SGC 98's vs. PSA 10's
TimeMachine
Posts: 261
OK, OK... I know some here have been strictly weaned on PSA 10's kool-aid, but man, you have to admit that most SGC 98's are out and out BLAZERS in comparison to their PSA 10 counterparts... true, SGC seems to be a little more lax on centering issues when considering whether or not some otherwise gem mint cards (especially vintage) in all other respects get the nod. But I for one have far more confidence in an SGC 98 receiving a PSA 10 grade on further professional review than, say, a GAI 9.5. I am also convinced that tyhere are PLENTY of SGC 96's that could also reside in PSA 10 holders upon further review from Collector's Universe... so...
Assuming the above is accurate, does SGC's lower-volume and apparent reluctance to favor large submitters over us little guys account for their consistency in awarding only the finest specimens the lofty grade of 98 or 100 for that matter?
just curious... and no, I am not some SGC honk, just a collector who is just beginning to recognize the high standards that SGC seems to employ.
Assuming the above is accurate, does SGC's lower-volume and apparent reluctance to favor large submitters over us little guys account for their consistency in awarding only the finest specimens the lofty grade of 98 or 100 for that matter?
just curious... and no, I am not some SGC honk, just a collector who is just beginning to recognize the high standards that SGC seems to employ.
0
Comments
brian
<< <i>I am about to send off a 1976 topps Roger Staubach I bought in an SGC 98 holder just a coupla months ago... I am quite confident it will return in a PSA 10 holder... as far as SGC crosses, I recently crossed a perfectly centered 1968 Topps Mike Ditka SGC 92 into a PSA 9 holder, as well as a 1968 Topps McCovey SGC 92 into a PSA 9 holder as well... I cannot provide a scan yet, but the Staubach is absolutely sterile, perfect centering to the mm, full uninterrupted gloss and color, and lethally sharp gem mint corners... I am hitting the post office tomorrow...
Congrats if it does get a 10! That'd be a 1/2
Brian
<< <i>i think the weak prices commanded by SGC 96 (and higher) vintage cards (especially commons) is not necessarily a testament to their grading, but rather psa's chokehold on set registries. just the other week, i saw a blazer '65 common sgc 96 sell for less than a weak psa 8 of the same card. >>
That's a fallacy. SGC cards have always sold for weak prices. The existence of the PSA set registry didn't change that. The weak prices are due to consumers lack of confidence in the quality of the SGC product. It is clearly an inferior product, and the market has spoken loud and clear.
If you think I'm wrong, ask yourself this question: why aren't PSA dealers buying up SGC cards at discounted prices?
Think about it.
Because they're too busy buying lower graded psa cards, resubmitting them, and selling off the ones that don't get rejected for trimming?
And, actually, dealers do buy sgc/gai/bvg cards. Not always for a discount, though.
4 SGC 96s: PSA 9, PSA 8, PSA 8, PSA 7
4 SGC 92s: PSA 8, PSA 8, PSA 8(ST), PSA 7
1 SGC 88: PSA 8
Indeed, this is a very small sample but it is still interesting evidence in PSA's favor as far as I am concerned. Edited to add: I cracked each and every one of these out prior to submitting.
Seriously, does anybody care if a random 1952 Topps high number came back with a grade of SGC 98? Hell no! Now if it came back in a PSA 10, it would be the talk of the community, and rightfully so.
People worry too much about the actual card sometimes. Pay attention to the label and holder!
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
<< <i>That's a fallacy. SGC cards have always sold for weak prices. The existence of the PSA set registry didn't change that. The weak prices are due to consumers lack of confidence in the quality of the SGC product. It is clearly an inferior product, and the market has spoken loud and clear. >>
Here is a typical comment from someone who can't think outside the box and a person who speaks in
generalities. These and other comments here always make me laugh. A quality post from a quality
poster...haha...
I've been a member of this board for years. Took a lot of criticism back in the day from the likes of
fatcat, koby, toppsgum, and others as I crossed my Psa graded red man cards to Sgc. Comments
like my cards were instantly losing value. Now years later my cards are what they are and have actually
strengthened in value and did so regardless of what holder they would be in. Meanwhile I'm quite
sure my biggest detractors have watched their precious low pop Psa graded gems sink in value like
a rock along with others they bought back in the day...
