Yeah, to roll out a new, "more accurate" grading system, but then revert to a 10 point scale seems bizarre. You could deduct a single percentage point for a fisheye, or depression on the surface of a card. Having to downgrade it a half grade or no downgrade at all seems counter-intuitive.
I guess the standardization of monetizing a card's value would be too splintered with additional grading divisions, so maybe that's why it's on the way out. (That's presuming they are switching to the 10 point scale, which is implied by the images of the new flips; maybe they're mock-ups?)
My worry about computerized grading is that no card is technically perfect. Say the computer spits out the best graded card out of thousands of modern cards that get submitted and it's a 94%. Are they going to declare that 94% to be the standard for an SGC 100/10 Pristine? Are they never going to award a 100, 98, or 96 again? If the best grade a person submitted to SGC could gain is a NM-MT+, is anyone going to submit to a company when they could get a BGS 9.5 or PSA 10 with a human grader? I also think the whole idea is overblown, and that the market is doing just fine with cards being graded by humans on the whole. If it wasn't there wouldn't be an exponential increase in the value of high grade vintage commons like there is.
Someone could also flood the initial submissions with this new computerized grading with good quality fakes, and if not caught, those could be the first cadre of slabbed/scanned cards, and become the standard which real cards are compared to.
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.
|
06-05-2018, 05:36 PM
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode