|
SGC grading inconsistencies
Hello all,
I recently sent cards into SGC for grading, as I hope to sell all my cards to pay for my photography gear. I used SGC for two reasons, first, it doesn’t require a subscription and second, I always read they are better with vintage cards. Before sending them in, I carefully examined each card and compared them with others I found online. I estimate the condition score conservatively and what I got back left me flabbergasted. I know, I know, it’s common for collectors to not get what they were expecting. That’s happened to me with PSA in the past, but with them they were consistent with everything I had sent in. With SGC, the grading was like a Rob Dibble fast ball...all over the place. Cards I thought for sure that were 7s got 5s and cards that should have gotten 4s got 6s. Has anyone else had this issue with SGC? Do I have any recourse? Does the same grader do the entire order? Any advice would help. |
All of a sudden, they seem to have gotten strict on centering. I sent an what would be an SGC 7, they said it was a 2 at best
|
Hi Mike. Do you have any scans that you can post so we can get a peek as well and give an opinion?
|
scanning
Quote:
|
pics of cards
i'm having a difficult time uploading to this site. Is there an easy way from an iPad?
|
Quote:
|
SGC is a no-go
Quote:
It's typically a mixed bag and even more so with mid-grade cards. Different graders react differently to various "ailments". Some look right past a little surface pimple--others demolish it. Some think a 70/30 card is NM material--I would demolish it. Written standards mean comparatively little when a grader is actually holding the card. A minor surface scuff can lower a card 2-3 grades OR go completely ignored! It's been said grading is subjective a million times...it bears repeating, however. To send your cards to another person for their subjective opinion is ludicrous when you think about it, unless you're looking to sell them. That said--one thing that is NOT subjective is value-added service. Why would you send your cards that you intend to sell to SGC? I understand they are a reputable 3rd party and certainly as competent as PSA--but cards in those holders are crucified when the day comes to sell them. Remember, Mike, the vast majority of the collecting world is stupid beyond what you can comprehend. I would strongly recommend submitting anything you wish to sell to PSA only or give it to Greg Morris to sell raw (he gets better prices raw than cards in holders). Now...tell us about this photography equipment! You have a project in mind? Change of career? Sounds exciting! |
talkatap app
I'll try this app and see what I can get posted.
regarding the camera equipment, it's not a career change, but a hobby right now. I also photograph for local animal rescue charities. I'm going partially back into film and have a Leica itch I need to scratch. |
Regarding the Morgan rookie...I was asking for a minimum 7 and didn’t get it. The images aren’t that great but it’s the best I can do for now.
It is what it is, I guess. Next time, I’ll just keep them raw or send to PSA. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
I'm confused. You say you wanted a 7 minimum for the Morgan, but the picture you posted shows it in an 8 slab, or am I missing something?
|
Quote:
I can see what you mean, however, with the 2 T-206 cards. That 3 looks like it is well graded compared to the 2.5 of the other one? Scans don't always show creases nor paper loss/pin holes very well sometimes so I am guessing something like that is the case? I've never sent a card in to be graded, but in my time here, I've concluded SGC is the most consistent of the bunch. That's not saying they are perfect, however. |
The Morgan is a crossover from the now defunct CSA grading company.
There are no holes, bubbles in the 2.5 Marquard. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
Quote:
I wish you success and enjoyment in your photography endeavor! |
SGC grading inconsistencies
Inconsistent results especially with midgrade from what I can tell recently affects all 3 of the legit TPG’s. My last SGC submission, a ‘69 Rose that I thought had a chance at a 7 got a 5, due to centering and a tiny stain on the back. Several other cards then got exactly what I had predicted. Then a ‘57 Pee Wee Reese that I had figured for a 6 got a 7.5. Who knows.
At the end of the day, grading always will be a subjective game. There’s just more room for variety in the middle grades because the pyramid widens as you go down. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Sgc
Mike, I think that the Morgan was in a defunct/bad company holder it's going to be hard for them to want to cross it, plus one of the corners looks hit so maybe it is only a 6-ish type card.
59s are a bit weird sometimes the paper stock when you feel it you can feel some wrinkle crease or bend not easily seen. The T cards I'm not an expert on but just keep in mind that there is a top baseline for certain types of issues like a crease so no matter how good the other qualities the technical grade can only go reach so high which is why some lower grade cards actually look better (eye appeal) than higher grade cards. As for the other poster I think grading key cards does help with recouping value and Greg Morris usually only handles big consistent collections (from my experience) so this type of hodge-podge offering I'm not sure they would have even been able to help.... In short, I think SGC is the best although I haven't graded with them recently so hopefully nothing has changed! |
I have heard people calling SGC after the fact and asking for the Grader's Notes on their cards that underperformed. I'd definitely ask about these, as I agree, they look much better than the grades you got. Based on the 4 on the Aaron, I'd guess spider-wrinkle or crease too. Morgan looks large enough, maybe they think it's trimmed? Most people crack cards out to send raw on ones from crappy grading companies, just so the company can see the card in full; there's no real value added in keeping it in a CSA slab.
|
I didn’t know I could get the grader’s notes. Great idea, thanks. They said two of my other cards were trimmed and gave me the “A” grade, so that wasn’t the case for the Aaron.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:40 AM. |