Kind of ironic how things worked out huh?
aconte
Due to the opportunity that SGC has to utilize the 1/2 point scale, the SGC 98 is generally a stronger card that the PSA 10. Likewise the 96 is awfully hard to come by sometimes as the 92 option is available to SGC when a card has a flaw the needs forgiving. That does not mean that PSA 9's & 10's are all soft or lesser than SGC's. Both companies exercise a fair amount of random designation to this very subjective plateau. I own hundreds of fantastic PSA 10's. Generally, I keep 1/4 of the PSA 10's I buy. The other 3/4 are often glorified 8's or marginal 9's. I own a half dozen SGC 98's and my retention is 100% on that small sample. It's pretty darn hard to find anything obvious on an SGC 98.
PSA 10's often leave some trait to be forgiven. These include: Poor focus and registration, weak ink-strike, chipped edges, tilts, poor centering, 90/10 or worse reverses, glossless surfaces, one or more soft corners, to name a few. SGC may well holder cards with these attributes as well, but they will do so far less frequently. The consistency SGC has is due to fewer graders, longer turnarounds, better training, and private ownership. They simply spend more time grading and less time answering to share-holders. One could argue that if SGC were as busy as PSA, they would be just as inconsistent. I disagree with that baseless and empty argument.
In recent months (since early 2004), the PSA 10 has been given more frequently to stimulate submissions on many borderline or downright undeserving cards. This decision by PSA, I believe, was conscious and the residue of that short-sighted decision has eroded the value of the post-war 10 in many cases. With exception to low-pop registry singles and notoriously difficult cards on everyone's wish-list, PSA's added value has declined dramatically. SGC is seeing their cards steadily increase in value. Many HOF'ers and regional star cards are outselling their PSA counterparts with regularity. Again, not ALWAYS, but often enough to take notice. SGC will seemingly never outdistance PSA when it comes to commons, however. The blind and misguided zeal with which regitry participants chase those cards is a psychiatrists wet dream.
I liken it to mice in a maze seeking cheese. So do we seek peer validation and bragging rights to satiate our fragile "want-it-all at any cost" ego and mentality only to find a card in a plastic case with a number on it that is special only because some guy you've never met with no more credentials than you said it was NM/MT 8! I feel I can state this as I, too, have fallen prey.
I digress...On topic,
SGC is gaining every year in acceptance with novice collectors. The astute collector has recognized SGC as a quality product for some time. Only a truly unenlightened and closed-minded collector would say anything negative about SGC at this juncture. They may not be your choice, but they are the most consistent and offer tremendous customer service and cater to the collector rather than the dealer. Dealers purchase SGC graded cards all the time, by the way.
Cross-overs are a poor judge. This is due to a number of reasons. First, the submitter. I have never had an SGC card fail to cross. We're talking well over a hundred cards. I have had two SGC 92's make PSA 10. I have had eleven SGC 96's make the "Gem Jump" as well.
On one submission, I sent Joe Orlando 47 SGC 96's. Some of the finest 1977 Topps cards I had ever seen. I asked him to cross them in the holders. The results....
44 of the 47 crossed to PSA 9 (no 10's...a joke) and three failed.
I cracked the three "failed cards", including a Pete Rose, sent them on my next invoice and got two 10's (Yes, the Rose) and the other a PSA 9.
Obviously, the Rose was too expensive a card for $5 to put in the "9" holder on a cross-over. However, at the $10 rate it went from an apparent PSA 8 to a deserving PSA 10.
Bobby stated his poor results. I suggest you examine your standards or re-submit those cards. Typically the error is on the PSA side. Not always--but typically.
The Second reason is that card companies are inherently biased. Never attempt a cross-over in the holder. I learned that one first-hand.
Further, high-grade MINT cards are subject to the pace of the grader as well as his moods and other factors. Heck, it would be hard for us to grade our OWN cards the same from one week to the next. When splitting hairs between NM/MT+ and MINT and GEM, these variables are magnified.
There are other valid reasons why cross-overs are a poor test, but these are the obvious ones.
<< <i>true, SGC seems to be a little more lax on centering issues when considering whether or not some otherwise gem mint cards (especially vintage) >>
Absolutely NOT true. That reputation was founded in the early days of SGC. Their head grader just didn't think centering was that important if the card had strong eye-appeal. This led to many fresh and sharp cards with 66/34 and 72/28 centering getting into MINT holders. Hence the reputation. That is many years ago now and, today, SGC's centering standards are every bit that of PSA's and then some. You will find exceptions like the SGC football cards that "wolfbear" posted last month, but generally speaking SGC figured out the industry accepted centering standard years ago and applies it second to none.
In the end, collect whatever gives you your little hobby chubbie. No one cares. Each of us lives in our own little hobby world where facts are often out of place and reason gives way to rhetoric. SGC is likely the most collector-friendly company available and they have stayed the course and kept their collective noses clean. I trust them and admire their ability to maintain integrity amidst opportunities to get in bed with dealers the way PSA and GAI do. Those are dealer-driven companies. Both grade cards very well, but I feel compromise at the foot of the dollar. They're the "Aerosmith's" of the grading world. With that said, I still love Aerosmith so I make excuses for them; just as PSA's loyal fan-base has been doing since early 2004.
dgf
downgoesfrazier - dude, try to find yourself a hobby
that at least brings you a little bit of pleasure.
Obviously, sports card collecting ain't doin' it for you.
Once one's SGC rhetoric begins to approach Wentzian proportions,
the little men in white jackets with butterfly nets cannot be far behind ...
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
Is it membership only, like PSA?
Cynical Realist
Banned from the Beckett boards!
Do you want to know me?
For those of you who read DGF's post, please look at the metal tube in the picture and please remember, PSA is the foremost experts trained and CERTIFIED in the science of card grading. They spend more on training brochures to teach their graders a year than those turkeys "across the street," pay their hack graders! Trust the brand you know and love. Trust PSA!
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
-------------------------------
BigHurt> "experts trained and CERTIFIED in the science of card grading. "
Which certification(s), exactly, do they have? How do I go about becoming certified?
------------------------------
Wolfbear> "try to find yourself a hobby that at least brings you a little bit of pleasure."
In all honesty, the issues DGF mentioned (inconsistent grading, PSA10=candy, etc) are exactly why I no longer build sets in PSA holders. They simply took all the fun out of the process for me. If I'm constantly having to babysit my order and call them when my grades post to correct the 40% I know damned well they got wrong, then it's no longer fun for me. If when I step up to buy PSA9s in the 3rd-party market, 50% of the time they're clearly inferior to my self-submitted PSA8s, then it's no longer fun for me. When PSA's propensity to arbitrarily award PSA9s and 10s has sucked the value out of the market and you can't sell your duplicates for the cost of grading, it's no longer fun for me. And in all honesty, I have too many things vying for my time, attention, and money for me to put any of those three things into endeavors which aren't fun.
So I'm reducing my card life to three sets - 73T, 74T, and 75T. The 73 and 75 sets will be raw and NM/MT+. The 74T will be a graded set, with a minimum grade of 92.
Mike
Why do you start with me? All I did above is state facts. Obviously, the truth hurts some. I said many nice things about PSA in the past as well as in the post above. It, in the end, is people like yourself who I refer to as making excuses. When you begin to approach the collection I have, I may listen--I may not. For now, the post above is accurate and you are just reacting on a personal level rather than show the ability to assimilate and discern the information. What I suggest, since you seem to only respond with inflammatory tones, is that you pick yourself up and crawl back to your elitist "secret password" driven chat board where everyone can re-hash the same old topics and pat each-other on the backside for finishing or starting or thinking about doing a new set, etc. A place where I can be banned for sharing my password with a close friend who wanted membership and was eager to see what was being said about him. Yes, the top-secret world of cardboard. It's funny, I'll bet if I was shot down before the enemy and was tortured to extract information, I'd be the last one to talk. You'd be among the first. Just a hunch, but who knows. I don't have issues with you personally, so don't make this out to be something it's not. Perhaps on LTS you will find the benign collectors whose opinions are the same as yours who don't get out of line with your thinking. Perhaps that could give you A LITTLE bit of pleasure as CU obviously does not.
"Wentzian"?--I should be so informed. The man is one of the most knowledgeable collectors the hobby has known. He is affluent to the point of offending the less enlightened. For the record, while I disagree with Michael's methods and overzealous nature, his venom toward PSA is well-founded. He is a very intelligent man if not a misguided one...who isn't. He just takes things to the point of parody sometimes for us simple folks. Also, I like collecting just fine and continue to purchase PSA graded cards daily. Aside from their MINT grades, I think they do a solid job. There are some good people at PSA. Some really not so good. Same as everywhere. Just understand that SGC is all about the collector and does a better job of doing what they are supposed to these days than PSA.
respectfully,
dgf
On a closing note, I'm quite sure if Joe Yanello (shoeless) was to post the EXACT same thing I did, you'd say something quippy like, "Bingo Joe!" or "Nail on the head, Joe" or "I wish I was you, Joe." It's simply me you have a dislike for. Don't confuse your uninformed distaste for me with facts and content.
