SGC T206s....It needs to be brought up, it's scary, very scary if you are a collector

[ricktmd]

While it is clear that PSA cards bring higher $ than SGC cards of the same grade the question is why and does it matter to a collector. I believe the psa registry collectors who will pay more for PSA. This is a simple dynamic. Besides spending the time energy and money trying to cross the cards they often don't cross at the same grade so PSA collectors like myself are willing to pay more for PSA over SGC. One other factor is that PSA is part of a larger company that grades coins stamps etc.. They are a more substantial stable company which makes there cards safer investments as well. PSA is a pain to deal with but I think there grading while sometimes a head scratcher is fairly consistent. SGC is cheaper and easier to deal with that is for sure. In my opinion SGC over grades and grades items like S74 silks terribly. On top of all that the recent fiasco with the Standard Biscuit cards where they graded crudely cut strip cards with a lame standard biscuit stamped back as 84's that went to auction shows they are not trustworthy with authenticity. I have nothing against them but the standard biscuit fakes would never have been graded at PSA. I know SGC is popular and I get why. It just makes more sense from an investment standpoint with pricey vintage cards to collect PSA
Rick Clemens

[nolemmings]

While it is clear that PSA cards bring higher $ than SGC cards of the same grade the question is why and does it matter to a collector. I believe the psa registry collectors who will pay more for PSA. This is a simple dynamic. Besides spending the time energy and money trying to cross the cards they often don't cross at the same grade so PSA collectors like myself are willing to pay more for PSA over SGC.

While I agree with this part of your post, I do not with the rest. The Standard Biscuit fiasco, as you call it, was close enough where it is at least somewhat excusable, IMO. The cards were not "crudely cut" at all; if anything, they were a bit too sharp. The "lame stamped back" was apparently close enough to fool you, as you bought one of the cards.
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...hlight=biscuit I don't for a minute have trouble believing they could have passed through PSA as well, as all the companies have had trouble with this set for years. PSA is the company that graded a reprint Ruth rookie with a numeric grade!! Talk about being on alert as to what to look for in one of the most prestigious cards in the hobby and then blowing it.

As for PSA grading coins, they are absolutely horrid at grading PX7 discs, so that that additional area of ""expertise" certainly has not translated.

So the debate can continue on investors vs. collectors etc, and how SGC seems unable or unwilling to expand its brand, but their ability to prove authenticity is at least as strong, and in my view stronger, than PSA.

[ricktmd]

The standard biscuit fiasco was surprising. I bought one of the mistakenly graded W575 strip cards from a reputable dealer on ebay who took the card back. It was not a perfect scan . As soon as I received the card and looked at it , it was obvious that two out of the 4 sides were hand cut with small hanging pieces and jagged edges . You could see them with a magnifying glass or a loop. It was as clear as can be and any competent grader should have caught that one , not to mention the several SGC graded. I posted about the cards when I was a bidder and thought no way that if they were altered it would get through SGC or the dealer who sold them. I am sure people have had bad experiences with PSA that could be similar. That experience along with the fact the SGC cards don't normally cross and sell for less money is the reason I posted and agree with Kevin. I do understand why people like SGC . I just think Kevin is right about the values and I am just hesitant due to a bad experience
Rick Clemens

[Peter_Spaeth]

It may be hindsight, but the stamps weren't 100 percent convincing either.

[nolemmings]

It is hindsight, Peter. The 1921 SBs are a fairly obscure issue with a woefully incomplete checklist. The backs of these cards, which may not even be fakes or at least may be original blank-backs with added stamps, are not 100% convincing when held up next to one with a real back. Still, that is perhaps the best stamp I have seen--most just have text and not design, and while I agree it should have been caught, the breakdown here is far more understandable than letting a reprint m101 Ruth rookie get through.

Rick, I'm sorry for your bad experience and understand your PSA preference, although I don't share it. I just wanted to point out one last thing on those Standard Biscuits, and that's my opinion that your finding some jagged edges is nothing conclusive. I do not believe that shows them to be hand-cut, and W575s are often found machine cut. Machine cut cards can have jagged edges--here are two of several PSA cards I own that show this--note the view from the backs:


I believe that certain B&W issues can have high-grade cards that retain these little fragments, which are then worn down or off as the card is handled. Now Standard Biscuits are very rarely seen in high grade, which maybe should have alerted SGC right there. But having a little "hair" on the edges doesn't mean they were trimmed or hand-cut, and wouldn't by itself tell a grader that these were strip cards (if they were).

[e107collector]

Originally Posted by ricktmd

I have nothing against them but the standard biscuit fakes would never have been graded at PSA.

I'm pretty sure PSA graded fake Babe Ruth Sporting Life rookies a few years back.

They all make mistakes.

Tony