![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
No I wont. When I decide to sell my SGC 84 (7)I will break it out and submit it to PSA where I will get an 8!!!
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
if that were the case they would sell for a lpt more than they currently do because the dealers that make a living at this would be bidding heavily for the sgc cards to breakout submit to psa and make bank. i am not saying it doesnt happen and that their are not some poorly graded psa cards but i find sgc to be more lenient on condition than psa in many cases. Pretending every sgc card is a grade or more higher in a psa holder is laughable. in fact there are several dealers that switched to sgc because they were not getting enough high grades from psa.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
In my opinion, it used to be that for the most part PSA and SGC graded about the same, except maybe SGC was a little easier on centering, and stricter on paper loss and wrinkles.
Now, it seems SGC at least on prewar has becomes much looser about corner wear (I see cards with rounded corners in 5s which I find troubling). At the 6-8 grades they still seem to grade pretty much as I would. PSA, on the other hand, has become too strict. I see lots of cards that I would grade 1-1.5 grades higher. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The PSA 8 does look better than the SGC 8, imo. Sharper corners and the contrast is a little better (assuming it's not the scanner). Is it 2.5x better...? Personally, I don't think so, but obviously PSA is in more demand than SGC and has always carried a little more of a premium.
![]() |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[QUOTE=wilkiebaby11;1480153]The PSA 8 does look better than the SGC 8, imo. Sharper corners and the contrast is a little better (assuming it's not the scanner). Is it 2.5x better...? Personally, I don't think so, but obviously PSA is in more demand than SGC and has always carried a little more of a premium.
cool graphic...PSA carriers much more than a 'little' more of a premium...the clear direction is a 1 grade difference in value for same graded cards in similar condition... obviously if you are buying a SGC card now you are getting that benefit now so doesn't impact the resell but I know 3 years ago, people were paying much closer amounts so it hurts the buyers there if they plan on reselling...for the hobbyist it doesn't matter either way.. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[QUOTE=1952boyntoncollector;1480184]
Quote:
I give nearly all credit to the PSA Registry. If SGC ever wants to compete, they need to make their registry more popular than PSA's. That will start will supply. It'd be cool if they did a promotion of free grading if you are flipping the card from PSA to SGC. That would possibly motivate people to change over without any added cost. Obviously SGC would take a hit now, but in the long run, it could possibly help them over take PSA. Just to note, I dont care if they do or don't. I have no preference in the matter. Last edited by wilkiebaby11; 12-09-2015 at 10:08 AM. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
My experience is the opposite. I find that PSA is definitely substandard compared to SGC. I have bought PSA 6's with corner creases and will never be burned by them again. This my opinion and my experience.
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1954 banks rookie vg | Flintboy | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 05-09-2015 12:32 PM |
1954 Topps Al Kaline PSA 5 1954 Topps Ernie Banks PSA 3 MC | Sean1125 | Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T | 0 | 05-18-2013 10:00 AM |
WTB: 1954 Ernie Banks | SushiX37 | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 11-28-2012 07:31 PM |
FS 1954 Banks SGC 80 | Taxman | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 4 | 09-28-2012 07:04 AM |
FS: PSA 2 1954 Banks with NM Appearance | shagrotn77 | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 8 | 07-22-2010 07:57 PM |