Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman
The same is true of most flaws though. Anyone can see excess print lines, poor registration, lack of color depth, wax stains, rounded corners, etc. Yet these all come into play in the grading process. I don't see why centering should be any different, especially when it is hands down the number one factor that collectors care most about. It shows you how well the card was printed/cut at the factory.
The whole point of having a ranking system in the grading process is to establish a hierarchy for each card's desirability based on it's appearance. The TPGs have largely failed us in this regard. Especially with respect to the attention paid to corners. As a specific example, the difference in the corner standards between a PSA 6 and a PSA 7 today, with their newly established goalposts, is entirely imaginary. What makes a PSA 6 a better card than a PSA 7 has absolutely nothing to do with the corners whatsoever, yet PSA wants to pretend that it does. Eye-appeal matters to everyone and that should be reflected in a card's grade.
Exactly how to evaluate eye appeal could be debated, but at least SGC makes honest attempts to do this. I probably get more half-grades with my PC cards at SGC than I do full grades because of it. And I almost never get half grades at PSA, and when I do encounter them on the marketplace, they're usually OC cards with horrible eye appeal.
Should SGC give full 1 point grade bumps for cards with 50/50 centering and otherwise perfect eye-appeal for the grade level? I don't know. And I'm not sure they'd agree with my claim that I think they sometimes do, but I'm OK with it. A dead-centered "VG" card with no creases and great color & registration with just some honest corner wear should (and will) absolutely outsell a "VG-EX" card with a crease, 80/20 centering, a print line, and square corners. The grading process should reflect that.
The fact that 3s regularly outsell 4s, and sometimes even 4s outsell 6s in the same auctions side-by-side, should be an embarrassment to the TPGs. But it's probably too late to change things now (though that clearly hasn't stopped them from moving the goalposts multiple times already).
|
Cards don't get bonus points for not having wax stains or print lines. The idea is to start at 10 and then subtract for flaws.
I personally don't think the grading process should be an eye appeal measurement, rather it should be a technical review of the card. It definitely should not be an estimate of the market value.
A 50/50 card with good color and clear focus can sell for double the average price for the grade. And that's the way it should be. We don't need SGC bumping up high eye-appeal cards to the next grade to try and estimate their market value. That would be a mess.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk