Crossover Issue

[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.

Yeah they have all the time in the world to just call you because PSA and their lax standards of grading, over graded your cards. I never cross PSA to SGC for this reason much less buy PSA anymore. About 80% of the PSA cards I have tried to cross end up lower or are altered.



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.


Man this sounds famliar. Didn't one of the Board members just quit that sounded just like this

[scottglevy]

Andrew,

The difference is that Dan is the 'real deal' not a pretender. Just take a look at his set registry if you have any doubts. I never knew that one man could own so many high grade Lenox back T206s

Regards,
S

Scott I was referring to the money comment. I have no doubt he is legit more so than another.

[ullmandds]

That sucks Dan...I recently sent 42 cards to SGC for a combination of grading, crossovers, etc. When I got the cards back I was perplexed at some of the grades. Some were undergraded, some were what I thought to be overgraded...some didn't cross.

IT's really unfortunate our great hobby has come to this. The grading companies have got us by the balls...and there is not a thing we can do about it!

But I think you are wrong saying PSA grades tobacco cards tougher than SGC...this is totally wrong...and in my opinion the opposite is true...and if SGC sucks...than PSA is the antichrist!

[3-2-count]

Dan sorry to hear your experience was a bad one. I do have one question though. Why didn't you take the initiative to call SGC yourself on such a sizable cross over submission with specific instructions? I can tell you this, if it were me I would have had notes on my submission form to cover my butt and also placed a call into them prior to on something this size.
They're very easy to get ahold of. You should in my opinion take much of the responsibility in this instance. Again, just my opinion.

[dancollins]

Tony I submitted them in person at a show to Brian and he reassured me they would do a great job grading but you have a point that I should have took some other steps. None the less I am not happy and I am relaying my story to people so something doesn't happen to them like this and many members with previous posts have nothing better to do but find a reason to argue.

[FrankWakefield]

I love the photo of the mass slab grave.

Dan, if you'd never graded them in the first place with PSA, nor the second time with SGC, nor again with PSA; AND if you'd have devoted all of that grading money to buying more cards, then you'd have one fine pile of cards right now. Maybe the lesson was to bust 'em outa the PSA slabs before submitting to SGC, maybe the thing to do was not fool with slabbing. And if you're content when you get them all back into PSA slabs, then obviously that was the right thing for you. Wish you well with it all.

[3-2-count]

Dan I totally understand. My objective is to not argue here. Gets you no where. I just think it's very important that others know that when submitting a cross over submission, especially a large one like yours you'd better make it very clear to the submitter your "goal". If you throw caution to the wind without it you take a chance of getting hurt just as you did. I hope it all works out in the end for you. As others have mentioned you still have the same great cards so that's a plus, right??

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

From my observation SGC is less strict about corner wear but more strict about surface wrinkles, paper loss, marks, etc. I don't think you can fairly complain given that each company has its own criteria and you did not specify minimum grade. It is my opinion that recognizing you have significant cards, SGC would want your business and would not deliberately screw you on your submission. That said, all grading is a crapshoot.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Originally Posted by dancollins

Tony I submitted them in person at a show to Brian and he reassured me they would do a great job grading but you have a point that I should have took some other steps. None the less I am not happy and I am relaying my story to people so something doesn't happen to them like this and many members with previous posts have nothing better to do but find a reason to argue.

No one is looking to argue, but I think many would do things a lot different and that is the message being conveyed. There are plenty of good reasons to bash any grading company, but this might not be one of them.

[M's_Fan]

Dan, I just wanted to say I feel your pain. I really wish you would have asked us on the board and I think we would have told you this mass crossover from PSA was a bad idea.

And let me just state that I'm an SGC fan, all of my cards are SGC graded. This is mainly because I love the look of the SGC holder, their fees are reasonable, and they have great customer service.

But I have to admit that SGC has a big anti-PSA bias. PSA probably has an anti-SGC bias, though I don't know that from experience.

I've quit buying PSA cards and trying to get them to cross over because SGC never gives a PSA graded card a fair shake, I really think they are harsher on cards graded by other companies, it makes them feel superior when they can turn their nose up at a PSA graded card.

Consider this stunning Mathewson that SGC wouldn't grade:



Luckily I said I wouldn't accept below an SGC 60, so they just charged me the grading fee and sent it back, but if I didn't, who knows what it would have come back in (30, 40, or 50, depending on the mood of the grader).

This was supposedly due to "glue residue" on the back of the card. Huh? The back is clean!

I gave up crossing over after this experience, I'm not going to pay money to boost SGC's ego.

So tell me how this Matty isn't a 60 and this McGraw is? The Mathewson has sharper corners, colors and a cleaner back.



The silly part about this is that grading companies are losing revenue because people have become very hesitant to cross cards over. So they've shot themselves in the foot in my opinion with their snobiness.

[botn]

I think there is plenty of incentive for a grading company to cross over a card. That means one more card in their holder and one less in their competitors. That is how you build market share.

