PSA versus SGC
 

I have not had good luck crossing my SGC to PSA ( I know, I know, but the card not the grade!!). I wanted to switch them to PSA mostly for uniform look (OCD) but also for possible resale value as PSA tends to sell for more. I first attempted to send in my SCG slabs for crossover and didn't have any success (returned below minimum grade - as I specified my lowest acceptable grade was a half point below the SGC grade).

So I then sent in some different cards but cracked them out this time and sent in raw. All of them came back one full grade lower and two were marked trimmed despite being previously slabbed by SGC. Now, I know from many different threads that both companies make errors but man PSA is being harsh.

My question is, what do you guys recommend. Taking the lower PSA grade or re-crack out and putting it back into SGC for the higher grade. None of the cards are very high value low hundreds at the most so the fees really begin to add up for these low value cards. Also, if you send in the card raw with the previous SGC paper from the case, you have to pay for full regrade again, right?

Once specific example I wanted to show you. It is a T206 Polar Bear Lajoie with bat that was graded SGC 60/5 that I cracked (case was previously damaged) and submitted and PSA only gave it a 3!! That is a two grade discrepancy. I just looked at the pop report and PSA has not even given a PSA 5 out yet, so I am not sure if that is the reason for the low grade. There is heavy tobacco staining on front. What do you guys suggest? Thanks

Aaron

Both companies grade cards very differently. That needs to be taken into account before crossing over.

I would suggest collecting raw cards.:D

That is insane! It's as if PSA has gone 180° On the way they grade vintage. It used to be you could easily find dozens upon dozens of over graded PSA cards. And now it seems they are grading extremely harshly as if to reward those who graded early. Uniformity of product is very important to me and PSA has not demonstrated that over the years .

The reason for the varied grades is the inherent subjectivity in grading. Those seeking objective justifications, I think, will be disappointed.

It's a beauty regardless. I would guess the staining and off center back would be the reason for the grade, but that's pretty harsh considering the front centering and corners.

PSA versus SGC
 

For cards as plentiful as T206s, why crossover? Just buy the card in the slab of your choice.

Maybe it's just the scan, but did those corners get softer during the crossover?

No. Corners look crisper in person than on psa scan.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Another example of discrepancy
 

Here is another example of a SGC 60/5 flipped to PSA 4.

Grading
 

It looks like SGC was very generous on the Lajoie and PSA was a bit harsh. If I didn't know that you crossed the Waddell I would accept either grade. I think that set yourself up for disappointment by submitting the cards for a cross over and putting a lower grade as acceptable. I have only submitted a few cards for cross over and put the same grade. If it does not cross over I keep the card in the original holder with the original grade. You may not get the original grade if you send it back to SGC. Just my 2 cents.

John P

These were cracked out because I thought psa graded other companies slabs harsher. I wanted what I thought was an unbiased opinion.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Like someone else said, SGC was EXTREMELY generous giving the Lajoie a '5' with the staining it had. The Waddell is a coin flip card.

well
 

first card around vg - vg/x and second card about x - generally with either company. Both grade DIFFERENTLY in some key areas and there's a lack of consistency in all the TPG's because of the elements described here on earlier threads ad nauseum. As I have OCD which in my day was the simpler OMG - to me the answer would seem obvious - all my graded cards are graded by the same company - AND - like Pete I look for some basic consistency over the years. I will admit lately I'm a little scared by SCD - it appears they've not held firm on a steady course but not enough evidence for me yet.
In any event, the grade a TPG puts on a card except with the high grade registry graded cards DOESN'T CHANGE the card. It's all about YOUR perception and current/future intent - or when buying/selling to determine a market range.

2 cents...
 

More times than not you lose on crossover from SGC to PSA. Not to say I haven't had some make it, but its rare. You stand a better chance at crack and re-submit, but its a gutsy move - only try with high end for the grade SGC.

Pay a little lower for SGC to begin with, be happy with the lower price, keep it in the SGC slab. Always try to look for high end for the grade SGC. Steer clear of low end for the grade anything SGC or PSA.

Recently I have picked up a few good looking SGC 86's with better than average centering and very strong sharp corners. I may crack and send to PSA when the time strikes me, but they are under $200. cards. If they get a PSA 7, that will be ok, but decent chance of PSA 7.5 or even 8.

I have always wondered - does PSA keep pictures of SGC crossover attempts for their future records? I bet a given card may have been tried multiple times. Or not? Any luck from anyone on the second crossover attempt?

The grading standards that the two companies use right now is just different. An SGC 60 is going to be a PSA 3.5 or 4 in most cases.

People pay more for the same grade in a PSA holder, but it's not just because of the registry or anything else. An average SGC 60 is going to be a much weaker than the average PSA 5 (under current grading standards).

