Old Card Grading a boondoggle???

orly57 · #1 06-12-2016, 10:21 PM

[ATTACH][/ATTACH][ATTACH][/ATTACH]I personally think they should add a 5th component to the grading categories. Centering, edges, corners, surface, AND PRESENTATION. This would lower the grade of uglier, but more technically sound cards, and raise the grade of the nicer looking cards that have technical flaws. Here is an example. Mine is the SGC 4 on the left (suffers from a nearly invisible 2 inch wrinkle). The other is a psa 5 that I found online. If you gave my card a presentation subgrade of say, a 7, and the psa received a presentation sub of 2 or 3, this would help even out the disparity i think.

bravos4evr · #2 06-12-2016, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orly57

[ATTACH][/ATTACH][ATTACH][/ATTACH]I personally think they should add a 5th component to the grading categories. Centering, edges, corners, surface, AND PRESENTATION. This would lower the grade of uglier, but more technically sound cards, and raise the grade of the nicer looking cards that have technical flaws. Here is an example. Mine is the SGC 4 on the left (suffers from a nearly invisible 2 inch wrinkle). The other is a psa 5 that I found online. If you gave my card a presentation subgrade of say, a 7, and the psa received a presentation sub of 2 or 3, this would help even out the disparity i think.

yeah, I think that is mostly what I'm on about. From a collecting perspective a prettier card is more desirable . From a investor/speculator perspective a more technically sound card seems to be more desirable. It's like those of us who want the cards for collectible and more sentimental reasons are at odds with those who buy them hoping to flip in 3 years when the market gets hot. (or wtvr)

bcornell · #3 06-12-2016, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orly57

I personally think they should add a 5th component to the grading categories. Centering, edges, corners, surface, AND PRESENTATION.

No, thanks. Presentation is in the eye on the beholder. I don't care if someone at PSA or SGC or BVG thinks a card looks nice. I'll decide that for myself.

The OP called grading a "boondoggle", which means that it's phony. That's not the correct word here.

bravos4evr · #4 06-12-2016, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcornell

No, thanks. Presentation is in the eye on the beholder. I don't care if someone at PSA or SGC or BVG thinks a card looks nice. I'll decide that for myself.

The OP called grading a "boondoggle", which means that it's phony. That's not the correct word here.

In my neck of the woods a "boondoggle" is something that generates cash while not providing much in terms of value. I didn't call it a boondoggle either, i asked if others thought it was. I wanted to know what others here thought about grading. Did they find it oh so important? Did they not bother with it? Is it a pure money generation game for the speculators or does it provide value?

It seems odd to me that someone would say "I'll leave presentation to the eye thank you" yet turn around and defend grading as being "better' than before. So, is your eye good enough or isn't it?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
SGC vs. PSA vs. BVG for card grading	Rascal1010	Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)	14	03-02-2016 10:20 PM
Card Grading vs. Autograph Grading	scooter729	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	9	08-20-2014 01:52 PM
Card Grading...	Tim206	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	12	07-16-2011 06:02 PM
When will Grading Card Co.'s Consider..	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	11	09-10-2007 10:51 AM
SGC grading of this card?	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	55	02-02-2006 12:36 PM