![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Has anyone here forgot how PSA launched their brand with the T206 Wagner...strict grades...what BS!
Patrick Last edited by Vintagecatcher; 07-18-2015 at 01:02 AM. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sorry Peter, I have to say BS that PSA is stricter. Here's a PSA 7 (HA!) 1952 Billy Martin for you. Who gives a rat's @$$ if the corners are sharp. You can barely make him out because of the OBVIOUS registration errors. (And for the t206 freak collectors - no, this doesn't make this card more vluable - there are TONS of cards like this troughout this set. Dozens are on Ebay right now.)
Heck, even the centering isn't great. That card grade is garbage. PSA should be embarassed. Cheers, Patrick Prickett (in case I need my full nae on this one) Last edited by SMPEP; 07-18-2015 at 09:04 AM. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
you were joking right???? Countless examples of inept grading for all the companies - see the last Heritage auction with PSA 7's that have front and back paper loss.
The major TPG's do a decent job with regard to authenticity and more easily discernable faults. You're not submitting to some kind of crime lab - for the ten bucks no-one is taking out the micrometer or neutron scale. ANYONE can render an opinion about a "grade". Such grades really only matter in terms of commerce - buying and selling the commodity. Historically PSA cards have been shown to bring higher prices on many issues. They were first, better advertised, and developed the wildly successful registry. With the passage of time SGC has taken over the larger share of the more niche-like 19th century market and made inroads in the "T" card market. I think they do a better job, the holders look nicer, they offer excellent customer service. That said - it's a personal preference thing - you align yourself with the company whose condition/grade parameters feel "right". |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
right heres another 'sgc is better for prewar' it is what it is....PSA sells for more than SGC on a large scale.....theres always bad examples for each in terms of why a grade was given.....you can buy sgc cards cheaper for the same grade as psa.... which is fine for the people who want cards cheaper and who believe the card looks the same as the psa counterpart.....really no problem there....just don't expect to get the same money back as the psa counterpart ..it can happen from time to time of course.. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I am not joking at all. Ask people who submit regularly (that is, people not getting favors or to put it more charitably benefits of the doubt, and I am sure there are some of those) and they will tell you that these days -- which is all I said in my post -- PSA is very strict with grades. I have seen numerous examples of this.
My observation is not at all contradicted by the fact that in its 24 year history PSA has overgraded many cards or graded many altered cards. Of course they have. I have no doubt that if you took a cross section of mid to high grade cards with no paper loss or wrinkles, and had someone unknown to either company submit them, the PSA batch would grade lower in the aggregate. That is not a criticism of SGC, just an observation that the grading standards are not the same these days. And putting up a single example of an overgraded PSA card to prove your point is really not a very good argument. I am talking about overall, in the aggregate, etc.
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. ![]() My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 07-18-2015 at 10:19 AM. Reason: clarification |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Kevin, I looked on ebay at the last 4 sold 1955 Topps Aaron PSA 8's. They ranged from $1,366. to $1,654. The SGC 88 I bought in 2014 I paid $850. plus $18. shipping. Bad news is big difference between SGC 88 and PSA 8. Good news is I paid $850. for the SGC 88. I am happy with the card, especially for the price I paid. Whenever I sell the card, I must remember what I paid and adjust expectations accordingly. I would imagine an Aaron run is a super highly competitive arena in the registry game - probably the biggest reason for difference?
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I never sell, but i can say i like the look of the sgc holder better, as well think its more of a secure holder than psa.
I do buy, t205's and ruths graded by sgc, psa, bvg and raw. I always buy the card not the holder.
__________________
Successful transactions with: Drumback, Mart8081, Obcmac, Tonyo, markf31, gnaz01, rainier2004, EASE, Bobsbats, Craig M, TistaT202, Seiklis, Kenny Cole, T's please, Vic, marcdelpercio, poorlydrawncat, brianp-beme, mybuddyinc, Glchen, chernieto , old-baseball , Donscards, Centauri, AddieJoss, T2069bk,206fix, joe v, smokelessjoe, eggoman, botn, canjond Looking for T205's or anything Babe Ruth...email or PM me if you have any to sell. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In economic marketplaces you need at least two healthy companies to spur competition in creating innovation as well as consumer focused pricing and service. I'm a PSA supporter but hope that SGC and BVG can get their acts together. No one wants a TPG monopoly. Investing in technology (websites that are mobile responsive and look like this decade a good start) and marketing is much needed.
