![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Probably should have submitted them raw but here's the tally (a lot of collectors wonder about GAI grading and how it holds up against SGC):
24 E94s submitted. 4 received the same grades, 12 received a half a grade lower (4.5 to an SGC 50, etc.), 5 received a grade lower (4 to a 40, etc.), 2 received a grade and a half lower (2.5 to a 20, etc.) and 1 went from a 4.5 to a 30 (gulp) a whole 2.5 grades lower. Just thought I'd share this for whatever it is worth. ![]() |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
At least no cards went to Authentic or trimmed/altered...
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
My thoughts exactly.
JimB |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Yes, I told them not to crack them out any which were going to get an authentic grade which had a GAI number grade. I was a little disappointed that the grades like 3.5 and 2.5 were routinely and consistently downgraded to the next grade. Taking in to account that SGC is brutal on caramel card grading I expected as much, I guess, but some of the cards were really sharp and I felt like GAI had undergraded some of them but I guess we all have felt like that when submitting, from time to time.
There just seems to be a stigma right now (with collectors) on the older graded GAI cards from when Baker was grading, I don't know why, so I plan on crossing over more in the future from my T210 set. ![]() Last edited by tbob; 04-14-2011 at 10:50 AM. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Thanks for interesting results.
Agree, amazed none deemed trimmed. Back when, I sent in a GAI lot to PSA for crossover - every single one of them came back "trimmed". Come on folks - all of them ?!?! I honestly think PSA are unethical sob's with GAI crossovers. Kudos to SGC for being honest - may not like the results, but if compared against comparable, you would probably have to agree. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
i know there were some disappointments but i have to say with all of the negativities we've felt toward gai, you actually did better with the grades than I would've thought. So,in large part, i must offer a congratulations with
a touch of empathy as i still have a number of the old gai's sitting in the safe. all the best, ole friend barry |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Bob, last week I submitted my last GAI to SGC for crossover: 5.5 to a 3 as well.
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/sets |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I thought that SGC 20 was the equivalent of a 1.5?
Either way, sorry to hear of your disappointment but very much appreciate your sharing these results.
__________________
collecting T206, 1940 Play Ball, 1947-66 Exhibits, and 1952 Bowman. e-mails preferred over PM. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Looking for people to write articles about certain cards | mmync | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 09-27-2010 05:59 PM |
FS: Various SGC Graded Cards | Robextend | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 04-12-2010 11:14 AM |
SGC Cards for sale (SOLD) | Robextend | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 6 | 01-09-2010 11:26 PM |
Cracker Jack Blowout | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 4 | 01-16-2009 07:46 PM |
Bunch of SGC cards for Sale | Archive | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 02-11-2008 09:07 PM |