What's this SGC rumor????

[theseeker]

Read in another thread of SGC rumors as to its future. Is its survival in question? I sure hope not.

[4815162342]

What thread?

[dherm360]

Read in another thread of SGC rumors as to its future. Is its survival in question? I sure hope not.

I would also like to know where you heard this

[vintagerookies51]

I saw one post like that on here... but SGC is only getting more popular

[bobbyw8469]

but SGC is only getting more popular


I wouldn't say all that. On most issues, SGC only gets a fraction of the value of their competitors cards. I ran several SGC auctions at $15 opening bids (their PSA counterparts routinely get $30-$50), and couldn't even get the opener.

[vintagerookies51]

Well SGC is realy good for pre-war, and a lot of people prefer the eye appeal of cards in SGC holders over PSA holders

[HercDriver]

If I'm holding on to my cards, I would prefer the SGC slab for the eye appeal. However, if I were to sell them, I'd prefer the eye appeal of the cash that PSA brings (even if it is sub-par compared to SGC)...

Take Care,
Geno

[Pup6913]

I have always been a huge supporter of SGC. This yrs national made me second guess that. Their customer service sucked, they misplaced my cards, I gave them a card to slab that was without a shadow of a doubt missing an ink pass and told me there was not enough evidence to slab it. It was missing all the bright A$$ red ink on the front.:eek: Can't all be happy I guess, but PSA is becoming more appealing:(

[ullmandds]

+1...to what andrew said...at national...PSA setup was much more professional and well organized...as compared to SGC.

"I have always been a huge supporter of SGC. This yrs national made me second guess that. Their customer service sucked, they misplaced my cards, I gave them a card to slab that was without a shadow of a doubt missing an ink pass and told me there was not enough evidence to slab it. It was missing all the bright A$$ red ink on the front. Can't all be happy I guess, but PSA is becoming more appealing."

[k-dog]

This is not sounding good at all. :(

[Taxman]

I strongly disagree with the statements both about the National setup and realized prices. I mostly collect Mantle, Rose and Aaron....Based on VCP averages for these three stars prices are within 1-2% of each TPG...Also SGC was very prompt and courteous to me at the National. Also they gave us a great deal on grading fees...Keep up the good work SGC.

[Leon]

First of all SGC is an advertiser here so I want that to be taken into account. That being said, my service from SGC at the National was extraordinarily good. They did have their main customer service person leave the company unexpectedly the day before the show. That had to take some sort of toll. I thought the crew there did a great job, especially under the circumstances. And even with being a little short-handed my order was done on time, correctly and professionally. As a matter of fact I spoke with several of the SGC staff and they said that was their best National ever!! I think they did a great job. As far as not grading something the way someone wants them to, I am glad to hear that. More often than not I also don't get the grade or decision I hope for, but they always explain why. Brockelman & Luckey Auctions continues to make them our grader of choice....with BVG a close second, for me personally. As far as realized prices, I will always pay a little more for a higher end vintage card in one of their holders as opposed to PSA. Even though I think PSA does a good job, I trust SGC much more. I know I have spoken to hundreds of vintage collectors and most feel the same way I do...even though they might not publicly say anything. I do hope the new upper management will let the crew do what they know how to do best. As long as that happens, and the graders from before (except Derek) are still there, then I have a lot of confidence in them going forward. best regards

[vintagetoppsguy]

As far as realized prices, I will always pay a little more for a higher end vintage card in one of their holders as opposed to PSA. Even though I think PSA does a good job, I trust SGC much more.

+1

[glchen]

I think with prewar cards, there is little differential between realized prices between SGC and PSA although I would give a very slight edge to bigger, popular sets where the PSA Registry may have an effect. For higher grade, vintage cards, there is more of a difference. For example, in a recent Goodwin auction, a 1961 Wilt Chamberlain in SGC 9 recently sold for ~$5000 here: Link (http://www.goodwinandco.com/LotDetail.aspx?lotid=19558). In the Memory Lane auction that just closed, a PSA 9 Chamberlain fetched over $8000 here Link (http://www.memorylaneinc.com/site/bid/bidplace.asp?itemid=21333). From the SGC boards, the only recent change that I saw is that Michael Goldberg has left the company again due to what is believed an internal dispute: Link (http://www.sgccard.com/boards/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2002153&page=2#Post2002153).

I also just want to say that I'm not an SGC hater at all. I use PSA, SGC, BVG, and even GAI (for wrappers). I just don't like the anti-PSA bias on the board, so I try to post a little bit on the other side to show that no TPG is perfect. There is no question PSA does some screwy things, which annoy the heck out of me, and SGC has to exist as a strong alternative to PSA, otherwise PSA will get worse. Right now, my current peeve with PSA is that you cannot get a somewhat fragile card slabbed by PSA. SGC is much, much better in this regard. PSA, if you are reading this, if the card is fragile, just allow it to be slabbed inside a thin sleeve like SGC does sometimes and BVG always does. My biggest peeve with PSA is of course, that they do not allow different card sizes / crossovers to be mixed into a single submission / shipment to saving on shipping fees. The excuse is that they get too many submissions where it's too complicated to do this, but this is either a money grab or pure laziness, I don't know which. Obviously, SGC and Beckett allow this.

