ooga booga me like big number
8 Likes
As far as Wotc set cards from Neo Destiny thru E series a lot of the pop reports are similar for PSA 10 and 9 so the lower pop doesn’t hold as much value here.
For example Skyridge Arcanine Holo PSA 10 pop is 77 PSA 9 pop is 78. Many of the others from the same sets look pretty similar.
Then you have other sets like base set which there is actually a big difference but the pop report is so high I’d never feel comfortable buying a 9 or 10 because there is simply too many in high grades. For example: Base Set Charizard PSA 10 is pop 440. PSA 9 pop is 5625! You could damn near add the pop report from every Holo from one of the sets I listed and still have a total of way less then 5625. As a matter of fact you could take a 32 card Holo set like Aquapolis and add the PSA 10 and 9 pop report of every Holo and you’re still not going to be anywhere near 6065 PSA 9s and 10s base Zard has alone
9’s help me diversify my Pokefolio. Having small amount of 10’s can be tricky, especially if one of those cards really tanks in value. 8’s/9’s allow me to spread my money across multiple sets and different areas of the hobby in general.
1 Like
If you’re playing a video game (e.g. a racing game) and the goal is to get the best lap time, would you rather aim for A-Rank or S-Rank? I think most people would prefer getting an S-Rank time over an A-Rank time. So if my gaming skill is good enough to achieve S-Rank eventually, that’s what I aim for.
Same goes for vintage Pokemon cards. I consider a PSA10 an S-Rank, the best you can achieve. And if my budget allows me to get a 10 of a card I want, why should I buy a 9? There are 2 exceptions to this rule though: If a card is so valuable that I could never buy a 10, I would consider a 9. it’s analogous to playing a game that’s so hard that S-rank is not feasible to achieve. I wouldn’t be super happy with it though. The other exception are cards with a very high psa 10 count, like in modern, in which case I don’t feel the need to buy a grade in the first place because there’s thousands of raw cards in gem mint condition out there. It’s like a game where you can get an S-rank through gameplay, but you can also get an S-rank by paying the developers 5€ via microtransaction. It involves no skill, everyone can do it, and it’s not special anymore.
3 Likes
I believe that is more a case of the OVERALL environment of TCG in general. The problem is how people perceive the environment as a whole rather than how specific spots do. I am not saying today, right now, 9s are worth alot but that has to do with messed up reports skewing everyone’s overall perceptions. Once something like Genamint goes live with Unique ID, we WILL see True Pop 9 and 10 Rarity. Add in far stricter Grading essentially creating a new 10 class and bumping most current 10’s to 9s and 9’s to 8’s etc. Look no further than CGC/BGS. 10’s are not easy and that trickles down. When that happens, 9’s will become a highly sought after rarity. Again, we would be looking at 3-5 years AFTER Genamint comes online.
I don’t see how Genamint can ever identify all the previous 9’s that have been cracked. It seems too late to identify and clean up the pop reports for 9’s. Am I missing something?
1 Like
If there was a grade 11, people would want it.
3 Likes
100% Agreed. It’s not just about the thing you’re collecting, but also the process. Think back to the first chase card you caught. Is it the card that matters, or the experience tied to it? For example, Scott’s unikarp that he mentions occasionally, it’s not a 10. That isn’t what matters to him. One of my favorite cards, however IS a 10, but for the same reason, I didn’t expect to get it AT ALL. For some reason, the auction fizzled and it was basically robbery. So that’s gonna stick with me forever.
If you enjoy the hunt of the “10”, then that’s what you go for. If you’re “fine with the nine”, then that’s perfect as well. Someone who enjoys the hunt and the experience of collecting is what matters, and for many, that is getting those 10s.
Off the bat, you are right. That’s why it would take years for people to migrate their PSA Slabs to their Genamint ones.
Also I did not bring up an important point. This is all congruent on PSA making a new Population Report and Freezing the current one upto the point of Genamint going online. If PSA just keeps the old Population Report going with Genamint, then add like 5 more years since the pool is 60+ million deep and it’ll take a very very long time to minimize that number to something like 20%(or ~300 million graded cards).
Do you have any evidence for the claim that Genamint will establish stricter grading standards? Because I don’t see any reason to expect that. It could just as easily establish looser grading standards or not change the grading standards at all. For all we know, the AI could make it easier to get 10s. It’s all baseless speculation at this point.
3 Likes
I have 0 evidence. Just like anyone making ANY future claims. I thought that was implied just by making such a statement.
However, I think PSA will make 8-10’s harder and 4-7 easier and cry at how hard it is to get 1-3 AI graded lol. Just what I believe will happen, take it for what it’s worth.
A properly trained AI model would not make any grade easier or harder to get. The primary benefit would be improved consistency. Modern machine learning algorithms can learn to grade in the same subjective way that humans do, the main difference is that the subjective differences of opinion between two human graders would be averaged out and an algorithm is not subject to the day-to-day variability that even a single grader would exhibit.
