[raulus]

I suspect it's just a hell of a lot of work.

There's just so many sets these days. Even if you ignore the new stuff, and just focus on vintage, there are thousands of sets. And that's before you get to subsets and player sets, etc.

The process requires a pretty significant up-front investment to make sure that you're including everything, with all of the variations. And then you get to keep it updated as new information and variants come to light. It could take a pretty sizeable team just to keep it maintained.

And if you're going to be adding new sets for modern stuff, then it would take a big team to manage all of those.

As others have mentioned on other threads, it seems like organization and standardization has been lacking, with the same cards getting slightly different names and labels, which makes it really difficult to attempt to group everything together properly.

Add it all up, and I suspect that every time they've considered it, they've decided the juice isn't worth the squeeze, in terms of what it would mean for the brand.

And if we're being honest, about the only real significant impact on sales prices tends to be at the tippy top of the pop charts. Set registry hounds (like me) will pay staggering multiples for 1-of-1s, or to get into the rarified air of vintage 9s and 10s. But outside of that, especially with pre-war, any discount for SGC slabs seems relatively minor.

Don't even get this group started on the folly of chasing the set registry rankings by paying 10x for a card with a bigger number on the flip that looks no better (or in some cases looks worse) than other examples with smaller numbers on the flip.