[D. Bergin]

All you guys should just send your cards into PRO grading and get guaranteed 9's and 10's back.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by M's_Fan

But I have to admit that SGC has a big anti-PSA bias....I've quit buying PSA cards and trying to get them to cross over because SGC never gives a PSA graded card a fair shake, I really think they are harsher on cards graded by other companies, it makes them feel superior when they can turn their nose up at a PSA graded card....This was supposedly due to "glue residue" on the back of the card. Huh? The back is clean!

I gave up crossing over after this experience, I'm not going to pay money to boost SGC's ego....The silly part about this is that grading companies are losing revenue because people have become very hesitant to cross cards over. So they've shot themselves in the foot in my opinion with their snobiness.

SGC is not rejecting PSA cards because they have an ego. To suggest otherwise based on a scan of a card that has glue residue that you cannot see in a scan is absurd. The whole purpose of 3rd party grading, especially in the internet/scan age, is to identify flaws in cards that cannot be seen easily in a scan like, e.g., glue residue.

[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????

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by 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're kidding, right? You have any evidence of this? Because my experience in having my 40 PSA graded T206 cards crossed over was precisely the opposite.

Originally Posted by ScottFandango

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

For what possible reason would SGC would want to hammer PSA graded cards as over-graded? If they did that, most cards would not cross over and would instead still reside in PSA slabs. They would be better served crossing everything over so they could populate collections.

Originally Posted by ScottFandango

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....

That's true, unless you recognize the value in a grading company having more valuable cards in its slabs. If all the Wagners in the world were in PSA holders, SGC would clearly be motivated to cross over as many as possible. That they would try to downgrade any on purpose as a result of some purported grading standard ego misses the point -- and the primary motivation of grading companies -- entirely.

You have to assume the following:

1. SGC virtually only crosses cards over if they meet the same grade or higher in their opinion; otherwise the submitter of the card will take the card back un-crossed over.
2. SGC is primarily motivated to encapsulate as many cards in the universe as possible.
3. If SGC hammered PSA on its grades, they would not satisfy its primary motivation because 1 and 2 above would fail.

That SGC would let its purported "ego" get in the way of encapsulating as many cards in the universe as possible is a model for bankruptcy and is certainly not the way that they conduct business, in my experience.

[tbob]

Originally Posted by 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....

Scott, I normally agree with you but I don't here. I have never had SGC miss a single spot of paper loss, no matter how tiny, or the lightest and smallest of pencil or ink markings. They are like bloodhounds in their pursuit of flaws, at least that has been my experience. I've seen PSA 5s with paper loss before but not SGC cards. At least that's been my experience.
tbob

[sox1903wschamp]

Originally Posted by tbob

Scott, I normally agree with you but I don't here. I have never had SGC miss a single spot of paper loss, no matter how tiny, or the lightest and smallest of pencil or ink markings. They are like bloodhounds in their pursuit of flaws, at least that has been my experience. I've seen PSA 5s with paper loss before but not SGC cards. At least that's been my experience.
tbob

Piling on a bit here but I am with Bob, my experience is they (SGC) NEVER miss paper loss and I am okay with that.

[dancollins]

I just got through reading Brian's post from SGC, Brian has many great points. The one thing that I would suggest is that SGC maybe handle a large crossover like mine differently. He stated that giving a preliminary grade and calling the customer would bottle neck the operation and he is right however on a larger crossover when you are talking about thousands of dollars in cards something different should be in place. Many of you have been down right rude in your responses to me. If anyone crossed a set and received that many downgrades you would have a bad taste in your mouth no matter what grading company it was from. I have also read many comments saying well PSA over graded them to start with and they probably deserved the downgrades, but in the next sentence you here grading is subjective so my point is maybe many peoples opinion is subjective? So my take away is I didn't protect my self by putting a minimum grade on it. The only downside is if you use a registry for your sets like I do that wouldn't work either because then I would have had half and half. So all around just a crappy situation. I do think SGC should put something in place to change how they handle large crossovers because if I would have received a phone call saying hey half your cards will get downgraded I would have said leave them in their holders thanks but no thanks or at that time dug into why and received detailed info and would have not had a bad taste in my mouth.

[dancollins]

All in all it does show integrity on the part of SGC that they have addressed my concern on the board PSA would never have. I am not gonna run around and be an SGC hater now but I will be cautious of my moves in the future. I am glad I posted about this because I think this crossover issue received some much needed attention. No matter what anyone says I still do think there is bias in crossovers because of the competitor's holder. I have sent at least 30 to 40 SGC graded T206's to PSA for crossover in the past and had at least 80-90% of them rejected for minimum grade and now I had a similiar issue with SGC. All I ask from the grading companies is to clean that issue up so the collectors are not the one paying the price.

[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

[bobbyw8469]

Dan, I am like 0 for whatever on crossovers....anytime I leave a card in someone elses slab it gets rejected. Talk about the ultimate insult, I even had GAI of all freaking people reject an SGC slab and say THEY overgraded the card! This was when GAI was "reputable" way back in the day with Danny Fisher, Justin Preddy, et al. Now, I wouldn't want ANY GAI card in my personal collection, nor would I touch one with a 10 foot pole!

[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