Net 54 Vintage Baseball Card Forum
Hello to all visitors! Please visit the NEW Net54 board at www.Net54baseball.com You can directly contact the moderator here if you have any questions or comments. Enjoy!
 


  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Top of page | Bottom of page | Main Index  

PSA OR SGC?????

January 11 2003 at 12:32 PM
  (no login)

 
Hello All,

Just wanted some expert opinion on the grading company issue. I have acquired a pretty nice collection of PSA graded cards but after speaking with other collectors (via chat) I have discovered that their is a deep appreciation for SGC graded cards. I myself like the SGC graded cards with the deep black borders surrounding the cards. When I started my collection, I was under the impression that PSA was the top of the line and that cards graded by PSA would sell for premiums in the future. Any thoughts on this topic are greatly appreciated. Although I do have a nice collection started with the PSA grades, it is still early in my T206 quest to convert over if need be. Thanks for your input on this matter.

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply

Robert
(Login Bigb13)

Re: PSA OR SGC?????

January 11 2003, 12:46 PM 

Hi Jeff one thing you should know and I think everybody here will agree with me on this is that if you send your cards to SGC you WILL get lower grades. That you can be sure of. SGC is really tough on old cards and in a way that is good. Why would you want to spend money on a high grade PSA when in fact the card probably is not as high as PSA grade it at. Like a lot of people here say but the card and not the holder. I have SGC cards that are vgex to ex and if I would send them to PSA I could get at least a 7. But as time goes on more people will realize that SGC is the better grader and the prices of slabed PSA cards will come way down. Just my opinion. Rob {Bigb13}

 
 

quan
(Login quannimir)

Re: Re: PSA OR SGC?????

January 11 2003, 1:05 PM 

I'm the new guy around here (and in the hobby) but I've been more disappointed with SGC cards than PSA concerning overgrading. Maybe that's just my luck but whenever possible I do try to buy SGC over PSA because for now they are more of a bargain. In the end support the company you like and collect what you love and it shouldn't matter.

 
 
Wesley
(no login)

Re: Re: PSA OR SGC?????

January 11 2003, 1:08 PM 

For purposes of having a more uniform collection, I also considerred converting many of my PSA cards to SGC cards, and I have noticed the exact problem that Robert has pointed out. Cards sent to SGC under their "crossover" deal have not worked out favorably for me. If I do not write a minimum grade for cards, SGC usually lowers the grades. (In my opinion, this is suicide if I ever plan to resell cards, because the values of the higher number, regardless of SGC or PSA, almost invariably gets more money.) If I do write a minimum grade on my submission form, SGC sends my PSA grades back in the PSA holder because SGC's minimum standard for that grade is not met.

 
 

(no login)

SGC

January 11 2003, 2:16 PM 

I personally send all my cards to be graded to SGC. i have been happy with the results. You always get some you fell are undergraded and some that receive better grades than expected. They have been too many questions to the quality of grading by PSA brought up by this board that have gone unanswered.

I also like the look of the cards in the holders. At the current time I am able to buy SGC cards cheaper than some raw cards of the same condition.

I believe in the long run that SGC cards will be in a better position that PSA, because of the turn over of graders and there past history of dealer network preferential treatment. In the vintage card grading for SGC only Derek grades them. i like this continuity and I believe the market will eventually pick up on this fact. Plus there customer service is great.

 
 

(Login rvognarattbi)

I've had so many (at leasst 10--I don't go looking for graded cards)

January 11 2003, 3:13 PM 

didsappointments with PSA graded cards, that I'm inclined to say nothing coming out of a PSA holder would surprise me. So It shouldn't have surprised me when I won PSA 5 and SGC 60 common T202s, and the PSA 5 was a much nicer card. Smooth, well-cut, no "card ick,"--like i said, nothing coming out of aPSA holder would surprise me. They're inconsistant.

 
 


(Premier Login leonl)
Forum Owner

my take

January 11 2003, 3:52 PM 

ALWAYS BUT ALWAYS buy the card and NOT the holder, regardless of who's slab it's in....in the long run I do think that SGC pricing/value will hold up better AND they do grade harder, at least on older cards, and are more consistent than anyone else....again, and it can not be over emphasized, ALWAYS BUY THE CARD and don't look at the holder so much....regards all..

 
 
Wesley
(no login)

Re: my take

January 11 2003, 4:07 PM 

I love SGC....the black holder, the service, the consistency. That said, how can everyone be so confident that the value of SGC cards will hold better over time? That certainly is not the case at present. Whenever you have two cards of same grade and same quality go head to head, the SGC card usually ends up with the smaller price. Just look at the end prices on ebay....you will see this applies to pre-war, post-war, etc. In the long run, who knows? But at this time, if the intention of grading is for resale, PSA may be the way to go.

 
 
MW
(no login)

I can't agree

January 11 2003, 6:36 PM 

Wes,

I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but sales for SGC-graded cards, particularly vintage issues, are continually gaining strength. In fact, for nearly every 19th century issue, most E-card issues and many T-card series, SGC graded examples outsell their PSA counterparts. Of course, that assumes that PSA can even get the right card in the proper holder and satisfactorily identify the card they are grading. That's consistently been a problem with PSA over the past year -- PSA has clearly been unable to replace its two top graders who left the company just over a year ago. The question I have is how can a company determine whether a card should even belong in a holder if they don't know what it is? To me, this is pretty elementary.

The examples of strong SGC prices (greater than either PSA sales or the SMR values) are many. Here is what I've documented:

http://www.bmwcards.com/Hobbynews3.htm

 
 
MW
(no login)

My biggest concern...

January 11 2003, 6:46 PM 

is purchasing PSA graded cards, especially those valued in excess of $1,000 and getting something that is altered or trimmed.

A recent example with the "new" PSA label:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=31721&item=1986975833

 
 

Robert
(Login Bigb13)

Re: My biggest concern...

January 11 2003, 9:06 PM 

I think 12 Grand is a bit much to pay for a trimmed card. Rob

 
 
MW
(no login)

Unless

January 11 2003, 9:19 PM 

...it's a T206 Wagner

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

Re: Unless

January 11 2003, 9:22 PM 

lmao!!!

 
 

(no login)

re: I can't agree

January 12 2003, 12:12 AM 

Jeff-Collect what you like. Clearly, in this room people prefer SGC and they back up their preference with sound reasons. However, I am not so certain the rest of the collecting world feels the same way. Other than BMW how many major dealers carry and prefer to sell SGC cards over PSA? How many major auction houses prefer SGC?
BTW-Impressive list of sell prices you have there MW. Are they all sell prices-or are they asking prices?

 
 
MW
(no login)

Answers...and more questions

January 12 2003, 1:21 AM 

<< Other than BMW how many major dealers carry and prefer to sell SGC cards over PSA? How many major auction houses prefer SGC? >>

Albie, I'm not sure what your point is. If one took a look on eBay at the pre-1930 Graded Baseball Singles category, might they not conclude that AAA and NASA are the hottest companies in the hobby? I remember this argument on the old chatboard. Just because one company has a greater marketshare or more exposure does not mean that it offers a better product.


<< BTW-Impressive list of sell prices you have there MW. Are they all sell prices-or are they asking prices? >>

They are all sales prices. Also, many are recorded from direct eBay auction sales. If you take a close look at sales of vintage PSA-graded cards during the last year you will find that many PSA 7s, 8s and 9s are only selling for a fraction (75% or less) of the catalog price (SMR). And this is even AFTER many of the prices were adjusted downward by their so-called pricing experts. During the same time period, SGC prices have increased.

Albie, if you are really interested in collecting and promoting PSA cards, I think that's great. I'm sure you could have asked these same questions on the Collector's Universe forum and all of your friends would have been agreeing with you and patting you on the back. On the network54 forum, however, we are more grounded in reality.

BTW, thank you for the 1956 Topps football set at the November Toronto Expo.

 
 

(no login)

Backing Up PSA

January 12 2003, 2:42 AM 

As long as I have been watching this board Mike has came up with valid points as to why PSA has problems and have yet to hear from anyone to back up PSA or explain why these things happen. The most disturbing thing about PSA to me is there dealer network preferential treatment on grading, which by NO stretch of the imagination is true grading, just putting money into the hands of the people in the dealer network and the people getting hurt are the collectors that by these overgraded cards. I personally can not support a company like this.
If the PSA thing is so good why aren't there people out there defending them? I know the majority of the posters prefer SGC, but there has to be more PSA supporters. Other than the fact that they seem to sell for higher prices, why use there services or buy there cards?

 
 
B C Daniels
(no login)

How about lazer exstracted????

January 12 2003, 3:37 AM 

or one on a sheet??

 
 
MW
(no login)

Exactly!

January 12 2003, 3:41 AM 

Lee --

You bring up a very important point. Many of the members of this vintage forum collect for the enjoyment of it. They are not as concerned with "resale" value as many PSA collectors. Absent the argument that "PSA sells for the most" (which I don't even think is true), what argument is there to defend PSA? Do they grade more accurately? Do they have more attractive or better fitting holders? Have they historically offered better service? Are PSA's grades consistent from one week to the next? Do they have a good working knowledge of vintage baseball cards? Are they impartial to every submitter?

Like you, I would like to see a PSA supporter answer those questions that have the MOST relevance to this vintage forum.

 
 

(no login)

Why the comparison

January 12 2003, 8:37 AM 

I have always been curious why there has been the comparison of grade degrees (e.i. SGC X = PSA X) between the two companies in the hobby circles. More specifically, you very often see the comments either in the title of a card on ebay or in the body of the writeup (e.g. SGC 7 = PSA 6) the SGC will have its dual-equivalent grade (e.g 7.5, 7) and then there will be a comment about ("this = a PSA 6"). I'm sure I've seen this 100 times. I don't understand why it is done and seems to be contrary to my and others experiences on this board (as far as SGC grades being slightly lower than PSAs)? I wonder if the "average" collector views SGC as an "easier" grader when in reality they are more thorough and tougher. Any thoughts? PSA still (to the masses) semms to carry its image as the "Card grading 800 lb. gorilla" that it established years ago. But SGC is obviously bulking up to compete for their market position (especially in vintage cards).

Pat

 
 
Jeff McKee
(no login)

Re: PSA OR SGC?????

January 12 2003, 9:17 AM 

Hi Jeff,
I have both PSA and SGC graded cards.All of the PSA graded cards I bought on ebay.Most of the SGC graded cards I have,I sent to be graded by SGC.My reasons for sending my cards to SGC at first was that I liked the holders better,also they have better prices for the turnaround time.I also like there web site more as it offers you more options without buying anything.But after comparing both of the companys grades on the same cards I would say that SGC is the tougher and more consistent company.In closing if I were to have my cards graded that is where (SGC)I would send mine,but this is only my opinion.
Jeff

 
 
Robert
(no login)

Re: Why the comparison

January 12 2003, 11:53 AM 

I think this is wrong(e.g. SGC 7 = PSA 6). I think it is the other way around. (SGC6 = PSA 7 or 8)Depending who sent in the card. That would be more like it. Rob

 
 

(no login)

One of Brian's

January 12 2003, 12:13 PM 

Robert,

Here is one of Brian's cards as an example of my point.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=31718&item=1987274904

 
 

(no login)

Speed Limit

January 12 2003, 12:44 PM 

I think That the equivilant is inteneded to educate the people that are familiar with the 1-10 system to have a quick reference. We tried that in this country with the speed limit signs from mph to kmph. I think the big failure there was they continued to list mph first and kmph in smaller numbers below that. We just need to make sure we refer to SGC numbers first and 1-10 second this might help.

 
 
Robert
(no login)

Re: One of Brian's

January 12 2003, 1:02 PM 

I see that it is graded a Sgc60 which would be a PSA 5. But what I mean is if that same card went to PSA it would have come back at least a 6 if not a 7 with out question. So if you have two of the same grade cards one in a SGC holder graded a 60 and one in a PSA holder graded a 5 I bet you 9 out of 10 times the SGC card is the better card. Rob

 
 

(no login)

??

January 12 2003, 1:21 PM 

Still, if one says an SGC 60 is a PSA 5, my point is an average buyer (not the most informed on the two co.s) would say SGC is a lighter grader? I have see this from buyers. Somem, (I repeat some) buyers have mentioned in e-mails directly and indirectly "that PSA is better". Again, my point is that this comment (SGC 60 = PSA 5) can give this type of impression. Not to you and me, but to others.

Why say SGC 60 is a PSA 5 if you think its a PSA 7 as you stated? Why not say nicely "this SGC 60 is really a PSA 7 because PSA sucks and they overgrade they're cards."

I think we're in agreement that SGC would accomplish Jeff's goal. Better physical presentation (nicer holders) and "handled" by more knowleadgeble people, etc. Again as MW said, assuming the goal of Jeff is Not to appeal to the masses (the others mentioned above) and sell but to hold and enjoy.

Regards.


 
 

(no login)

re: PSA vs SGC

January 12 2003, 2:09 PM 

MW-My point was that most major dealers and auction houses sell PSA cards. My guess is that this fact is because they are more liquid. That is my opinion. I did not say that PSA is more accurate or consistent, merely that PSA is preferred by dealers and auction houses. I do not see a reason to slam that point.
Yes, thank you for buying the 1956 Topps set (although it was somebody I work with who sold BMW that set-we usually flip a coin for the task of who is going to go around on Sunday and try and peddle some extra stuff-he lost ) do not forget I have sold you a C57 Benedict, some Ice Kings and some Canadian Chewing Gum cards. If you are nice to me, I might offer you some high grade 1937 OPC batter-ups and some high grade V304D's as well in the future.
Finally, a couple of questions in your notes you write - "Now, there's no longer any guesswork as to whether that 1952 Topps PSA 7 Mickey Mantle is really the borderline "8" as an Internet seller might claim. If it is, SGC grades it a 7.5 (86). If not, it's just a 7 -- simple, meaningful, and precise with a greater emphasis placed on offering the consumer a better value rather than a better "snow job" by a seller who probably sees every card he owns as a super-high-end, unbelievable example."
Yet, you have a Bobby Orr SGC 84 in which you state- "Conservatively graded NM 84 by SGC. In our opinion, this stunning card is extremely close to an SGC 88!" -if it was that close to an 88 should it not be an SGC 86?
and my last question -Does Dick Towle do restoration work? I was under the impression (from years ago mind you) that he was only capable of removing things from cards-can he also improve centering and build up corners?


 
 
Anonymous
(Login Marty_P)

Re: Re: PSA OR SGC?????

January 12 2003, 2:10 PM 

A couple of thoughts. If someone had a card that just made a grade, eBay is the perfect place to dump that card, weither it is PSA or SGC. If you have bought all of your SGC cards on eBay, then compare them to the PSA cards that you bought on eBay.
SCG is very forgiving for centering, example http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=16269&item=1986746467

I believe that PSA would have given this card an oc qualifier, thus this card is of more value in a SGC slab.

 
 

(Login rvognarattbi)

MW--yes, $12,000 is an awful lot to pay for a trimmed card..

January 12 2003, 2:48 PM 

...

 
 

(no login)

Maybe not on the DiMaggio

January 12 2003, 3:07 PM 

1) I could easily see Psa grade this card a six without
a qualifier.

2) This is in an old style Sgc holder so who knows
what it might grade now

3) Who are you sir?

aconte

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

the misconception

January 12 2003, 6:40 PM 

The big misconception here is that SGC's 1-10 scale is the same as PSA's. It's not even close. SGC started doing it so that people familiar with PSA would ahve something to relate to, but I gaurentee you, as others have mentioned, a card that gets 5 on the SGC scale will come back with a 6 or better from PSA.

Short term, yes, PSA sells better and has better market share than SGC, but if they continue as they are, this will not be the case in the long term, especially for vintage cards. It was pointed out that the major auction houses carry mostly PSA cards. I am sure this more a function of the fact that there are more PSA cards out and not out of preference for one company or another. I don't think auction houses really care what slab it is in, as long as it is not PRO, AAA, NASA or some other disreputable service.

Jay

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

the exception, not the rule

January 12 2003, 6:47 PM 

As mentioned by someone else, that is an older holder. If that card were resubmitted, it would get hammered for centering. It states right in the grading guide SGC40-...90/10 centering. So that card would get no better than a 40 if resubmitted. I have a great looking e93 Griffith that got a 40 grade because of its 90/10 centering.

We can always find exceptions, but try and show us repeated examples where SGC cards this far off center got a grade this nice.

Jay

 
 

(no login)

Respectfully Confusing

January 12 2003, 7:23 PM 

First, the question I posed and the example I gave continue to be danced around and not addressed.

Secondly, I never mentioned resubmitting cards already graded by PSA of SGC to get higher and or different grades.

Finally, my statement WAS, "people seeing (over and over again) the statement that a 60 SGC = a PSA 5 would lead one (a common collector, this is a key point here) that SGC is an easier grader."

Why are reponses continuing to saying\gaurantee that the same card if submitted to PSA would yield a 7. That is NOT what the question was and does not address the point that SGC 60 and PSA 5 are IN THE SAME SENTENCE therefore MISLEADING a common collector (A key point here not a vintage web-site reader). There is NO mention of the ficticious PSA 7 grade that is mentioned unpon re-submittle.


 
 


(Login runscott)

Albie - I have a question for you

January 12 2003, 7:35 PM 

If I sent a card to PSA and it was judged to be an 8, then I broke it out of the slab and sent it back 9 separate times, how many of those times would it come back as an 8? (in your opinion).

Maybe someday they'll create a machine that you can simply stick a card in, it will be electronically evaluated, and an indisputable grade will be assigned.

 
 
marty
(Login Marty_P)

Re: the exception, not the rule

January 12 2003, 8:26 PM 

"We can always find exceptions, but try and show us repeated examples where SGC cards this far off center got a grade this nice." Jay
See below

"2) This is in an old style Sgc holder so who knows
what it might grade now" Aconte
Ask MW. I believe that he feels that it does not matter when SGC graded a card, they are consistent. MW, sorry if I am misstating you.

"Are PSA's grades consistent from one week to the next?" MW
I believe that the eBay auctions below are consistent.


This is not a tough game. This has been my concern with SGC. I believe that they are consistent on allowing centering concerns in higher grades. I acknowledge that, I do not condim them for it, it is just the way that they grade.
I spent about 5 minutes on eBay and posted some auctions that I feel show cards that PSA would grade oc for the grade given. I do not play bash SGC, this is just my opnion and I do not take sides on which is right. My customers ask for PSA. If they asked for SGC, I would have SGC. IF they asked for GA, I would have GA. If I would have thought that Intel stock was a good buy going from $80.00 to $12.00, I would have bought it. I let the markets tell me what to do.
I am just a small time guy that does not fell that I have the power or desire to try to change the market or convince others what it should be.
If you disagree with me, that is heathly. This is just my observation.
Sorry for leaving my name off before.


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=16269&item=1988188572

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=16269&item=1988322794

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1985424858

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=16271&item=1987465937

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=16271&item=1987616200

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=16271&item=1987620272

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

Re: Respectfully Confusing

January 12 2003, 9:05 PM 

to answer that quention, people that say SGC60 is the equivelent of a PSA 5 are misinformed or trying to convey information that would make more sense to someone not familiar with SGC. Personally, I wish they would stop saying that it is equivelent to a PSA 5 since anyone familiar with both companies knows that the card would grade higher than a 5 with PSA.

Jay

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

Re: Re: the exception, not the rule

January 12 2003, 9:09 PM 

at least 2 of the cards you show as further examples are also in older slabs. Most of the others, I cannot tell becuase they do not have back scans.

Jay

 
 
MW
(no login)

Question for "marty"

January 12 2003, 9:16 PM 

Who are you? Do you buy or sell on eBay?

 
 

(no login)

Exactly my point!

January 12 2003, 9:17 PM 


The comment is made and the layman thinks (and they do) that they are comparing apples and apples. And the one with the lower number is the result of a tougher company (so they think).

 
 
marty
(Login Marty_P)

Re: Question for "marty"

January 12 2003, 9:49 PM 

Jay, I am under the impression that the SGC supporters feel that SGC cards are the same, within reason, regardless of when they were graded. There will always be just missed and just made grades that my be reversed. Should not this cross over to centering also? I was just answering your request to show you a pattern.

MW, my name is Marty Pritchard. I do a few shows, Fort Washington was the last, some eBay, some Yahoo and my web site. I do business as All Marty's Stuff. I hope that you are not offended by my refering to you in my last post. I do not defend PSA. I do not say that they are the best, or most consistient. I do point out to people when there is inconsistiency in their strong statements.

