Thoughts on Third Party Graders?

[AGuinness]

While there are many threads about TPGs on the board, I think it's useful every so often to re-ignite the discussion as things evolve and change. In the past six months, just look at the various threads here and on BO about trimmed cards, forgeries, etc. in slabs. Plus, grading criteria seem to change over time, and there are changes in flips, slabs, etc. It's useful to reexamine things from time to time.
That said, the most universal advice in the debate (which is hammered on here and rightfully so) is "buy the card and not the slab." And part of that includes taking responsibility for understanding the issue, doing your research and drawing your own conclusions from the photos (or from a first-hand view if you go to a show, LCS, etc.). Another aspect is to develop your own preferences on what you want with centering, wear, etc. in the issues you're looking for.
If you can hone your skills on pegging condition, understand the card issue's red flags and adhere to your own preferences and values, it will matter so much less what company sealed the card in plastic.

[ToddW.]

I've been looking into this quite a bit, and certainly there are lots of examples that deviate from the norm. But one aspect that continues to confuse me is why there isn't significant cross-over investment activity. A few points/questions:

- It seems to be agreed by most that graded-PSA increases resale value (and there are plenty of examples of that).

- Some people assert SGC is the "better / more consistent" grader. I don't have a view on that necessarily, but I have seen (and own) plenty examples of SGC cards that clearly look "better" (to me) than comparably graded PSA cards.

- If we assume the first points are correct, wouldn't an opportunity to buy SGC, convert to PSA and resell be an easy decision (even including costs of regrading or converting)?

But it doesn't seem like it. I've seen many "cross-over" type threads on various forums where the grade from PSA was lower than an SGC grade. Not all the times, but that seems to be the case more often than not. Which prompts all sorts of questions. Is there a significant difference between eye-appeal (how collectors might view a card) and technical grading where one company is harsher than another on certain aspect that are irrelevant to eye-appeal? If there is a sense that a card has been graded by SGC (sent in SGC slab), does PSA grade it lower intentionally? Doesn't seem like that could merely be the result of marketing and market dominance. There is more there, it would seem. I ask because I have a number of SGC slabs that look better than many of their PSA counterparts, and have thought about crossing them over (for registry and consistency), but worry about the PSA grade. At the end of the day the card doesn't change and if I own it I wanted it, but it seems like it would effect investment results.

Now, left out of this is authenticity discussions for older cards. I can't speak to that, but it seems like some/many believe SGC is better in this area. That would further support that cross-over opportunity should be even more desirable. Get a better chance at an "authentic" then cross-over for gain.

I don't know the answers, but it seems like there is something that isn't explained (or at least I don't understand). Yes, buy the card is easy, but there are lots of factors to consider.

[DeanH3]

I'm firmly believe that PSA is very reluctant to cross deserving SGC cards at the same grade. Lower grade cards (1-3) do have a better shot. But mid grade and higher, good luck.

[oldjudge]

PSA has different grading standards than SGC. SGC is much less strict on centering. Everyone has their favorites and like I said mine is PSA.

[Goudey77]

My experience with SGC is overall lenient on surfaces and edges when compared to PSA. This is well documented in higher end cards. Mid to low grade will not have this variance between the TPG’s