SGC or PSA on Stained CJ's

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jerry</b><p>Which Grading Company would be more lenient on caramel stains regarding Cracker jacks or caramel cards for that matter. I would like to get this card graded and was hoping for atleast a 5.<br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1177342574.JPG">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anthony</b><p>I looked thru my set, and found this 4, that seems overgraded (due to staining)compared to the other ones I have- normally this amount would get a 3 at best<br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/griffins/crackerjacks/CJ037.jpg"><br /><br />Here are a few 5's that have a bit less than yours<br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/griffins/crackerjacks/CJ052.jpg"><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/griffins/crackerjacks/CJ070.jpg"><br /><br />I think you may have just gone slightly over the stain tolerance for a 5.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dylan</b><p>lol, GAI. but between psa and sgc i might go with psa first., ive seen some decently stained cards pull EX before

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jerry</b><p>I would like to see some stained mid-grade Cracker Jacks graded by SGC if anybody has any to post.<br />Thanks in advance<br />jerry

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Check out the Matty 1915 CJ in the REA auction.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>I would be surprised if that card did not pull a 5 from either PSA or SGC. The staining is not that bad and the card is really nice.<br />JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anthony</b><p>what does the back look like?<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>THAT'S how you drop a card to impress your collecting brethren - without having to tell everyone how geat your collection is.<br /><br />Gorgeous CJ Grover Anthony, you can make out every feature in his face, just a brilliant image for the card issue.<br /><br />I personally don't think cards that are heavily stained on the front should grade higher than a 4, and SGC are REALLY tough on those kinds of marks. I've got an N29 Sears with a small water mark stain on the back - everything else minimally ex-mt, and they wouldn't give it a higher grade than a 50.<br /><br /><br /><br />Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dave S</b><p>There is no doubt that PSA is more lenient with E145 stains than SGC. I have crossed MANY from PSA to SGC and on stained cards, either held the same grade or dropped. Never bettered! If you're looking for the highest grade for re-sale and not to retain in your collection, you'll do better with PSA. Griffith's stains don't appear too significant unless the reverse is more pronounced. Left edge looks a hair irregular, might get docked for that but I'd guess your PSA 5 seems possible, think SGC would be 40-50...Good Luck.. HIPPO V was formerly a PSA5<img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1177347984.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1177348110.JPG">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scott Mosley</b><p>I think SGC grades 1914 CJs tougher than PSA IMO particularly when it comes to staining but at least they seem to be fairly consistent about it.<br /><br />Here are a few examples from my partial set which I thought should have at least been worthy of 5s.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.sgccardregistry.com/images.asp?cardid=10260&usetid=1668" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.sgccardregistry.com/images.asp?cardid=10260&usetid=1668</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.sgccardregistry.com/images.asp?cardid=10284&usetid=1668" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.sgccardregistry.com/images.asp?cardid=10284&usetid=1668</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.sgccardregistry.com/images.asp?cardid=10282&usetid=1668" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.sgccardregistry.com/images.asp?cardid=10282&usetid=1668</a><br /><br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Scott- Beautiful cards. The Brown definitely is a 5 you got robbed. On the Cobb and Jackson, do you think the grades of 4 were because of the slight diamond cut? I have some E93s and E98s that appear to be 5s from PSA but graded 4s and they have a similar slight diamond cut.<br />Take care,<br />Bob

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>quan</b><p>i had an sgc60 plank that had alot more staining than yours...like actual circular spots. your card is an easy 5 sgc/psa imo and might even pull a 6.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jerry</b><p>Scott, You got robbed unless there is a wrinkle or crease on those cards. Very Nice cards, they look like 5's or 6's to me.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jason M</b><p>Is anyone else a little troubled by this thread. These cards have stains and they are the same stains whether the card grades out at a 4 or at a 5- then why in the world should the 5 be worth more- its seems that the grading companies are really running the show if the same card is worth more because one company takes a less harsh view of stains<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scott Mosley</b><p>Jerry, thanks for the compliment. To answer your question, no, there are no wrinkles present. I talked with the head grader when I got them back from SGC and was told that it was strictly the staining that reduced the grades on the above examples.<br /><br />That being said, I still give SGC credit in that I think they are much more consistent with their grading standards on Cracker Jacks, IMO, even if their standards are tougher.<br /><br />I hope, for your sake, that Quan is correct and you'll get the grades that you are looking for on your cards regardless of which company you submit them to. <br /><br />Bob, I guess it is possible that my examples got knocked down an "extra" peg for having a very slight diamond cut but, as I mentioned above, thats not what I was told by the head grader when I got the cards back from SGC.<br /><br />Jason, your point is exactly why collectors should buy the card and not the holder.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dylan</b><p>I like tweener grades because there is such a thing as a strong 4 and a weak 5. It'd be nice if sgc utilized more tweener grades in from 5.5 down. NM is NM, but with those lower grades there's so much disparity

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>James Gallo</b><p>I think PSA is tougher on the higher grades with the staining. I don't see anything over a 6 with stains, at least that I can recall off the top of my head.<br /><br />I have also had cards that PSA has killed because of the stains, and SGC has not.<br /><br />When I saw the above Cobb and Jackon the first thing I thought of was the diamond cut as well. I think saying it was the stains is an easier out.<br /><br />I think the Griffith has a good shot at a 5 but I could also see it in a 4 holder.<br /><br />As for different compaines assessing the staining differently it's just like anything else. How much paper loss knocks a card down to a 10, what about creasing. Its just another aspect of the gradeing.<br /><br />James G<br><br>Looking for 1915 Cracker Jacks and 1909-11 American Caramel E90-1.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anthony</b><p>Here's a few from a few years back<br /><br />#4 SGC 4 to PSA 5<br />#13 SGC 4 to PSA 3<br />#14 SGC 70 to PSA 5<br />#15 SGC 4 to PSA 5, 1st time evid of trim, holdered 2nd time<br />#21 SGC 4 to PSA 4<br />#32 SGC 5 to PSA 4<br />#50 SGC 4 to PSA 4<br />#51 SGC 3 to PSA 1 have no idea what happened here, but it was ugly<br />#56 SGC 3 to PSA 4<br />#71 SGC 3 to PSA 4<br />#78 SGC 4 to PSA 4<br />#117 SGC 3 to PSA 3<br />#107 SGC 4 to PSA 4<br />#134 SGC 4 to PSA 4<br /><br />’15 CJ<br />#8 SGC 5.5 to PSA 5<br />29 SGC 40 to PSA 4<br />69 SGC 60 to PSA 5<br />82 SGC 60 to PSA 5<br />#83 SGC 6 to PSA 6<br />#114 SGC 5 to PSA 5<br />#132 SGC 5.5 to PSA 6<br />#137 SGC 5 to PSA 5<br />#142 SGC 5.5 to PSA 6<br />#154 SGC 3 to PSA 3

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jerry</b><p>well, I sent off 14 cards to be graded by SGC today. The Griffith is one of them, well see how they like the stains.<br />Jerry

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Frank Evanov</b><p>PSA is tougher, especially when they add qualifiers:<br /><br /><img src="http://images1.collectors.com/psa/set_registry/m514804/15Matty.jpg"><br /><br /><br><br>Frank