In my opinion it doesn't make one company better than the other, and doesn't mean one of them is making mistakes. They just use slightly different grading scales.

PSA has carved out a snobbish marketing ploy that has sadly worked out for them, lending to the impression that they are the standard bearers in the hobby. Their elitist approach has worked, however much I despise it. And despite many mass submitters they have in their pockets. But Bottom lines don't lie...0Until the Feds crack down, which they should have done on the very first, very famous, and knowingly inaccurate submission grade...

I respectfully disagree. SGC can be impossibly tough. This idea that an sgc card will be graded lower by psa is not necessarily true. It is true on crossovers, where they arrogantly and methodically grade it liwer or cry "trimmed" in efforts to belittle the competition. Here is my ruth sgc 4 on the right and a psa 5 on the left. And before you ask, the back on my 4 is CLEAN

The PSA in the above scan is one of the really old labels. That opens up a whole 'nother debate. Treat the old labels (from BOTH companies) with a grain of salt.

I mentioned it in another thread, but I think it's worth mentioning here too. Here are 2 1965 Topps Pete Rose cards that ended on eBay about the same time. Both are graded NM. Does anybody truly believe that the PSA card (in the new holder, with the new flip) is NM?

Well said my friend. A company "founded" on knowingly grading a altered t206 Wagner. Way too much faith put into the almighty PSA! I have yet to ever submit a card to PSA, Yes, I've bought PSA graded cards. I've only ever submitted 13 cards which was to Beckett this past May after 29/30 years of collecting. I'm a collector not a flipper. I'll let my 401k and "real investments" make/lose me money. :)

With that said, I'm strongly considering using SGC services to preserve my collection. I actually like SGC's cases the best. The black insert really highlights the card. From looking at my SGC cards I've bought , they seem to have a solid grading system. I feel PSA's is all over the place. Heck, look at some PSA cards that where graded 10 years ago. If you were to crack that "older" slabbed PSA card out and send it back in for grading, you'd probably end up with a card 1 to 2 grades lower than the original. Ahh, I miss the old days of , Mint, Near Mint, EX, Good, Poor. :)

EDIT: I wish someone would come up with a computer program that could "grade" cards, check for alterations, etc etc, this would definatley end the "bias" and "funny business" with these grading companies. Unfortunately it won't be me as I'm in the medical field.

i cant imagine the psa one sold more than the sgc in this case. if so people are stupider than I ever imagined!!!!

yup...i totally agree but apparently we're in the minority?

Great Example to what I briefly touched on in my posting.

It sometimes seems that way!

Ha! The sgc one probably sold for $80, while the PSA sold for $180! :confused:

I know I'm in the minority here, but for me, getting a card slabbed is about authentication and preservation of a wonderful baseball artifact. Cracking open a perfectly good SGC slab and paying to resubmit the card to PSA in hopes that you will get lucky with a more lenient grader, thus changing a card's resale value (notice I don't say "worth") from, say, $500, into one now miraculously worth $800 (just making up these numbers as an example), just seems kind of crazy to me.

Probably some of my view stems from the fact that I collect cards due to a family connection and don't look to make money on them. So as I said, I understand that I am in the minority here. But I always find these discussions bewildering.

Close on the PSA > 186.50

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1965-Topps-2...p2047675.l2557

... but SGC came out ahead, or rather the better card did. > 293.88

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1965-Topps-P...p2047675.l2557

My '52 Topps Mantle (SGC 4) didn't meet the requirements for a PSA 4 crossover. $700 down the drain...But...it looks better than most PSA 5s.

That is absolutely at least a PSA 4 per their descriptions:

Very Good-Excellent
A PSA VG-EX 4 card's corners may be slightly rounded. Surface wear is noticeable but modest. The card may have light scuffing or light scratches. Some original gloss will be retained. Borders may be slightly off-white. A light crease may be visible. Centering must be 85/15 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the back.


http://i1056.photobucket.com/albums/...pssh20ce9k.jpg


They couldn't even tell me why it didn't cross. Spent $700...gave me my card back in SGC holder and didn't even have the courtesy to explain why. Had to call 3 times.
If a big customer that spends a lot of money with them submitted it - then I'm sure it's going to cross over. Politics for sure. Shouldn't be that way, but it is.

If anything, they are inconsistent snobs...especially when you compare old labels vs the new label harsh standards. Doing a 180 to protect current high graded cards.

The current 3s and 4s look better than the older 5s and 6s in many instances. I just want consistency.

Wow
 

Sure looks like a lock for minimum 4 grade. Anything more than a hairline crease on one side? Or paper loss or surface indent? $700. - ouch! I feel for ya.

Absolutely no creases or paper loss. They said it was the corners after I called for a third time.

