A lesson in perceived market value?
 

Posted By: <b>jackgoodman</b><p>Two recent auctions I was watching pointed out, what I believe to be, a perceived difference in market value based upon grading company used. What do you all think?<br /><br />First, a SCD 8.5 NM-MT+ sold for $810. While the PSA 7 NM sold for $1726. just about a week later.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1155650507.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1155650525.JPG">

A lesson in perceived market value?
 

Posted By: <b>PC</b><p>The JoeD on the left is graded by the "new" SCD, which explains why the card went for so much less than the lower graded PSA card (it should have gone for even less, IMO).<br /><br />The "new" SCD (with the blue line circle logo) should not be confused with the "old" SCD (with the red background/circle logo). The old SCD had a decent reputation, but the new SCD should not be ranked in the same category as the old SCD and certainly not with PSA, SGC or GAI.

A lesson in perceived market value?
 

Posted By: <b>Joe Tocco</b><p>I'd characterise the discrepancy more as a lesson in the market's confidence in the ability (or willingness?) of certain third-party graders to spot alterations. Of course, that manifests itself in the market value disrepancy, so maybe that distinction does not need to be made.<br /><br />Joe