Stingray
In this case, you have one man writing very nicely on his experiences with SGC and PSA, and trying to enlighten people that PSA 10's are a crapshoot and on any given day can be anywhere from an 8-10. Based on the pictures of cards he has posted in the past, and based on his crossover rates, I believe this man knows what a gem mint card looks like. Also, anyone with a brain can see that there are countless examples of PSA 9 and 10 cards that don't make the grade, and when you buy them and receive them you just scratch your head.
But for some reason the ardhent PSA guy sticks to his amazing bias towards PSA, just as the sports fan demonstrates amazing bias towards his team or player...evidence be damned. They don't want to see the flaws or the 'truth'.
I'm not going to debate on the merits of PSA or SGC, as they both have their positives and negatives, and are both good companies as DGF pointed out. I just wanted to chime in on the human bias rearing its ugly head as usual.
Good fluid comments, and well written analysis by DGF. For the people who refuse to listen to reality, maybe somebody needs to go scratch Atlas's balls while he is holding up the earth.
Any off the wall comments I may make
should be taken in the spirit of good natured ribbing.
I'm fresh out of enemies, so if anyone wants to apply, there's lots of openings available.
Hey dgf, how about we hold a little competition at the National
involving driving bamboo spikes under our fingernails to see who cracks first.
Should be fun ...
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
Kuntryboy - your comments are ridiculous.
<< <i>Kuntryboy - your comments are ridiculous. >>
Ridiculous? I presented FACTS, not an OPINION. I truly feel sorry for those that believe otherwise, as they are obviously gullible chumps that have bought into Michael Wentz' self-serving propaganda.
<< <i>is that you pick yourself up and crawl back to your elitist "secret password" driven chat board where everyone can re-hash the same old topics and pat each-other on the backside for finishing or starting or thinking about doing a new set, etc. >>
DGF
I have no axe to grind with you or anyone - I think it's unfair and an overstatement to spread this kind of generality. I enjoy your posts and am disappointed in this kind of rhetoric.
It just feels like your attack of Paul is a bit over the top.
<< <i>Good fluid comments, and well written analysis by DGF. For the people who refuse to listen to reality, maybe somebody needs to go scratch Atlas's balls while he is holding up the earth. >>
Skin
Could you put this is terms that my high school education can understand? It's almost like someone decided to post something just to start a fire? Heck, SGC, GAI, PSA, Beckett - in relative terms, they all have their place and value. Some day, maybe everyone will be crackin their cards out and placing in binders - it sure would cut down on the weight.
mike
<< <i>Kuntryboy - please explain the "facts" behind your statement that "The weak prices are due to consumers lack of confidence in the quality of the SGC product. It is clearly an inferior product, and the market has spoken loud and clear". >>
Southerncards
Click here for the explanation that you are looking for.
<< <i><< is that you pick yourself up and crawl back to your elitist "secret password" driven chat board where everyone can re-hash the same old topics and pat each-other on the backside for finishing or starting or thinking about doing a new set, etc. >> >>
<< <i>DGF
I have no axe to grind with you or anyone - I think it's unfair and an overstatement to spread this kind of generality. I enjoy your posts and am disappointed in this kind of rhetoric.
It just feels like your attack of Paul is a bit over the top. >>
I agree - sounds like a cheap shot (taken at a lot of people) to me.
If I said "PSA is crap", I'd expect someone to ask me for facts to support my statement. All I ask is for kuntryboy to show me how SGC is inferior.
and lets leave my vitriol out of this!
While chasing high grade commons to move up a notch on the PSA finest list may seem juvenile, it absolutely has to do with market value. The fact that you have a 100% PSA graded set is apealing to many like it or not. The bottom line is that PSA is the most recognized brand in grading. SGC does do an outstanding job, and PSA often does fall to the problem of borderline cards and subjectivity. this is magnified by the sheer volume PSA does relative to anyone else. I can guarantee if you took 10 borderline 8-9-10 cards and submitted the same cards raw to GAI, SGC, and PSA you WILL NOT get the same grades back.
It is unfortunate that sometimes you feel like you get screwed, but bottom line is, you can crack it and keep it raw and lose the submission cost, or resend it in. Pick your battles. If you think PSA is doing you more harm than good, then go elsewhere. Nobody is forcing you to be a member and pay for submissions.
It is absolute fact that you have to crack and resend raw on ANY card you want an honest opinion on. the bias between companies is clearly there, there is no way around it. If you can't risk "losing" the value of the card by sending raw, then sell it as is, or trade it. All this bickering and pissing and moaning is pointless.
GG
This is true. I guess my exasperation at the debate exhibited here actually contradicts my point. All I should have said was "pick what works for you." SGC is a good company. PSA is also. It is only opinion (in my humble opinion) that separates the two.
