Talk about PSA grading cards wrong, whats up with...

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark Turner

SGC grading this a 3. Even PSA would give this a 2.


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=31718&item=8831076004

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Grading is subjective. One grade either way is not abnormal. Not enough of an issue to make an issue over, imo. Even if PSA, or GAI, graded this a 3 I wouldn't really make note of it. regards

[Archive]

Posted By: bigfish

This card could be slightly over graded. Not really close to the magitude of mistakes that PSA makes. PSA has put cards in 5 and 6 holders with paper loss. While both are mistakes, the price involved rises with the grade. That is my real issue with the PSA misgrades. I Guess the same could be said about this SGC card.

As Leon said, it is subjective and I don't have a problem with this SGC graded card. Not a real big deal IMO.

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

Leon says: "Not enough of an issue to make an issue over, imo. Even if PSA, or GAI, graded this a 3 I wouldn't really make note of it. regards"

I do think that Leon wouldn't make an issue of it if it was in a PSA holder...but I can count quite a few on this board that would.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

Well, I won't pay for this.

It is time to stop buying inferior product. Specifically, card mapping technology exists. Couple this with individual pixel assessment and the resultant average weighted grading and you have a repeatable product. The programming would be done in an instant, if our market demanded accuracy.

Also, if we required overall quality, some of the encapsulation features we would want may include:
protection of the card from
a. fading, due to uv light - display your card anywhere !!
b. acidic air pollutants - air tight
c. accidental liquid exposure - air tight
d. relative humidity changes - no need for silica gel
e. tampering/crack outs - permanently sealed holders

And possibly other features.
This would be worthwhile. It will happen eventually. How long will we wait?

[Archive]

Posted By: Bobby

The card though even over graded fetched far less money the the PSA 3 equal which is 460.00-480 with an Old Mill back. And even PSA 2's in the past where getting in the $350 range.

So I would say in this case the buyer did buy the card and not the grade.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

King,

you might be right about people not making such a big deal out this proable misgrade because it's not in a PSA holder. I believe the sentiment is that if PSA were to improve their customer service that they'd probably not get so much crap about it. Personally, a misgrade is a misgrade no matter who's misgrade it is. On the other hand, since it's a PSA misgrade - lets start a new PSA bashing thread!!!

Ok, just kidding (kind of).....

[Archive]

Posted By: V117Collector

I can't believe the card posted is a SGC40, I'm still frustrated on the grade given for my V117 Mackechnie....

Brad

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

You have a Bottomley from that set?

[Archive]

Posted By: Greg Ecklund

Definitely an overgrade, and one of the worst SGC 40's I've seen. If I bought that card sight unseen (which wouldn't happen, but just as an example) I would definitely take advantage of any return policy offered. I have several 40's that when compared to that card should be 60's.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

I've owned SGC 20s nicer than that Johnson card. Wow....