In my experience over the last 24 months, I've cracked 50+ cards out of SGC holders and received an average of 1 grade lower per PSA grading standards. (after the first couple times sending the cards in the holders for crossover and receiving uniformly lower grades, I always break them out first and surprisingly get the same results).
__________________
Join my Cracker Jack group on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/crac...rdsmarketplace https://www.collectorfocus.com/collection/ajohnson39 *Proudest hobby accomplishment: finished (and retired) the 1914 Cracker Jack set currently ranked #12 all-time |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. ![]() My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't know why PSA's sell for more, probably a "self fulfilling prophecy" because people think they are worth more and should sell for more so they pay more for no other reason than that. It's certainly not for PSA's beautiful holders in comparison to SGC
I keep hearing about PSA being stricter in their grading. I disagree on that, at least in the low to mid grade cards say grades 2-6. SGC has been crazy picky on some of the cards that I have had graded and when it comes to any type of paper loss I've found them to be much harder on that than PSA. I've submitted to both many times and have had many more comparison cards. Depending on the issue(s) that a card may have that usually determines where I send it (that and whether or SGC has a good monthly special ![]() |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. ![]() My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 07-18-2015 at 10:18 AM. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I have had several situations with paper loss with SGC that floored me with their strict grading. I had a BEAUTIFUL Zack Wheat that had some small paper chipping in the lower right corner. The card looked like at least a 7 it was that nice. But b/c of that small paper chip they gave it a 1.5. And that's just one example. In regards to PSA vs SGC pricing, in my opinion I for the most part trust both companies grading and review of the cards the same in regards to trusting the card is what it is. If I am buying off EBAY I am not more or less worried about the card if its PSA or SGC. I personally wouldn't pay a dollar more for a PSA over an SGC with the same grade or vice versa if the cards looked to be in identical condition. There are 2 reasons I have more SGC's that PSA and neither have to do with the quality of the grading. 1 is that normally it cost $17 per card with PSA and I can get it for $10 at SGC with their specials. The second reason is that as the OP said, PSA tends to sell for more so I've been able to get the SGC for cheaper. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The part I don't get is the PSA people always say my cards sell for more. So what they paid more to get the card. A real comparison would be the difference in increase/decrease in value and not the selling price.
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I do agree I don't think grading standards are better for PSA or that their holders are better .....its the analogy of the other thread about would you buy from someone you not like and I said if they are handing you free money or a bargain I think most people would put their feelings behind and buy the card if a PSA and SGC card were selling for the same price from a private seller and the card looks the same I don't think the SGC lovers will end up buying the SGC card, they will take the PSA card because of sell price...even if they don't like the holder and don't think their grading standards are better.......money talks. Last edited by 1952boyntoncollector; 07-18-2015 at 11:20 AM. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
If an industry wide rumor started next week that SGC was better within a month you would see the pricing reverse. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
PSA is so strong that you would be talking a major major rumer...some rumors that could further kill the other TPG would do nothing to PSA......anything can happen of course but going to take more than just a normal 'rumor' to change the current perception of the ebay buyers out there.. Last edited by 1952boyntoncollector; 07-18-2015 at 10:33 PM. |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
429/524 Off of the monster 81% 49/76 HOF's 64% 18/20 Overlooked by Cooperstown 90% 22/39 Unique Backs 56% 80/86 Minors 93% 25/48 Southern Leaguers 52% 6/10 Billy Sullivan back run 60% 237PSA / 94 SGC / 98 RAW Excel spreadsheets only $5 T3, T201, T202, T204, T205, T206, T207, 1914 CJ, 1915 CJ, Topps 1952-1979, and more!!!! Checklists sold (20) T205 8/208 3.8% |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Collecting Pre-1920 HOF Postcards (single subject, not team postcards) @TreyCumby |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Scary | mintacular | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 3 | 08-04-2011 10:50 AM |
Looked Very Scary to me... | Northviewcats | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 06-28-2011 12:37 PM |
SGC problem - Scary for me | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 28 | 01-14-2008 08:08 AM |
Pretty scary.................. | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 06-23-2006 03:30 PM |
this is scary | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 04-02-2005 01:38 PM |