Wow psa blowing away competitors

[EldoEsq]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Market share, blah blah blah. SGC isn't trying to be PSA or have their volume. They are trying to have zero or minimal backlog, which they have managed to become wildly successful at, at least over the last 6 months plus.

If you are into subbing or buying PSA slabs for your collection only out of consideration for the $ and turnaround, I get it. But in virtually every other way - customer service, pricing, turn time, presentation - SGC has made strides over and above PSA that are noticeable. And at least for vintage, please don't try to say that PSA is tougher than SGC anymore. It's simply not true. Both have their quirks and differences (PSA tougher on corners maybe, SGC tougher on centering) and things like that, but SGC is not exactly the cakewalk for vintage that BVG historically is.

PSA may have won at least the early long term game with their registry, but increasingly just for a professional presentation and accurately graded card, it's difficult to see them maintaining a 30-50% resale advantage in the long term to come. I would agree that it has defied logic so far, but SGC is the company you see making progress in the last 5 years and doing things differently, PSA not so much. Either the backlogs are endless, or the prices are unreasonable - or some combination of both.

I'm leaning more towards raw vintage cards myself in the days ahead, simply because I've realized that I don't actually value a bunch of things in my "eye appeal" collection that I've ostensibly ascribed to for years - but that said for the few things I still want in a slab for whatever reason - I'm sticking with SGC for submissions. When buying 3rd party I buy the card first and not the slab, thus I have a variety of slab brand labels - but have only ever submitted myself with SGC.

Come on...seriously. you are saying that SGC wants no backlog. They just don't like money.

You do know the true reason why the turnaround is like 24 hrs for SGC right?

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[dnilgis]

Originally Posted by EldoEsq

Come on...seriously. you are saying that SGC wants no backlog. They just don't like money.

You do know the true reason why the turnaround is like 24 hrs for SGC right?

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

No, please tell

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by EldoEsq

Come on...seriously. you are saying that SGC wants no backlog. They just don't like money.

You do know the true reason why the turnaround is like 24 hrs for SGC right?

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

So they’re just lying? Ok. They were overrun with volume they couldn’t handle in the summer of 2020, with the old lower prices. They raised them in order to slow submissions and get through the backlog, which they did. There were a few hiccups yes, but it’s largely worked. If they wanted to be PSA clones with economy subs and months-long backlogs, they could lower sub prices to $10 or less and easily overwhelm the queues again. Many of those scenarios have actually happened since 2020 at this point as they were trying to figure out the price points. Maybe not everyone wants to wait months or a year to get their cards back in the name of some great special or economy price? I don’t think it’s crazy to think that SGC might want to differentiate their business model in the ways they have instead of just blindly / slowly emulating PSA. Their stated goal was to continue to grow while maintaining turn times that were not PSA cringeworthy. Obviously that will take longer to do than if their only goal were a quick money grab.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gonefishin]

It is true that some companies, privately owned primarily, may not desire to be the biggest company out there. There are still some companies that just want to make a decent living for themselves and their employees. Just guessing that demand at the time necessitated SGC to hire more employees to keep up with demand when PSA and BGS suspended their services. When the flood gates opened again, customers started submitting back to the companies that failed them previously. Hence, SGC I'm guessing wanted to maintain their upscaled work force but is struggling because customers went back to their "old girlfriend". New hires and proper training costs money, lots of money. It would be a hard blow to turn around and lay off those new hires that came aboard with the expectation they would be there for the long term.

We must ask our self at what point is it "not ok" to tolerate backlog, poor customer service, etc. etc. etc. It's not ok when you are awaiting the return of a treasure that has been out of your possession for months and see where the same company is touting submissions of 1B new submissions for the month.

I watched the SGC video. It pained me to watch it, as all my experiences with SGC have been positive. I can't say as much for BGS and for sure PSA. However, I turned around and submitted a couple of bulk submissions to PSA because of the lowered pricing, and yes, I paid the membership fee in order to do so. My little submissions won't create change if I don't submit them to PSA. However, they may have a small impact on SGC, with whom I have been very happy with.

There are cases, photos for example and sealed pack certification, where I have no other options. Not the case with cards. I have options. The main question I need to ask myself is, if I submitted them to SGC when I had no other options, and was happy with the price and service, why would I go back to a company that basically closed the door on me.

Does anyone else feel the same or is it just me?

