Whoever came up with "EX/MT"?

SOM

Wouldn't it make more sense to have our PSA grades (and all grades, period) read

Gem - 10
Mint - 9
NM/MT - 8
NM - 7
EX/NM - 6
EX - 5

etc...

Where did the term "Ex/Mt" originate? Just to confuse hapless buyers?

Wouldn't a more hierarchically-consistent grade name as "Ex/NM" make us as an industry look more professional? Especially to those outside our business?

stevek

<<< Where did the term "Ex/Mt" originate? Just to confuse hapless buyers? >>>

Don't know but certainly it is confusing to new collectors. But we're "stuck" with it now I guess.

PS: Love your CU icon

SOM

Hey...if Joe made that change to a spread offense, and then even played freshman, then certainly the name of a card grade can be changed!

Griffins

In the old days (the early to mid 70's, when I first started collecting at shows and thru the mail) there were 7 grades: Poor, Fair, Good, VG, Ex, Ex- Mint, and Mint. No Near Mint, or Near Mint/Mint. What often was considered Mint then would be a 7 now- if it was even gradeable.

zef204

<< <i>In the old days (the early to mid 70's, when I first started collecting at shows and thru the mail) there were 7 grades: Poor, Fair, Good, VG, Ex, Ex- Mint, and Mint. No Near Mint, or Near Mint/Mint. What often was considered Mint then would be a 7 now- if it was even gradeable. >>

And that is where it came from.

Stump

Anthoney is right. The original Ex-Mt was a spread. It just meant the card was better than Ex but less than mint. Now it is portrayed as a EX/MT with the slash being added. This is where the confusion started.

Dave

Wabittwax

I'll tell you what is got to be rough for novice collectors is the Excellent grade. If you list and auction and say the card is in excellent condition, a newbie thinks the card is in incredibly great shape whereas seasoned collector's know that card will look like crap when it arrives. I tend to shy away from auctions that state the cards are in excellent shape. I might be expecting great cards from somebody who doesn't know the scale we use, but how can I complain when they show up at my door with rounded corners, I got EX condition cards.

Onlypsahockey

5 grades are all you need. If we can't put every card we own into one of these five catagories we are too picky.

Mint
Near Mint
Excellent
Very Good
Poor

As SOM stated a universal scale would both simplifyand unify the hobby while keeping unethical overgraders in closer check.

Griffins

I think we now have too many classifications at the upper end, and not enough at the lower. 8, 9, 10 can often be all the same, or interchangeable. But there is a huge difference in 2's.

jradke4

I would agree about the high end all blurring together. It would be fun to keep sending the same PSA8/9 card in and seeing how many times it comes back with different grades.

GOODLIEU

I agree with Griffins the lower end cards are where you see the most variance in condition. The cards in the 8 and up category can change grades from one grader to another as exhibited by the information that I have seen on these boards in regards to cracking open 8's and 9's for review hoping to move up in grade. But as flawed as this may be realistically there does not appear that this system will change any time soon we are stuck with it.

Griffins

9 million cards in (plus whatever SGC and GAI have graded) would we even want the scale to change? Look at what a fiasco would result if PSA shot themselves in the foot (and us in the heart) by going to half grades, changing the grading scale would be even worse. No, it's too late, but if any of the big three went down and gave rise to a new company these are things that should probably be considered.

WinPitcher

Back in the day (the 60's in my case) the following were accepted grades:

MINT

EX/MNT

EX

VG

G

Poor


The EX/MNT card was a card that at first glance showed all the attributes of a MINT card but had 1 or 2 slighty dinged corners. The card had to be centered fairly well to be considered MINT and thus true EX/MNT cards were centered as well.


An EX card had 3 or more dinged corners and again was centered fairly well.


VG cards were cards that did not have to be well centered and were allowed to have 4 dinged corners......NO CREASES


Good cards were cards that still presented well but had the problems mentioned above.


Poor cards were cards that were beat to death.



Cards that were somewhat OC yet had sharp corners began to be called near mint in the later part of the 70's and by the 80's it was a grade onto itself.


defects such as print dots and focus problems (depending on severity brought those cards to what we called "off grade" cards.


The bottom line back in those days was that 2 collectors would sit down and aomehow try to agree with a grade and thus a price or value for trade.


