Collectors (PSA) Acquired SGC

[steve B]

I don't really see anything good coming from this.

The only way I see it working long term is a situation similar to packs, where PSA sends all the vintage and things they don't grade to SGC for the number. And SGC sends modern to PSA for a number. Then back for slabbing.
That seems like too much handling, but it seems to work for packs.

I've seen an acquisition go bad from the customer side. Used to use CVS, but they were not great and very arrogant. Went to Target which was much better.
They got turned into CVS, and went from nice and helpful to *you arrogant in under a month. No change in the staff either.

The claim that PSA will bring "technical expertise" to make SGC better is a joke.

[Zan]

Originally Posted by steve B

I don't really see anything good coming from this.

The only way I see it working long term is a situation similar to packs, where PSA sends all the vintage and things they don't grade to SGC for the number. And SGC sends modern to PSA for a number. Then back for slabbing.
That seems like too much handling, but it seems to work for packs.

I've seen an acquisition go bad from the customer side. Used to use CVS, but they were not great and very arrogant. Went to Target which was much better.
They got turned into CVS, and went from nice and helpful to *you arrogant in under a month. No change in the staff either.

The claim that PSA will bring "technical expertise" to make SGC better is a joke.

Why? Turner is a tech guy, and SGC has historically always been behind in tech. Seems like an easy application.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Zan

Why? Turner is a tech guy, and SGC has historically always been behind in tech. Seems like an easy application.

PSA has bailed on grading so much stuff because they just can't tell what's good or not. And they don't have a good track record of finding alterations.

Tech can be good, but if it's info is bad as I expect it is, it's results will be bad.

[steve B]

An unlikely but potential angle I haven't seen mentioned is a sort of fix and flip.

SGC has a lot of things going for it. And a lot of things that don't. The things they don't do well, PSA does. (mostly)
Even if SGCs market share doubled, PSA probably wouldn't see them as a threat.
So
Buy them, leave the people in place. Fix whatever problems they had using databases for a decent pop report and registry. Maybe add the scanning and QR code, no that I think as much of that as some others do.

How much value does that add?
Flip SGC for a substantial profit.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

An unlikely but potential angle I haven't seen mentioned is a sort of fix and flip.

SGC has a lot of things going for it. And a lot of things that don't. The things they don't do well, PSA does. (mostly)
Even if SGCs market share doubled, PSA probably wouldn't see them as a threat.
So
Buy them, leave the people in place. Fix whatever problems they had using databases for a decent pop report and registry. Maybe add the scanning and QR code, no that I think as much of that as some others do.

How much value does that add?
Flip SGC for a substantial profit.

Why would they put a strengthened competitor back out there? I think not.

[Snowman]

The more I think about this, the more I believe that Collectors is in fact planning to build up and invest in both brands. It puts the most money into their pockets at the end of the day. Run a joint PSA/SGC office out of Florida, share technical resources, continue to operate SGC with reduced overhead, cast a wider net over the hobby without alienating your customers, keep both your grading teams happy. It all makes sense financially.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

The more I think about this, the more I believe that Collectors is in fact planning to build up and invest in both brands. It puts the most money into their pockets at the end of the day. Run a joint PSA/SGC office out of Florida, share technical resources, continue to operate SGC with reduced overhead, cast a wider net over the hobby without alienating your customers, keep both your grading teams happy. It all makes sense financially.

I don't see how you can possibly know enough about the finances and operations of either company to be able to say this.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Why would they put a strengthened competitor back out there? I think not.

7% to 78%, I don't know if that would rate as competition.
Even if they doubled SGCs numbers, the hit probably wouldn't be to their percentage, but to CSG and Beckett.

The tiny business I ran got tons of stuff referred to us by bigger shops. Stuff they were either unequipped to handle, or didn't have the expertise. At least one we had a good almost friendly relationship, they needed weird tires that I stocked, and I just had them replace them when their order came in.
I'd get stuff from them that was odd to me on pretty much the same basis.
The "competition".... I sent the nuisance customers to them.