[vintagetoppsguy]

My problem with PSA is they just don't know how to grade. Take the card below for example. It has paper loss on the back of the card, but still received a 6. It shouldn't have graded any higher than a 2 - therefore overgraded by 4 grades.

You can say this is just one card, but I can post many more examples of cards grossly overgraded by PSA. I challenge anybody to show me an SGC card that is overgraded by 4 grades...heck, show me one overgraded by just 2 grades. How anybody could look at this card and still want to submit their cards to PSA is beyond me. Just keep drinking your Kool Aid!

http://www.net54baseball.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=31629&stc=1&d=1295595806http://www.net54baseball.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=31630&stc=1&d=1295595817

http://dingo.care2.com/pictures/c2c/share/28/289/940/2894009_370.jpg

[barrysloate]

In tracking my sales over the years I never felt that any quality vintage cards in SGC holders performed any worse than those graded by PSA, and in fact whenever I achieved a really crazy price in one of my auctions, more often than not it was an SGC card.

It's too simplistic to say PSA cards sell for more than SGC's. In the set registry area they generally do. PSA has that market. They also seem to have the bigger share of the postwar market. But when you're talking about a scarce or rare vintage card in mid-grade, say Good to Excellent, the SGC cards are usually more accurately graded and hold their own comparatively well.

Both companies make grading mistakes but SGC makes fewer, and I think most collectors realize that. And that counts for something.

[sportscardpete]

In tracking my sales over the years I never felt that any quality vintage cards in SGC holders performed any worse than those graded by PSA, and in fact whenever I achieved a really crazy price in one of my auctions, more often than not it was an SGC card.

It's too simplistic to say PSA cards sell for more than SGC's. In the set registry area they generally do. PSA has that market. They also seem to have the bigger share of the postwar market. But when you're talking about a scarce or rare vintage card in mid-grade, say Good to Excellent, the SGC cards are usually more accurately graded and hold their own comparatively well.

Both companies make grading mistakes but SGC makes fewer, and I think most collectors realize that. And that counts for something.



Barry I agree with everything you say. But even if SGC makes fewer mistakes, is that because they are focused on vintage as opposed to focusing on a wide variety of items like PSA does? Again, no disrespect to SGC I love their holders a lot more. I just feel that PSA might make more mistakes because they either deal with a wider range of cards or just a higher volume in general.

[Leon]

[QUOTE=glchen;919719
I also just want to say that I'm not an SGC hater at all. I use PSA, SGC, BVG, and even GAI (for wrappers). I just don't like the anti-PSA bias on the board, so I try to post a little bit on the other side to show that no TPG is perfect. [/QUOTE]

Hey Gary
I agree with this very much. I have my preferences but I don't like PSA always getting the short end of the stick on this board. They do a good job overall. Yes, when a mistake happens I will agree it's a mistake- see Fro-Joy thread. But PSA isn't nearly as bad as some make them out to be. I just happen to like SGC's, and Beckett's, grading better. One other thing....a few of the PSA haters only seem to come on this board to call them out...and otherwise don't share information. Some of those people do it out of greed and I guess to each their own. Sometimes I think they don't understand they are not only hurting the hobby by not divulging information, they are hurting themselves too. But then again ignorance can be bliss.

ps... I should mention I am not referring to David (vintagetoppsguy) in this post...

[Fred]

In the past I always felt that SGC had fantastic customer service. I haven't sent a submission in since that cheesy autograph authenticator took over. I don't like the way he does business and unfortunately that influences me in how I feel about sending in any further submissions to SGC. I might look towards Beckett since I don't really care for PSA too much.

I always figured that prewar cards sold about the same in SGC or PSA holders. My observation is that the post war stuff that seems to do better (in sales) with PSA holders.

[barrysloate]

Pete- I can't say for sure why SGC makes fewer mistakes, but I've surmised that PSA simply has too many submissions and can't spend as much time with each card. If you have to work in an assembly line manner, you are going to make some mistakes.

[GoldenAge50s]

I would also say some of the graders may be poorly trained & lack any experience and obviously many times do not follow the procedure of having cards double-cked before holdering.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Here's the bottom line. I agree that both companies make mistakes. We all do - none of us are perfect. It's how we deal with those mistakes that matters (and says a lot about our character). From what I can tell, SGC owns up to their mistakes. They make a mistake, they admit it, they fix it and move on. That's the way it should be.

PSA on the other hand tries to cover up/hide their mistakes. They think they can sweep the problem under the rug by deleting a thread and it will go away - out of sight, out of mind, right?

Let me give you a great example of this. About 4 years ago there was a thread started on the PSA boards about a 1966 Topps Harmon Killebrew that was graded a PSA 10 being sold on eBay by a reputable dealer. Most agreed that the card looked like it probably shouldn't have graded over a 6/7. The case was not tampered with, so it was either a mechanical problem or a grading problem. It was quite a controversy on the boards. Anyway, rather than doing the right thing and making good on their buy-back guarantee, they removed the certification number from their data base. The seller was pretty pissed about it and rightfully so. I don't know if PSA ever compensated him for the card or not, but this is not how you handle problems.

