SGC - New in 2022

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Bobsbats

IMO, both PSA and SGC should change their grading write up criteria. When was the last time you saw anything graded with a crease at a 3? The write ups on a "4" are listed below from SGC
4

QUALITY
VG/EX

DESCRIPTION
85/15 or better centering, corners are slightly rounded with modest surface wear. Light hairline crease may show on one or both sides. A light tear or surface break may exist.
When was the last time you saw this grading as a 4?

PSA states a light crease may be present on a PSA 4.....on a PSA 4? That type of grading hasn't happened since the 90's.

I hope they grade cards based on their own standards soon.

Bob

One of the biggest problems in this hobby is that no TPG should have been allowed to determine their own grading standards, and then go even further and to then change them as they saw fit over time. One single set of agreed upon standards should have been set by the people in the hobby, and the TPGs should have had to seek approval and accreditation from whatever group spoke for the people in the hobby. Not the TPGs, not the dealers, and not the people/companies originally printing out price guides and other hobby publications years ago that often included their ideas of what the grading standards should be. And each and every TPG certified and accredited by the overriding hobby group setting the standards should have to adhere to those standards, be transparent in all they do in regards to grading (in other words, when a customer paying for grading asks why a card got a lower grade than expected, they should be given a complete, full answer), certainly not be able to charge grading fees based on a contingent percentage of a card's perceived value (doing so can cause the grading service to not be viewed as independent and unbiased, and it should take about the same time and effort to grade a '52 Topps Mantle as it does to grade an '87 Topps common, so why the difference in grading fees), and also be required to undergo some type of independent, periodic, third-party review of their grading, and if found to be deficient, their certification as an approved TPG should be subject to suspension, or even forfeiture.

It is too late though, as the TPGs have control of the hobby (with too many people now having too much value tied up in certain TPG slabs to ever want to go against them), basically call the shots, charge what they want, and decide what is what.

And as far as TPGs hiring more graders, exactly what experience do these new graders have to start, probably none. So who then is training them, and exactly how and what are they being trained to do? For all the errors and mistakes, and the uncaught alterations, in TPG slabbed cards that continually seem to keep turning up in our hobby, maybe it is about time the TPGs get held to some accountable standard, and start explaining how they go about performing their selection and training of graders, and exactly how they do what they're doing as far as grading. It sure as hell isn't like any of them have something akin to a proprietary grading technique or trade secret, like Coca-Cola's formula or KFC's fried chicken recipe, that could or should allow them to keep from their paying customers exactly what it is they're doing. .

[cammb]

Originally Posted by BobC

One of the biggest problems in this hobby is that no TPG should have been allowed to determine their own grading standards, and then go even further and to then change them as they saw fit over time. One single set of agreed upon standards should have been set by the people in the hobby, and the TPGs should have had to seek approval and accreditation from whatever group spoke for the people in the hobby. Not the TPGs, not the dealers, and not the people/companies originally printing out price guides and other hobby publications years ago that often included their ideas of what the grading standards should be. And each and every TPG certified and accredited by the overriding hobby group setting the standards should have to adhere to those standards, be transparent in all they do in regards to grading (in other words, when a customer paying for grading asks why a card got a lower grade than expected, they should be given a complete, full answer), certainly not be able to charge grading fees based on a contingent percentage of a card's perceived value (doing so can cause the grading service to not be viewed as independent and unbiased, and it should take about the same time and effort to grade a '52 Topps Mantle as it does to grade an '87 Topps common, so why the difference in grading fees), and also be required to undergo some type of independent, periodic, third-party review of their grading, and if found to be deficient, their certification as an approved TPG should be subject to suspension, or even forfeiture.

It is too late though, as the TPGs have control of the hobby (with too many people now having too much value tied up in certain TPG slabs to ever want to go against them), basically call the shots, charge what they want, and decide what is what.

And as far as TPGs hiring more graders, exactly what experience do these new graders have to start, probably none. So who then is training them, and exactly how and what are they being trained to do? For all the errors and mistakes, and the uncaught alterations, in TPG slabbed cards that continually seem to keep turning up in our hobby, maybe it is about time the TPGs get held to some accountable standard, and start explaining how they go about performing their selection and training of graders, and exactly how they do what they're doing as far as grading. It sure as hell isn't like any of them have something akin to a proprietary grading technique or trade secret, like Coca-Cola's formula or KFC's fried chicken recipe, that could or should allow them to keep from their paying customers exactly what it is they're doing. .

SGC went looking for graders by putting out a want ad in the newspapers.

[vthobby]

Originally Posted by cammb

SGC went looking for graders by putting out a want ad in the newspapers.

Intelligent people still read newspapers thank god!

Smart move regardless of your point.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by cammb

SGC went looking for graders by putting out a want ad in the newspapers.

LOL

Were they at least asking for people with some experience? Actually, that may be a smart, calculated move on their part. If you think about it, it's pretty much only going to be old people still reading the newspaper, so maybe by advertising there they might actually come across some older, experienced collectors that already know what they're looking at.

I'd still be very curious and interested to see and read what materials and such they then use to train these graders. And they must have a documented set of standards they are all supposed to be working off of in coming up with the numerical grades they do. Why isn't that made available to the public, instead of treating it like some big secret? There is no good, logical reason for any TPG to not share that with the people paying them for their grading services. The one main thing/reason I can think of for TPGs not wanting to share that information with the public is if they did so, everyone will begin seeing and pointing out all the grading mistakes, inconsistencies and errors these TPGs turn out on a daily basis.

