New SGC Grading scale updates!!

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

It's funny how whenever we have a thread about grading, people have strong opinions and always take sides. I guess there will always be the pro-slabbers and those who don't care for it.

I'm hugely pro-slab, and really don't care for this move.

[barrysloate]

It's a move that helps SGC stay more competitive with PSA, and also adds to their bottom line as collectors resubmit cards for a second look. Does the hobby really need it? Probably not. But SGC is a good company and I understand it's a business decision.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The addition of an "82" makes their grading scale even more confusing and, really, nonsensical. 55-60-70-80-82-84??? I agree with the poster who said they should now just go to 1-10, with .5s representing the half grades. As for the "100" they could just label the card "pristine" without need for a numerical grade.

[GasHouseGang]

I'm all for SGC adding the half grades. Hopefully all of the big players will spend all their money on getting their cards bumped a half grade and not be able to afford that card I've had my eye on!

[CW]

This is a win win win scenario.

SGC wins because (as Barry put it so well) it "helps SGC stay more competitive with PSA, and also adds to their bottom line as collectors resubmit cards for a second look."

The pro-slabbers win because they get what they were requesting for many years (ie. more options at the lower end of the grading scale, where a card's eye appeal can vary greatly).

And the anti-slabbers win because this give them more ammo to lob at the grading companies for being money-grubbing, clueless, unproffesional dimwits who get it wrong half the time.

Win win win!

edit: actually, the only guy who gets screwed is RGold and his awesome Red Heart Musial collection.

[lharri3600]

I have this to say, i just received my grades and i truly believe 2 cards would have received 50's before the new grading system. Both cards received 45. I mean we've all seen worse haven't we?

[pcoz]

I think it's a great idea and plan on resubmitting a bunch. Most of us buy on eye appeal, but who wouldn't want their card in a holder with a higher grade?? It's silly to say you wouldn't, as a higher grade can't hurt your collection, only enhance the value. But, some card collectors do buy the holder. No question a Babe Ruth RC in a 4.5 is worth more than a 4 with equally as pleasing eye appeal. A bump in a card like that may cost $200 to regrade with a 10-15k bump in value.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by pcoz

I think it's a great idea and plan on resubmitting a bunch. Most of us buy on eye appeal, but who wouldn't want their card in a holder with a higher grade?? It's silly to say you wouldn't, as a higher grade can't hurt your collection, only enhance the value. But, some card collectors do buy the holder. No question a Babe Ruth RC in a 4.5 is worth more than a 4 with equally as pleasing eye appeal. A bump in a card like that may cost $200 to regrade with a 10-15k bump in value.

LOL, and you are the guy they were hoping for when the decision was made.

[Bicem]

Originally Posted by pcoz

A bump in a card like that may cost $200 to regrade with a 10-15k bump in value.

But it's the exact same card -- this is why it's such an inherently flawed system, the enormous value difference based on opinions that change day to day, grader to grader.