Crossover Issue

[bobbyw8469]

Well said Barry....if I believe a grader got it wrong, I get a second opinion. I do it for dentists as well (as one has said I need 3 crowns, and the other said my teeth are fine). I have only sent cards in review a few times (I have NEVER had any cross) enough to tell me that that avenue is NOT the way to go. I have had cards come back that I was 100% POSITIVE look better than the grade on the card. I got my dremmel tool out and resubbed. Had a 1961 Fleer Bob Cousy turn from a '5' into an '8'. Has a 1956 Mantle "Authentic - trimmed", become a '4 (MC)'. I don't do that often, but I do know that those guys are FAR from perfect!!

[benjulmag]

While I understand how you can be frustrated, this seems like a correctible problem -- resubmit them raw to PSA (as you said you plan to do). Presumably SGC did not damage the cards, so if in fact they were downgraded for reasons other than to do with their actual condition, PSA should reslab them with their original grades. And if PSA was not to give a card its original grade, then that would suggest the card was overgraded to start.

I think one of the reasons many collectors prefer SGC is because of the perception they are more strict then PSA. So maybe it's possible the downgrades had nothing to do with bias against PSA? But if you feel it was, going forward maybe the thing to do is not to submit them for cross over in the other company's slab? Also, couldn't you have told SGC that if they knew they were to downgrade the card, to leave the card in the original PSA holder?

Bottom line, as a previous poster said, is that the cards themselves are unchanged. So, if they were inappropriately downgraded, presumably they can be upgraded. I realize the whole thing might be a pain to get back to that point, but at least the option is there.

[barrysloate]

Of course, if he sends them back to PSA raw there is no way he is going to get the exact same grades. They could end up higher or lower, who knows. And if they are lower he has spent a fortune on grading and will lose because of the downgrades. What a pain in the butt.

[Matt E.]

When I read stories likes this it only reaffirms my faith in SGC and why I primarily buy SGC.

Like you I have received lower grades when crossing expensive cards. Usually T205's from PSA to SGC. Each time they had a reasonable explanation why my card received the grade it did (Seems like I usually get bit by erased writing)

Not bashing PSA here, just my two cents.

Dan, Sounds like your beef is they did not call you.

Barry, By having SGC look at them again could be considered good customer service.

EVERYBODY KNOWS SGC GRADES TOUGHER THAN PSA
Matt

[Bicem]

PSA sucks.

[dancollins]

Both SGC and PSA are very inconsistent at best! I would have had put minumum grades on them but I like having a whole set type all graded by the same company. I see problems with both and I am fully aware of PSA issues, I figured SGC would do better. I have bought, sold and upgraded hundreds and hundreds of graded tobacco cards and I have always noticed that PSA was stricter on condition. BOTH SGC and PSA do not cross very often.... Last year I purchased a T206 Chase blue portrait from another member on here it was an SGC 80/6 with a piedmont fact. 42 back and I sent it to PSA and they would not cross it due to minumum grade. I popped it out sent it back raw and got a 6.5 That is just one of many many examples I can give. Bottom line is I feel as though I was ripped off by SGC and Barry is absolutely right they should have done it right the first time. If it were 10 or 15 I could have lived with that not 52. I just spent 2 hours popping all of them out and I can see some of their downgrades but many were just flat out under graded and this has been a very costly lesson and horrible experience. Grading is actually very annoying but the cards are worth more in those stupid holders.

[calvindog]

So Dan you believe that SGC, by not bumping more of your cards up or keeping them the same grade purposely defrauded you?

Your mistake was that you didn't ask for a minimum grade.

One quick story: I began representing Dave Forman a couple years ago and when he came to my office the first time I gave him four GAI graded cards (graded years ago) to cross: a T206 Matty dark cap graded 6.5, Diamond Stars Mel Ott graded GAI 7, Play Ball Greenberg graded GAI 7.5 and 53 Bowman Color Reese GAI 7.5. Three of them came back graded a half grade lower and one stayed the same (the least valuable card). As soon as I saw the grades, I flipped out and accused SGC of ripping me off. Ok, the last part is a lie.

Moral of the story: if you don't want SGC's opinion on your cards, don't submit them to SGC. Try submitting cards in GAI and SGC holders to PSA and see how well you do. My guess is you'll think they 'ripped you off' too.

[barrysloate]

Matt- is SGC reviewing them as a courtesy, or are they charging Dan a grading fee for each one? That isn't clear to me. If it's a courtesy look then I agree that is a good thing.

[dancollins]

calvindog you are missing the entire point...... If this happened to you I am sure you wopuld be pissed off and posting about it. If I had submitted them and asked for a minumum grade I would still be in the same boat I would have half graded by PSA and half by SGC and I like them to be in the same holders when I am putting together a set. Everyone rants and raves about how damn great SGC is and they are not. They are no better and no more consistent than PSA. I guarantee if I sent them into SGC raw again they would be totally different grades just to show a few SGC lovers on here I would if it wouldn't cost hundreds of dollars and all that time. Bottom line is in most years I spend 6 figures on cards and they lost my business for good. Last point if the person who graded these had half a brain he would have realized at some point that more than half the cards were down graded and the average person wuold be pissed off about that and should have called me. That would be customer service.

[ScottFandango]

SGC loves this thread...it perpetuates the stereotype that they are more difficult, when in fact, they seem to miss or not care about paper loss and/or pencil marks as much as PSA cares....

You would have been MUCH better served cracking them out yourself and submitting raw....there is no way SGC would grade them equal or higher, as it would be admitting they grade easier than PSA....its a pride thing

CROSSOVERS ARE A LOSING PROPOSITION...

why the grading company would take the risk of breaking out a valuable card is beyond me...you would theink they wouldnt anything to do with this service....

who knows, maybe they are rough in removing cards and now the grades are true????

[dancollins]

One other piece of info about this was last year I sent roughly 10 SGC graded T207's to PSA at different times and none of them crossed. What is the problem with these grading companies? Both of them do the same things. Part of the reason I sent them to SGC is because everyone on here brags on SGC so much......... Everyone has their opinion on grading companies but I challenge anyone on this board to send a bunch of their graded cards to either PSA or SGC for crossover and see your results. I promise you and would bet on it that no one would be satisfied with results and would feel the same way I do about it.

The reason I am posting about this is to warn others so they don't waste a bunch of time and money like I just did and end up with the picture below.

[dancollins]

They were going to do it as a courtesy but it is a waste of time and pointless unless about 30 of them get higher grades. Already popped out and I will never use SGC again

[bcornell]

Originally Posted by dancollins

One other piece of info about this was last year I sent roughly 10 SGC graded T207's to PSA at different times and none of them crossed. What is the problem with these grading companies?

T207's often vary in size and even when a card is short but untrimmed, both SGC and PSA may reject the card because it doesn't measure "normally". I've had that happen more than once with submissions. It may have happened with a number of your cards.


Bill

[egbeachley]

I imagine the review was to help Brian explain why they got the grades they deserved and wasn't an attempt to regrade.

To say SGC was wrong is ridiculous. The other posibility is that PSA was wrong. Or maybe they were both right based on their particular standards.

I expect they were both right since PSA has loosened their standards over the years.

[D. Bergin]

So in the end these cards will have been graded three separate times, been handled and busted out of plastic cases a couple times over and will somehow be the exact same cards they were before they ever saw a holder to begin with?

I imagine I'm a lot clumsier then everybody else in the world.