PSA versus SGC

[Luke]

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.

[sniffy5]

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...

[nrm1977]

Originally Posted by sniffy5

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...

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.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by nrm1977

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.

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

[nrm1977]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

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

It sometimes seems that way!

[Leon]

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

Originally Posted by sniffy5

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...

[Dan Carson]

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

[MikeGarcia]

Originally Posted by Dan Carson

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

...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.

...

[Luke]

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.

[cammb]

The Hutchinson probably one or two spider vein creases

[orly57]

Originally Posted by LukeLyon

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.

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

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by orly57

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.

[vintagetoppsguy]

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?

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

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?

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

[nrm1977]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

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

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

[pbspelly]

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.

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by nrm1977

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

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

[nrm1977]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

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?

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