Crossover's and PSA

[Donavon]

I cannot agree more with Scott. If you want a fair shake with PSA, crack them & resubmit. Seeking a bump in a holder is almost always setting yourself up for disappointment when it comes to PSA.

[wolterse]

I just got some results from PSA:

I broke these out of their SGC slab and submitted raw:
SGC 20 Shag graded a PSA 2 (yipee)
SGC 30 Dahlen (brooklyn) graded a PSA 2
PSA 3 Keeler (portrait) graded a PSA 4 (yippee!!)

I kept this one in the case and submitted:
SGC 60 n2 indian chief crossed to a PSA 5

I was pretty happy with these results!!

[Jantz]

Steve - 100backstroke


Is this the first time PSA has done this to you?


Jantz

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by wolterse

I just got some results from PSA:

I broke these out of their SGC slab and submitted raw:
SGC 20 Shag graded a PSA 2 (yipee)
SGC 30 Dahlen (brooklyn) graded a PSA 2
PSA 3 Keeler (portrait) graded a PSA 4 (yippee!!)

I kept this one in the case and submitted:
SGC 60 n2 indian chief crossed to a PSA 5

I was pretty happy with these results!!

It seems easier to get upgrades from PSA now. Possibly a revenue enhancer to make folks happy. But it is diluting the product and is the main reason why PSA sells for less $ than SGC for vintage cards.

[wolterse]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

It seems easier to get upgrades from PSA now. Possibly a revenue enhancer to make folks happy. But it is diluting the product and is the main reason why PSA sells for less $ than SGC for vintage cards.

It is easy to knock PSA given the small success I had 'crossing' over my T cards, but you wonder what would have happened if roles had been reversed. You can only speculate.

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

It seems easier to get upgrades from PSA now. Possibly a revenue enhancer to make folks happy. But it is diluting the product and is the main reason why PSA sells for less $ than SGC for vintage cards.

I see scant evidence that PSA cards sell for less money, in fact due to the set registry they can sometimes sell for considerably more. Unfortunately we have a poster here, egbeachley, who likes to slander PSA and spread false rumors about their "going out of business" which is entirely fictitious, as well as mistruths about SGC cards selling for more money. One can prefer one grading company over the other without spreading lies and conjecture about the other one. This poster has a personal agenda to try to ruin PSA's reputation, perhaps due to an experience he had with them that he found to his disliking. That he would choose to compromise his personal integrity to spread lies and falsehood speaks far more about the legitimacy of the poster than the company he attempts to disparage.

[egbeachley]

There have been a couple recent comparisons between the 2 companies where SGC is beating PSA 2-1 on the same grades for the same cards (meaning when 30 cards of the same grade are compared, 20 SGC cards went for more and 10 PSA cards went for more). Same thing on the non-sports side. This is in direct contrast to a couple years ago when it was the other way around and seems to be relevant based on the sample sizes. And yes, I've said that in certain cases (T206 in grade 9), they sell for considerably more. But not for the average card. I'm trying to find the posts to link.

This is an observation based on observable events, not an opinion. My posts on PSA going out of business is an opinion based on many factors such as their cessation of dividends, recording a deferred tax valuation allowance, stock market price below repurchase plan agreements, executive poison plan implementation disagreed upon by major shareholders, lack of integrity on violation of the service agreements, etc.

As a third-party service provider they are following the direction of Arthur Anderson, not Price Waterhouse Coopers.

[egbeachley]

Here is a short post from last year from a thread call "Grading Companys" from the non-sports side on similar N224 cards sold the same week and the results. Not statistically definitive though.


..........Just waited to see how the SGC Kinney Military cards graded 80 (which they also call a 6) compared to the PSA Kinney Military cards graded 6.
Same grade, different companies. PSA got $14 on average while SGC got $18 on average..........

But what is interesting is a post on the thread from a PSA customer where he said he has submitted between 50-100 SGC cards (broken out) and NEVER has received a higher grade from PSA. I believe him. That was a year or more ago. That is not the case anymore (see a few posts above). It is apparent that PSA has loosened grading standards and that is what I am basing my opinions on, along with their financial results. Again, see the Arthur Anderson comparison.

Now looking for the other comparison threads.

And Jamie, no lies or falsehoods in anything I've written.

Eric

[cyseymour]

PSA posted a profit last quarter. Can you recall a time when a company that was posting profits went out of business? Also, their share price has increased 60% over the last few months. They hold $10 million in cash. There has been massive insider buying. It is one thing to be a "bear" on their stock, but there is little to support their going out of business. Also, your claims, as you know, may effect the opinions and actions of those on this board, which I still suspise is your true agenda.

As for the pricing, it does appear that SGC cards are increasing in value, but there are thousands of cards on the market. Simply because you found "a couple" examples, of which you fail to mention any particulars, is scant evidence that the conventional wisdom of PSA cards going for more should be overturned. PSA cards definitely go for more in all high grades, not only 9's. I do not follow the prices of lower grade cards, but I see no concensus that SGC cards deliver higher prices as you suggest, and no evidence either, which would mean that your both your arguments, that a) PSA is going out of business, b) that SGC cards sell for more - is complete speculation and conjecture. You also failed to deny that you have had a personal experience with PSA that you have found less than satisfactory, and my speculation is that that is truly the case.

[cyseymour]

Eric,

I had not read your second post, but I hardly think that price results from a set of obscure Kinney Military cards is an accurate indicator of the total market for SGC vs. PSA prices.

Also, just because one or two posters has suggested that they have recently received higher grades from PSA, that again, a sample of one or two people, is hardly a significant sample size in which to judge the strictness of an entire companies that grades hundreds of thousands of cards.

I am not thrilled myself with the stories about PSA that have come off this board, especially the one where PSA bumped two cards based on a customer complaint of not having a report that explained the grades. It is not that I believe that all PSA does it angelic - hardly. But I do believe that, in spite of a few widely written cases, they are a respectable, and highly credible grading company. To suggest that PSA may be going out of business, when in fact they are turning a profit, in my opinion, is simply irresponsible and slanderous. And again, I wish I knew more about Kinney Military cards, but I hardly think that one strange subset of non-sports cards is an accurate indicator for the entire pre-war market.

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

PSA posted a profit last quarter. Can you recall a time when a company that was posting profits went out of business? Also, their share price has increased 60% over the last few months. They hold $10 million in cash. There has been massive insider buying. It is one thing to be a "bear" on their stock, but there is little to support their going out of business. Also, your claims, as you know, may effect the opinions and actions of those on this board, which I still suspise is your true agenda.

Their small quarterly profit was their first in 3 years and consists of 1 profitable division (coins) and the rest losses. Their 60% price gain was unusual in that the low price was below book value. Their $10M is about to become $5M after the stock purchase. Their insider buyers are the only buyers and a large shareholder thinks they can be broken up (sold) for $7 per share.

As far as my objectives...none really since I don't grade cards. Except as an Accountant I don't like some of the things they have done. I just read financial statements and make predictions. But predictions don't count unless they are in writing. This is my writing.

I wasn't going to make a Part 3 post except that the stock purchase plan was very unusual and needed to be mentioned.

I should mention that I don't have any financial stake in any grading company either.

And yes I agree that that sample is too small. But it is the first I found.