I do not normally post, I just try to learn. I do not try to change oppions of others, it is their opnions. I have a new customer that wanted to bid on one of my Yahoo auctions and asked me if I thought that the ungraded cards, vg, was a better by than either of the graded cards that I had on my web site. He told me that he was interested in getting back into collecting, investing, for his children's college. I told him that the best investment for his college funds is college IRA's, not cards. I told him that cards are a hobby that he may come out ahead on. He asked about graded cards, and the grades of cards. I told him to stay with PSA, SGC, GA. I gave him my view of the past market with the different grade ranges and the different grading companies. It was not my intent, but I must of talked him out of bidding on my auction also. I did ship him an order.

 
 
runscott
(no login)

Marty - it's difficult to prove anything on this board,

January 12 2003, 10:06 PM 

but obviously the question is a little tougher than you feel, since this debate keeps getting repeated. With your 6 examples you have made a good point about SGC and centering. Fortunately most buyers can visually determine if a card is off-center or not, so this isn't as big of an issue as grading trimmed cards.

I don't have a problem buying PSA-graded cards, and don't think twice as long as they are PSA 6 or lower. But when I buy PSA 7-8 cards I just have to not look too closely at the edges - afraid of what I might (not) find. Fortunately I stick mainly to pre-wwi baseball, and SGC is doing great in that area, but I also like Bowman football and those still seem to be mainly PSA territory.

There are realitities to the market that we would be foolish to ignore, but I disagree with you in that I feel we can definitely change trends. We do this as customers by "voting" when we purchase slabbed cards or choose a grading company for submissions. We also do it as board members by educating others on the qualities of the various grading companies. Hopefully you will continue to participate in this process with your observations.

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

Re: Re: Question for "marty"

January 12 2003, 10:17 PM 

Marty, I just realizd the problem with your examples and something that a lot of people do not know about SGC. Vintage cards pass through a different set of graders than do cards from the modern era (post ww2). So far, all the cards you have shown to have been given high grades regardless of centering are all cards from the modern era and graded by other people than Derek Grady and the other graders in the vintage area.

This is a big part of the claim for consistancy for SGC, at least in the vintage cards, becuase every card that goes to SGC for grading passes thru Derek Grady's hands before finally being slabbed. I don't know if this sort of situation is true on the modern card side.

Jay

 
 

(no login)

re: Albie - I have a question for you

January 12 2003, 10:24 PM 

runscott-Probably a 7 or lower from all of the excess handling.
Really I think it would depend on the card and the individual grader. Grading is very subjective and there are a number of factors going into the grade of the card that are dependent strictly on that grader. I would like to believe that the card would come back with the same grade all 9 times - but I realize the reality of the situation and that it is very unlikely. I have seen plenty of examples of inconsistencies with PSA grading and re-submissions getting different grades.

 
 

(Login Marty_P)

Re: Re: Re: Question for "marty"

January 12 2003, 10:56 PM 

Runscott, I stated that I do not have the power to change the market, not the collecting world. If the market changes, I am there. I do not care.

Jay, I have reread your request for additional examples. I did not see a request for Derek Grady's cards only. How can you tell that Mr. Grady did not grade any of these cards. Is there a chance that any of these were graded by him? I do not know how to tell, please enlighten. Is there a chance that the head grader gave different instructions to Mr. Grady than he did to the other graders? How does that stand to the consistency statement?

I do not want to spend the time, nor care to, to go back and see who stated that SGC is the strictest. Maybe they could have two different holders, one one for the cards that they are consistent with, and one that they do not care. Maybe the cards should state who graded them. I bought a shirt that had the name of the inspector in the pocket.

The most discouraging feature in this board is how personal some take comments, and the effort that is taken to prove a point. A fun part is to see how easy it is to start a fight. I observe. If I had even 10% of my customers requesting SGC, I would carry some of their product. I do not deal in the era that many of you do. I had three Tango Egg cards of the same player, one SGC 84, and two PSA 5. They looked identical. The PSA cards were 5 for centering in my mind. They sold on eBay for about the same money.

 
 


(Login runscott)

Marty - whatever

January 12 2003, 10:59 PM 

thanks for enlightening us.

 
 
Brian H
(no login)

My current thoughts on this endless debate

January 12 2003, 11:08 PM 

Apart from the escapades of the folks at AAA and NASA debating the grading companies is the most common recurrent topic on this board.
From these debates and my own observations I have come to the following conclusions:
1. The vocal majority (I don't know about the lurkers) is generally pro-SGC. But that must be qualified -- they are pro-SGC primarily with respect to Vintage (pre WWII and earlier) and as collectors more than investors. One of the primary reasons is that all of these cards are reviewed by Derek Grady. Derek Grady has been SGC primary vintage grader for some time (although not the whole time SGC was in operations). During that time PSA has apparently employed at least 3 different graders (hence less consistency many believe.)
PSA also has made more clear mistakes than SGC on Vintage cards. To some extent this results from the fact that they have graded many more cards. However, I think that they have also been rather careless compared to SGC.
2. #1 is not the same as saying that vintage SGC cards are necessarily worth more than PSA cards. The truth is that there are collectors (primarily PSA set builders) who prefer and only bid on PSA cards. Some of these folks put big dollars into PSA cards. On the whole I would say that PSA cards are still a bit ahead on price in the Vintage are -- but that is a very general conclusion and I think theat the gap is shrinking.
3. PSA is far more dominant in the 1948-1980 market and I think that PSA graded cards of this era are prefered by the market to those graded by its competitors. Also this part of the market is less comfortable with SGC's grading scale which incorporates centering into the overall grade rather than using qualifiers (OC etc.) (I also think that PSA is more strict on the centering of the backs of cards).
4. The market for cards since 1980 generally prices similarly graded cards by Beckett above both PSA and SGC. (SGC and GAI seem to trail PSA here).

Most Importantly as Leon said: "Buy the cards not the holders." If you decide to sell you can always have the card regraded if you think the holder will determine your profit.

 
 

(no login)

re: My current thoughts on this endless debate

January 12 2003, 11:14 PM 

Brian H-I would agree with your statements. Well said.

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

Re: Re: Re: Re: Question for "marty"

January 12 2003, 11:20 PM 

Marty, Derek Grady is the head grader for SGC. Others that know him personally can tell what his full duties are beyond checking every vintage card that passes thru SGC.

You said this game of finding grading consistancies in regards to centering was easy. Now that you have a better understanding of most people's perspective in regards to SGC here on the board, finding those grading inconsistancies in regard to centering aren't so easy now, are they?

You also mention that you cannot influence markets, but that is where you are mistaken. If you are a dealer, then you can and do influence markets by what you can carry and, if bother to take the time, by educating your customers. And I don't know about you, but when I had a business, I took pride in what I sold, and didn't meerly sell things jsut because they wanted it. If I felt there was a better, comperable or similar product, then I would educate them about and offer taht product too.

Jay

 
 
MW
(no login)

Response to Marty

January 13 2003, 12:17 AM 

<< I do not defend PSA. I do not say that they are the best, or most consistient. I do point out to people when there is inconsistiency in their strong statements. >>


Care to rephrase, Marty? The name of your website is martyspsagradedcards.com. Content: 99% PSA graded cards.

Also, I was wondering if you could answer a few questions about some of PSA graded cards you have for sale on your website. In particular:

(1) Is this 1915 Cracker Jack stained (ST) in the lower left corner or is it just the scan?



I tend to think it DOES have a stain because this one does too:



As does this one:



(2) How do you feel (OC) about the centering on this PSA 8 you have for sale? Gosh! This card lists for $12 and you're asking $50? Are you selling the card here, Marty, or the "8" on the PSA holder?



(3) Do you think the stain (ST), rounded corners or poor centering (OC) makes this card suspect?



(4) Which bothers you more -- the staining (ST) or the centering?



(5) Does this card normally not have a border on the left side, Marty?



(6) See anything wrong with this one?



(7) Which do you prefer? A card that is OC top-to-bottom or OC left-to-right? Come on, Marty, $125 for this card? It only lists for $30 and was double printed in the set. What are we buying here? The card or the holder?



(8) Paper loss on the surface? Severely rounded corners? VG???????




No offense, Marty, but nearly every third or fourth card I was viewing on your PSA site was overgraded (http://www.martyspsagradedcards.com/new.htm). And I'm not quite sure what your policy is on the "buy the card, not the holder" issue, but it certainly seems that you are trying to sell the holder, not the card.

Finally, Jay is absolutely correct. You are pointing out examples of modern SGC graded cards. That's 90% of what you buy and sell but that's not what the majority of people here collect. Again, I think it's great that you are in love with PSA and you trust their accurate grades (why else would you be selling so many PSA cards?), but your interests would probably be better served on the Collectors Universe forum. Hobbyists on this forum mostly collect vintage cards and can tell the difference between a company that often grades randomly (AAA, NASA, PSA) and one that is knowledgeable and consistent (SGC).

 
 
MW
(no login)

Response to Albie

January 13 2003, 12:33 AM 

Albie,

Think about this for a moment. Why would you be selling so many cards to us if you could just get them PSA graded and sell them for more than what we'll be getting for them in SGC holders? Kind of makes you wonder about which company REALLY inspires more confidence in collectors, doesn't it?


<< Yet, you have a Bobby Orr SGC 84 in which you state- "Conservatively graded NM 84 by SGC. In our opinion, this stunning card is extremely close to an SGC 88!" -if it was that close to an 88 should it not be an SGC 86? >>

Many qualities of the card were similar to that of a NM/MT card -- color, clarity, borders, etc. The fact that the corners had a touch too much wear made it an SGC 84. Do you mean to tell me that a Near Mint card can't have NM-MT qualities? I sure think it can.


<< and my last question -Does Dick Towle do restoration work? I was under the impression (from years ago mind you) that he was only capable of removing things from cards-can he also improve centering and build up corners? >>

If you have a specific question for Dick Towle, I suggest that you give him a call. Also, I think some of his advertisements might provide some clues. You might want to check some old SCD's and issues of the Beckett Vintage magazine.

 
 
marty
(Login Marty_P)

Re: Response to Marty

January 13 2003, 12:46 AM 

Mike, you are big on facts. I did not say that I trust the grades or did not trust the SGC grades. I said that my customers want PSA cards. I would have to assume that your customers want SGC cards rather than PSA. That also is great. I will disagree with you that AAA and NASA grade randomly, I think that they are consistent, not correct, but consistent. One reason that I did post was to start a one way arguement. I do not plan on posting again. You may attack me all that you like, you will get no response.
Mike,I do want to thank you for listing my web site. I normally will only do so when asked. I do not want to force myself on others.

 
 
MW
(no login)

Response to Marty

January 13 2003, 12:57 AM 

<< Mike, you are big on facts. >>

When you buy and sell accurately graded vintage cards, you have to be.