I don't know about anybody else, but I've never had a problem just magically go away. Problems linger. The best way to deal with problems is to face them head on. There is absolutely nothing wrong with admitting you made a mistake. In fact, it shows a lot of character when you own up to your mistakes. However, I have never seen PSA own up to anything. When’s the last time they admitted they were wrong about something? Instead, they just try to shut up those making the noise.

Say what you want about PSA, but if your honest with yourself, then you know in your mind I am right. Even Jeff said in the Joe Orlando thread, “I think I'd have some respect for Joe if he didn't do all that he could to shut down any sort of public criticism of PSA. That doesn't suggest to me that he cares about fixing his company's problems.”

Again, we're all going to make mistakes. It's how you handle those mistakes that set you apart from others.

[Leon]

When’s the last time they admitted they were wrong about something?

David- I agree with almost everything you said pertaining to mistakes. God knows I make my share. That being said I do know that PSA bought back a fake Sporting News Ruth from Andy Baran, quite some time ago. Also, I would bet a friendly dollar that if someone brings that blue Fro-Joy to Joe O, he will make it right. best regards

[smtjoy]

I use both and have been overall happy with them. If I had to choose one it would be SGC mainly based on accuracy and consistency of grading the cards I collect, exhibits. They both make mistakes but I have seen far more exhibit mistakes by PSA than SGC. I was involved with an ebay seller who was selling 8 high grade PSA exhibits a year ago that were all fake, I also own a fake PSA graded exhibit from 2 years ago that I just held onto because I only had $20 bucks into it. I have never seen one of these fakes graded by SGC and hope not to as its far to easy to tell them apart. I have also seen way too many times PSA messes up the years on exhibits, this has been to my benefit a number of times as I buy them then cross them over to the correct year, its usually 1923-24's listed as 1921's and 1926 listed as 1925, 1927, or 1928. In 7 years I have purchased over 10 of these and seen double that number mis graded by PSA, in the same time frame I might have seen only 3-4 from SGC, big difference.

I am concerned with all the recent turnover and lack of merger announcements over at SGC and really hope it improves in the near future, I do still believe they have the top graders and at the end of the day that is most important to me.

[tbob]

I think BVG doesn't get the credit they deserve for accuracy in grading. I have always used SGC with prewar cards but lately have started leaning toward using BVG more. That said, I disagree with Barry and others with regard to the sale prices of comparable SGC and PSA cards. I hate to admit it but even with pre-war cards I think if you are selling, PSA is the way to go. I think PSA cards sell for more although I prefer SGC. I hate the "slip sliding" cards in PSA holders and love the black distinctive format of SGC cardsbut I just think PSA cards sell for more.

[tbob]

I also think, rightly or wrongly, that if you have pre-war cards with beautiful fronts and slight paper damage or writing on the back, and you plan on eventually selling them, PSA is the way to go. I have just about had my fill of those great looking pre-war cards, even with blank backs, which have very tiny paper or writing imperfections getting downgraded all the way to "10s" or "20s" by SGC. But at least I know going in that they are going to hammer them. It is not at all uncommon to take one of these "10s", crack it out, and resubmit to PSA and get a 7 MK. :eek:

[Rickyy]

I guess I've been lucky so far...My experiences with PSA and SGC have all been positive experiences counting some 200+ submissions ....the grading has been satisfactory to my eye....with SGC leaning slightly toward more stricter and consistent grading across the board. The customer service with each has been without any problems... PSA contacted me right away via email for a error I made on the form that I didn't catch....SGC mislabled one item and corrected it without hesitation...and in some cases they shipped items PRIOR to the actual turnaround date....

Ricky Y

[sox1903wschamp]

In the past I always felt that SGC had fantastic customer service. I haven't sent a submission in since that cheesy autograph authenticator took over. I don't like the way he does business and unfortunately that influences me in how I feel about sending in any further submissions to SGC.



This also has me worried although I don't lose any sleep over it :).

My thoughts at the National was SGC was down a Customer Service rep as mentioned in this thread and they were struggling to keep order. Someone mentioned on another board that PSA was ultra busy and you could see tumbleweeds over at SGC at the National. To me, they were both busy but PSA is just so much larger in general that it gives that apperance but they were both busy related to the volume of business they do.

As for BVG, I don't know about pre-war. If I have to buy a card in thier holders, I cross it to SGC or crack it (which is not easy at all). So far the results have been okay as most crossed except a couple went down a grade. I just do not like the holders and BCCG (or whatever it is called) is a joke and yes, it is seperate grading from BVG but it is the same company and it puts a stink over the whole operation (IMHO).

[T206Collector]

I will once again repeat my theory -- a lot of PSA graded pre-war cards you see for sale are for sale because SGC wouldn't cross them over.

My percentage of blind PSA purchases -- where I made a purchase decision based on a scan or a representation as to grade, but didn't hold the card in my hands -- where the card had an obvious defect upon receipt has gone way up over the last several years.

Put another way, I've seen tons of PSA 5 T206s that had wrinkles or creases, or were obviously trimmed. I've not seen an SGC 60 T206 with a wrinkle or a crease, or that was obviously trimmed.

Say what you want about JSA's ownership interest, the main graders are all still there. And they sometimes come out from behind the curtain to chat with customers about their grading practices. Very educational.

