 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
01-10-2020, 08:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Scg
I had a card graded by PSA. It's ,in my opinion,graded
way below what it should be.PSA won't return any of my Emails,about this. Have many of you sent your cards to SCG,for a RE-GRADE ? And,did SCG have a special fee,for that?I can't remember. Thanks, Ben 
|
|
#2
01-10-2020, 09:02 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
It’s SGC.
|
|
#3
01-10-2020, 09:10 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Post a scan of the card....we can tell if it is undergraded or not.
|
|
#4
01-11-2020, 05:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I did. They had a $10 regrade special. I had a card that, while not outed as altered, was listed as part of a submission that included an altered card. This was early in the PWCC scandal. I called them and told them that I couldn’t see anything wrong with card but that they look closely at it. In the end it came back in same grade (EX5).
__________________
Contact me if you have any Dave Kingman cards / memorabilia for sale. Last edited by ejharrington; 01-11-2020 at 05:45 AM. Reason: Edit
|
|
#5
01-11-2020, 06:08 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Was the card initially in an SGC flip, and you sent to PSA; did not like the grade PSA gave you; PSA will not return your calls/emails; and now you want it back in the SGC flip? OR, was this a raw card that PSA graded?
|
|
#9
01-11-2020, 07:30 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
PSA has cracked down a bit more since the scandal. For example, card that looks like a 6 or a 7 but has a small hard to find wrinkle might get a 3 or 2.5. I've seen a lot of this. It's not really right, but given that all grading is subjective at some level, I kind of understand what they are doing. If you have something that you think is way undergraded just based on eye-appeal, it's possible you've run afoul of this. All of the big 3 TPG's make mistakes. But at least in my experience, SGC and BVG are more apt to grade a card based on the whole of it's eye appeal than PSA is. At least right now.
__________________
Prewar Cubs. Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Currently working on 1956, '63 and '72 Topps complete sets. Last edited by jchcollins; 01-11-2020 at 07:31 AM.
|
|
#10
01-15-2020, 02:47 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Scg
I would agree if the same card, that is accurately graded as a 1. Expecting more, especially from today’s PSA is not realistic. They are giving cards that look EX-MT 2’s and 3’s because of barely perceptible wrinkles; not sure what we should expect them to do with cards that have multiple, obvious creases other than rate them poor.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Prewar Cubs. Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Currently working on 1956, '63 and '72 Topps complete sets. Last edited by jchcollins; 01-15-2020 at 02:48 PM.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
