PSA vs. BGS

lanemyer85

Has anyone noticed that some PSA 10's from the early 80's are selling for almost double of what the same BGS cards are getting? For example, over this past month a PSA 10 83 Topps Sandberg rc sold for over $900 while my BGS nabbed "only" $338. I know many collectors prefer PSA when it comes to vintage, but 1983 isn't vintage. Is this trend carrying over to pre 90's? BGS is typically a stricter grader so I'm assuming the market is just trending upward for that particular card due to PSA registries for Sandberg cards or 83 Topps sets...perhaps. Do the individual subgrades turn people off and only GEM copies with 4 - 9.5's constitute what PSA 10s usually grab? I recently sold a 1985 Topps BGS 9.5 Clemens rc as well and received low book which is about what the PSA versions are sellling for so I was just wondering if it's just an oddity for Sandberg collectors to be choosing PSA over BGS copies. Anyone noticed this on a particular card or the market in general? Any thoughts?

artistlost

Hey...I have been collecting for a while now and just started grading about a year ago. I at one time used both PSA and BGS but have since switched to strickly PSA and in fact am in the process of crossing over my BGS cards to PSA holders. I have been buying and selling on Ebay for a darn long time now and have noticed that the price difference is gone between a BGS and a PSA card even for modern stuff. I find that PSA is a tougher grading company than BGS for both my vintage and modern cards which is what i feel most people are now seeing and why you see the swing towards prices now being even and even a bit more for PSA. I do feel that the PSA set regestry is helping a lot, with cards like the Sandberg, but also in getting more cards in PSA holders. I think that we will all see a swing in PSA becoming the king of grading not just in vintage but also the modern stuff.

And as a side I am getting a little tired of BGS 9.5 stuff. It seems to be flooding the market place these days (mostly modern stuff) and the cards are really not that nice. I bought a 2005 Kendry Morales SPX auto /185 BGS 9.5 and the edge on the card was down right UGLY...too many cards are going that way with BGS.

Anyway...just my thoughts.

gregmo32

It is obvious from the numbers that BGS lowered their standards drastically to allow way more BGS 9.5 to be graded. That grade used to be at least as difficult, and maybe more so, than a PSA 10. Now they are almost a dime a dozen and it is sad and sickening to me for a whole lot of reasons, the main one being how a lack of integrity in a company can influence peripherally so many people's financial situations.

artistlost

I agree completely. It is a shame. I would take a PSA 10 over a BGS 9.5 in a heartbeat and hopefully the rest of the collectors out there will get wise and start doing the same...though I think many of them finally are.

lanemyer85

It certainly looks like the market is heading that way. I think PSA would draw more newbies or crossover submitters if they dumped their insipid membership package deals and just went with a standard service rate per card. $100 for 6 submissions isn't a great deal if you don't care about the book and market reports that are included....and you don't want to go through a third party. I guess I'm not surprised to hear that BGS has lowered their standards. Early on they were probably considered overly strict and I'm sure that was a detriment to some submitters who send in 10-20 modern cards and draw zero GEMs. Beckett has been running several package deals over the last 2 years so I'm sure they were hurting for bulk submissions. BGS was running 10 card submissions at 10 day turnaround for $100 and I sent in some newer football (mainly P.Manning rc's) and didn't receive one GEM so it didn't occur to me that their grading standards had been toned down until I sold my Sandberg GEM 9.5. I bought a 94 SP Arod BGS 9 about 4 years ago and paid a couple hundred over what the PSA 9's were selling for. I'd bet that they're probably pretty much even now. Like gregmo32 said, BGS is going to cost many of us some serious money. So I guess it's not just a modern vs vintage argument anymore.

braves72078

BGS is just like the magazine, the message boards, and all other things Beckett.. they BLOW.

Bill

TheMcgwireMuseum

I have bought around 35 cards that I need for my McGwire registry that have been graded by other grading companies, just to cross them over. BGS ranks the absolute lowest in my book. I got a BGS 9.5 (1/1) of a card that had no PSA 10's, only to receive it and know without a doubt it will not grade any higher that an 8. I imagine other collectors have bought BGS to cross over and wised up after receiving the cards.

mosaic

I'm relatively new to submitting cards to PSA, but I've submitted to BGS off and on for about six years now. Of course, I also buy PSA and BGS cards off of eBay too.

People say that BGS has become less strict within the past few years, and my experience confirms that. Back in the day, a 9.5 was a rarity. I submitted some 94/95 A-Rod cards once and ended up with mostly 8's and a couple 9's. I have since come across 9.5's of the same cards that look just like mine did. Glad I sold them off when he went to the Yanks. I recently bought some BGS cards off of eBay in holders with 9.5 grades that have obvious chipping on the back and/or questionable centering. I have a 1988 Fleer Glossy Edgar Martinez that they gave a 9 for edges and a 9.5 for surface, even though there is most definitely visible chipping on the back. That card is an 8.5 or a 9 masquerading in a 9.5 holder.

It used to be a BGS 9.5 was a PSA 10. Now, a BGS 9.5 is more often than not a PSA 9. Unfortunately, that shift has made me wary of buying BGS 9.5 cards sight unseen anymore. I'm definitely one of those folks that likes to buy the card, not the holder.

I still submit to BGS from time to time though... not to take advantage of the now-lenient standards, but because i prefer their holder. Yes, storing it is a pain, but it offers more protection to the card inside and that little baggy definitely lessens the slipslide factor. It's only an issue with poorly printed black-bordered cards, so I send those to BGS and the rest to PSA.

Inconsistency in grading is hurting BGS slabbed cards. Meanwhile, PSA's consistency and set registry feature is giving their slabs premium.

I've also found dealing with PSA to be much smoother. Their turnaround is faster in my experience, their customer service reps are quicker to respond, and their bulk deals make large submissions affordable. Yeah, that $99/year fee is a pain, but it pays for itself if you take advantage of just one bulk deal.