Finally, I had amazing service from SGC at this year's East Coast National. I got a ton of stuff done with their on-site grading service, and a strip card that couldn't be done on-site got done the next day and I received it in the mail today -- $13 total, including encapsulation and shipping!

Keep up the good work SGC.

[Big Ben]

Pete- I can't say for sure why SGC makes fewer mistakes, but I've surmised that PSA simply has too many submissions and can't spend as much time with each card. If you have to work in an assembly line manner, you are going to make some mistakes.

I very much agree with this post Barry. Here are my personal perceptions from dealing with graded cards for about 2 and a half years. I am curious to see what more experienced collectors think.

PSA- like the registry, and the .5 scale. I think that PSA's grading is very lenient on T206 Cobb cards. I haven't formed an opinion with SGC's grading of Cobb cards for now.

SGC- grading seems to be conservative which is a good thing... I think that SGC is too lenient with centering and should utilize a system similar to PSA on cards with marks, or paper loss... Unless I am missing things, SGC needs a data base registry for individual cards on their site ASAP! The lack of an easily accessible card registry by SGC really annoys me!!!!! Love SGC's holders!

Beckett- like the registry and the holder... The grading and their scale is way too inconsistent for me...

Regardless of grading company, I look at the card first and then the grade before making a purchasing decision.

[Jewish-collector]

I was glad to hear that Leon & Joe Orlando finally met at this years National. :)

[vintagetoppsguy]

Here's a nice 1969 Mickey Mantle PSA 6. How can anybody defend this?

http://i.ebayimg.com/t/1969-Topps-Mickey-Mantle-500-PSA-6-PLEASE-READ-/00/$(KGrHqQOKo0E4t869VCeBORf!Zrgww~~_12.JPG

From this auction. At least the seller's description is honest. Props to the seller.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1969-Topps-Mickey-Mantle-500-PSA-6-PLEASE-READ-/110729413710?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item19c7fcc44e#ht_500wt_1180

Way to go PSA
http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x137/vintagetoppsguy/Personal/ohhhh.gif

[DixieBaseball]

I was at the National and used PSA and SGC multiple times for on site grading and both passed with flying colors. It did appear however that PSA had more support staff to service their customer's where as SGC seemed under staffed for influx in customer traffic, but when I was there my service was solid. (I observed a few customer's a little frustrated at having to wait...) God Bless you Earl!

[dwinters]

I was at the national and two great things happened: I made my first submission to SGC and I got to meet Leon.

While both were noteworthy events, I was extremely happy to get this back from them. It did take some convincing and some documentation, but SGC was top notch with excellent customer service.

SGC just makes all your stuff look so much better.....

[cwazzy]

GREAT card, Dennis! Look at those corners, David. That got a 6 and those corners are WAY more rounded then the Mantle...














Yes, I am kidding. :)

[GRock]

I sent a sub to SGC just before the national and it didn't log in for a week. I called asking about it and was told all hands were on deck at the show and all would be taken care of. It was a 10 day turnaround sub that shipped in 9 days with the national confusion. Grades were absolutely on par with previous subs from the same set.

[thejuanscards]

The 1969 Mantle PSA 6 pictured is mine. Like I state in my ebay description, I expected no higher than a 3 on the card. I had little into it, and only graded it to make an extra 25% or so. This card was in a lot of 85 cards that I graded, and the most came back where they should have. In this case, another card, a 1969 Ron Santo, should have been a 6, but was slabbed as a 3. The Mantle and Santo were 3 or 4 serial numbers apart, not right next to each other.....but I am guessing that somehow they got switched. They might as well take the Santo out of the database, because I cracked it on the day I received it back. The Mantle just makes me sick, though. You can see the corner wear in the picture, but there is also a very obvious crease on the back....and the back has seen better days. I am always hoping for better grades......but this one.....John

[murcerfan]

^^^They might as well take the Santo out of the database, because I cracked it on the day I received it back.

you sent the flip back, right?

[tribefan]

So, what's the rumor?

[christopher.herman]

The 1969 Mantle PSA 6 pictured is mine. Like I state in my ebay description, I expected no higher than a 3 on the card. I had little into it, and only graded it to make an extra 25% or so. This card was in a lot of 85 cards that I graded, and the most came back where they should have. In this case, another card, a 1969 Ron Santo, should have been a 6, but was slabbed as a 3. The Mantle and Santo were 3 or 4 serial numbers apart, not right next to each other.....but I am guessing that somehow they got switched. They might as well take the Santo out of the database, because I cracked it on the day I received it back. The Mantle just makes me sick, though. You can see the corner wear in the picture, but there is also a very obvious crease on the back....and the back has seen better days. I am always hoping for better grades......but this one.....John

Very honest. The hobby needs more like you.

