Why is the SGC Pop Report Getting Ignored?

[frohme]

Yes, the 8 char minimum in SGC's search is annoying, but that's only the start.

If you start with the year, it works well enough. e.g. "1912 T207" got me right to the T207's broken down by back ... and the fun starts there ...

Even though things evolve and there's not much way to correct past mistakes, omissions, etc... there is still much that could be improved:

Primarily data accuracy - fix things that are very clearly wrong.

After that, my biggest pet peeve is ... WHO SORTS BY FIRST NAME??... separate the damned names, please, or fix the sort ordering. I see that PSA has fixed this and that they are now ordered by default by last name. I will give SGC credit for being able to sort on any column simply by clicking the column headers ...

Also, for me, the entire table fits onscreen (no left/right scrolling) at least as long as 'Show old grading' is not selected.

Do I consult it much? not any more. Do I care? not really, but it is interesting to see how the populations have evolved over the last decade or so. Do I have graded cards? Almost entirely, and mostly SGC but the former registry has faded from the rear window and interest in the registry mostly with it... would I like to see it back. Maybe if they revisited the registry in more friendly way, but it would need work they're not willing to invest, I believe.

[Snowman]

As a data guy, I suspect that SGC wants to resolve their pop report and registry issues, but they've probably been blindsided by the scope of just how challenging it is, and how big of a job it is, to fix everything.

I seem to recall hearing that their entire operation was only 8 people a few years back, before the hobby really started to expand again. I don't know if that's true, but if so, it gives you some insight into what their technical capabilities likely were until very recently.

I believe they have dozens of employees now, and they're clearly working on improving things on the technical side (improved website, built a fairly decent app, etc).

Fixing their pop reports and getting a useful registry up and running means a lot of work needs to get done on the backend to clean up all of the set redundancies you guys are talking about. It sounds like they weren't forward thinking enough in the early days about data quality, and now they have a mountain to climb in cleaning that up. Add in the complexity that ultra modern cards bring with the billions of distinct sets and checklists being printed each year now, and things start to just build and build.

They know the hobby wants a registry. I trust that they are indeed working on it. I just think it's a much bigger problem than they thought it was going to be, and they probably don't have all the technical resources necessary to get it done. Yet. Maybe 2024 will be the year!

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by Snowman

They know the hobby wants a registry. I trust that they are indeed working on it. I just think it's a much bigger problem than they thought it was going to be, and they probably don't have all the technical resources necessary to get it done. Yet. Maybe 2024 will be the year!

Snowman, one can only hope. But I have heard the same thing for years and I am really curious if anyone at SGC is working on that.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

Snowman, one can only hope. But I have heard the same thing for years and I am really curious if anyone at SGC is working on that.

The fact that they came out with an app this year was promising. And it allows you to place your graded cards into a "My Cards" repository/folder. This was a much easier project to tackle than rebuilding a useful registry, but it's a promising sign nonetheless.

[ricktmd]

I prefer not to say what side of the fence I am on as working with SGC is sure a lot easier and more reasonable than trying to work with PSA. If you are buying a very rare card its worth looking to see what is on the SGC pop report. I know a lot of people say SGC gets the same money as PSA. That is not true from what I see. There are countless examples of similar eye appeal cards (particularly T206's) where PSA cards do 10-20 % better numbers. For that reason alone valuable cards in the SGC pop report may have been crossed over to PSA. This makes SGC's report on specific cards potentially inaccurate. I also believe that the PSA has kept better records. Their population report is more extensive, with bigger quantities making it a better resource. I think that is the answer to the question on the original post. Still it is worthwhile to see what is on the SGC report when bidding or buying

[HexsHeroes]

.
Simply, because I suspect there are lots of SGC graded items, up to and exceeding a year old, that are not "yet" reflected in the report.
Adds another challenge to selling a high grade SCG vintage item when their own report does not show it in the population report. Even more discouraging when item held is two full numerical grades higher than next highest graded item on report. Afew interested parties suggested it was a fake since not reflected in report. What I am to say? Tell them what SGC told me? Which was that SGC working on it but it will not be a quick/speedy fix. So the SGC population report is like reading last years news. Sill informative (up to a point) but limited usefulness.

