View Single Post
  #1  
Old 02-16-2013, 07:27 PM
jhs5120's Avatar
jhs5120 jhs5120 is offline
Jason S!m@nds
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 867
Default PSA vs. SGC - A look at the T206 set

I realize that there is currently a discussion about this, but I didn't want to highjack the thread.

I for one am a PSA guy. I have nothing against SGC, but being a post-war collector, I choose PSA because it is more readily available. When it comes to Pre-War cards I am indifferent.

I would like to limit this discussion to the T206 set.

It seems as though PSA demands a higher price for mid grade and high grade cards. I went through VCP and took the average price of all T206 cards (minus the big 4) per grading company. What I found wasn't too surprising. PSA and SGC have an immaterial difference in their average price for low grade cards (ie. "2" & "3"). We start to see a difference at a "4" (With PSA at $132.66 compared to SGC at $124.48). NOTE: These prices include stars and Hall of Famers. This isn't a huge gap, but when we reach "5" the difference grows to $30 per card and at "6" the difference is over $60. See chart below:






What explains this difference? At first I thought it was demand. Perhaps a higher concentration of mid grade SGC cards dilute their value. So, I then turned to the population reports of both companies. I was somewhat surprised at what I found.

There are FAR more mid grade PSA T206 cards than SGC. Almost 25,000 more 4's, 15,000 more 5's, SIX times as many 6's and 5 times as many 7's. This anomaly is not explained by shear volume. A breakdown of the percentages show that PSA assigns a "4" to 27.28% of their cards while SGC is at a meager 18.06%, and SGC assigns a large amount of 1's and 2's.

NOTE: For this analysis half grades were rounded down and qualifiers were given a 2 point deduction.








It seems as though mid grade T206 cards defy the most basic law of economics, supply and demand. There is a far greater supply of mid grade PSA cards as opposed to SGC, so why the difference in price? Well, SGC and PSA cater to two separate consumers. SGC, the collector; PSA, the investor.

Most here can agree that SGC displays a card better than PSA. For a collector with no intention of selling their collection and only assigns a value based on a personal level, SGC is a far greater company to send your cards. To the collector who plans to sell their collection, PSA is the way to go. Neither one can fully understand the other and while I would label myself as an "investor" I have nothing but the utmost respect for collectors of SGC cards. I have a completed PSA registry set (not T206), and I while I enjoyed the rush of collecting the cards, I must admit I began to focus more on the plastic than the cardboard.

It seems as though the "collector" who is obsessed with a numeric grade leans towards PSA. I'm not saying collectors of SGC cards do not care about condition, but they focus more on the card than the flip. This trend can be seen throughout all sets, but it is most obvious in this example. Neither the collector or the investor are better in anyway, they're just different and in conclusion; PSA and SGC are two very different companies that share the same market. While on the surface they appear identical, to an experienced collector, they are not. In my opinion it is pointless to argue which company is "better" or "worse" because quite simply, they are designed for different types of collectors.


On a completely separate note I thought this was interesting:

The total cost of assembling a graded T206 set (minus the big four).

Reply With Quote