[E93]

I submitted several cards at the National and received outstanding service and accurate grading.
JimB

[Jaybird]

I submitted several cards at the National and received outstanding service and accurate grading.
JimB

+1

[Mrvintage]

Here is my National grading experiences...First off i had a 33 George C Miller that was graded a psa 4(mk). Not wanting the qualifier I take the card to SGC and ask about a crossover. The guys that helps me at the SGC booth says he is one of the grader so I show him the card and he looks it over and says "that shouldn't be a problem" about getting a straight 4 grade so i pay the 20.00 bucks and come back 2 hours later to pick up my card and it is still in the psa holder with a sticker that says it didn't meet the min grade. I cracked out a psa 3 George C Miller and took it to psa and it got bumped to a psa 3.5. I took 3 1996 Ex-2000 Kobe Bryant rookies that were pulled by myself from boxes that same day to Beckett for their raw card review and when I picked them up I had an 8.5, 8, and one that said evidence of trimming....all of the companies make mistakes

[canjond]

so I show him the card and he looks it over and says "that shouldn't be a problem" about getting a straight 4 grade so i pay the 20.00 bucks and come back 2 hours later to pick up my card and it is still in the psa holder with a sticker that says it didn't meet the min grade.

I like SGC, but if this happened to me, I would be VERY pissed. I'm happy SGC takes cross-overs seriously, but if a grader tells you "it shouldn't be a problem", you then pay him, and it instantly becomes a problem - well to me that's bad practice.

[JamesGallo]

What is going on here!! Ever since Spence bought in at SGC that place has been a freaking mess. Michael is one of the best employees they have ever had and his customer service is a HUGE reason why I spend so much time and money with SGC. They can't manage to keep one guy happy. I was wondering why I didn't see him at the National and this explains why. IMO I will not be using SGC until this mess gets cleaned up one way or the other. This back and forth is just not acceptable.

I like the graders over there and all, but honestly who is running things from a service point of view. As far as I am concerned the front man, the customer service rep is the face of the company and they keep messing with it. I love SGC and really have always been a huge supporter but this is crap.

One simple question....
How do you ruin a great company in less then 1 year?

Answer-Get bought by JSA.

James Gallo

[glchen]

Again, I want to point out that I'm not picking on SGC, and PSA has tons of examples of doing this. However, this Magie that sold on ebay recently, doesn't this look like it should have been graded Authentic because of the writing on the front of the card, which looks like there was an attempted erasure? The original owner of the card listed this on ebay BST on the board, so he may know better, of course.

The other thing is that, and this is not really an overgrade, but more of a difference in grading philosophy, but SGC is much more lenient on diamond cuts than PSA IMHO. The Gehrig that was slabbed by SGC as 3, probably would have received an Authentic from PSA. Again, I can point out these two cards from SGC, and be shown 20 cards from PSA that have similar, if not worse, issues than these. No question that PSA needs to tighten up their grading consistency better.

I also have to say the ex-SGC employees are superb. When looking at the SGC board, it's crazy how much work Brian is still doing there. He doesn't even work for SGC anymore, and he's still answering forum questions, updating the SGC registry. That's dedication. I also had the recent experience working with Derek Grady on a consignment for Heritage. He was extremely pleasant and made the entire process for my first consignment to Heritage very smooth. Those beaters in the November Signature auction are mine! I haven't had a chance to work much with the new crop of SGC reps, but I do have a growing pile of cards that I'm preparing to send that way, and they have big shoes to fill.

[danmckee]

I like Scott the grader a lot. He is a super guy and fun as hell to hang out with. I like Michael as customer service and Brian was amazing. Derek was an asset as well.

I even liked the new guy they hired in place of Michael that is now gone already. I hear there is one particular guy that is making everyone else miserable. I would think a company would see this and rectify the one instead of the many.

I... better stop right here :)

[vintagetoppsguy]

The other thing is that, and this is not really an overgrade, but more of a difference in grading philosophy, but SGC is much more lenient on diamond cuts than PSA IMHO. The Gehrig that was slabbed by SGC as 3, probably would have received an Authentic from PSA.

Grading companies have the right to define their own grading standards. However, nowhere in SGC's or PSA's standards does it say that diamond cuts (or cards with erasure marks) receive an automatic "Authentic." I'm not sure where you came up with that.

[GehrigFan]

Obviously I'm not a submitter of graded cards, but as a friendly competitor of SGC, and being set up next to them, I thought they seemed to be doing just fine. As always, I found the staff to be friendly and I always enjoy talking to Dave, Brian, etc. Competition is good, so I hope they had a very successful show.

Mark Anderson
Beckett Grading

[Big Ben]

Again, I want to point out that I'm not picking on SGC, and PSA has tons of examples of doing this. However, this Magie that sold on ebay recently, doesn't this look like it should have been graded Authentic because of the writing on the front of the card, which looks like there was an attempted erasure? The original owner of the card listed this on ebay BST on the board, so he may know better, of course.

The other thing is that, and this is not really an overgrade, but more of a difference in grading philosophy, but SGC is much more lenient on diamond cuts than PSA IMHO. The Gehrig that was slabbed by SGC as 3, probably would have received an Authentic from PSA. Again, I can point out these two cards from SGC, and be shown 20 cards from PSA that have similar, if not worse, issues than these. No question that PSA needs to tighten up their grading consistency better.

I also have to say the ex-SGC employees are superb. When looking at the SGC board, it's crazy how much work Brian is still doing there. He doesn't even work for SGC anymore, and he's still answering forum questions, updating the SGC registry. That's dedication. I also had the recent experience working with Derek Grady on a consignment for Heritage. He was extremely pleasant and made the entire process for my first consignment to Heritage very smooth. Those beaters in the November Signature auction are mine! I haven't had a chance to work much with the new crop of SGC reps, but I do have a growing pile of cards that I'm preparing to send that way, and they have big shoes to fill.

