrades and give training to graders who fall outside of standards
  • graders look at cards in a dark room with an overhead halogen lamp
  • newer graders tend to be too conservative with grades
  • graders focus on centering and corners primarily, surface issues are secondary
  • planned to roll out grader notes at the top level service tiers in june 2025, hope to roll out to lower tiers as well
  • cards do not come out of your submitted cardsaver until the grader receives it
  • PSA reholders are cracked by a machine, slabs from other companies don’t fit in the machine and are cracked by hand using traditional tools available to hobbyists

Card Altering

  • Defines altering as adding any foreign substance to a card, water is fine
  • Says that PSA would be fine with altering if they knew that the chemicals used would not cause damage to appear in the future. This is their primary concern and motivation to get better at spotting altered cards because they are liable for the grade guarantee. Cites an example where stain remover was used on sports cards and years later the stains reappeared

Autos

  • discusses the history, sunsetting and re-introduction of auto-only blue labels
  • plan to add image matching to autos to events

Submissions

  • Pokemon is often their largest category of submissions
  • one piece is their #2 category in TCG
  • At the start of 2025 Ryan Hoge set a goal finish every sub within 30 calendar days. From this we can infer that submission size is not as much of an issue as is the volume of total submission packages.
    Highly recommend giving the hour-long interview a listen
  • 90% of cards submitted through the Japan branch are Pokemon, essentially funding that operation

Pricing

  • PSA intentionally uses pricing to throttle and greenlit submissions so that they do not get overwhelmed. One could infer that the recent move to eliminate their lowest submission tier is a signal that they are beginning to be overwhelmed with subs.
  • At the time of recording Hoge did anticipate any radical submission tier changes
  • PSA collector magazines are serialized

Sister Companies

  • PSA shares information with it’s sister companies (SGC at the time, and BGS soon) on anti-fraud/counterfeit. Highlighting individuals and techniques used

20 Likes

Thank you for the summary! It is appreciated!

Cheers!

6 Likes

Felt this one was noteworthy

Maybe this is why people say psa is “harsher” now.

As they expand, they need lots more new folks to grade the millions of cards. If new graders tend to be harsher, you naturally end up with lots of conservatively graded cards.

Contrast this with more lax graders and you get the mismatch.

I also am assuming that by “conservative”, they are referring to grading cards harsher, meaning they get lower grades than a more lax grader.

8 Likes

Very interesting post, thanks for the share.

That’s my read, too. It makes sense.

2 Likes

I hate that this opinion exists at the top of the world’s largest grading company.

9 Likes

Shower thought:
Ryan Hoge is adamant that grading standards have not changed. But acknowledges that the grading workflow has been significantly renovated. It is likely that new innovations in automated border measurements, QA and scaling grader training account for the variability in the historical grading standard that we have observed.

1 Like