Barry,

I suspect the chances of that occurring are somewhat less than it happening in the other direction but I would have to concede that getting a bump up is inconsistent too. However, if there is going to be inconsistency, I would prefer that it work in my favor:D

Fair answer, and I agree the new regime is likely stricter than the old one.

Kenny: If I sell a PSA 8 that I submitted raw and the buyer gets it bumped to a PSA 9, does PSA owe me?

If you paid 8 money for an 8 slab, you got it. If you paid 8 money for a 6 card, you're overpaying. Next time look at the card, especially if we're referring to centering.

These damn plaintiffs' lawyers see a cause of action everywhere they look. :D:D

Not sure if this gets into a current SGC 84 Holder. Centering is pretty off to the top. This is a good debate. I have a few of the old SG holders and this is one I have doubts that it would or should "cross". Besides the centering, it is a sharp card. And I do not think I paid "7" money for it but it was long time ago (late 90's?).

Peter, I don't think so. Nor is that scenario likely to occur. While the buyer received what could be perceived as a windfall, you aren't out anything and haven't suffered a loss, except, perhaps, a loss of opportunity.

egbeachley, as for paying 8 money for a 6 and "looking at the card" you are missing the point. You paid 8 money for an 8 card that became a 6card. "Looking at the card" isn't going to help because it only became a 6 due to a change in grading standards. Unless you are the Amazing Karnak and can anticipate that change, you can look at the card until your eyes fall out and it won't matter.

Kenny I think what you are missing here is that everyone knew SGC standards were different from PSA and probably even most people's standards for raw cards due to their weird indifference to centering. So it's not like there was some unfair surprise in the change, the change really was just to conform to what everyone else was doing.

Kenny, the scenario I mentioned has probably occurred countless times, particularly in the days when PSA was bumping cards at shows.

With all the different labels out there... it seems as though collectors always seem to prefer to have the latest one. As crazy as it sounds, cards recently encapsulated with a newer design PSA label sometimes sells for more than the same card with an older label.

not exactly. those collecting bgs seem to prefer and pay more to have the old bgs label with the subs printed on the back. the explanation for this from buyers and what people list on auction descriptions......"this card has the old bgs label from when bgs had tougher standards with their grading" is this true or not, who knows. also people seem to prefer the old bvg labels that were bronze for grades 8 and up. these cards are believed to be stronger cards again from when bvg was (commonly believed to be) tougher on grading.

i always see auctions with the old bgs label and people saying resub this for a higher grade. to me thats mostly just a sale tactic to try and get more money. i really dont see that working. bgs has always seemed pretty consistant to me. however, bvg hasnt been so consistant (to me at least)

with prewar cards, stay away from bgs holders with the subs...because beckett sucked and there's alot of altered and trimmed cards in there.

I agree with Quan, I know I have heard on at least 3 occasions where those old BGS slabs were not able to crossover due to trims and other alterations.