Quote:
Originally Posted by T's please
This is a cheap alternative for the beginners, along the same lines as PRO & GEM. If they can read the 5, then they can read the description below that.
r/
Frank
|
I think that the cheap alternative is a benign enough idea; however, the 5-10 scale is both dishonest and damaging to the hobby, as if it is confusing to us, imagine how confusing it is to beginners. I think we can all agree that we don't want beginners to be confused; rather, we want them to understand the basics of grading with little effort. Thus, the lower the barriers to entry, the better it is for all of us! One last thought. While I agree that if collectors can read the "5," they can generally also read the "poor or better" underneath the numerical grade (reading glasses needs aside).
However, if Beckett lists a condition description (e.g., "poor or better"), why do they need a numerical grade at all? Why can't they simply write "poor or better?" 
On a side note; I just received a call two days ago from a collector who got his first computer last week. He has been a collector of primarily ungraded material for 40+ years. He asked my opinion of the grading companies (my advice was to buy cards in three holders: SGC (IMO the best); with BVG/BGS (IMO second); and PSA (IMO third) -- but
without a huge gap between first and third place). The next day he called me back to ask about BCCG, due to his understandable frustration and confusion. Needless to say, his opinion of Beckett is now neutral, at best.