To PSA or not to PSA, that is the question
 

So, a few things generally agreed upon. Debatable, but generally agreed upon:
1) SGC is the go-to for pre-war cards
2) PSA commands a premium in the market
3) PSA slabs have in the past been ill-fitting for non modern-size cards

With that behind us, what are your thoughts on current PSA slabs for the likes of T206, Cracker Jack, C-55, etc? It looks like the wrapper is gone, and the fit is better/more snug?

And, has anyone crossed from PSA to SGC? Plenty of discussion about SGC to PSA, not so much the other way.

Who generally agrees on 1?

I thought the forum generally disagreed.

I generally much prefer the PSA/DNA slab to Beckett. I don't have much of a preference when it comes to pre-war in either PSA or SGC. I don't think I have any pre-war in Beckett holders.

T206 look amazing in a 20 card binder page.

I agree. :eek:

Agree

"Hey, you're peeling his eggs."

"That's right, Mr. Alibi."

"He peels his eggs himself. That's understood."

"Now, you may be just great at hanging paper around the big city and passing bad checks, but us country boys ain't entirely brainless."

"When it come to the law, nothing is understood."

For the twenty years I've been on this forum it has been largely agreed upon.
Most have suggested they prefer the look for pre-war in SGC, and until recent times it was felt SGC were more accurate and 'less' prone to blatant inaccuracies.

That's changed some in recent years.

I disagreeing with what you saying this forum generally disagrees.
Or am I supposed to agree about the disagreeing

I think we need a poll on this.

Do you agree? Er I mean disagree?

So confused

I wish they never appeared in the hobby. It is not a hobby anymore, it is an investment business. And not a very stable one either. IMHO.

2021 - 2010 = 11

So your claim of length of time on this forum either needs to be "trimmed" down a bit, or your user name has been "altered".

Doug "insert smiley face here" Goodman

I generally agree with your use of the word "debatable" in the OP.

I agree we on the forum disagree, but to what degree do we disagree? I expect we disagree as to what degree we disagree, but in searching the posts, I have not seen a decree among the debris.

Generally?

No, I specifically agree that we generally disagree.

It's still a hobby for me. I understand what you're saying, but it's still very much a hobby for a lot of people.

Net54 has actually been around since September 2001, though I think the webhost(?) was switched about 2010, and everyone's prior posts became labeled 'Archive', which led to the infamous Bruce quote that, if I remember correctly, he was going to sue 'Archive' over a post on a thread brought back to life, but that post was actually one he (utilizing his famous 'we') had posted years before.

Brian

Enjoying the repartee and looking forward to an actual answer to one or more of my questions. :D

When you say "wrapper", do you mean mylar baggie?

I think most people are off submitting from PSA at this point since the minimum submission level costs $300/card until at least July, maybe much longer.
SGC is currently charging $75 a card min, while BGS has raised their prices and has just as much backlog timeline as PSA. Even CSG is slammed.

I would guess most collectors are just biding their time.

As Billy Cox would've said, "f**kit". A good many collectors here would just as soon not bother with any of them, but whadayagonna do, that's where the hobby has evolved to. I don't think there is any consensus on any of it, except for the cards that one or another service refuse to grade. If you want a non-baseball Exhibit card graded, SGC is the clear choice since PSA won't and CSG can't (no slab). Beckett is the choice for Star basketball for the same reason. If you just want to make the most money possible on resale in a registry-heavy set, gotta go with PSA and hope a couple of the registry queens get into a bitch-slapping fight over it.

If these are any indication (cert numbers suggest that these are recently slabbed), PSA is not doing too well in this regard at the moment (not my cards):

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/DDMAA...9m/s-l1600.jpg
https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/34MAA...8j/s-l1600.jpg
https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/P~AAA...7q/s-l1600.jpg

Yeah, that ugly Mylar thing. In my mind, PSA not having a slab designed to fit the card in question just means they don’t take that segment (pre- and immediate post-war cards) seriously. Or at least they didn’t.

Even if the slab fit is OK PSA can still find something to mess up

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...ocus%20set.jpg

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...ricktop_1.jpeg

It could well be a matter of manufacturing costs. Injection molding dies aren't exactly cheap, and if you only expect to grade a few of an odd size card a year there's no way you'll ever make that back in fees.

That's one of the advantages of the gasket/frame system SGC and a couple others have used, it's easy to convert a gasket to a different size.

Pretty Clear choice for me

This -

<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150864751@N07/51152484978/in/album-72157711330478736/" title="Stahl, Jake PSA 2 - Piedmont (Obverse)"><img src="https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51152484978_0d9abf2646_m.jpg" width="300" height="480" alt="Stahl, Jake PSA 2 - Piedmont (Obverse)"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

VS This -

<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150864751@N07/51153356750/in/album-72157711330478736/" title="Kleinow, Red BVG 3 - Piedmont (Obverse)"><img src="https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51153356750_aa01e23844_m.jpg" width="300" height="480" alt="Kleinow, Red BVG 3 - Piedmont (Obverse)"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

VS This -

<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150864751@N07/51153040744/in/album-72157711330478736/" title="Clark, Josh SGC 40 - Piedmont (Obverse)"><img src="https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51153040744_ecfb658f8a_m.jpg" width="300" height="480" alt="Clark, Josh SGC 40 - Piedmont (Obverse)"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Presentation may be nicer in SGC, but the slabs can be opened with your fingernails or a butter knife and resealed. For actually protecting the card inside and proof it's the one that was graded, I think BGS has the best holders. Holders are sturdy, tamper-proof, and despite the slight eyesore of a mylar baggy or penny sleeve inside the case, protects the card very well.

I think that if CSG could/would incorporate the black "gasket" in their slabs - they would have a winner (anyone from CSG listening? I know it has been mentioned before)

This is spot on. I would submit cards to them in a heartbeat, if they adopted some form of the black framing. I dislike the way the smaller cards are swimming in a sea of void space in CSG's current slabs. Not quite as bad as PSA with their diagonal placement in crumpled up baggies, but close.

Right now I'm collecting only raw cards, because I can't stand any of the three "leading" authenticators and will not give them my business. CSG is missing the boat, if they want to be a player in the "vintage" market. Perhaps they only care about modern card submissions? :confused:

Their ability to grade would matter much more to me than how the card looks in the holder.

If people weren't high on Beckett's vintage grading, I suspect they aren't going to be high on CSG's.

"Their ability to grade would matter much more to me than how the card looks in the holder.

If people weren't high on Beckett's vintage grading, I suspect they aren't going to be high on CSG's."


Have you observed poor/inaccurate grading from them to this point? Have they misgraded tens of thousands of altered cards like PSA, SGC and Beckett? I have heard they actually use rulers and blacklights. They certainly can't be any worse than what we've had for the past decade.

My statement assumed that all other factors being equal, the aesthetics matter. I like to display my cards.

Mixed reviews so far, although of course it's limited and anecdotal.

I have not submitted myself.

Incidentally at least for myself, I think the result of PSA and SGC taking away the lower grading tiers (and it wouldn't surprise me if they don't come back) is that I'm going to be just fine going back to my roots with at least cards below a certain threshold just in sleeves and toploaders.