Of course, this is under the assumption that the AI was developed in a competent way.
Most of the time, speculation relies on some sort of evidence. For instance, many on this forum have speculated that the price of certain graded cards will decrease in the near future because of the gigantic backlog at PSA. This is a speculative claim, but it has evidence backing it (because supply has an inverse relationship with worth).
The difference with your claim is that it has zero basis in anything. It’s just a total guess – like speculating that if I flip a coin, it will turn up heads. It could be true, but it could just as easily be false. As it stands, there’s no good reason to believe that AI grading will be any more strict or lenient than the current grading standards. And as PFM noted, if the AI was programmed properly the grading standards would remain the same, just more consistent. So if anything, there’s a reasonable basis for speculating that the grading standards won’t change.
I collect PSA 10 for a few reasons:
- OCD - I like knowing my cards are the highest grade possible.
- Security - If shit hits the fan IRL, 10s are the most liquid.
4 Likes
I think it’s neat, but a psa 10 satisfies my urges enough haha.
Anything I’d want in a black label is WAAAYYY out of my range, so…maybe i have just convinced myself to not want it.
Do you have any right now?
1 Like
That’s not evidence either, that’s doing exactly what I am doing without the explanation. Example, if a hurricane hit PSA directly this summer, then that claim becomes very bunk as we watch a river of cards flow into the Gulf. There’s literally no evidence anyone can present to say what the market will be like and anyone who says they do is full of it. BTW, by the standards you are setting for “evidence” here, my Hurricane statement is 100% evidence because we know Hurricanes can hit where PSA is.
Now if you are asking for WHY I believe what I believe, that is very different. First, I believe PSA can’t let their standards slide any further. They are already getting a bad rep for being too fast and loose especially lately. Just look at how often someone does a submission return video FULL of PSA 10’s. Then look at CGC and see how little 10 Sub Grades people get. If PSA keeps this up for too long, people are going to look elsewhere like CGC. People were buying CGC 9’s on the cheap and getting PSA 10s out of them and flipping for massive profits. PSA can’t let this go on forever.
PSA is transitioning to Genamint. This is a MASSIVE change. When companies undergo such massive changes, they typically try to do all the little things they wanted to but couldn’t before. For instance I believe PSA will start offering Sub Grades now too. One of the things I think PSA would like to do too is to match BGS/CGC on how strict they grade but were likely afraid of losing out on those who know sending to PSA would net them that easier 10.
I am not stating AI = harsher grading cause AI. I understand the confusion but if you reread, I said “add harsher grading” not that harsher grading is the outcome of AI. These are two SEPARATE statements, the Unique ID AND Harsher Grading.
I hope that clears things up 
We’re using ‘evidence’ differently. I’m going by the conventional definition of ‘evidence’ – you’re going by a highly unorthodox conception of ‘evidence.’ Evidence supports an inference – it doesn’t affirm anything. The PSA backlog being as large as it is supports the inference that prices will decline. Could the backlog be wiped out by a hurricane? Sure, but that doesn’t make the size of the backlog any less evidence. Just because it doesn’t necessarily result in what it predicts doesn’t mean that it’s not evidence for what it predicts.
(Not to mention that PSA has been grading cards for 30 years without having their output interrupted by a hurricane, which is evidence for the extreme unlikelihood of that event happening within the next 6 months.)
I’m a big fan of CGC, but you can’t compare PSA 10s and CGC 10s. CGC gives out fewer 10s because 9.5 is their gem mint grade. Just because CGC gives out fewer 10s doesn’t mean they’re harsher than PSA – that’s simply a reflection of the fact that 9.5 is gem mint on their grading scale, whereas PSA’s only gem mint grade is 10.
Source? I doubt this. Of the close to 100 CGC 9s I’ve received back, only one or two would have a shot at a PSA 10, IMHO. The vast majority would cross to a PSA 9.
‘BGS’ and ‘strict grading’ don’t belong in the same paragraph, let alone sentence. What BGS considers ‘gem mint’ is a joke. What CGC considers ‘gem mint’ is pretty similar to what PSA considers ‘gem mint.’ The only meaningful difference is that PSA uses ‘10’ to indicate gem mint whereas CGC uses ‘9.5’ to indicate gem mint. They’re the same condition designation.
Gotcha – I misunderstood what you meant, then. Still, I don’t accept the premise that PSA grades less harshly. The fact that they give out more 10s is merely a reflection of the fact that they designate ‘gem mint’ condition with a different number. If you compare gem mint CGC cards to gem mint PSA cards, you’ll find that there’s no appreciable quality difference.
I did do it unorthodox cause I was trying to convey the idea that no one can know the market, yes with an extreme example.
I can give a far more realistic explanation but I gatta type more. I hope you won’t mind.