Once the coin dealer money came into the hobby in the early to mid eighties and every collector became a dealer we then found ourselves with a multitude of grades.

Do not get me wrong if you had 2 Mint cards and one had better color and was centered better it almost always commanded a better price then one that did not.



Steve

SOM

Steve...do you think it is better now (with 10 grades and various half-grades), or is the era you refer to, with only 5 or so grades and a huge gap between EX/MT and Mint, better for us as an industry?

Would you say the formalized grading system is better for sellers (dealers) or the buyers?

Any others have views on this?

I've been collecting since the 60's, and I must say, both as a collector (buyer) and as a limited seller (of my duplicates), I am more comfortable dealing today than yesterday.

Onlypsahockey

I should have clarified. The 5 grades I refered to were meant for raw cards.

Mint
Near Mint
Excellent
Very Good
Poor


The PSA scale is perfect for graded examples.

Bob C.

Buccaneer

I actually thought it came from the Coins people since they were way ahead of the game on grading.

67standup

I trademarked the EX/MT designation in the '70s and am still living richly off the royalties.

WinPitcher

Som

I think it is better now. What I do not like though is how a card can grade ex/mnt only cuz it does not meet a centering criteria for another grade.

These so called off graded cards diminsh what a true ex/mnt card is.

The same can be said for nmnt 7 with regards to 90C

My opinion is that they (PSA) should have never allowed submitters to request NQ. I know it is too late in the game to change that now but if a card is OC it is OC and no straight number is ever gonna change that.

Another gripe I have is the ST qualifier. most do not realise that the ST qualifier is for wax stained cards and not any other stain (from what I have been told) so therefore a water stained card gets a lower grade then what it would have had if a stain was not present. perhaps 2 ST variations could have been used, one for wax and one for outside influences.

I have gotten cards back with a ST qualifier and I could not find the wax.

The formalized grading that we enjoy today benifits all IMO.

Especially the authentication part which shows if a card has been altered etc. that IMO is the benifit we most enjoy from these company's.

Steve

mikeschmidt

Hey - if you look across the street to PCGS, you will see that they have 30 different numerical grades for coins. Can you imagine having a 1-30 grading scale for cards, or, like their scale, 1-70, with ten distinct grades between 60 and 70?

SDavid

<< <i> Hey - if you look across the street to PCGS, you will see that they have 30 different numerical grades for coins. Can you imagine having a 1-30 grading scale for cards, or, like their scale, 1-70, with ten distinct grades between 60 and 70? >>



That's nuts. No wonder coins get resubmitted so many times.

jaxxr

Interesting thread, and the original question has been answered correctly by several, it's just an old-school term which has become accepted as the expression for a card between NM and Ex in quality. And of course many use / prefer Ex-NM rather than Ex-Mt, but most can tolerate either.

The coin references bring up a similarity in top-end grade splitting. From 55 ( AU coin, perhaps Ex-Mt or 6 in cards) there is an escalating lack of variance. 55 is common, also a 57 and a few 59s, after 60 ( BU coin, NM cards ) each single increment is seen often, 61 thru 70 ( PL or Proof-like coin, Gem Mint or Pristine 10 cards ), while there are few numerical differences in coins which rate a grade of 40 or lower.
Somewhat paradoxical to cards, a Cameo coin, a bit like a print-defect in cards, usually commands a premimum, and off-center coins are typically quite sought after.

I found it amusing that SCD tried to use a 1 thru 11 scale, maybe one of the reasons they sold out, and still am puzzled by the noble SGC scale; 100= Pristine, 98= Gem Mint, 96 = Mint, 92= NM/MT +, 88= NM/MT, 86= NM+, 84= NM, and so on. Four points bump given a plus for a NM/MT card but only two points for a plus on a NM card bump. The Points are even more varied on lower grades. Seems they could have had a true 100 point scale and really have a clear full range system. Possibly they don't like odd numbers.

WinPitcher

30 different grades for coins?

i am aware of 20, with 11 being in the mint state category and better.

20 different grades is basically the same as the card graders that use the half grade system

AG1, G4, VG8, F12, VF20, EXF40, CH EXF45, AU50, AU/BU55

MS 60,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 70


I admit I have not been in the coin loop as much as I had in the past and could be unaware of some new grades?


Steve

fiveniner

Steve Ds grading criteria seems very accurate in my opinion. OLD SCHOOL.