<< I will disagree with you that AAA and NASA grade randomly, I think that they are consistent, not correct, but consistent. >>

I don't agree with you here, Marty, and I don't think anyone else does either. Think about it. We're talking about scraps of paper with 6, 7 and sometimes 8 corners.


<< You may attack me all that you like, you will get no response. Mike,I do want to thank you for listing my web site. >>

I'm not attacking you, Marty, just pointing out that many of the PSA graded cards on your website are highly suspect. Please don't take it personally -- you weren't the one who graded them.

 
 


(Login sabrjay)

Re: Re: Response to Marty

January 13 2003, 1:34 AM 

Marty, just curious, if after everything that has now been presented to you, are you going to mention that the fact there is a better alternative out there in the grading field, or are you going to continue to let your customers blindly buy product, knowing full well that what you sell is inferior? I know that if I was your customer and found out that you kept promoting something that was inferior, I would not be inclinded to continue to do business with you.

Jay

 
 


(Login sabrjay)

Re: Re: Response to Marty

January 13 2003, 1:40 AM 

You did forget to respond to one very important question that was asked of you about what you sell.

Do you sell the slab, or the card within the slab?

Jay

 
 

(Login RC_McKenzie)

Is the guy's name really "Grady"?

January 13 2003, 3:56 AM 

Derek "Grady". How pollyanna-Dickensonian is that for a name? "Grady" if you're reading this... you got a Pet Cigarettes Battling Nelson coming down the pike. Don't do me wrong, bro.

 
 

runscott
(Login runscott)

Gee, that's sad

January 13 2003, 9:20 AM 

...I will really miss Marty's "un-biased" "expert" opinions (sorry, I can't find a laughing smiley).

Marty - I certainly respect your right to go away and not respond to these posts, but I know it will be hard for you given your admission that...

<< a fun part is to see how easy it is to start a fight >>

 
 
Jerry O'Conner
(no login)

What is wrong with #6?

January 13 2003, 1:19 PM 

Sorry if this is a double post. I did not see my initial post show up so I am doing it again.

I see the grading concerns with most of your examples, but I can't find the problem with the Fregosi card. I am not very familiar with the issue, so please forgive me if it is obvious.

 
 
MW
(no login)

Clarification

January 13 2003, 2:33 PM 

Jerry --

Care to introduce yourself?

Also, who is "Fregosi?" Do you mean "Williams?"

 
 
Jerry
(no login)

Hi, my name is Jerry.

January 13 2003, 2:48 PM 

As they say on some of the radio talk shows, "I am a long time listener, first time caller."

I am an occasional lurker on this board and have learned quite a bit from the different posts thanks to many of you. I do not have the budget to collect all of the items that I want, so I try to concentrate on middle grade T205s and vintage Brooklyn Dodger cards.

I must be as dumb as a stump because I still do not see what I am missing about the Fregosi card. I am not even interested in the issue, it is just bothering me that I can't figure out the problem with the card!

Jerry

 
 


(Premier Login leonl)
Forum Owner

mw

January 13 2003, 3:06 PM 

Jerry is talking about that huge black looking card in the middle of the screen with the name of "Fregosi" on it......I, too, am not versed in that series.....are you knocking it because it has no perforations? later ya'll......and welcome aboard Jerry....

 
 


(Login runscott)

leon - you goof - it's only got a head. It's missing the body.

January 13 2003, 3:11 PM 

Personally, I never cared much about "getting a head".

 
 


(Premier Login leonl)
Forum Owner

Runscott

January 13 2003, 3:18 PM 

and I am supposed to know that? I have an E100 that all you can see is Melchoir's head too....I didn't think anything was wrong with it.....oh well....guess I better stay in the PreWWII era....later

 
 

(no login)

Re: leon - you goof - it's only got a head. It's missing the body.

January 13 2003, 3:19 PM 

I think this is where we can call Mike a DUNDERHEAD.

 
 
Jerry
(no login)

Thanks Leon.

January 13 2003, 3:22 PM 

I can't tell from the scan, but maybe the card is not the unperforated version.

 
 
Todd (nolemmings)
(no login)

my two cents

January 13 2003, 3:23 PM 

I have dealt with Marty personally on a few occasions, and believe him to be very personable and fair. While I understand the comments about his website, I recall that more than half of his "stuff" was ungraded, perhaps because he carries odd ball stuff that isn't always conducive to slabbing-- one of the reasons I visit his tables. I also remember speaking to him at length over three Tango Eggs Beschers that were graded, and he did not present as pro-PSA in any way that I noticed (as an SGC fan, I usually remember any PSA puffing).

I'm not sure I follow all of the criticism he's taken in this thread, although I do see some hypocrisy given a few of his PSA cards scanned and posted here. Still,
I do believe that old-label SGC cards were graded a little more generously than new; if SGC fans acknowledge this, then Marty is merely mistaken in suggesting otherwise, if they do not acknowledge it, then I agree with him.
Next, I find the Derek Grady excuse rather lame. It may be that he is the toughest/fairest/insert your compliment here grader in the land, but that does not excuse inconsistency from other graders if in fact it exists. In my view, SGC cannot overtake PSA or even sustain its current market share if the demands on Mr. Grady's time increase a whole lot. Therefore, they need to channel his expertise to others in their company. Of course, the more graders, the greater chance for inconsistency, so I suppose it's a bit of a catch-22. Still, to forego criticism of SGC because "Derek didn't grade it" doesn't impress much.

Finally, I would like to point out what may be an unnoticed problem with PSA that chaps my arse. Apparently, PSA will grade without a qualifier if specifically requested to do so. While the card presumably may "slab" one full grade or more lower, it still irks me that someone buying one of their cards sight unseen (remember, that's one of the so-called selling points of a PSA card)could be sorely disappointed if they fail to ask for centering, staining, etc.
regards...................Todd

 
 


(Login runscott)

I was of course kidding - I've never even seen one of those "head only" cards

January 13 2003, 3:28 PM 

I collect baseball from pre-wwI almost exclusively, and barely have a clue about anything more modern.

 
 


(Login runscott)

Todd - I thought the responses to Marty were predictable and justified

January 13 2003, 3:38 PM 

If you are going to put on a front that you are something you aren't (or in Marty's case that you aren't something that you are) then you better be ready to take some fire. He popped in, said a few things that were self-contradicting, bad-mouthed the board a little and mentioned it was fun to start fights, then picked up his toys and went home when a couple of people responded in a way he didn't like. So what did we do wrong again?

 
 
Hankron
(no login)

Re: my two cents

January 13 2003, 3:42 PM 

I don't specalize in cards and have owned exactly three graded cards in my life (2 PSA, 1 SGC, each worth about $2). My guess is that PSA, SGC and Beckett are all legitimate graders-- each with having comparative weaknesses and strengths, or being better in one area instead of another. I think these arguments often come down to a collector's emotional attachment to her grader of choice-- only enhanced by the fact that she has invested lots of money in that company's product. I think that in many PSA collectors' minds, the weaknesses of SGC are artificially magnified and PSA's weakness are casually dismissed. And visa versa.

So, while there are many facts to the arguments (I am personally aware of certain graders grading fakes and counterfeits), I think a lot of the arguments are at least partially based in the cliques typical to any part of society, including baseball cards.

 
 
Hankron
(no login)

Re: Re: my two cents

January 13 2003, 3:46 PM 

And if you don't beleive that there are cliques: how come the 'PSA' board is over there, and the 'SGC' board is over here. It's just like high school all over again.

 
 

(no login)

SGC Board

January 13 2003, 4:08 PM 

There is a forum on SGC'c site. This is a vintage board that most members prefer SGC. Mike goes over to the PSA board and gets kicked off, what good does it do to go to the board if they kick you off because they don't like your views?

 
 
hanrkon
(no login)

Re: SGC Board

January 13 2003, 5:03 PM 

<<< Mike goes over to the PSA board and gets kicked off, what good does it do to go to the board if they kick you off because they don't like your views? >>>

Doesn't that support what I just said?

 
 
Anonymous
(no login)

Scott

January 13 2003, 5:20 PM 

I didn't say that you did anything wrong-- please re-read my post.
I did say that he does not sell exclusively or even primarily PSA cards--his own web page shows many other items, and stated that I do not consider him, based on my first-hand dealings, to be a PSA apologist.
I do not see exactly what he said that was self-contradictory, unless you take the position that by selling PSA cards, he cannot criticize SGC without coming across as self-interested. As I understood his message, SGC has made centering mistakes/overgrades too, and with that I would agree. I say that not being a dealer, and as one who has more SGC cards than PSA.
He stated that others were free to disagree, he identified himself by full name, and provided information from which his wares could be reviewed on line. Not exactly laying in the weeds.
He stated his opinion on a fairly debatable issue, one that may never be resolved. Having stated it, he elects not to participate further--what would you have him say? Does he sell the holder instead of the card? Who cares? What's there to fight about? Time to move on.


 
 
MW
(no login)

Actually...no

January 13 2003, 5:32 PM 

David,

We don't "ban" PSA supporters here. We gently coddle them while applying the tar and feathers. We've also been known to give them quite a bit of "floor" while they speak. Especially if they've got big mouths and small feet. See? There's a difference. Diplomacy.

 
 

Robert
(Login Bigb13)

Attach a picture?

January 13 2003, 6:57 PM 

How do you attach a picture on to a thread? Rob

 
 

runscott
(Login runscott)

Todd - I understood your post completely

January 13 2003, 7:39 PM 

and I feel no urge whatsoever to re-read it.

 
 
Anonymous
(no login)

Ironically............

January 13 2003, 8:51 PM 

SGC is way less restrictive on grading T-200's!

Fatimas from SGC are two grades lower than the standards used by PSA and I have plenty for comparision.

 
 
Brian C Daniels
(no login)

Ironically............with T-200's it's opposite!

January 13 2003, 8:52 PM 

SGC is way less restrictive on grading T-200's!

Fatimas from SGC are two grades lower than the standards used by PSA and I have plenty for comparision.

 
 
marty
(Login Marty_P)

I forgot to ask one request.

January 13 2003, 9:11 PM 

I know that I said that I would not post again, but I did forget one thing. Will someone please post a scan of a card that has a grade of a 30, 40, or 50 that if centered well would have graded 88 or better.
Thank you in advance.

Do you think that this thread will reach 100? I will help one more time.
MW, do you really think that the Pafko is centered 35/65?
Now I am done, go ahead on.

