New SGC Grading scale updates!!

[3-2-count]

And just think, all those over priced BUY IT NOW cards on Ebay that do get the .5 bump just went up in price. Same card, but at a new higher price.
Sorry I just think the whole thing is silly.

[Leon]

I think the new half grades are a good thing in general for SGC. They needed them to stay competitive. For me personally, I buy cards based on eye appeal and authenticity not a number on a piece of plastic.

[GregMitch34]

Surprised that people say SGC does not have a "grade can't go down" feature. I submitted a Mayo a couple months ago aug a show and stipulated must be same grade or above and they wrote that on order and said that was guaranteed. Unusual?

[ullmandds]

With crossovers...there is no guarantee of a same grade or better cross. I have submitted a handful of psa cards for cross and requested same or better and in all cases cards were returned untouched.

Maybe if SGC already has graded the card...they'd guarantee same grade or better...but then again why would you have resubmitted an SGC card to SGC a few weeks ago before they implemented this new grading scale?

[nolemmings]

Somebody tell me please, does SGC already have a policy that essentially promises your grade can't go down unless you agree? Just put a min grade requirement that's the same as it already graded and at worst you get your card back as failing to meet the minimum grade. Do min grade requirements only apply to cross-overs or are they good for review of SGC already-graded cards as well? If the latter then it seems the submitting party has no risk.

[CW]

This is a win win win scenario.

SGC wins because (as Barry put it so well) it "helps SGC stay more competitive with PSA, and also adds to their bottom line as collectors resubmit cards for a second look."

The pro-slabbers win because they get what they were requesting for many years (ie. more options at the lower end of the grading scale, where a card's eye appeal can vary greatly).

And the anti-slabbers win because this give them more ammo to lob at the grading companies for being money-grubbing, clueless, unproffesional dimwits who get it wrong half the time.

Win win win!

edit: actually, the only guy who gets screwed is RGold and his awesome Red Heart Musial collection.

[lharri3600]

I have this to say, i just received my grades and i truly believe 2 cards would have received 50's before the new grading system. Both cards received 45. I mean we've all seen worse haven't we?

[pcoz]

I think it's a great idea and plan on resubmitting a bunch. Most of us buy on eye appeal, but who wouldn't want their card in a holder with a higher grade?? It's silly to say you wouldn't, as a higher grade can't hurt your collection, only enhance the value. But, some card collectors do buy the holder. No question a Babe Ruth RC in a 4.5 is worth more than a 4 with equally as pleasing eye appeal. A bump in a card like that may cost $200 to regrade with a 10-15k bump in value.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by pcoz

I think it's a great idea and plan on resubmitting a bunch. Most of us buy on eye appeal, but who wouldn't want their card in a holder with a higher grade?? It's silly to say you wouldn't, as a higher grade can't hurt your collection, only enhance the value. But, some card collectors do buy the holder. No question a Babe Ruth RC in a 4.5 is worth more than a 4 with equally as pleasing eye appeal. A bump in a card like that may cost $200 to regrade with a 10-15k bump in value.

LOL, and you are the guy they were hoping for when the decision was made.

[pcoz]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

LOL, and you are the guy they were hoping for when the decision was made.

Lol then it worked. No brainer as far as I'm concerned. I'm sure I'm not the only one resumitting cards. Long overdue by SGC IMO.

[Kenny Cole]

IMO, you'd have a better chance going to Vegas and putting all your money down on one Roulette number. Hope it works out for you, but don't think it will.

[pcoz]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

IMO, you'd have a better chance going to Vegas and putting all your money down on one Roulette number. Hope it works out for you, but don't think it will.

???? Not sure I know what you mean by that. Who wouldn't want the most accurate grade on their card? SGC has always given the lower number when between grades, and they'll be the first to tell you that. .5 of a grade on a "valuable" card makes a financial difference, and if for nothing else, a more accurate grade on your card. PSA & Beckett have half grades, I don't see a problem with SGC doing it.

[barrysloate]

An accurate grade or a higher grade? I think the idea that a grading company can mint money by bumping a card is a little disconcerting to me. Sounds like others may agree.

[Bicem]

Originally Posted by pcoz

A bump in a card like that may cost $200 to regrade with a 10-15k bump in value.

But it's the exact same card -- this is why it's such an inherently flawed system, the enormous value difference based on opinions that change day to day, grader to grader.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

An accurate grade or a higher grade? I think the idea that a grading company can mint money by bumping a card is a little disconcerting to me. Sounds like others may agree.

If the higher grade is accurate, and the market places value on the higher grade, I don't see the issue. The real issue in TPG is the same one it always has been, that altered cards get through. That's where money truly is minted.

[barrysloate]

Peter- if it's a balanced system, where a card mistakenly given a numerical grade is now deemed to be trimmed, and reholdered as such, I too am okay with this system. But if it's a one-way street, where cards only go up but are guaranteed never to go down, then it's no more than a handout to good customers.

[ullmandds]

I agree w/Barry...it has to go both ways! If a card is "mistakenly" assigned a lower grade...imagine how many cards were "mistakenly" given too high a grade.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Peter- if it's a balanced system, where a card mistakenly given a numerical grade is now deemed to be trimmed, and reholdered as such, I too am okay with this system. But if it's a one-way street, where cards only go up but are guaranteed never to go down, then it's no more than a handout to good customers.

My comment said IF the higher grade is accurate, I have no issue with it. I agree with you, if it's going to be in part a vehicle to hand out favors, I don't like it. PSA went through a phase where they would hand out bumps at shows and I didn't like that either.

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by Bicem

But it's the exact same card -- this is why it's such an inherently flawed system, the enormous value difference based on opinions that change day to day, grader to grader.

+1

The "system" dictates that a card's value will be directly related to its technical grade as determined by a subjective 3rd party. So many people have bought into this, its disturbing!

p.s. this is my opinion so i hope no one sues me for libel when their sales drop next fiscal year

[Leon]

Again, I just don't think this is that big of a deal and a good thing overall for SGC. If you have a card that has been a certain grade but is freaking great for that grade, it has always and will always sell for a premium. If I sold this card I am quite sure it would bring more than most 4s of the same card.....because it warrants it, not because it is really a 4.5, right Peter?

[glchen]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Peter- if it's a balanced system, where a card mistakenly given a numerical grade is now deemed to be trimmed, and reholdered as such, I too am okay with this system. But if it's a one-way street, where cards only go up but are guaranteed never to go down, then it's no more than a handout to good customers.

If a review can go both ways (up or down), no one would ever get their card reviewed for the fear of the grading going down for some reason. Think of a review like this like a crossover from another TPG where you specify a minimum grade and that minimum grade is the current grade on the card. I don't think anyone has problems with crossover attempts only going up or staying the same when a minimum grade is stated.

[barrysloate]

I think it will be virtually impossible for a card to get downgraded because as we've said, only high end cards for the grade will be resubmitted. Let's say you have ten SGC 50's in your collection, you are only going to send in the two or three best ones for consideration. The ones even you think might be overgraded will never be seen again by a grader. Leon's E90-1 Young (above) is a perfect candidate as it is a very high end card within the range of VG-EX.

But what if someone sends in a group of high-end 80's, with a hope of getting some 82's, and the grader notices that one card is a hairline short and probably never should have gotten the numerical grade. Is he allowed to rectify the error, or are his hands tied? That's the issue for me. The chance of any collector sending in an SGC 50 with a surface crease is nil.

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by Leon

Again, I just don't think this is that big of a deal and a good thing overall for SGC. If you have a card that has been a certain grade but is freaking great for that grade, it has always and will always sell for a premium.

Devil's Advocate:
1) The strong 4's will get properly bumped to 4.5s, but the weak 4's won't get properly downgraded to 3.5
2) TPGs are all over the map as it is, sometimes grading the same card anywhere from Authentic to a 3 to a 6 and everywhere in between. If they don't have the consistency/accuracy to correctly grade to a whole number, how can they find the precision to grade to a decimal?

[ullmandds]

While Leon's e90-1 young is very nice...is that not a crease running left to the center of the card at the height of cy's eye?

If so...how could this possible be a candidate for an upgrade...unless of course you send it to psa?

[E93]

The other problem from a TPG perspective with downgrading is that I would imagine they would be liable for the difference in value in the card by downgrading since it would have been their mistake. Unless the error is egregious I doubt there would be an inclination to downgrade.

And I agree with Barry that since most people would only be submitting cards they feel are high end for the grade anyway, the likelihood of legitimately necessitating downgrade is slim.

In terms of numbers, lets say they get the grade right 98% of the time. Among the 2%, let's say some deserve upgrades and some deserve downgrades. My guess is that it is highly unlikely that the ones that really ought to be downgraded will get submitted with the hope of an upgrade very often.
JimB

[pcoz]

An example for me for an upgrade would be this card. I've seen a PSA 4 & 3 get sold the past 2 years that weren't as nice as this one. This by all accounts, should be higher than an SGC 30. No creases, and just for the "principal" of it, I'd like to see it in a higher graded holder. I don't see the downside of submitting it now that SGC has half grades. I think they're fair with their grading, and if it deserves a more accurate grade with their new system, then maybe it will end up in a higher graded holder. Apples to apples in the eye appeal department, a 35 would be worth more than a 30.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

Again, I just don't think this is that big of a deal and a good thing overall for SGC. If you have a card that has been a certain grade but is freaking great for that grade, it has always and will always sell for a premium. If I sold this card I am quite sure it would bring more than most 4s of the same card.....because it warrants it, not because it is really a 4.5, right Peter?

Ugly card.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

Devil's Advocate:
1) The strong 4's will get properly bumped to 4.5s, but the weak 4's won't get properly downgraded to 3.5
2) TPGs are all over the map as it is, sometimes grading the same card anywhere from Authentic to a 3 to a 6 and everywhere in between. If they don't have the consistency/accuracy to correctly grade to a whole number, how can they find the precision to grade to a decimal?

But a weak 4 is still a 4. If it got downgraded to 3.5 it wouldn't be in the 4 range. I don't disagree with the TPG's having some wiggle room but SGC and BVG seem to be very consistent, not perfect, but consistent.

PCOZ-That E103 Wags deserves a 2.5 and I absolutely believe is a perfect candidate. A 2.5 should be worth more than a 2 but I also don't think you got it at a 2 price, nor a whole 3 price. You bought the card not the holder which is the only way it was going to be sold, if I remember correctly. It's a great card, sir. Really is in the top part of E103 Wags I have seen.

[pcoz]

Originally Posted by Leon

But a weak 4 is still a 4. If it got downgraded to 3.5 it wouldn't be in the 4 range. I don't disagree with the TPG's having some wiggle room but SGC and BVG seem to be very consistent, not perfect, but consistent.

PCOZ-That E103 Wags deserves a 2.5 and I absolutely believe is a perfect candidate. A 2.5 should be worth more than a 2 but I also don't think you got it at a 2 price, nor a whole 3 price. You bought the card not the holder which is the only way it was going to be sold, if I remember correctly. It's a great card, sir. Really is in the top part of E103 Wags I have seen.

Leon, I completely agree. You were right on the money on price, and correct that a nice 2 should be priced above an average 2. Regardless if it's upgraded or not, I'm thrilled to have it. But, it is a good candidate now that they have the .5 system to give it a shot.

[doug.goodman]

These threads about the specifics of grading always make me laugh.

Doug

[Bicem]

Originally Posted by E93

In terms of numbers, lets say they get the grade right 98% of the time.

Can I be a famous time traveling robot in this extreme hypothetical?

Submit a mid-level condition card 100 times and how many times will it come back with the exact same grade?