Crossover Issue

[Griffins]

Other than a head start, I'm still puzzled why SGC's registry lags so far behind PSA's in participation. Certainly it's in part due to availability, but the gap is so huge it can't be just that.

[botn]

Originally Posted by Griffins

Other than a head start, I'm still puzzled why SGC's registry lags so far behind PSA's in participation. Certainly it's in part due to availability, but the gap is so huge it can't be just that.

PSA has always dominated the market in sheer volume of cards graded and collectors and dealers supporting them. That is where everyone is perceived to be. The SGC registry does have some awesome sets registered and most likely those sets consists of cards which are more accurately graded.

I have had to use PSA because that is what is easier for me to sell.

[dancollins]

Let me start by saying I think many posters have some valid points and I think some are just in another world.

I really should have specified a minumum grade so I will take credit there. I think Brian from SGC made me feel really comfortable about it so I was not worried. Many posters said lets see some examples and they are right. Here are some examples you be the judge......

Now Severoid stayed a 3 while Wilie was downgraded to a 3

How does that make any sense?

Severoid is clearly a 3 and Wilie in my opinion is clearly vg-ex

[Robextend]

Dan,

I think the Wilie card is really a toss up at best. I am looking at the bottom left and right corners and they might be too beat up for an SGC 50. Nevertheless, sweet card, and I wouldn't argue if it was an SGC 40 or 50.

Rob

[barrysloate]

The Wilie is a strong 3, weak 4.

The Severoid is a 3 but not a great one...maybe 2.5 is more accurate.

[barrysloate]

In the next group of 4 they don't look too strictly graded. Best as I can see, the two 5's at the top have some corner fraying, and shouldn't have been 5's. The two below also look a little weak for their grade.

It's the difference between strict grading and lax grading. Why should each company have different standards? Makes no sense to me.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Why should each company have different standards? Makes no sense to me.

I think the best we can hope for is consistency within a company within a card issue. So, e.g., SGC grades T206 cards so much more consistently than PSA that it isn't even funny. That is why I stick with them.

[dancollins]

Here are four more examples that were all taken down one full grade

Ball to a 4
McLean to a 4
Coulson to a 4
Danforth to a 3

You Judge

[T206Collector]

The 5s that became 4s probably have a solitary wrinkle or back crease. On the McLean specifically, what is going on on the left border on the reverse scan?

[rhettyeakley]

I have said it on multiple occasions that IMO all the grading companies are biased when they are grading cards previously graded by other companies.

If SGC had crossed or bumped the vast majority of these cards they are in essense saying "wow, PSA did a great conservative job gradng these cards the first time!" but by downgrading them all they are in essense saying "look at what a crappy job PSA did when they originally graded these, I hope you like that they overgraded them all". The same experience happens when the PSA and SGC names are switched as well. It isn't in the grading companies best interest to confrim what a great company their competitors are. The idea that bias exists in these situations is almost undeniable to me based on experience.

On multiple occassions a card submitted in a GAI holder has been rejected only to be resubmitted raw and then get the numerical grade...bias exists!

-Rhett

[dancollins]

Another member posted a picture of the PSA 5 Matty that didn't cross which is a 5 all day long.

This was not meant to turn into a PSA vs SGC thing but many people are doing so. I guees it simply comes down to everyones individual experience with either grading company, mine is definitely now PSA over SGC. With that said believe me I have many issues with PSA grading. Here are 2 cards the PSA one I still own and the other Cobb in the SGC holder I just sold. I see a clear difference in their grading favoring PSA by far in this one. Also here is a link to my T206 registry with a lot of the images and I think my T206 set is graded pretty correctly.

http://www.psacard.com/setregistry/p...et.aspx?s=2289

[dancollins]

Another point I want to make is that while going through these cards when I got them back I do agree that some of them deserved to be downgraded but not 52. That is my problem and the point many is missing. 52 cards out of 103 is a bit over the top and it does clearly show bias. I ask the people that think SGC does no wrong to step back for a moment and see that they have inconsistent grading as well. Since many people talked so highly of SGC I figured I would give them a shot and it didn't work out for me. Now they will never get a hold of my T206's and T205's.

The real lessons learned is grading companies do not like giving crossovers and put a minimum grade on your submissions.

[Robextend]

I have over 800 cards slabbed by SGC and I agree no grading company is perfect. I have had very few disagreements out of all those cards. Many times when I expect a higher grade then I get, it is often me who missed something. One thing about SGC is that you can always reach out to them and have them explain it.

I do use the crossover service, and when I do, I pretty much know what to expect based on SGCs grading methods.

Again I am sorry it didn't work out for you, but many times you need to examine the card beyond the slab it is in. In the examples you have shown so far, a good argument can be made for downgrades.

Rob

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by dancollins

The real lessons learned is grading companies do not like giving crossovers and put a minimum grade on your submissions.

If you learned that SGC does not like giving crossovers you have shown no objective evidence in support of this lesson.

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by dancollins

52 cards out of 103 is a bit over the top and it does clearly show bias.

Or it clearly shows original overgrading.

[Sterling Sports Auctions]

Dan,

You have made a few replies since I posted and others have pointed out the grading company differences.

But the underlying question to me is would you have posted or complained to PSA is the situation was reversed.

The cards you have all posted to me are either tweeners or definately should have been down graded.

I currently have about a dozen PSA 5s that have small creases in them. They will stay in PSA holders because SGC would not give them an EX and may even drop to VG with them.

Why not show the cards that got up grades not much talk from you about them.

Lee

[jcmtiger]

Here is a vg-ex Cobb, compare to the ex Cobb.

Joe

[jcmtiger]

How many think this card is overgraded?

Joe

[dancollins]

Originally Posted by jcmtiger

Here is a vg-ex Cobb, compare to the ex Cobb.

Joe

That Cobb should be a 5+++

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by dancollins

Wilie in my opinion is clearly vg-ex

How can you say that if the damage on the lower right is so significant as to remove the corner of the box containing the name/team?

[smtjoy]

Thanks for the scans, my 2 cents-

Wilie- way too much corner damage for a 4, at best a 40/3
Severoid- ouch I think they both got it wrong looks like a 2.5 at best or most likely 30/2
Ball- I think this one is closer to a 5 than a 4 and would agree with PSA
McLean- too much corner wear, correct at a 40/3
Coulson- same as McLean 40/3
Danforth- very borderline, weak 4, strong 3, tossup

On crossovers I have sent over 250 1940 and older PSA cards to SGC for crossover and I have had about 25% get lower grades, while your percentage was higher I dont think off the charts from your couple scans shown.

[nolemmings]

Most of what I would like to say has already been covered, and I have no problem with what SGC did here. I would be upset if there was some wink and an a nod deal where larger submitters or those friendly with the SGC echelon get bumps on that basis. Let the cards stand or fall by themselves.

I would agree with Scott--only one of the cards shown looks harshly graded, and I'm going only on the basis of a scan that might not reveal everything.

While the bias thing might have some visceral appeal, it makes little business sense. SGC has to know it runs the risk of losing customers by downgrading many of their crossovers, who are unlikely to be pleased with such result. Moreover, it would be far easier to just take a batch of 100 cards and give them a straight cross with no real examination. It's not hard for me to imagine a blurry-eyed grader at the end of the day seeing an opportunity to cross 100 off his to-do list in about ninety seconds by just picking 5 to bump, four to downgrade and passing the buck on the rest. Who's going to question, or really even be upset? The fact that they changed grades on so many at least suggests to me that they took the time to look at each card.

Next, what is the point of "they lowered it by a full grade". Of course they did--they have no half grades under 60 that could apply. If it's not worthy of a strict cross, that's what happens. Either request min grade or roll the dice.

Finally, this whole notion in the original post that you could "live with" 10-15 cards being lowered, but now your collection is devalued by "thousands" is bogus to me. If the cards truly are 5s and you want them in SGC holders, crack them out and submit them raw. They will come back 5s and you'll be out 52x the grading fee of $6 or $7. No devaluation, no "bias". Of course, if they are accurately graded at less than 5, then why blame SGC? If the number on the holder is so damn important, send them to PSA for 52x their grading fee--again, you will not be out thousands and your faith in humanity will be restored.

[barrysloate]

This whole concept of graders having a bias when they see a card holdered by their competition is very troubling to me, assuming it is true.

Are they grading the card you submit to them, or are they playing politics? If it's the latter, then they are not doing their job, which is to grade cards, period.

[Orioles1954]

Of the last ten cards I crossed over from PSA to SGC (all 1933 Delong or Tattoo Orbit) the results were.....

4 came back higher in a SGC holder
4 came back the same in a SGC holder
2 were retuned because they didn't meet the minimum grade.

When dealing with a grading company, it's virtually impossible to have exact, 100% robotic results time after time after time. The sheer volume they deal with and that pesky human factor won't allow it. I grade hundreds and hundreds of cards a day at my job. I like to think I'm very consistent and one of the best in the business. However, there are times on a day to day basis where there is a slight variance. I think it's unreasonable to expect a complete, scientific approach to grading....it is what it is. For my money, I collect SGC.