 
 
Elliot
(no login)

Re: Ironically............with T-200's it's opposite!

January 13 2003, 9:26 PM 

Just to be clear. This is NOT a SGC board. It is true that a number of posters have strong favorable opinions regarding SGC, but it is far from unanimous. Different viewpoints are always welcome here, although sometimes it appears otherwise. A number of people just have strong opinions--don't let them get you down. I think all the major grading companies have their strength and weaknesses. The best advice is to buy the card and not the holder. View the grade as a guide.

 
 
B c Daniels
(no login)

Canadian card Rodney King-ism at it's finest!!!!

January 13 2003, 9:58 PM 

"Can't we just all grade along"


Ted Kennedy is my designated driver.........

 
 
MW
(no login)

Reply to Marty

January 13 2003, 10:37 PM 

Night blindness -- the inability to see after dusk or at night -- is the most common ocular manifestation of moderate to severe vitamin A deficiency.

PSA blindness -- the inability to accurately judge the condition of a card –- is the most common manifestation of someone who sells the holder and not what's inside of it.

Which category do you fall into, Marty?

 
 
MW
(no login)

The location of the missing Ted Williams

January 13 2003, 10:54 PM 

Classy move, Marty.

For those who were not logged on earlier, I had originally copied a PSA 6 1951 Bowman Ted Williams from Marty's website. For whatever reason, Marty chose to change the image to a Jim Fregosi instead. Here is the original image for #6 above:

Incidentally, Marty has this card listed for $525. At that price, I'd switch images too.



 
 
MW
(no login)

Note to Jerry, Lee, Leon & Scott

January 13 2003, 10:58 PM 

Just so you guys are aware -- Marty tried to change images on me. The image he had posted for #6 above was originally a PSA 6 1951 Bowman Ted Williams. I have reposted the correct image farther down.

 
 
petecld
(no login)

Re: 51B Williams image

January 13 2003, 11:47 PM 

What are we supposed to be wondering about:

1) that a card that is that off-centered is in a PSA 6 holder.

or

2) that a card that is trimmed along the top and is in a PSA 6 holder?


Legal fine print: Just my opinion.

 
 

(no login)

To Clear The Air.......

January 14 2003, 12:21 AM 

Hello All,

I just wanted to take some time to clear the air on this subject. If I would have known then what I know now, I would not have sat down and posted this thread in the first place. It was not intended to start a heated debate between members of the forum or anything to that matter. As I mentioned in the original thread, I am new to the hobby and was just searching for the majority vote on this topic. I was looking to pick the minds of the many experts that frequent this forum, but in doing this, I may have ruffled some feathers. I have had other members of the Forum make comments about this lame thread and how bad it is and have had them comment on the first impression that I have made with the other members. With that said, I am going to continue doing what I have been doing from the beginning and that is to buy quality cards, not quality holders. Thanks to all for your help.

 
 

(no login)

Re: To Clear The Air.......

January 14 2003, 12:55 AM 

Jeff, The subject was a topic that has been hashed over and will continue to be. I feel that sometimes this is the best way to gain information at times. As long as there are no personal attacks I feel there is no problem.. Every member of the board is a different person with different thoughts and opinions. I feel that no matter what your opinion there is alot of respect for the people on the board. I know that personally I tend to bid a bit higher on board members auctions and wouldn't hesitate to buy or trade from them. Sometimes you just don't know what topic will get this board rolling, just climb aboard and enjoy the ride, I know I have.

Lee

 
 

Scott Forrest
(Login runscott)

Lee put it very well

January 14 2003, 10:23 AM 

Bill calls me "Mr. 1st Amendment", so the following comment shouldn't come as any surprise: If someone ever tells you what you can and can't post regarding vintage baseball cards, just tell them to go take a jump. I also don't see a problem with questioning the motives of certain posters - after all, this isn't an encyclopedia, it is a forum of flesh-and-blood human beings who should be communicating honestly.

 
 
Scott Whittenburg
(Login drscottw)

I guess I'm a PSA guy

January 15 2003, 10:28 PM 

I've popped quite a few cards from various companies and resubmitted to other slabbers and here's my opinion...

Asking SGC to regrade a card they know came from PSA is "death". SGC WANTS you think they grade harder, so the grade comes in low. Always pop first, then submit.

PSA won't accept it in a holder from anybody else, you have to pop it first. My guy feeling is that if they think it's an old SGC card they grade it tougher.

The vast majority of SGC cards I pop and submit to PSA come back with lower grades, even on old cards.

PSA cards in equivalent grades to SGC almost always have a price premium.

 
 
MW
(no login)

I beg to differ

January 16 2003, 2:09 AM 

<< The vast majority of SGC cards I pop and submit to PSA come back with lower grades, even on old cards. >>


My experience and that of my customers tells me differently. I've "popped" over a hundred vintage PSA graded cards and re-submitted them to SGC. I would say that roughly 70% of the time, they come back graded lower. For quite some time I have also heard that some dealers allegedly receive preferential treatment when submitting to PSA. That combined with the current PSA scandal where a major PSA authorized dealer was supposedly grading and slabbing his own cards and circulating thousands throughout the hobby via "grade-and-trade" as well as through other PSA Authorized dealers, makes SGC easily the best bet right now. Anyone who would argue differently at this juncture either works for PSA or has many thousands of dollars invested in PSA graded cards and fears a substantial loss in equity.


<< PSA cards in equivalent grades to SGC almost always have a price premium. >>


Just not true. Here are some recent examples of major rookie cards or "benchmark" indicators:

1955-56 Parkhurst #50 Jacques Plante Rookie Card. SGC 92 value = $2555. SMR value for a PSA 8 = $2000. The typical range for a PSA 8 would be $1500 (low-end) to $2000 (high-end).

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=16309&item=1987402680

1963 Topps #537 Pete Rose Rookie Card. SGC 88 value = $2500. SMR Value = $1750. Recent PSA 8 sales have been in the $1300 (low-end) to $1500 range (high-end).

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=16273&item=1987165848

1968 Topps #177 Nolan Ryan Rookie Card. SGC 92 value = $1600. SMR Value = $1100. The typical range for a PSA 8 would be $900 (low-end) to $1200 (high-end).

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=16273&item=1987178574


As can be seen by these and other examples I could provide, SGC cards -- even those from the 1950s and 1960s -- have overtaken the values for similar PSA graded cards. And with the drastic loss of confidence from the current PSA scandal, I expect this gap to widen.

 
 

(no login)

Two sides to everything:

January 16 2003, 7:30 AM 

MW: “I would say that roughly 70% of the time, they come back graded lower.”

What is lower? Can you provide an example of “lower” using SGC and PSA grades?

Do you know how SGC grades translate to PSA or is this an opinion?

MW: “That combined with the current PSA scandal where a major PSA authorized dealer was supposedly grading and slabbing his own cards and circulating thousands throughout the hobby via "grade-and-trade" as well as through other PSA Authorized dealers”

The “Scandel” appears to be ONE company that has unquestionably broke the law as the FBI has indicted them. Can we\should we conclude all PSA slabbed cards and or companies are fraudulent? As the article states “The charges were based, in part, upon evidence PROVIDED TO THE FBI BY PSA.” This doesn’t make PSA’s credibility look worse, does it? Further, “No Collectors Universe personnel were involved in the fraudulent scheme. Rather, Collectors Universe, using proprietary security measures that it has developed to protect collectibles consumers from fraud and misrepresentation, helped to uncover the fraud and to assist the Federal Government in the investigation that led to the filing of charges against the dealer.” Should we just skip this paragraph entirely?

MW: “….makes SGC easily the best bet right now.”

1. “Easily” – one dealer indicted and your opinion = easily?

2. “Right now”? Can PSA survive this “scandel” or are will they lose their position as the article states as “the leading provider of value-added grading and authentication services and products to dealers and collectors of high-end collectible coins, sportscards, currency, stamps, sports and entertainment memorabilia, autographs and other collectibles.”

MW: “Anyone who would argue differently at this juncture either works for PSA or has many thousands of dollars invested in PSA graded cards and fears a substantial loss in equity.”

1. “this juncture” – conclusive evidence and support from the one dealer and a few cards?.

2. “… many thousands of dollars invested in PSA graded cards and fears a substantial loss in equity”. Don’t you have thousands of dollars in PSA graded cards listed on your web site?

MW: “Just not true. Here are some recent examples of major rookie cards or "benchmark" indicators:”

Are you answering the first couple questions above re: card grades and is this fact or your opinion?

Could it be that PSA’s SMR prices are more conservative (i.e. lower)?

I thought PSA would grade a SGC 8.8 as a 10 from the sounds of respondents in this thread? Therefore, your SMR values are incorrect and the cards would be worth well more in every example you list?

How do you know what PSA SMR values are? Are you a PSA member?

MW: “As can be seen by these and other examples I could provide, SGC cards -- even those from the 1950s and 1960s -- have overtaken the values for similar PSA graded cards. And with the drastic loss of confidence from the current PSA scandal, I expect this gap to widen.”

1. “As can be seen by these and other examples I could provide, SGC cards -- even those from the 1950s and 1960s -- have overtaken the values for similar PSA graded cards.

There is no question based on the above conclusive evidence.

2. “and with the drastic loss of confidence from the current PSA scandal…..”

“Drastic loss of confidence” – A quick search of “Pre-30’s Graded” cards on ebay shows 258 PSA cards and 61 SGC cards. Is this the drastic loss of confidence you’re talking about or are these 258 being sold by “When It Was A Game”?

Finally, can these two companies even be compared? What is the economic size difference of these two entities. If SGC does do a better job of grading, have we seen the shift in the market place or will it come now that the above referenced article (just released to the public yesterday) is out? It seems SGC’s strength is in Mr. Grady. If the market has shifted (efficient market hypothesis), there still seems to be many people selling vintage cards in PSA holders. If the market hasn’t shifted to SGC quite yet, how will Mr. Grady be able to handle the influx of business? Will his resources be taxed and grading standards suffer or will he train others to grade vintage cards and therefore create as least two if not more opinions on what a card grades at SGC? I have many SGC and PSA cards, what I don’t have is such a closed-minded view of things.

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

Re: Two sides to everything:

January 16 2003, 8:05 AM 

>“Drastic loss of confidence” – A quick search
> of “Pre-30’s Graded” cards on ebay shows 258 PSA
> cards and 61 SGC cards. Is this the drastic loss of > confidence you’re talking about or are these 258
> being sold by “When It Was A Game”?

I'll save MW some time on this one.

