PSA vs. GGC web sites

[Snapolit1]

Much prefer PSA website when searching for population report. Like the way it gives you the entire year and you can then see the whole series in a glance and then zero in on specific card. Many times I get errors on SGC because I dont know precisely what the exact set name is or where there is a variation in player name. Nowhere near as user friendly.

Plus sometimes with SGC I just get zeros across the board and I have no idea whether that's a real output or just some kind of default error message because I did something wrong. Doesn't give you any info on what you are looking at.

Bad web design many levels.

[sbfinley]

People can proclaim it be grading standards or reputation, but the singular reason PSA has cemented itself as the industry leader is that instituted a user-friendly set registry and when they first saw its popularity they ran with it.

[4815162342]

PSA's website works great; especially the mobile version.

FYI, you might want to double check this thread's title.

[pclpads]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Bad web design many levels.

+ 1 . . . Not user friendly. Haven't used it in years.

[bcornell]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

...Bad web design many levels.

Why do you get to post anonymously? How about putting your name to your opinions?

[Snapolit1]

Easy pal. Who peed in your Cheerios this morning?

I expressed an opinion that I don't care for their website. I didn't say they were crooks or defrauding people or despicable businessmen. In fact I have previously posted that I love their slabs and far prefer them to the competition. I voiced an opinion. Wasn't calling their integrity into question.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Easy pal. Who peed in your Cheerios this morning?

I expressed an opinion that I don't care for their website. I didn't say they were crooks or defrauding people or despicable businessmen. In fact I have previously posted that I love their slabs and far prefer them to the competition. I voiced an opinion. Wasn't calling their integrity into question.

I think you still need to put your full name in the post. According to the rule listed at the top of the page: " If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post."

[Snapolit1]

I didn't give an opinion on a person or a company. I gave an opinion on a website.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

I didn't give an opinion on a person or a company. I gave an opinion on a website.

+1. It's like saying broken slabs stink, and I hate when I get them in the mail.

Now, if he said, PSA does a real shitty job at packing and they keep sending me broken slabs,.......

That might need a name. I say so much, I just put my name out there just in case!

[Snapolit1]

If someone says this new REA catalog looks great, that's an opinion on a catalog.

[Pilot172000]

I like PSA's registry and fact that I am comfortable with finding what I am looking for. All things being equal, PSA does a great job.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

I didn't give an opinion on a person or a company. I gave an opinion on a website.

Im pretty sure saying their website sucks qualifies as an opinion of a company for net54 purposes, even though I completely agree with the assessment. I have been on the site and could not find a way to verify a cert #. SGC did verify it when I called though.

[Touch'EmAll]

PSA website is better than SGC, just is.

However, I am not concerned with websites when I purchase a card. I buy the card not the holder, and realize PSA brings more value than SGC, and I adjust my willing purchase price accordingly.

The PSA Set Registry is not for me, but many folks do like the competitive ranking. Obviously the Registry helps to significantly drive prices. SGC has no qualifiers, and you have to wade thru a lot more off-center stuff to get a nice SGC card. This probably hurts SGC values.

Would you rather have a PSA 7 card that has poor centering for the grade, but not OC, or an SGC 84 card that has near perfect centering and less expensive? All other things equal - I will go for the SGC every time.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Im pretty sure saying their website sucks qualifies as an opinion of a company for net54 purposes, even though I completely agree with the assessment. I have been on the site and could not find a way to verify a cert #. SGC did verify it when I called though.

Yeap. My litmus test, other than the clear rule at the top of each page, is putting myself in the place of a company or person (or website owner etc..._) who is being talked about...then, If I would want to know who is saying something, that is the test I use. And I almost always want to know. I am pretty sure he isn't, but how do we know Snapolit doesn't work for a competitor of SGC?
It is black and white to me. We aren't playing semantics. If you give an opinion of a companies website you are giving an opinion that pertains to them.

[Snapolit1]

Leon - it's you site (and I enjoy it immensely) and I am happy to play by the rules, but that rule is really unenforceable. Every post in this thread contains an opinion. Most of them contain more than one opinion on SGC. Many positive and some not. I get the point of now allowing people to anonymously trash people and companies, but if your test was applied literally it would apply to over 90% of what's posted here. On basically every thread.

Ste.ve Na.polit.ano

[Pilot172000]

Originally Posted by Leon

Yeap. My litmus test, other than the clear rule at the top of each page, is putting myself in the place of a company or person (or website owner etc..._) who is being talked about...then, If I would want to know who is saying something, that is the test I use. And I almost always want to know. I am pretty sure he isn't, but how do we know Snapolit doesn't work for a competitor of SGC?
It is black and white to me. We aren't playing semantics. If you give an opinion of a companies website you are giving an opinion that pertains to them.

When giving an opinion, should I also put my last name or can I leave it in the about me section? I don't like bad mouthing anybody, but in case I do I surely don't want to break any rules.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Pilot172000

When giving an opinion, should I also put my last name or can I leave it in the about me section? I don't like bad mouthing anybody, but in case I do I surely don't want to break any rules.

I appreciate Snapolit1's understanding and yours too. The rule is not to try to catch someone having their name be technically correct anywhere. As long as, by your post or signature, we can easily find out who you are then there is no need for a name. After Steve (Snapolit1) and I just spoke I am going to mask his name and put it under his user id, where the word Member is. I can do that for anyone. It will be masked so it is not searchable and now he can go on and be himself and folks will know who is saying what.

[Pilot172000]

Originally Posted by Leon

I appreciate Snapolit1's understanding and yours too. The rule is not to try to catch someone having their name be technically correct anywhere. As long as, by your post or signature, we can easily find out who you are then there is no need for a name. After Steve (Snapolit1) and I just spoke I am going to mask his name and put it under his user id, where the word Member is. I can do that for anyone. It will be masked so it is not searchable and now he can go on and be himself and folks will know who is saying what.

Ok, its a very understandable rule.