This is one of my complaints with SGC. IMHO, SGC needs to establish a qualifier with their grading system. A couple of years ago, I purchased a 1941 Playball card that had four obvious glue marks on the back from when it was placed in a scrapbook. The card looks great on the front but the seller did not disclose a picture of the back during the auction. I did not complain as I won the auction with a good price. But, I was disappointed with SGC.

[spacktrack]

This is one of my complaints with SGC. IMHO, SGC needs to establish a qualifier with their grading system. A couple of years ago, I purchased a 1941 Playball card that had four obvious glue marks on the back from when it was placed in a scrapbook. The card looks great on the front but the seller did not disclose a picture of the back during the auction. I did not complain as I won the auction with a good price. But, I was disappointed with SGC.

I'm not aware of any qualifier out there that denotes glue on the back of a card. If the card looked great on the front, but had glue on the back, I'm sure SGC graded it low (10-40 maybe) which would signify some other issue going on with the card.

[Robextend]

This is one of my complaints with SGC. IMHO, SGC needs to establish a qualifier with their grading system. A couple of years ago, I purchased a 1941 Playball card that had four obvious glue marks on the back from when it was placed in a scrapbook. The card looks great on the front but the seller did not disclose a picture of the back during the auction. I did not complain as I won the auction with a good price. But, I was disappointed with SGC.

I am against the qualifier and I am glad SGC does not use one.

If I am buying any card from EBAY I want to see a scan of the back. PSA, SGC, raw...doesn't matter. If the card looked great on front and received a low grade from SGC, wouldn't you have to assume something is afoot with the back and request a back scan??

[dwr11]

Both companies make grading mistakes but SGC makes fewer, and I think most collectors realize that. And that counts for something.

Of course SGC makes fewer mistakes than PSA - they grade just a fraction of the cards PSA grades each month.

[Big Ben]

I am against the qualifier and I am glad SGC does not use one.

If I am buying any card from EBAY I want to see a scan of the back. PSA, SGC, raw...doesn't matter. If the card looked great on front and received a low grade from SGC, wouldn't you have to assume something is afoot with the back and request a back scan??

I assumed that there was something wrong with the card such as a wrinkle etc... (the card was a 1941 Playball SGC 40 Tommy Henrich and I won with a $10 bid so I wasn't too worried about getting a scan of the back) However, I did not assume that there would be glue stains on the back with that type of grade. The qualifier is one thing that I like about PSA so we will have to agree to disagree. :)

[barrysloate]

They grade more total cards, but not sure they grade more vintage cards. And I'll have to assume PSA employs more graders. Look, I haven't done a scientific study, I'm just speaking from my observations. I feel SGC is more accurate and consistent, that's all.

[bbeck]

Of course SGC makes fewer mistakes than PSA - they grade just a fraction of the cards PSA grades each month.

Great point. If SGC had the massive volume of PSA, I am sure many more mistakes would be found. Just a basic ebay keyword search shows over 6,000 SGC cards for sale and over 98,000 PSA cards for sale. PSA would have to be superhuman to produce fewer or the same amount of miscues as SGC.

[Big Ben]

So if SGC grades fewer cards, and I have no reason to doubt this, than I think that there is no excuse for SGC to not have a better data base for collectors to look up cards before they decide on a purchase. jmho

[JamesGallo]

Great point. If SGC had the massive volume of PSA, I am sure many more mistakes would be found. Just a basic ebay keyword search shows over 6,000 SGC cards for sale and over 98,000 PSA cards for sale. PSA would have to be superhuman to produce fewer or the same amount of miscues as SGC.

Christ, people forget that PSA has been AROUND A LOT longer hence more graded cards are available.

I would like to compare year by year over the last 5 years and I would bet the numbers are A LOT closer then many think.

James G

[Robextend]

I assumed that there was something wrong with the card such as a wrinkle etc... (the card was a 1941 Playball SGC 40 Tommy Henrich and I won with a $10 bid so I wasn't too worried about getting a scan of the back) However, I did not assume that there would be glue stains on the back with that type of grade. The qualifier is one thing that I like about PSA so we will have to agree to disagree. :)

I hear ya, on very low dollar cards I sometimes don't need a back scan either.

I guess I wouldn't mind the qualifier so much, but I have seen so many examples of PSA adding a "OC" where IMO it really shouldn't have been warranted. Basically I would rather have an SGC 80 over an SGC 96 (OC). Just my preference, I understand the other side of it too.

[botn]

Great point. If SGC had the massive volume of PSA, I am sure many more mistakes would be found. Just a basic ebay keyword search shows over 6,000 SGC cards for sale and over 98,000 PSA cards for sale. PSA would have to be superhuman to produce fewer or the same amount of miscues as SGC.

And on this SGC friendly board SGC may have never made a single mistake.:eek:

[k-dog]

Crack out and re-submission has proven that a card graded today can grade differently at any given time in the future. If SGC is having personnel, management and customer service issues...I see that as a much bigger problem than whether or not a card will grade 20 or 30!!!

[Big Ben]

I hear ya, on very low dollar cards I sometimes don't need a back scan either.

I guess I wouldn't mind the qualifier so much, but I have seen so many examples of PSA adding a "OC" where IMO it really shouldn't have been warranted. Basically I would rather have an SGC 80 over an SGC 96 (OC). Just my preference, I understand the other side of it too.

I understand where you are coming from. There are times in which I have purchased PSA cards with the "OC" qualifier on vintage HOF players as I really didn't mind the "OC" interpretation.

[alanu]

I used to not like the PSA qualifiers, but I've gotten to the point where the more information I have on why a card receives a grade the better. Sometime on SGC cards I don't know if it's been downgraded for marks, centering etc. Would like to see a "PL" (paper loss) qualifier too.

With that said, I like both PSA and SGC and have had really good customer service with both.

[peterose4hof]

I would like to point out that while it is true if you search "SGC" and "PSA" on Ebay, PSA has about 10 times more items (on average). However, if you refine your search to only including listings that are for pre-war baseball, which I believe is the focus of the majority of the collectors here, the ratio is only 2:1 in favor of PSA.

[bbeck]

And on this SGC friendly board SGC may have never made a single mistake.:eek:

How true. SGC can do no wrong with many on this board. I own many cards from both companies but saying that SGC has graded close to the amount of cards in total volume that PSA has in the past 5 years? If that is the case SGC needs to hire a receptionist again.

[whitehse]

The question still remains..........Whats the rumor?????

[cobblove]

I have been having cards graded sence 1998 by PSA, When SGC first came out I used them just as much as PSA bc they were exciting and new, They also had the .5 grade thing. So all is good for the next 10 years for me and then SGC just seems to just D#*K me around. Up untill the last year I used them maybe 2-4xs a year. After the last national I told them I would never use them again. Was not pleased with my customer service at the national and I now shifted towards BVG as well. I sent them 80 cards this national all PRe 1970. Im going to give them a chance which I feel they diserve. They graded all my cards exactly how I felt they should grade.
PSA and BVG for me!!! SGC never again!!

[4815162342]

I feel that the tide is turning.

[alanu]

Concerning BVG, I haven't used them for pre-war and I like BGS for new shiny stuff, but have had some problems with buying higher grade (EX-MT or better) 1950-60's cards and trying to cross them to PSA or SGC, they often come back "evidence of trimming"

[vintagetoppsguy]

When I search "PSA" on eBay, then filter by "Cards" then "Baseball," here are the results:

151,101 Total
40,928 1981-present
99,086 1942-1980
11,760 Pre-1942
1,165 Not Specified

When I search "SGC" and apply the same filters, here are the results:

16,175 Total
1,465 1981-present
8,906 1942-1980
5,895 Pre-1942
121 Not Specified

Here's what that tells me. There are a lot of people submitting modern CRAP (1981 to present) to PSA. The majority of PSA's business is 1942-1980 and I attribute this to the set registry. Pre-War submissions are pretty close (which another member already pointed out).

[jp1216]

I never really liked BGS/BVG in the past. Slabs were bigger, thicker and (IMHO) blurrier. Tough to see the card inside the slab - if you know what I mean.
But, I've crossed a total of 4 cards (all pre-war) from BVG to SGC over the years and every one of them got a +1 bump. Best card was a BVG 1 Cy Young that ended up in a beautiful SGC 20 slab.
No one ever likes to send in cards to a company 'with issues' or change. Think GAI a few years ago. But I'd still trust and use SGC right now.

[cobblove]

"Concerning BVG, I haven't used them for pre-war and I like BGS for new shiny stuff, but have had some problems with buying higher grade (EX-MT or better) 1950-60's cards and trying to cross them to PSA or SGC, they often come back "evidence of trimming"""

Crossing over is the best thing grading companies can do to creat doubt with competitors. Cracking out with cause different results

[alanu]

"Concerning BVG, I haven't used them for pre-war and I like BGS for new shiny stuff, but have had some problems with buying higher grade (EX-MT or better) 1950-60's cards and trying to cross them to PSA or SGC, they often come back "evidence of trimming"""

Crossing over is the best thing grading companies can do to creat doubt with competitors. Cracking out with cause different results

I originally did crack the first card I crossed over and it came back from both PSA/SGC as "evidence of trimming". The others I kept in the slabs just in case they would come back with the same problem.

[bcbgcbrcb]

A while back, I crossed over a BGS 1 (not BVG) Koufax RC over to SGC (while still in the Beckett holder) and received either a 30 or 40, I forget which. If anything I would say that BGS does not take their grading standards lightly to give out generous grades and is every bit as accurate as SGC.

[cobblove]

+! on BVG!

I have more horror stories from SGC than I do from PSA and BVG combined.
SGC 96 1956 #120 Bill V. Football Trimmed.
SGC 92 1979-80 Topps Wayne Gretzky Trimmed.
To name the recent ones.
PSA has 1 that was trimmed from recent.
None by BVG as of this year.

[bbeck]

Christ, people forget that PSA has been AROUND A LOT longer hence more graded cards are available.

I would like to compare year by year over the last 5 years and I would bet the numbers are A LOT closer then many think.