What, Instantly, all the PSA graded cards are supposed to go away and SGC outnumber them? Give me a break. You try to pass yourself off as impartial, yet make this absurd statement.

Or, could it be that we are seeing the loss of confidence and everyone is dumpong their PSA graded cards while they can? I doubt this is the case, since I am sure it will take more than a few days for this story to filter through the entire hobby.

Jay

 
 

(no login)

You said it, Jay

January 16 2003, 8:16 AM 

This proud PSA supporter above us obviously has a large financial stake in PSA graded cards. If he weren't so worried about how his investment is going south, he wouldn't be here responding to me. I'll tell you something, Mark Thompson, the cracks are in the dam and they're getting larger and there's nothing you can do about it. Coming here from the CU forum to argue with me only shows how truly desperate you've become.

Might I recommend a few thousand crossovers to SGC before you end up with virtually the same thing that exists in AAA and NASA holders? Hurry, Mark Thompson, there's still time!

 
 

(no login)

Touche!

January 16 2003, 8:17 AM 

That's the whole point! You supported the silliness very well. His rush to judgement claims (with weak support) are as silly as the "quick search on ebay" I mention.

It seems whatever MW says, goes on this site. Impartial, open-minded, heck they should call this the MW hour and the MWettes.

 
 

(no login)

Another Strong fisted response

January 16 2003, 8:28 AM 

How dare I come to this temple and curse. Do you know who you are quesitoning. He sells PSA cards on his web site. Silly, silly, silly.

 
 

(no login)

Re: Touche!

January 16 2003, 8:48 AM 


Hi MW
If Psa cards are now in a class with AAA and Nasa, will you sell me the Cobb with the Uzit back for a $1000? PLEASE.... Pretty PLEASE


I'm still buying cards, not holders.

be well brian

 
 

(no login)

Get ready, Mark...here it come!

January 16 2003, 9:00 AM 

So, tell me, Mark Thompson is this you on eBay?

http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?MfcISAPICommand=ViewListedItems&userid=gemint&include=0&since=30&sort=3&rows=0

Because if it is, I'd like to compliment you on your selection. I really mean it. Lots and lots of great cards from the late 1960s and early 1971s. Is that what attracted you to this forum? Or was it another reason?

I'll tell you what -- let's address some of those possible reasons in the order that you present them:


<< What is lower? Can you provide an example of "lower" using SGC and PSA grades? >>

Yes. As the PSA scandal (not scandel) grows larger and larger, your PSA cards will sell for lower and lower prices. Soon, it won't matter whether we compare them to SGC graded cards or AAA graded cards. Wait, I'm sorry, Mark. Was I supposed to use PSA and SGC in the same sentence? Oops!


<< Do you know how SGC grades translate to PSA or is this an opinion? >>

Gee, I don't know Mark. I was one of the original PSA-Authorized dealers and I've bought and sold more SGC cards than your ten best friends combined. Maybe that doesn't count for anything. I don't know. Maybe you're the expert with all of your late 1960s and early 1971s PSA graded cards and I'm the one who looks like an unqualified idiot.


<< "Easily" – one dealer indicted and your opinion = easily? >>

One dealer, many thousands of PSA graded cards. On eBay. In major auctions. In other dealers' inventories. Maybe even in your collection. Take your pick.


<< Don't you have thousands of dollars in PSA graded cards listed on your web site? >>

Yes. And I submitted the 1887 N172 Kelly, the 1935 National Chicle Nagurski and the T206 Uzit Cobb myself. Can you say the same for all of your expensive PSA graded cards? Didn't think so.


<< Could it be that PSA's SMR prices are more conservative (i.e. lower)? >>

Yes, but not low enough. Stop hibernating and take a look at some of the prices that PSA graded cards bring on eBay. If we're talking 1950s and 1960s star cards, it is a fraction (that means less than 100%) of SMR. Uh oh!


<< I thought PSA would grade a SGC 8.8 as a 10 from the sounds of respondents in this thread? Therefore, your SMR values are incorrect and the cards would be worth well more in every example you list? >>

No offense, but this doesn't make any sense, Mark. There's no such thing as an SGC 8.8. Also, you assume that I sell my cards based on SMR values. I know that you live in a PSAcentric universe, Mark, but I don't. The bottom line is that collectors are figuring out that PSA cards are graded more leniently and, as a result, they pay less for them. It's really as simple as that. Promise!


<< How do you know what PSA SMR values are? Are you a PSA member? >>

A teeny tiny fairy named Tina told me. I'll send her your way when she's done talking.


<< A quick search of "Pre-30's Graded" cards on ebay shows 258 PSA cards and 61 SGC cards. Is this the drastic loss of confidence you're talking about or are these 258 being sold by "When It Was A Game"? >>

Look at it like this, Mark. You walk into a women's plus size clothing store and you wander over to the lingerie section. It's not going to have a great selection, is it? On a more tangible level, all you need to do is think about it. PSA has been grading since 1991. SGC has been grading for three years. You do the math and we'll check your answer later.

As for the second part of your question, I'm not sure. Do YOU know if some of these cards are from WIWAG? I sure hope they're not. But what do you say we play it safe and don't buy any?


<< If the market hasn't shifted to SGC quite yet, how will Mr. Grady be able to handle the influx of business? Will his resources be taxed and grading standards suffer or will he train others to grade vintage cards and therefore create as least two if not more opinions on what a card grades at SGC? >>

SGC has at least two other well-qualified vintage graders that I am currently aware of. Both grade at Derek's level. It's too bad we can't say the same thing about a certain other scandal-ridden grading company, isn't it, Mark?


<< I have many SGC and PSA cards, what I don't have is such a closed-minded view of things. >>

Add AAA and NASA to the mix. Will this make you even more open-minded? Just trying to follow your logic.

 
 
MW
(no login)

What Mark doesn't understand

January 16 2003, 9:04 AM 

No offense, Mark, but vintage collectors populate this forum. The knowledge base is pretty expansive here. I have full confidence that everyone can think for himself or herself. The CU forum I have my doubts about, but not this one.

As for more evidence of SGC prices, here you go:

http://www.bmwcards.com/Hobbynews3.htm

 
 
MW
(no login)

Another silly retort

January 16 2003, 9:08 AM 

Mark,

Add up the values of the three most valuable PSA graded cards on my website. Now, given the fact that I submitted all three myself, many years before the PSA scandal broke, what possible subtractions can we make?

Also, you might want to note that I sold off much of my PSA inventory years ago. Call me Promethean.

 
 
MW
(no login)

Response to Mark...reiterated elsewhere

January 16 2003, 9:10 AM 

No offense, Mark, but vintage collectors populate this forum. The knowledge base is pretty expansive here. I have full confidence that everyone can think for himself or herself. The CU forum I have my doubts about, but not this one.

As for more evidence of SGC prices, here you go:

http://www.bmwcards.com/Hobbynews3.htm


Brian, I submitted the card myself. Sorry!

 
 

(no login)

Re: What Mark doesn't understand

January 16 2003, 9:12 AM 


Hi Mike
Thanks anyway. You can't blame for trying.
Be well brian

 
 

(no login)

Insults Insults

January 16 2003, 9:14 AM 

It was only a matter of time before you edit, for spelling my first post. The web site is not mine and the spelling is different from my e-mail (I would think you would pick that up) anyway. It has to come to derogatory comments because anybody that points out anything contrary to your your logic is an "idiot". Lower the bar and flex up on counterpoints. That goes with your rush to bring up NASA and AAA. Even you know that PSA is not even in the ballpark with them.

Another disciple of MW comes to his aid and reiterates the same NASA, AAA garbage. I'm sure there will be more.

 
 
MW
(no login)

There's still hope

January 16 2003, 9:22 AM 

<< It was only a matter of time before you edit, for spelling my first post. >>


With scandal, spelled like you did, "scandel", I couldn't help it.


Actually, Mark, you're right. I shouldn't have said a thing..."scandel" made me think of "grendel" (Julie can tell you why) and that seemed more fitting...especially when discussing PSA. Cheers!

 
 
MW
(no login)

Wait a second (my second rebuttal to Mark)

January 16 2003, 9:26 AM 

Spelling in your email is different than spelling on this website? Does an object have the same weight but different mass on the moon? Didn't think so.


They're both HTML encoded, Mark. Nice try. Why not be creative instead of lying about it and claim it was an Old English usage?

 
 

(no login)

Don't Make him run

January 16 2003, 1:16 PM 

Hey Mike,

It is view points like Marks that the rest of the board would like to see. Wheteher he is selling vintage cards or newer cards, this thread is about PSA vs. SGC. Point counterpoint is what we are looking for but don't chase them from the board.

My one question to Mark or anyone in general, is how can you justify sending in nonhigh number commons in for grading and still make any kind of profit or justify the cost if you are keeping the cards for yourself? Are you able to get some great deal the rest of us don't aware of?

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

not a sciple

January 16 2003, 2:55 PM 

I am about as far from a disciple of MW as you can get. We have had more than few heated debates, but this does not mean that I blindly think everything he says is a lie or the truth. I will back up someone, regardless of whether I am a discople or not, if what they are saying is something I agree with or know to be a fact.

As for you SGC 8.8, it's possible he thought, that you thought SGC used a 1-10 scale with decimal points, which isn't the case.

Jay

 
 

(no login)

Making a profit

January 16 2003, 3:09 PM 


 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

Re: Making a profit

January 16 2003, 3:46 PM 

Albie, not sure if you've ever submitted cards for grading, but 9s adn 10s don't grow on trees, even with PSA's lax grading of late. If you can get one or 2 of your cards to grade in taht range, then it was most likely worth submitting all those cards, but the VAST majority do not make this grade, thus the reason for my brother's question.

Hell, I submitted some 1971 Topps that I pulled directly from vendor boxes and went straight in to plastic pages back in the mid 1980s. The highest grade I got was a SGC92, but none lower than an 84.

Once again, the exceptions have been pointed out.

Jay

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

a 10?

January 16 2003, 4:07 PM 

Albie, Check out the 1973 Topps example you posted and tell me you honestly think that card deserves a 10. The front looks nice, but no way a card should be a 10 with the back off center.

We knew they can't grade vintage cards, is this shoddy grading moving into modern cards, or is it possible to trace the who submitted the card and see if there was possible preferencial treatment in the grading of this card.

It would seem that PSA is going to have their hands full in the damage control department for awhile.

Jay

 
 
PSAKID
(Login PSAKID)

???

January 16 2003, 4:11 PM 

Don't get on your SGC high horse too quickly. If it (fake holders) happened to PSA, it can certainly happen to SGC. After all, SGC holders are 10x easier to crack without damage than PSA holders.

You may be jumping for joy now but if the graded card market comes crumbling down, we'll all be singing the blues, regardless of where our allegiences lie.

 
 

(no login)

changing holders

January 16 2003, 4:25 PM 

This isn't just about changing holders, there will always be criminals out there out smarting us, but they usually are not so called reputable companies. It's more about what my brother just pointed out. How do you justify the 10 with a O/C back. This is the facts that scare me.

HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THAT PROBLEM PSA KID?

 
 
PSAKID
(Login PSAKID)

Looks OK

January 16 2003, 4:32 PM 

I don't have my caliper with me but it looks to be within 75-25 (published PSA standards for back of card). By the way, here is a PSA 8 that is bringing in big $. So it's not just commons in 9 or 10 holders that sell for big money.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2700631727&category=16273

By the way, this card formerly resided in an SGC 96 holder.

 
 
John(z28jd)
(no login)

nothing to add

January 16 2003, 4:40 PM 

this thread was just too long for me to not be in it at least once....its officially the longest thread eve on this board which just proves you put psa or sgc in the title and more people will look at it,and you onder why people do it on ebay.Heres your proof!





 
 

(Login sagard)

Re: nothing to add

January 16 2003, 5:06 PM 

"Yes. And I submitted the 1887 N172 Kelly, the 1935 National Chicle Nagurski and the T206 Uzit Cobb myself. Can you say the same for all of your expensive PSA graded cards? Didn't think so."

Why are these cards still in PSA holders? I appreciate your tenacity for pointing out PSA weakness.

This board is a fantastic counter balance to the CU board.


 
 
Lee Behrens
(no login)

10 Gem Mint

January 16 2003, 5:12 PM 

Doesn't that mean flawless, with ZERO flaws?

If I am wrong I quite this hobby

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

Re: Looks OK

January 16 2003, 5:21 PM 

Dunno, could it be the fact that pop report for the PSA 8 Ferrarro says there is one ONE? <sarcasm off>

Jay

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

Re: Looks OK

January 16 2003, 5:25 PM 

If 75/25 centering on the back gets you GEM MINT status, then I really do have no respect for the grading standards at PSA. GEM MINt should mean GEM MINT, as in NO FLAWS!!!

I could understand a 9, but no way a 10. A 10 means perfection.

Jay

 
 
PSAKID
(Login PSAKID)

1969 Ferraro

January 16 2003, 5:46 PM 

Of course the price reflects the low population. That is a tough card, along with the Shannon, McDaniel and a handful of others. But a question was how do people justify sending in non-high # population commons. The answer is sending in low population commons. Of course any card with a vast supply in a particular grade will be tough to turn a profit on. Even high population star cards can be had for cheap. You just have to be wise in your submissions. I understand the question though as many of you collect pre-war cards. Based on your perspective, 1950's cards are considered new and plentiful.

 
 
PSAKID
(Login PSAKID)

75-25

January 16 2003, 5:52 PM 

It's published right there in PSA's standards. So if that's the reason you don't use PSA, great. That's your right. I could make the same argument about why an OC card like the Ferraro was given a 96 from SGC? The card is clearly OC top to bottom and does not deserve to be considered mint. Yet SGC's published standard is 60-40 or better for SGC 96. I would rather buy a card that is 75-25 vs a 75-25 published standard as opposed to a card that is 65-35 vs a 60-40 published standard.

The Ferraro is a very recent SGC grade and is not a product of the old holder.

 
 
PSAKID
(Login PSAKID)

Show me a Flawless Card

January 16 2003, 6:00 PM 

in any holder and I'll pay 10x book for it. I can say that because it's impossible. There's no such thing as a flawless card. Not even the 2003 1 of 1 atomic NASA titanium refractors are perfect. So if a PSA 10 or SGC 98 has to be perfect, then there would never be a 10 or 98 graded.

I'm surprised SGC collectors would be putting down PSA for centering when SGC has a higher than insignificant percentage of OC cards on the market as well. I remember tracking SGC 1972 commons on eBay several months ago for crossover opportunities and I hit 15 consecutive auctions for SGC 88 and 92's that were outside the PSA 8 centering guidelines. They were vending quality but were outside SGC and PSA's published guidelines for NM/MT.

I must say I have had luck getting some SGC 92's and 88's from 1969 to cross over to PSA 8. I have a 1969 SGC 96 in for grading now. It's real borderline for a 9 but I have my fingers crossed. I also have an SGC 92 that has ink smear on the back that is not likely to get an 8.

 
 

(no login)

responses

January 16 2003, 7:41 PM 

sagard,

They're in PSA holders because I submitted the cards myself. I didn't submit them through a service where preferential treatment was received by a particular dealer and I didn't submit them through someone else who slabs his own cards on the side. Can you say the same thing about all of your PSA graded cards? Didn't think so.


PSAkid,

Your senseless banter is quite typical of a small-time PSA pundit. By sprinkling your collectors universe dust here and there and by clicking the heels of your PSA red ruby slippers together, you hope and pray that the nonsense you write will take on a life of its own and somehow be transformed into something that is truthful or makes some sense. Try again later?


By the way, guys (PSAkid, Albie), any updates on how many fradulent PSA cards are out there? Just give me a rough estimate of percent. 10%? 20%? 30%?

 
 
Todd (nolemmings)
(no login)

MW

January 16 2003, 8:02 PM 

I think the question about your PSA cards was directed toward why it is you have not submitted them to SGC for reholdering/regrading. If SGC cards command similar or higher prices, and PSA's integrity is slipping more and more, one might ask why you have not made the switch. I believe that to be alegitimate question.
Todd

 
 

(no login)

Answers

January 16 2003, 8:10 PM 

Jay-Somebody wanted to know how it could be justified sending in commons for grading. I showed a few examples. There are countless more examples but why waste space? There are currently 20 collectors on the PSA set registry trying to complete the 1968 topps set-and 19 of them have over 20% complete. That is enough people bidding and competing for PSA commons from this year to justify sending card in to be graded.
The PSA 10 card qualifies under the back centering qualifications for PSA which is listed as 75/25 for the back.
If you are not getting the grades back that you want you should examine the cards with a 10X magnifier before you submit. Even cards from vending are not guaranteed to get 8's.

 
 
PSAKID
(no login)

Nice Try MW

January 16 2003, 8:35 PM 

I refuse to engage in personal attacks and had ignored your constant personal attacks on virtually every member before you got kicked off of the CU boards. If decide to discuss cards and not the people (who you don't know) posting the message, I'll be glad to reply to you. Otherwise, I will ignore your replies. It is apparent from other posts here that forum members want to see more inputs from PSA collectors. So why try and drive them all away with personal attacks???

Have a nice day.

 
 
MW
(no login)

Questions for PSAKid

January 16 2003, 8:48 PM 

PSAKid, which worries you more? The fact that many of the PSA cards in your personal collection may be fraudulent or the fact that many of your nonfraudulent PSA cards may be overgraded and a by-product of PSA's long-standing system of dealer favoritism?

I mean, when you really think about it, is it safe to purchase ANY PSA graded card that doesn't come with a detailed history?

Do you have a detailed history accompanying all of your PSA cards, PSAKid? Maybe this should be the next step for the PSA dealer network????

What do you think, PSAKid?

Oh, and have yourself a wonderful evening while you ponder the possibility of using your PSA cards for a useful purpose -- firewood! Cheers!

 
 
MW
(no login)

Answer for Todd

January 16 2003, 9:15 PM 

Todd,

As long as one knows the origin of a PSA card, I don't see why there's anything wrong with it. In the case of the remaining PSA graded cards on my website, they were all submitted directly by me.

Keep in mind that I have never claimed that "every SGC cards always sells for more than every PSA card." This would be silly...but I think you already know that.

I see nothing wrong with my PSA 9 N172 Kelly or my PSA 6 T206 Uzit Cobb. In fact, there are many vintage collectors who have both PSA and SGC graded cards in their collections. Heck, you might even be one of them.

I've got expensive cards in both PSA and SGC holders. Obviously, I have MORE value in SGC cards than PSA cards, but that's just my choice. I've been involved in this hobby and grading for quite some time. I was one of the "original" PSA-Authorized dealers and I am extremely familiar with the inner workings of both PSA and SGC. Based on my years of accumulated knowledge, I have chosen the company that serves my needs and the needs of the hobby most adequately -- SGC.

I'm just fine with a few of my cards being in PSA holders. I know where the cards came from and I submitted them myself. No favoritism, no PSA-dealer network, no reviews that resulted in PSA upgrades, no fraudulent PSA cards that were graded and holdered outside of the company. I can honestly say that the PSA cards that I own are 100% free from the ominous black clouds of fear and doubt that have descended upon many PSA dealers and their valued PSA inventories. Many years ago, when I saw the current PSA scandal approaching, I sold off the vast majority of my PSA inventory. What am I supposed to say? I told you so? I've been writing the same thing on this forum for over a year now. It's not my fault that PSA collectors and PSA dealers might have tons of overgraded crap in their collections.

I DO have something to admit, however. Given the current nature of the PSA scandal, I just might end up crossing over my remaining PSA cards to SGC holders. Even though I am confident in their authenticities, I am also keenly aware that panic has begun to set in among many PSA collectors and dealers and the public is beginning to think that EVERY PSA graded card is tainted. I guess I'm just sitting tight for now to see what happens. Fortunately, I haven't said abusive things about SGC or SGC dealers like many of the PSA collectors and dealers who are posting here today, so at least I'll still have a home to come back to when the PSA scandal starts to unravel the fabric that so precariously holds together the hopes and dreams of so many deluded PSA supporters.

 
 
runscott
(no login)

Albie - this is a huge thread, so maybe this has already been answered

January 16 2003, 9:56 PM 

But what I think perplexes people is when they see commons sell for $5 in a PSA holder and we know it cost more than that to slab it. The answer is probably that the original owner of the commons sent a bunch of them in, banking on 1 or 2 to get high grades and off-set the cost of slabbing all the others - the $5 cards you see on ebay are simply the chaff.

 
 

(no login)

You know

January 16 2003, 9:56 PM 

I'm going to be ROFLMAO when the latest SGC news comes out. All this high and mighty talk and slamming of PSA will slow down...