<< <i>and lets leave my vitriol out of this! >>
Yeah! And, I don't even know what that means!?
I found this card buried in an auction and paid 67 bucks for it - I bought the card and am proud of it.
Some may say it's overgraded - some under? I'm just happy to have it in my collection. And, BTW, I do like the black background also.
And I can't argue with what Bobby said - it's fun to debate and even get passionate but anything beyond that just gets counterproductive.
But, if you guys insist. Wait a minute! I need another beer!!
mike
<< <i>kuntryboy - dont hide behind ebay.........you say SGC is inferior, I say "prove it" !!! >>
Well gee, Southerncards, I'm sorry for "hiding behind" the FACTS which can be seen 365 days a year on The World's Largest Marketplace. What was I thinking? Please forgive me!
To me, it could have gone either way, 88 or 92. Without seeing it in person and being in the grader's head, I dont think its fair to say yes or no to being overgraded. Some will disagree.
I just purchased that '59 Brooks Robinson PSA 9 that ended last night for about $150 under SMR, and I would have paid another $200 for it due to its perfect centering and color. I will ALWAYS buy the card and not the holder, but I am always curious what PSA's minions review of a card is. I did not expect such contentious discussion, but welcome the truth in whatever form it arrives in... again, very good discussion.
SGC does a fine job, there is no debating that fact anymore as far as I'm concerned.
Kudos on the purchase.
Jim
I have a friend who is in charge of SGC's upcoming ad campaign - look for them to address a lot of the concerns brough up here and I think you will find that they will continue to "work" the crowd who will make them their choice over the competitors.
Let's face it, in general, they all have their merits - as Aconte had alluded to earlier - some card issues have their qualified niche in certail grading holders.
We can all agree, ebay is our ad hoc "price guide" - and some cards will sell better in a Beckett holder e.g.
mike
<< <i>kuntryboy - I'm still waiting for your answer to my question, although I am enjoying watching the backpeddling. >>
Southerncards
Backpeddling? I've answered your question. Twice actually.
Here it is for the 3rd time -- Link to The World's Largest Marketplace
Enjoy the FACTS.
However there is a lot of consumer demand for these "perfect" cards...
A psa 8 its a nice card, a damn nice card.
I believe the value its in the authentication of the card, not the grading part. Actually i pay for the authentication, then protection and then the actual grading.
all companies make the same amount of mistakes grading cards, PSA simply has 10X the amount of cards than its competitors all together.
anyone could focus on the bad things, but the truth its that PSA has done lots of good things for our hobby.
PSA took grading cards mainstream which make buying and selling online a much better experience than ever before.
PSA invented the set registry which brings together tons of collectors lets them display their cards and guess what they do this for free.
PSA also launched PSA/dna to grade autographs on cards, baseball, bats etc.
SGC has done nothing except follow up whatever PSA does.
Groucho Marx
<< <i>kuntryboy - I take it that you weren't the star of your high school debate team? >>
Southerncards
I take it that you didn't finish high school.
FACTS need not be debated. FACTS are FACTS. It's not my problem if you're in total denial or incapable of comprehending the FACTS.
A) Consumers have a lack of confidence in the quality of the SGC product
Please show specific examples. Thank you
Are you ever going to write anything else besides your constant bashing of PSA?
WE get it , you like SGC better..its OK really.
There is a joke about a canadian and his american friend where the canadian asks the american,
What do you guys think of Canada?
We dont.
no really what do you think of Canada?
Really, we dont.
This board is for the most part very positive about SGC and the job they do...But a lot of members here prefer PSA because they do a similar job and its the most avaible holder out there.
Groucho Marx
<< <i>
<< <i>kuntryboy - I take it that you weren't the star of your high school debate team? >>
Southerncards
I take it that you didn't finish high school.
FACTS need not be debated. FACTS are FACTS. It's not my problem if you're in total denial or incapable of comprehending the FACTS. >>
Actually kuntry
It's hard to discern facts from factoids today since people repeat things so many times that they are mistaken for hard facts.
Plus, the way each person collects data/facts is actually based on their own global experience and no two people view things exactly the same way. A person's preconceived ideas about the grading companies can actually bias the way they collect data/facts on the issues and thus rendering all potential facts moot.
mike
I look on ebay daily for a variety of cards everyday, the cards are from different sets and different eras.
While on the lower grades all 3 major companies average the same prices, once it starts to get into mid-high to high grades PSA simply dominates.
Groucho Marx