James G

If you have access to that information I would love to take that bet (and I believe most unbiased observers would also). PSA can be researched, they are public. I have no favoritism towards either company but I would venture when you take all submissions into account PSA would be a runaway winner in the last 5 years.

[cwazzy]

If you have access to that information I would love to take that bet (and I believe most unbiased observers would also). PSA can be researched, they are public. I have no favoritism towards either company but I would venture when you take all submissions into account PSA would be a runaway winner in the last 5 years.

What he said.

[ValKehl]

Both companies make grading mistakes but SGC makes fewer, and I think most collectors realize that. And that counts for something.

I have no doubt that what Barry means is that SGC has a lower percentage of grading mistakes than PSA, and I completely agree with this based on my experience.
Val

[Pup6913]

What he said.

So you finally agree they are the worst:D:D

Just busting your nuts Chris. Every chance I get:cool:

[barrysloate]

That's correct Val. Thank you.

[cwazzy]

So you finally agree they are the worst:D:D

Just busting your nuts Chris. Every chance I get:cool:

Hey PSA has never lost my cards. :)

And for the record I like them both. But I like PSA a bit more when it comes time to sell.

[hunterdutchess]

Psa gets the most bang for the buck for selling but I really do not care for the qualifiers. Here is a recent 53 Bowman Mantle with a oc that sold:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1953-Bowman-59-Mickey-Mantle-PSA-7-NM-oc-/170682872637?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item27bd7df33d#ht_637wt_902
Then look at this card that does not have a oc:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1953-Bowman-Color-59-Mickey-Mantle-PSA-5-5253-/190539984598?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item2c5d116ed6#ht_1630wt_902
The psa 7 oc has more of a boarder and the back is centered unlike the psa 5. So I ask how in the heck does the 7 get a oc and the 5 does not?

[thejuanscards]

Hi guys, FYI, I ended the auction for that mis-graded 1969 Mantle card from page 3 of this thread. I can't sell it like that. I am sending it back to PSA for re-grading, and according to their policies, some cash. Has anybody else had an experience with returning a card like this? Their guarantee states that they will regrade the card for free, and will pay me the difference between the value of the grades (either SMR value or fair market value - their choice). So, in this case a 6 SMR is $165, and a 3 SMR is $40 based on their scale. But, 3's usually sell for closer to $100, so any idea? Am I going to get a check for $125 or $65 in the mail with the returned PSA 3 card? Or is this wishful thinking? Appreciate it, John

[vintagetoppsguy]

So I ask how in the heck does the 7 get a oc and the 5 does not?

You can request "No Qualifiers" on the PSA submission form. They'll comply with your request (not all qualifiers are eligible), but they'll knock the grade down a couple of points.

This Mantle is a good example. It looks like it would have graded a straight 7 if the centering was better. Since it is O/C, the grader took off a couple of points knocking it down to a 5.

I think that is fair.

[hunterdutchess]

Thanks for the info, I did not know PSA did that.

[bobbyw8469]

I did it with several cards. PM me.

[martyp]

Hi guys, FYI, I ended the auction for that mis-graded 1969 Mantle card from page 3 of this thread. I can't sell it like that. I am sending it back to PSA for re-grading, and according to their policies, some cash. Has anybody else had an experience with returning a card like this? Their guarantee states that they will regrade the card for free, and will pay me the difference between the value of the grades (either SMR value or fair market value - their choice). So, in this case a 6 SMR is $165, and a 3 SMR is $40 based on their scale. But, 3's usually sell for closer to $100, so any idea? Am I going to get a check for $125 or $65 in the mail with the returned PSA 3 card? Or is this wishful thinking? Appreciate it, John
I bought a PSA 7 card with a crease (it may have reapeared after being soaked) and showed them where PSA was grading on sight. They put the card into a PSA 4 holder and they mailed me a check.

[alanu]

Hi guys, FYI, I ended the auction for that mis-graded 1969 Mantle card from page 3 of this thread. I can't sell it like that. I am sending it back to PSA for re-grading, and according to their policies, some cash. Has anybody else had an experience with returning a card like this? Their guarantee states that they will regrade the card for free, and will pay me the difference between the value of the grades (either SMR value or fair market value - their choice). So, in this case a 6 SMR is $165, and a 3 SMR is $40 based on their scale. But, 3's usually sell for closer to $100, so any idea? Am I going to get a check for $125 or $65 in the mail with the returned PSA 3 card? Or is this wishful thinking? Appreciate it, John

I think they will only pay you if you purchased the card slabbed. If you are the one who sent in the card raw and are re-sending I don't think they will pay you the difference.

[Griffins]

I think they will only pay you if you purchased the card slabbed. If you are the one who sent in the card raw and are re-sending I don't think they will pay you the difference.

that was my experience. If you were the submitter it becomes a "mechanical error" and they will simply correct the slab.

It is my understanding that if a card is a 8oc (for example) and it would grade a straight 7 they will automatically do that, if it would be 2 grades or lower they will add the qualifier. Requesting no qualifiers will not automatically get you a 2 grade drop- if the centering is at the level of a card 3 or 4 grades lower they'll give you that.
Requesting no qualifiers will not rid you of getting an "mk" if the card is marked or has an erased mark.