First- Yes, the idea that PSA backlog will DECREASE prices is no different a level of claim than anything I said thus far. This makes so many assumptions it’s not even funny.
Assumption #1- a significant portion will go to market and drive current demand down by oversupply. I am not saying it will or won’t, simply that is the speculation. Darkness Ablaze Charizard is an amazing example. Something like 700 PSA a week or 100 a day? Yet, the price holds at ~$300-400. Whatever the reason, we are seeing in real time this speculation NOT play out. Do I believe eventually too many of these will flood the market where the price will drop? Yeah but so far that hasn’t happened yet and until it does I am seeing the real time debunking of this speculation. What are people going to say if this continues? “it’s ok we were wrong cause it was for the right reasons”. Nah, to me that just sounds like people who are making excuses for not seeing the market and properly adapting and yes I hold myself to that standard(maybe harsher).
Assumption #2- a significant portion of the backlog is of desirable cards. I am sorry to say but I believe this speculation to be only somewhat on the mark. Are more highly desirable cards being graded now more than before? Yes, but I don’t believe by that much. I think the vast majority of these card submissions are by both ill-informed people on their cards value as well as a surge of new people joining in either the hobby/game. In essence, I believe even the vast majority of cards going straight to market have a hard price people will not drop below and would rather hold. No one knows what that price for what card that will be and it’s far too many moving parts for anyone to make an accurate prediction. Even if prices “fall”, what if it’s only by a little and stays there? Was this a right speculation still cause it was half right that it went down but didn’t fall?
I hope you can see why I used an extreme example of a hurricane DIRECTLY hitting PSA(I know PSA has been through hurricanes, that’s why I said direct) to demonstrate my belief system than this wall of text.
I am sorry but this is all semantics. I could make a long winded rant on it but I believe someone as smart as you should be able to unpack what I am saying with that one statement.
www.youtube.com/results?search_query=cgc+to+psa
CGC Forums also have people discussing how they sent CGC cards to PSA and getting 1 whole point higher grade. People also discussing on many different sites/platforms how it’s better to buy a CGC right now cause it’s cheaper and higher grades than PSA. Just do a little research and you will find people do(or did before submissions were stopped) this. PSA can’t let this go on, CGC will overtake them at least in the Pokemon World.
Going back to semantics. I don’t care if .01% of people make the equation you are by saying Grader A = Grader B minus X. No, no one does that. Everyone looks at the number, not the designation worded like small print compared to the number. Please watch some youtube videos of submission returns. You can even just scroll through the bottom and just look at the numbers instead of actually wasting time watching. People are not looking at the word grade, they look at number grade.
Plus, what is the difference in me saying PSA is going to be harsher vs PSA is going to add grades above Gem Mint and change their number grading to reflect that. It’s all semantics.
What you’re not seeing is all the people who cracked CGC 9s, submitted them to PSA, and received PSA 9s lol. People are much more likely to report on their successes than their failures.
That said, I agree with you that a CGC 9 is a better “value buy” than a PSA 9 (based on the current difference in price). It’s the exact reason why I collect both PSA 10s and CGC 9.5s. I came to realize that CGC 9.5s were of no lesser quality than PSA 10s, but were significantly cheaper (not to mention that you could submit gem candidates to CGC and receive them back within your lifetime lol).
Re: your other point – fair enough. People do seem to be preoccupied with the number. But I think this is a fault people are making, not a fault in PSA or CGC’s grading system. People need to pay more attention to the ‘gem mint’ condition descriptor. The fact that PSA 10s sell for significantly more than CGC 9.5s is in part a result of people thinking 10>9.5. People simply don’t realize that the grading scales are different, with CGC 9.5 indicating ‘gem mint’ just as PSA 10 indicates ‘gem mint.’
Ultimately, I don’t see evidence that PSA is concerned with this perceived gap in harshness of grading standards. If they were concerned with it then yeah, maybe that would support the inference that they will make their grading scale harsher. But neither of us know if PSA cares. If I had to guess, PSA isn’t going to change their grading scale of 30 years simply because some people perceive CGC to be a harsher grader. PSA has majority market share and that isn’t going to change anytime soon, if ever. It would make little sense for them to depart from the grading scale that everyone is familiar with and that established them as the premier grading service in the first place.
3 Likes
To begin with there did seem to be a lot of people rattling on about how their CGC 9 grades were “guaranteed” PSA 10 grades, but I think now that some time has passed that’s mostly died down. I think most people who have had cards graded with CGC, myself included, would say that CGC’s grades lined up with their own predictions.
Like @zorloth said people are much more likely to report on their successes than their failures. On top of that it’s also a very easy and free selling tactic: buy my CGC 9 card because it’s a guaranteed PSA 10 - but ultimately this is no different to the PSA 10 regrade? sellers and if they truly believed this they’d be cross-grading the cards over to PSA themselves.
2 Likes