PSA to SGC comparison

Mphilking

Although we could debate about who is the toughest grading company, this guy seems to know for sure.

1963 Topps Stan Musial #250 SGC Rating 84 NM PSA 9 WOW

akuracy503

SGC 84 "NM" technically does equal to PSA 9 "NM" no?
The SGC holder is really growing on me for the vintage white border cards.

That is a nice card.

dizzle

<< <i>SGC 84 "NM" technically does equal to PSA 9 "NM" no?
The SGC holder is really growing on me for the vintage white border cards.

That is a nice card. >>



A PSA 9 = Mint...not NM

PoppaJ

Latest Auction Prices for: PSA 9 - Average Price: $1,859.00

Latest Auction Prices for: SGC 84 - Average Price: $69.00

Latest Auction Prices for: PSA 7 - Average Price: $73.76

You decide

PoppaJ

torc

Isn't that against e-bays rules having PSA in the title when it isn't graded by PSA?

wasn't there a thread about this last week where some have had their auctions pulled because of this?

Nice card BTW

Mphilking

I think they call adding PSA to a title that is not a description of the card is called "title spamming" and disallowed on Ebay. I just thought it was funny that he said his SGC 84 (7) was equal to a PSA 9. I personally prefer SGC on vintage stuff, but I am not sure they are 2 grades better than PSA.

akuracy503

I'm going out of the box here and pitch the idea that grading companies only authenticate the originality (unaltered) of the card...without an official condition grading stamp.

This would open up the market to be truly a collectors, eye of the beholder, non (PSA,SGC,BGS) political environment.

Basically going back to the old school days of collecting...with the assistance of authentication.

I think this would make it very interesting in the collectors market...however challenging for internet buyers...

I just feel that eventually this whole condition grading stuff will cause big controversy in the long run....some sort of corruption will come in play...if not already realized.

SidePocket

I think both companies are comparable in grading, but I like SGC holders for certain years, otherwise I usually go with PSA.

For example the 56 Topps look great in SGC holders:



But I think 59 Topps look better in PSA:

70chip

Personally, I like the SGC holder much more than the PSA holder - I just think it looks way better.

sagard

The way I see it:

SGC is more likely to undergrade a card.
PSA is more likely to overgrade a card.

PSA gets the grade right more frequently.

RawPlusSlabbed

<< <i>Although we could debate about who is the toughest grading company, this guy seems to know for sure.

1963 Topps Stan Musial #250 SGC Rating 84 NM PSA 9 WOW >>



I see this a lot with people that sell Beckett slabs i.e. BVG 6.5 = PSA 7.5 etc.

Nice card and the seller is probably a good guy but to honestly state a SGC NM card is equal to a PSA MT card is going too far.

Mphilking

Sagard, I'm with you, that's why I go with SGC on vintage.

tarheelsnipe

This guy has a similar opinion about his Rickey Henderson RC. not sure how SCD compares to PSA, but he still makes the comparison to PSA and SGC. It begs the question, why not submit the card to one of the Big 3?...

Ebay Link

I reported it to the TOS Police at Ebay. I'll let you know how it turns out.