[theshowandme]

just tried looking at a set, got hit with the crosswalk captcha... then looked up and saw I was logged in.

It is the little things!

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by ricktmd

I prefer not to say what side of the fence I am on as working with SGC is sure a lot easier and more reasonable than trying to work with PSA.

Someone answers the phone at SGc? Must be new technology

[4815162342]

I am bumping this thread to mention that I attempted to bring a stack of SGC labels to the SGC booth at the National last week, and I was told that they do not update their pop reports.

[trib01]

When I interviewed with SGC some time ago for a management position this is one of the many items I brought up to them. As someone who used them regularly I was surprised at their reactions to the question of "What suggestions would I make or what would I do if given the authority?"
I think they failed to realize the importance of the POP reports and registry at the time. Several of my answers were met with laughter from the group. Since I knew I wasn't getting the job at that point - I told them that if they failed to "keep up" PSA would end up buying them out in 5 or 6 years....that was met with a great deal of laughter. We all know how that turned out. I still think today that had they made some critical decisions not long ago they would have been much closer to PSA in several areas. Just my two cents.

[ValKehl]

Cards I submitted to SGC in April now appear in SGC's pop report, including a W501-2 card, which is an issue SGC only recently began to recognize.

[4815162342]

Originally Posted by calvindog

I sent three cards in for grading two weeks ago and all three showed up on the SGC pop report after grading. I think you got wrong info.

Originally Posted by ValKehl

Cards I submitted to SGC in April now appear in SGC's pop report, including a W501-2 card, which is an issue SGC only recently began to recognize.

I am happy to hear that newly graded cards are still being added to the pop report. Hopefully they will begin accepting flips for removal again at some point.

[ejharrington]

The SGC population report is awful and inaccurate.

[Kidnapped18]

You guys realize that we on this board and as collectors care way more about PSA and SGC getting the pop numbers right. Most of us probably care way too much and as shown in the past the companies don't care at all. In the past I used to try to notify each of obvious and significant errors to no avail so I don't anymore. PSA has pictures when you look up certs now and even when they are not compatible with the listed info they still want you to jump through hoops to prove what you are saying is true when they just need to look at the pics and description
SGC does update the newly graded cards on their pop reports with no rhyme or reason as to the cert number...numbers appear very random
I have no personal knowledge as to whether they delete cards from the database

[ATL]

Originally Posted by ejharrington

The SGC population report is awful and inaccurate.

Prime example- 1911 Baseball Bats SGC population report used to be ~100 and I owned ~50 of that. Population report today totals 18 (and I still own ~50). I’ve emailed them several times with no response.

[mordecaibrown1]

I always as well use & check the SGC pop reports

[Vintagedeputy]

Population reports are inherently flawed and wholly inaccurate. When you’re keeping any type of data like that, the data keeper has to be someone solely responsible for ensuring the integrity of the data. Unfortunately, with millions of slabs out there, every time someone takes a slab and cracks it out and resubmits, that label is not being removed from a database and replaced by the new label. Ever since the first time someone cracked one out, these reports have been useless.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by trib01

When I interviewed with SGC some time ago for a management position this is one of the many items I brought up to them. As someone who used them regularly I was surprised at their reactions to the question of "What suggestions would I make or what would I do if given the authority?"
I think they failed to realize the importance of the POP reports and registry at the time. Several of my answers were met with laughter from the group. Since I knew I wasn't getting the job at that point - I told them that if they failed to "keep up" PSA would end up buying them out in 5 or 6 years....that was met with a great deal of laughter. We all know how that turned out. I still think today that had they made some critical decisions not long ago they would have been much closer to PSA in several areas. Just my two cents.

To your point I think PSA bought them defensively to prevent Fanatics from doing so. If Fanatics had bought them SGC would've ceased to be more of a clubhouse than a company. I love SGC, but the breadth of bad business decisions is staggering.