[swarmee]

1880snonsports is right down the road and has a ton of experience.

[wazoo]

Originally Posted by BobC

LOL

Were they at least asking for people with some experience? Actually, that may be a smart, calculated move on their part. If you think about it, it's pretty much only going to be old people still reading the newspaper, so maybe by advertising there they might actually come across some older, experienced collectors that already know what they're looking at.

I'd still be very curious and interested to see and read what materials and such they then use to train these graders. And they must have a documented set of standards they are all supposed to be working off of in coming up with the numerical grades they do. Why isn't that made available to the public, instead of treating it like some big secret? There is no good, logical reason for any TPG to not share that with the people paying them for their grading services. The one main thing/reason I can think of for TPGs not wanting to share that information with the public is if they did so, everyone will begin seeing and pointing out all the grading mistakes, inconsistencies and errors these TPGs turn out on a daily basis.

I do agree that TPG is incredibly inconsistent, and that's an understatement, but SGC does have "loose" grading standards made public here:

https://www.gosgc.com/card-grading/submissions

[butchie_t]

Looks as though SGC is updating their site with the changes. 2 new tiers in addition to the standard one. And they have dropped down to ~25 days again on their standard turn around.

They are also providing high-res pictures of the front and back of any recent graded cards when one goes to validate the cert number.

If it does not show up when you go to the site. Refresh the site and you should see the new information.

B.T.

[Dandor]

I love the cert look-up with high quality images. It is great for SGC transparency and makes me more confident buying slabs on eBay. The multiple tiers are confusing. With SGC's already quick turnaround times, it is silly to pay double or more. Hopefully we start to see cheaper prices with SGC grading. Once we get into the $15 range, I have a bunch of cards I will be sending into them. Right now, I am just waiting things out.

[vthobby]

No holiday or New Years delay here:


They got my batch on: 12-30-21

Got my grades today: 01-24-22

[Bobsbats]

Originally Posted by BobC

One of the biggest problems in this hobby is that no TPG should have been allowed to determine their own grading standards, and then go even further and to then change them as they saw fit over time. One single set of agreed upon standards should have been set by the people in the hobby, and the TPGs should have had to seek approval and accreditation from whatever group spoke for the people in the hobby. Not the TPGs, not the dealers, and not the people/companies originally printing out price guides and other hobby publications years ago that often included their ideas of what the grading standards should be. And each and every TPG certified and accredited by the overriding hobby group setting the standards should have to adhere to those standards, be transparent in all they do in regards to grading (in other words, when a customer paying for grading asks why a card got a lower grade than expected, they should be given a complete, full answer), certainly not be able to charge grading fees based on a contingent percentage of a card's perceived value (doing so can cause the grading service to not be viewed as independent and unbiased, and it should take about the same time and effort to grade a '52 Topps Mantle as it does to grade an '87 Topps common, so why the difference in grading fees), and also be required to undergo some type of independent, periodic, third-party review of their grading, and if found to be deficient, their certification as an approved TPG should be subject to suspension, or even forfeiture.

It is too late though, as the TPGs have control of the hobby (with too many people now having too much value tied up in certain TPG slabs to ever want to go against them), basically call the shots, charge what they want, and decide what is what.

And as far as TPGs hiring more graders, exactly what experience do these new graders have to start, probably none. So who then is training them, and exactly how and what are they being trained to do? For all the errors and mistakes, and the uncaught alterations, in TPG slabbed cards that continually seem to keep turning up in our hobby, maybe it is about time the TPGs get held to some accountable standard, and start explaining how they go about performing their selection and training of graders, and exactly how they do what they're doing as far as grading. It sure as hell isn't like any of them have something akin to a proprietary grading technique or trade secret, like Coca-Cola's formula or KFC's fried chicken recipe, that could or should allow them to keep from their paying customers exactly what it is they're doing. .

Bob,
I agree completely. It's a shame that horse has left the barn and now it's a roll of the dice as to what is coming back from the TPG.

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by BobC

One of the biggest problems in this hobby is that no TPG should have been allowed to determine their own grading standards, and then go even further and to then change them as they saw fit over time. One single set of agreed upon standards should have been set by the people in the hobby, and the TPGs should have had to seek approval and accreditation from whatever group spoke for the people in the hobby. Not the TPGs, not the dealers, and not the people/companies originally printing out price guides and other hobby publications years ago that often included their ideas of what the grading standards should be. And each and every TPG certified and accredited by the overriding hobby group setting the standards should have to adhere to those standards, be transparent in all they do in regards to grading (in other words, when a customer paying for grading asks why a card got a lower grade than expected, they should be given a complete, full answer), certainly not be able to charge grading fees based on a contingent percentage of a card's perceived value (doing so can cause the grading service to not be viewed as independent and unbiased, and it should take about the same time and effort to grade a '52 Topps Mantle as it does to grade an '87 Topps common, so why the difference in grading fees), and also be required to undergo some type of independent, periodic, third-party review of their grading, and if found to be deficient, their certification as an approved TPG should be subject to suspension, or even forfeiture.

Our great country started eerily similar to this description and..... well you know that all went.

[npa589]

I was actually very confident they weren't trimmed once I got them in hand a long time ago.

I don't know the answer to if it's stricter or not. I understand arguments both for and against slightly easier standards for a 1909 T206 card as well, given limited printing capabilities of the time inhabitance in a pack of tobacco.

I thought the Schlei could have graded even higher to be honest.