[raulus]

Originally Posted by gonefishin

It is true that some companies, privately owned primarily, may not desire to be the biggest company out there. There are still some companies that just want to make a decent living for themselves and their employees. Just guessing that demand at the time necessitated SGC to hire more employees to keep up with demand when PSA and BGS suspended their services. When the flood gates opened again, customers started submitting back to the companies that failed them previously. Hence, SGC I'm guessing wanted to maintain their upscaled work force but is struggling because customers went back to their "old girlfriend". New hires and proper training costs money, lots of money. It would be a hard blow to turn around and lay off those new hires that came aboard with the expectation they would be there for the long term.

We must ask our self at what point is it "not ok" to tolerate backlog, poor customer service, etc. etc. etc. It's not ok when you are awaiting the return of a treasure that has been out of your possession for months and see where the same company is touting submissions of 1B new submissions for the month.

I watched the SGC video. It pained me to watch it, as all my experiences with SGC have been positive. I can't say as much for BGS and for sure PSA. However, I turned around and submitted a couple of bulk submissions to PSA because of the lowered pricing, and yes, I paid the membership fee in order to do so. My little submissions won't create change if I don't submit them to PSA. However, they may have a small impact on SGC, with whom I have been very happy with.

There are cases, photos for example and sealed pack certification, where I have no other options. Not the case with cards. I have options. The main question I need to ask myself is, if I submitted them to SGC when I had no other options, and was happy with the price and service, why would I go back to a company that basically closed the door on me.

Does anyone else feel the same or is it just me?

I’ll have to admit that I’m not entirely sure what you’re suggesting…you made so many points and counterpoints that it’s hard to evaluate whether I feel the same.

Want to boil it down a little for us?

It almost seems like you’re suggesting that we should all dump PSA for their past failures, but then you admit that you’ve personally gone right back to them, including paying your membership fee to get bulk pricing.

But maybe you had another message in mind?

[Johnny630]

I do like SGC for vintage however what upset me the most was completely giving up on-site grading. More specifically at the National. Especially at last year's National 2021 the first one after the Pandemic. The pre-grade at this year's National was half-ass if you ask me.

SGC used to grade on-site twice a year at Philly, Once In Strongsville, along with at the National. Come to think of it in 2015 and 16 they would do White Plains too! Now Zip. At least PSA does The National and Long Beach on-site.

Maybe this will come back. Idk not holding my breath.

[gonefishin]

Nope, you hit it right on the head. I did it - I went right back to PSA and submitted about 40-50 cards under their vintage grading special. I guess I'm just trying to figure out why I did it when I was very satisfied with SGC. Maybe it was because in my mind they would hold more market value with PSA than SGC. Maybe it's because I've been submitting cards to PSA forever.

The comparative submission numbers were stunning.

I would just find it interesting to know why other members went back to PSA that were also very satisfied with SGC. Maybe it's not one thing but a combination of several; market acceptance, PSA Registry, Branding, advertising, location, public shows, etc. etc.

By the way, I'm retired and don't have a "Dog In the Fight" one way or the other.

I'll have to figure out why I did on my own.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by gonefishin

Nope, you hit it right on the head. I did it - I went right back to PSA and submitted about 40-50 cards under their vintage grading special. I guess I'm just trying to figure out why I did it when I was very satisfied with SGC. Maybe it was because in my mind they would hold more market value with PSA than SGC. Maybe it's because I've been submitting cards to PSA forever.

The comparative submission numbers were stunning.

I would just find it interesting to know why other members went back to PSA that were also very satisfied with SGC. Maybe it's not one thing but a combination of several; market acceptance, PSA Registry, Branding, advertising, location, public shows, etc. etc.

By the way, I'm retired and don't have a "Dog In the Fight" one way or the other.

I'll have to figure out why I did on my own.

The First reason you said is why many don’t want to admit it but that’s the primary reason for many. Because in your mind they would hold more market value with PSA than SGC. When people say it’s not about the money they’re fooling themselves it’s always a major factor.

[Carter08]

SGC seems to do a fine job and all but psa is king of the market, no doubt about it. Some people have varying degrees of feeling about this but I also think overall sgc is an easier grader to the point where a new label psa 3 equals a new label sgc 4 or higher. Just my view and plenty of exceptions.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Carter08

SGC seems to do a fine job and all but psa is king of the market, no doubt about it. Some people have varying degrees of feeling about this but I also think overall sgc is an easier grader to the point where a new label psa 3 equals a new label sgc 4 or higher. Just my view and plenty of exceptions.

I would disagree on your notion of strictness. Were they an easier grader 20 years ago? Sure. But SGC is both tough and consistent on vintage these days. PSA from what I have seen is more inconsistent than anything recently, which I guess also means that they are sometimes tougher. Also just my view.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cammb]

Originally Posted by Carter08

SGC seems to do a fine job and all but psa is king of the market, no doubt about it. Some people have varying degrees of feeling about this but I also think overall sgc is an easier grader to the point where a new label psa 3 equals a new label sgc 4 or higher. Just my view and plenty of exceptions.

What???a.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by Carter08

SGC seems to do a fine job and all but psa is king of the market, no doubt about it. Some people have varying degrees of feeling about this but I also think overall sgc is an easier grader to the point where a new label psa 3 equals a new label sgc 4 or higher. Just my view and plenty of exceptions.

What???

[raulus]

Originally Posted by gonefishin

Nope, you hit it right on the head. I did it - I went right back to PSA and submitted about 40-50 cards under their vintage grading special. I guess I'm just trying to figure out why I did it when I was very satisfied with SGC. Maybe it was because in my mind they would hold more market value with PSA than SGC. Maybe it's because I've been submitting cards to PSA forever.

The comparative submission numbers were stunning.

I would just find it interesting to know why other members went back to PSA that were also very satisfied with SGC. Maybe it's not one thing but a combination of several; market acceptance, PSA Registry, Branding, advertising, location, public shows, etc. etc.

By the way, I'm retired and don't have a "Dog In the Fight" one way or the other.

I'll have to figure out why I did on my own.

HA.

I’m not going to psychoanalyze you, if for no other reason than my accounting training isn’t much help.

It does seem like there are plenty of SGC acolytes around here, many of whom proclaim their intent to stay away from PSA. I’m guessing that’s largely a function of the crowd that hangs out around here.

For me personally, I’ve never submitted to SGC. When I first got back into the collecting world about 7 years ago, I merely bought pre-graded items. And with the registry, I somewhat unwittingly went with PSA, also in part because PSA graded items were more abundantly available, not realizing at the time that in some ways, I was sort of locking myself into their system.

Over the years, I’ve sent items in to PSA for grading, although typically only because some low-pop items weren’t available on the market, and this was the only way to fill out my sets. If I had to guess, I’ve probably spent about $15k on having items graded at PSA, although the majority were at the “old” bulk pricing of $8 apiece.

I really don’t have anything against SGC. Certainly I wish them luck, if for no other reason than having some healthy competition will help to keep the 800 pound gorilla in the industry from taking over everything and all of the insalubrious outcomes that arise from having a de-facto monopoly. At the same time, some would probably argue that we are already there!

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by gonefishin

It is true that some companies, privately owned primarily, may not desire to be the biggest company out there. There are still some companies that just want to make a decent living for themselves and their employees. Just guessing that demand at the time necessitated SGC to hire more employees to keep up with demand when PSA and BGS suspended their services.

Right. I'm guessing that SGC had a desire to become somewhat more than the boutique shop that they were in say 2000, or 2005 - but they pulled a pretty major gaffe in 2020 with the whole "We're open, send us your cards!" campaign when they got big eyes at the idea of PSA being shut down, even if temporarily. For once, and for the first time ever I believe - collectors called their bluff and absolutely inundated them. They had to backpedal and hire more employees immediately to keep from drowning, and even so it took them months to clear the 2020 backlog. Quality slipped during this time as well, as I know their move to treat centering more strictly got wildly out of hand at one point around that timeframe - new graders were giving cards that should have been like 7's and higher 5's and lower due to centering alone. Luckily it seems they fixed that problem relatively quickly.

Again, I could be wrong but I'm guessing some of SGC's recent growth trends were unintended and just had more to do what the market dealt them, and with some of the other stuff - you have to imagine it's going to be different in ways with Peter and the younger folks in charge. I just don't see them setting their sights on grading a million cards in whatever period of time to keep up with PSA on a chart. Many people that submit to SGC regularly have reasons why they DON'T submit to PSA. What would be the point of trying to lead all TPG's in volume if you had to totally change who you were to do that?