Quote:
Originally Posted by glynparson
sgc does not allow wrinkles on 5s it does not mean sgc is not more lenient in some areas.
|
This is really my point. Every since I've been collecting baseball cards -- now close to 30 years -- "EX" was understood to allow somewhat rounded/touched corners, but NEVER creases. That was how I was raised to think of grading and, frankly, value.
Now, it may be that PSA will allow for more creasing in 5s than SGC. And it is certainly true that SGC will allow softer corners on a SGC than PSA will allow on a 5. But, to me, that is a terrific mistake on PSA's part.
As far as scans go, I keep my scans "in the clouds" on Picassa. No hard drive space issues here. And I have close to 100 PSA 5/SGC 60 T206 cards in my collection. I frequently buy them "blind" -- i.e., buying the holder and not the cards (mea culpa) -- and can tell you for dead certain that the SGC 60s are much safer to buy blind than the PSA 5s are, particularly if you don't like creases.
This 100 card example, which has been amassed since April 2012, is EXACTLY THE SAME as my experience collecting PSA 5/SGC 60 now almost 10 years ago.
Now, it may be that PSA grades a higher volume of cards -- but how is that at all relevant when I have been buying both in equal amounts, without regard for whether its PSA or SGC. I buy them both the same.
My "vitriol" for PSA is based on customer service, grading quality, and grading consistency.
I also have no personal knowledge of "cronyism" at SGC. But the "chatter" about cronyism at TPGs is as old as the day is long. So are the anecdotes. Where is the objective evidence? I really have no opinion one way or another on whether it exists (unlike the SGC 60 T206 with a crease, where I have never seen one).