Yes ouch! It was cash too, made it hurt that much more. You could've fried an egg on my forehead on the first 10 minutes of the drive home I was so pissed...
But I was more mad at myself that I just got hustled and played like an idiot...the kid had no idea why it didn't cross when he gave it back to me and "the head grader already left", he didn't even have any notes to give me. Take my money fine...but at least have the common courtesy to explain why! Brutal. Calling them back and being on hold to find out why it didn't cross made me feel like a bigger idiot, because they already have my money and it didn't cross over, so really it didn't matter.

I've found that in general (but not always the case), PSA is more lenient with paper loss and SGC is more lenient with tobacco stains when it comes to T206s in grades GD to EX.

If PSA gave that card a '3' grade, it would set a record price for a '3'. That card looks a lot better than a '3'!

I'm trying to understand what you're saying, but money is money. I can certainly appreciate your stance about the preservation of the card, but why would you not want that opportunity dollar wise? You don't have to crack the card. If it's a solid SGC grade, submit it to PSA with a minimum requirement of at least the equal PSA grade. Everyone talks about how nice SGC holders look, financially that doesn't mean squat. Also, they are a travesty when it comes to the security of the card between those stupid gaskets. But yet, they haven't done a damn thing about it...

Interesting take. Personally I think they Feds have done a pretty good job.

Psa/sgc?
 

I think there both inconsistent and should be out sourced right away!:)

PSA ? SGC ? A Pox Upon Their Grading Houses.
 

http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/204295...ERUPPP_NEW.JPG
...I remember the excitement in the whole family the day these arrived in the mail from the PRO headquarters and how devastated I was by the results but my faithful companion/grammarnazi TheWidowGarcia just kept patting my hand saying "their their,they're they're".

...P.S. The Moranville is the only one known.

...

Here are a couple recently graded cards to give an example of what I was talking about earlier. The SGC 50 is a pretty normal 50 for them. The Hutchinson might be a bit of an outlier with regard to how nice it is, but it shows that they can be incredibly tough. I think it would be an SGC 80 at least.

The Hutchinson probably one or two spider vein creases

+1

SGC is way easier on soft corners (at least on T206s) than PSA. But, my favorite thing about SGC vs. PSA is that SGC will not grade a T206 an SGC 60 if it has any sort of wrinkle or crease (at least, I've never seen one). PSA, on the other hand, is rigid about corners, but seems to miss the wrinkles and creases on PSA 5s at an inordinate level. That's really annoying to me. I buy PSA 5 and SGC 60 T206s because I abhor wrinkles and creases. SGC has never let me down. PSA frequently does in this area.

Also, I think I am right about this, but SGC has basically had the same three graders grading their cards for a very long time. That makes for much better consistency over time. PSA is all over the place.

Bob luce
 

Bob Is no longer at sgc he now works with REA. I believe Scott aka Lummy is the only grader still there from 5 years ago. . Derek has been gone for awhile. Steve may still be there I am not sure. I still feel that they (sgc) are generally more consistent and you are correct about wrinkles. I think they are both good services overall. I personally prefer psa. I like the holders and the demand for their product is far superior.

I think SGC is more consistent than PSA. PSA is all over the place, they make it so tough now I feel they don't even follow their grading standard description. SGC's holder looks better, and it's not too often they miss consistency by much.
PSA on the other hand a 6 if you crack it out might come back as a 3.5.

SGC's holders look better...PSA's are more sturdy.

SGC has definitely been more consistent over time...PSA has decided to change their standards over the years.

It used to be that more pre WWII collectors preferred SGC...but due to the "registry" and all the other puffery PSA promotes...PSA has become the preferred grading co. overall.

In most cases...PSA cards bring more $$$ than SGC.

PSA's customer service kinda sucks...SGC's is a little better.

They both have made plenty of mistakes.

Hey everyone, new to this and thought this might be a good thread to ask the question, since i can't even seem to figure out how to start a new thread!

I'm new to grading and looking a different services (PSA SGC, BGS). What i'm confused about is how you pay for the "level", If you don't know the value of a card.

Lets assume i going with PSA, here are my questions for them:

1. There are a lot of fakes as well as reprints. If the card appears to be in great condition (i.e. grade 7+) how do you submit the value of the card when you aren’t even sure if it’s even a legitimate card? (That's the whole point in sending it in).

2. If you submit a rough estimate of, say grade 8 for example, and put a value down of $1500, which costs you $45 to submit, but the card comes back graded as a 9+ and is actually valued at $6k, would you get charged the higher fee of $250, which is what it would have cost to submit a card at that value tier? Subsequently if it grades out lower or as a fake/reprint, would you get charged the lowest fee of $18?

I’m trying to understand how spending about $200 getting two cards graded, that could turn out to be a fake or reprint, would be worth it if you don’t get a reduced cost.


Sorry for the long post. Any info is GREATLY appreciated.

The price you use when submitting the card is the raw replacement value. At least that is what I do.

Hello Dibbydub,

First off, welcome to the board! You've found a great place to ask questions. If you are not sure if a prewar card is authentic or not, I would first suggest just posting a scan of the card here. You'll get good feedback and could save yourself quite a few bucks. As far as what level to submit the card under, I would underestimate what you think the card will grade at, especially since this is your first time submitting. Think of it more as what you would want to replace the card. If you get lucky enough to get a higher grade than expected and the value increases exponentially as a result, you should be happy to pay the higher fee if they charge you for it. Along the same lines, be happy when you pay more taxes, it just means you made more money.

DJ

Yes, this.

And if it's a postwar card, just post on the postwar side for opinions.

People misunderstand this subject a LOT. You are supposed to be declaring the amount you would want to be made whole if the card were lost or somehow damaged. This declaration is for insurance purposes when in the possession of PSA.

Mind you if you radically under-declare you will get contacted explaining that you can't circumvent their fees that way, but why would you want to take that risk in the first place.

What you AREN'T trying to do is predict the future value after grading.

Just crack them out and send them back to SGC with the original broken holder and have them reholder it for you. That way you get the original grades back and end up only paying $5 per card plus shipping. I've had the same experiences with both companies, and have done that a bunch of times with no issues whatsoever on the part of either company. I always got my original grade back in a new holder with no questions asked.

Having always been a SGC kinda guy - I have lots of crossover from PSA to SGC experience. I have always sent cards in original slab and have set "minimum" requirements for crossover grade. Over the course of several years I would say my crossover from PSA to SGC has been somewhere around a 70% success rate.

Over the last year or so I have determined that PSA cards with the "Hologram" slabs (frontside PSA Holo on Flip) have done better than 70% (maybe around 90ish percent)

Just got these back this week from SGC -

This one was submitted as cross from PSA 7 (1st gen holo on flip) to minimum SGC 84. Result was "Did not Meet Minimum" (crap - still scratchin my head a bit on this one)
<a data-flickr-embed="true" data-header="true" data-footer="true" data-context="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150864751@N07/38272705252/in/album-72157661606488128/" title="!005 Gilliam PSA 7 Obverse"><img src="https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4545/38272705252_0657474d7c_z.jpg" width="640" height="383" alt="!005 Gilliam PSA 7 Obverse"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


This one was submitted as cross from PSA 7 (1st gen holo on flip) to minimum SGC 84
<a data-flickr-embed="true" data-header="true" data-footer="true" data-context="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150864751@N07/26529934069/in/album-72157661606488128/" title="!010 Keegan 84"><img src="https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4560/26529934069_72d1a5772c_z.jpg" width="640" height="406" alt="!010 Keegan 84"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


This one was submitted as cross from BGS 7 to minimum SGC 86 (actually thought it had shot at 88)
<a data-flickr-embed="true" data-header="true" data-footer="true" data-context="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150864751@N07/24433932868/in/album-72157661606488128/" title="!071 Gomez 86"><img src="https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4569/24433932868_7bfef9ea03_z.jpg" width="640" height="401" alt="!071 Gomez 86"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


This one was submitted as cross from PSA 7 (1st gen PSA Holo on flip) to minimum SGC 84 (wasn't real sure it would meet minimum when sent)
<a data-flickr-embed="true" data-header="true" data-footer="true" data-context="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150864751@N07/26529955199/in/album-72157661606488128/" title="!166 Bauer 84"><img src="https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4567/26529955199_8370c2d715_z.jpg" width="640" height="406" alt="!166 Bauer 84"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


This one was submitted as cross from PSA 8 (1st gen PSA Holo on flip) to minimum SGC 88 (really thought this one had legit shot at a 92)
<a data-flickr-embed="true" data-header="true" data-footer="true" data-context="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150864751@N07/38304185671/in/album-72157661606488128/" title="!204 Smith PSA 8 Obverse"><img src="https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4586/38304185671_48f452039c_z.jpg" width="640" height="383" alt="!204 Smith PSA 8 Obverse"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<a data-flickr-embed="true" data-header="true" data-footer="true" data-context="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150864751@N07/26529965049/in/album-72157661606488128/" title="!204 Smith 88"><img src="https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4583/26529965049_568e61aa85_z.jpg" width="640" height="401" alt="!204 Smith 88"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

This seems like a major liability. What's to stop you from sending in a raw VG card with a VG-EX+ label and asking them to "reholder" it for you. Seems ripe for fraud.

Thank you to everyone's help. I understand the process now. Just wish they explained it as well as you guys did on their websites!