 
 


(Login runscott)

That's great David - when it happens, post to your heart's content about it

January 16 2003, 10:06 PM 

As often as PSA'ers complain about PSA-bashing, it really sounds like you all just don't like people discussing PSA's problems (which happen to be current news, BTW) - sorry, once they clean up their act there will be nothing to complain about, meanwhile....

Also, your defense of PSA sounds like an 8-yr old who gets caught doing something wrong and uses the defense "but little Johnnie did the same thing", only in this case it is "but little Johnnie WILL do the same thing".

 
 

(no login)

re: Albie - this is a huge thread

January 16 2003, 10:20 PM 

runscott-Yes, I agree with your statement. I think most of the commons that grade less than 8 were either part of big submissions where dealers have already made their money or they simply thought the card would grade higher.

 
 
PSAKID
(Login PSAKID)

No Worries

January 16 2003, 11:05 PM 

I own over 2000 PSA graded cards and most were pregraded and submitted by me. I've never bought a card from WIWAG and I own zero of the newer junk (all pre 1976). Sure some cards I feel are overgraded while others I feel are undergraded but I'm satisfied with their performance overall. I would like to see more consistancy from grader to grader. Perhaps SGC does a better job at that but that may not be the case if they didn't have the luxary of a single grader reviewing every vintage card passing through the door.

As I said before, every grading company is one scam away from a "crisis".


 
 
PSAKID
(Login PSAKID)

Always Some Lower Grades

January 16 2003, 11:14 PM 

I submit commons in bulk to PSA. As an example, I'll submit 100 1974 commons. 25-30 will come back 9's and a few will come back 7's or less due to print flaws or a light surface wrinkle I may have missed. The rest come out 8's. I'll lose money on the NM and worse cards and a small % of the 8's (high population cards). Most of the 8's I'll break even on. The 9's is where the money is. Getting one 9 that sells for $75 and cost me <$10 will cover most of the losses. The rest of the 9's will all sell for above $10 and that's where the profit is. And some of the 8's, especially Cubs, Mets, Yankees, etc will sell for premiums. So the PSA 7 and under cards are basically throw aways.

 
 
marty
(Login Marty_P)

How can I tell

January 16 2003, 11:15 PM 

I recently purchased a group of cards. I have an idea how to tell the era of PSA graded, but I do not know how to tell the era of SGC graded. I have attached a scan of the back of the label also. There are other cards that that have serial numbers that are close.


 
 
PSAKID
(Login PSAKID)

Let's Hope

January 16 2003, 11:19 PM 

This turns out to be no big deal (from a holder reliability standpoint) and that no other grading companies experience this. If there's an easy way to tell if the holders have been tampered with, then the graded card market should remain strong and viable. If it turns out the sonically sealed holders are not secure, we're all in trouble.

 
 

(no login)

Scott

January 16 2003, 11:24 PM 

Don't worry, you should hear about it in 2-3 weeks...

 
 
MW
(no login)

Reply to the above nonsense

January 16 2003, 11:26 PM 

PSAKid,

I'm happy that your collection of over 2000 PSA cards is safe and sound. Now then, do you think you'll have a tough time proving this to future customers? Hopefully you aren't one of those vest-pocket PSA dealers who doesn't keep track of transactions and doesn't have receipts for purchases and sales at shows and on eBay, otherwise you're SOL. I sure don't envy that prodigious task you've got in front of you once the PSA scandal unfolds, I'll tell you that.

As for other grading companies, does that really matter? Why are you so concerned about that? With 2000 PSA graded cards you had better take care of your own business mess and an impending public relations nightmare before you start wondering "what if?"

 
 
MW
(no login)

My special recommendation for PSAKid

January 16 2003, 11:39 PM 

PSAkid,

Personal attacks on nearly ever member of the CU forum? That's funny! Maybe if you were referring to the half-dozen names you and other anonymous users had to attack me on that message board, your statement would be true. Otherwise, it's just more PSA nonsense. What I find strange, however, is the fact that you waited until a major PSA Scandal to venture over here to attack me and belittle SGC. Does it make you feel better?

Let me put this to you another way. I wear that distinction as a badge of honor. If PSA and Collectors Universe view me as so much of a threat to their "wholesome" existence that they have to ban me (and all other dissenters) from their forums, then I don't have a problem with it. At least there were some who took my warnings about PSA to heart. My personal feeling is that once this scandal fully unfolds, you'll wish that you were someone who listened.

I believe that SGC is currently running a crossover special. Look into it.

 
 
MW
(no login)

Reply to PSAKid

January 16 2003, 11:43 PM 

<< If it turns out the sonically sealed holders are not secure, we're all in trouble. >>


Nope. Wrong again. The current Scandal only affects PSA and certain PSA dealers with inventories of 2000+ cards. My solution? Diversification. Try to think of it as owning a nonperforming stock.

 
 
MW
(no login)

I'm curious...

January 16 2003, 11:46 PM 

...would that be before or after the time period during which PSA cards will be worth diddly-squat?

 
 
MW
(no login)

Reply

January 16 2003, 11:48 PM 

Marty,

You own so few SGC graded cards that I wouldn't think this would create such a burning desire inside of you. Have you tried calling them?

 
 
MW
(no login)

Reply to "David"

January 16 2003, 11:52 PM 

David,

I'm glad you take some solace in your belief that something bad is going to happen to other grading companies. You must be really stressed out right now about the PSA Scandal to go to such extremes. Hey, whatever makes you PSA guys feel better about yourselves, right?

 
 
PSAKID
(Login PSAKID)

Buy the Card, Not the Holder

January 16 2003, 11:52 PM 

As long as everyone buys the card and not the holder, they won't have problems. I'm not worried about what I've sold. I'll put those cards up to scrutiny of any other grader at PSA or any other grading company. And yes, I've tracked every sale I've ever made. I know who purchased the card, when they purchased it, what they paid for it and what card they purchased. I'm confident many of those cards would bump up a half grade in SGC holders since I'm conservative in what I submit in order to eliminate the borderline 8's.

By the way, I bought a 1969 Nolan Ryan from BMW several years ago that ended up getting a PSA 8. Should you be concerned that the card can be traced back to you if it is a trimmed card in a bogus holder?

 
 
MW
(no login)

Reply to PSAKi

January 17 2003, 12:03 AM 

PSAKid,

You can worry about SGC's centering standards all you want, but I've got some practical advice for you. Concentrate on the unfolding PSA Scandal or you'll end up with 2000+ PSA graded cards that no one wants. Not you. Not me. Not anyone on eBay. No one. Think about it.

 
 
marty
(Login Marty_P)

Nothing wrong with knowledge

January 17 2003, 12:05 AM 

MW
I was hearing that other cards were graded quite a while ago from some on this board, including your self. Since this board is to exchange knowledge, and some say that they have the knowledge that I seek, I was hoping that they would be willing to share. If this is not the case, that is fine also.

 
 

(no login)

Hmm...

January 17 2003, 12:30 AM 

I'm not sure why my last post was deleted - just look at the IP numbers, I was not posting anonymously.

MW, I'm also curious - I've seen you promote BVG cards - do you approve of their standards? Over PSAs? I personally agree that SGC is a quality company, I just think many on here who feel it's MORE of a quality company will be disappointed by events in the future.

 
 
MW
(no login)

Secret information?

January 17 2003, 12:32 AM 

This doesn't have to do with the fifth horse in the fourth race at Canterbury Downs, does it? Now that's information I could really use!

 
 
MW
(no login)

Reply

January 17 2003, 12:36 AM 

<< MW, I'm also curious - I've seen you promote BVG cards - do you approve of their standards? >>

That would be a great topic for a new thread. Why don't you start one, David!

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

Re: Hmm...

January 17 2003, 2:17 AM 

David, instead of alluding to a supposed SGC scandal, how about telling us what you know so that in 2-3 weeks when this news is supposedly going to break, we can look back and go, WOW!!! He was right. Or, look back and laugh.

Jay- about to make a call to his psychic friend

 
 
MW
(no login)

Reply

January 17 2003, 2:45 AM 

Marty,

If you are really interested in chatting lots more about this subject and SGC, give me a call (608-833-5515). I'm sure we could speak for hours.

 
 
Marc S.
(no login)

Marty -- to answer your question

January 17 2003, 10:13 AM 

Any card graded by SGC that does not have the split grade on it (e.g. your fletcher card is not SGC 80/6) was potentially graded/overseen by Joe Merkle -- who has had a very dubious reputation in the hobby over some time. In fact, I believe that the first few months of SGC's split-grade was in place while Merkle was still with the company.

As with anything else, I advocate buying the card and not the holder. Though the jury is still out on what has taken place at PSA, it is important to realize that both PSA and SGC have had some difficulties in the past. As for your Elbie Fletcher card, it clearly does not meet SGC's current critera for that grade, which specifies "80 EX/NM 6: 75/25 or better centering..."

 
 

(no login)

Split Grades

January 17 2003, 10:46 AM 

The split grades were started well after Joe Merkle SGC. The semi-newer labels, with the green border and the SGC website on the top, WERE started a few months before Merkle left. So, the old labels with the "SG" in the background and kinda faded were all graded under Merkle's supervision, the split grades were NOT, and the new labels w/o the split grade may have been.

And Jay, if MW wants to present all this evidence that he is collecting on the forum, I'll be happy to indicate what will happen sooner...

 
 

(no login)

SGC

January 17 2003, 1:33 PM 

<<David, instead of alluding to a supposed SGC scandal,>>

I should point out I said news, NOT scandal.

 
 
jay behrens
(no login)

Re: SGC

January 17 2003, 2:04 PM 

The implication is scandal, since you are comparing it tot he recent PSA news.

Jay

 
 

(no login)

Well

January 17 2003, 2:27 PM 

Just to make certain you didn't get the wrong IMPLICATION, I qualified my statement.

 
 
MW
(no login)

Reply to Marc S.

January 17 2003, 5:49 PM 

Marc,

No offense, but I have long known you as one of the biggest hypocrites on this forum. There are many other individuals that you are well acquainted with who have contacted me and conveyed the same sentiment. Not that I requested it, but they also provided me with proof to support their assertions.

As a result, I do not believe you are a reliable source of information.

 
 
MW
(no login)

Reply to "David"

January 17 2003, 7:21 PM 

"David,"

Are you guessing or are you telling us this? Also, I'm not sure I've met you before. Do you buy or sell on eBay?

 
 

(no login)

Jeff

January 19 2003, 2:25 AM 

Look at the mess you made!!!!

 
 
Current Topic - PSA OR SGC?????  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Top of page | Bottom of page | Main Index  
 Copyright © 1999-2014 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement