Updated: First Crap Interaction with the New SGC

[CardPadre]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

What was the agreement? The $15 or $85? Or something else.

It was the $85 that was not offered to me in my initial upcharge phone call.

[packs]

I think there should be an encapsulation fee and an evaluation fee. It takes almost no effort to authenticate that card and there isn't any grading involved. It's just putting it in a case.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by packs

I think there should be an encapsulation fee and an evaluation fee. It takes almost no effort to authenticate that card and there isn't any grading involved. It's just putting it in a case.

The other part of the evaluation fee is the guarantee that SGC puts their name behind it. That is, if the card is determined to be not authentic or misgraded, SGC will need to shell out the compensation for the new owner of the card at the most recent market value. For example, if the card is graded in 2010 when it was valued at $200 and then sold in 2024 when it is now a $5000 card, SGC would need to compensate the owner based upon the $5000 value of the card even though it would be much more than any grading fee that the original submitter paid. In the situation that I had with SGC a few years back, I purchased a card that was graded 4, but after I sent it back to SGC questioning the grade, SGC agreed that it should have been graded a 2. I then received compensation from SGC on the difference in the market value between a 4 and a 2 at that time.

In this case, like most of the other posters in this thread, I agree that the $85 fee was the appropriate one in this situation.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by glchen

The other part of the evaluation fee is the guarantee that SGC puts their name behind it. That is, if the card is determined to be not authentic or misgraded, SGC will need to shell out the compensation for the new owner of the card at the most recent market value. For example, if the card is graded in 2010 when it was valued at $200 and then sold in 2024 when it is now a $5000 card, SGC would need to compensate the owner based upon the $5000 value of the card even though it would be much more than any grading fee that the original submitter paid. In the situation that I had with SGC a few years back, I purchased a card that was graded 4, but after I sent it back to SGC questioning the grade, SGC agreed that it should have been graded a 2. I then received compensation from SGC on the difference in the market value between a 4 and a 2 at that time.

In this case, like most of the other posters in this thread, I agree that the $85 fee was the appropriate one in this situation.

I thought SGC dropped their guarantee a few years ago.

At least, that's what I've read from Peter in a few posts over the last ~12 months.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by raulus

I thought SGC dropped their guarantee a few years ago.

At least, that's what I've read from Peter in a few posts over the last ~12 months.

That's very possible. My situation happened in 2014, and I worked with Scott Hileman on the re-grade, so their policy may have changed since then.

[Peter_Spaeth]

They dropped the "G" in SGC a few months into the Blowout exposee. I am still waiting for Steinberg to call me back after he told me it would be just a few days before they put it back up, they were tinkering with the language and he'd let me know. And went to random certs. And made clear insiders could submit. Nobody cared though.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

They dropped the "G" in SGC a few months into the Blowout exposee. I am still waiting for Steinberg to call me back after he told me it would be just a few days before they put it back up, they were tinkering with the language and he'd let me know. And went to random certs. And made clear insiders could submit. Nobody cared though.

Just maybe he is in post production on a video for you on this exact topic that will be posted to youtube. Stay tuned.