<< <i>"I don't understand why some feel the need to attempt to destroy another company to justify their TPG of choice"
Lol.. yeah you would never do that. >>
Are you referring to the fact that in the past I have pointed out that BGS grades sheet cut cards, most specifically OPC? If so, then I am guilty, but I've never done it in an attempt to make any other TPG look better, but rather to point out the fact that BGS has a track record of grading questionable items from specific issues at a rate that far exceeds those of the other 2 of the Big 3. I would be surprised to see you change your mantra and suggest something else.
Very similar to the original SGC labels that had the "SG" in the place of the "SB" on the old SBC labels. Also, the serial numbers on the old "SG" labels were not preceded with the SBC or SGC alpha prefix. Sadly, I do not have an example to post, but I'm pretty sure someone here must have an image on their PC and be willing to share.
I subbed a few cards when SGC first opened. I joked with Joe and asked if I was the first and he laughed and said no. The first flips were not that exciting to me. I am as vanilla as they come so the green and the placement of the bar code drove me nuts. They actually corrected it fast and moved the bar code to the bottom left but kept the SG in ghost letters. Then they added the www.sgccard.com and then they added the 1 to 10 equivalent to the system they were using. I just love those plain, antique , black and white labels. Its just one of those things that I can't explain.
I collect both PSA and SGC cards. I also have a few Beckett.
I crossed many cards to SGC based solely on the holder. These are cards that I generally do not intend to sell - PSA outperforms SGC pretty much every single time. I am sure there are an exception here and one there, but please. There is no argument.
I again want to state that I collect SGC cards. I have a lot of them actually. Probably more than some of their biggest "defenders of everything Parsippany and then some".
SGC has fantastic customer service. I have not dealt with PSA in many, many years, so I really cannot compare them to PSA. I never really had a problem with them, other than Joe Orlando and some cat named Charlie. Brian and Sean at SGC are a pleasure, and nice to talk with. Some of the PSA gals are nicer to look at however.
In my opinion, SGC and PSA are equal in terms of grading consistency. They both miss the boat within their standards - which are different by the way.
SGC cards are harder to buy for two reasons - there are not a lot of true auctions on eBay (my guess is that half are fixed price BINs) and the selection is just not there. It does make for an easy search however, and the scans generally give a more accurate feel for the assessed grade.
According to VCP the last two 1962 Lou Brock Rookies graded Sgc 88 sold for $557 and $455.
The $557 beat the last 17 Psa 8's. And the $455 beat 15 of the last 17 Brock 8's.
I do agree with many or often times but not "every single time" and there is more than an "exception here and one there". But as Col Slade would say "I'm just too old and too tired."
I have an older labelled SGC card, and I know that this card looks better than some of its PSA counterparts, b/c I was looking for a PSA 4-5 to buy, and I had a hard time finding something in PSA comparable for the grade.
<< <i>I have an older labelled SGC card, and I know that this card looks better than some of its PSA counterparts, b/c I was looking for a PSA 4-5 to buy, and I had a hard time finding something in PSA comparable for the grade.
>>
Nice card but I bet if you submit that card today to SGC it gets a 3. No way is that 80/20.
60 EX 5 80/20 or better centering, minor rounding or fuzzing of corners, roughness or chipping along edge (no layering), one VERY slight surface or "spider" crease may exist on one side of the card, gloss may be lost from surface with some scratching that does not detract from the aesthetics of the card.
40 VG 3 90/10 or better centering, corners more rounded--but not excessive, stronger creasing may exist. Poorer focus, registration, and discoloration, and staining are more noticeable.
<< <i>I have an older labelled SGC card, and I know that this card looks better than some of its PSA counterparts, b/c I was looking for a PSA 4-5 to buy, and I had a hard time finding something in PSA comparable for the grade.
>>
Nice card but I bet if you submit that card today to SGC it gets a 3. No way is that 80/20.
60 EX 5 80/20 or better centering, minor rounding or fuzzing of corners, roughness or chipping along edge (no layering), one VERY slight surface or "spider" crease may exist on one side of the card, gloss may be lost from surface with some scratching that does not detract from the aesthetics of the card.
40 VG 3 90/10 or better centering, corners more rounded--but not excessive, stronger creasing may exist. Poorer focus, registration, and discoloration, and staining are more noticeable. >>
Have you seen some of the PSA cards in this grade, with roller marks, centering issues, etc? I looked at a lot of Mantles in this 4-5 range, and this was one of the better ones. This card is plagued by centering issues, and I have run across many in PSA holders that were similarly centered w/ no OC qualifier. I assume that you don't buy a lot of vintage, I really would challenge that this would be a SGC 3 if I resubmitted it?
I just reading their standards but if your happy with your card then thats great. I have nothing against SGC I actually like them and their holders just not the flips. Wish they would change them and lose one of the two numeric grading scales on the flip.
<< <i> here is a nicer 3 two grades below here is one that looks pretty close to yours. here is another that looks ( IMO) looks just as good if not better. >>
As you can see there is a wide range among the grades, and you really have to see each up close to really see the differences. The clarity of the Mantle varies significantly. Best part is, that I got mine for well under 3K.
Comparing the front images of those Mantles and attempting to draw a conclusion without being able to view the reverse and and examine for creases and wax stains renders such comparisons speculative and likely inaccurate. The old label SGC 60 is a VG/EX card at best... Too much corner wear in addition to the centering. The centering as a sole issue may be stretchable to an EX grade, but the corner wears condemns the card to at best a VG/EX grade in my opinion.
<< <i>Comparing the front images of those Mantles and attempting to draw a conclusion without being able to view the reverse and and examine for creases and wax stains renders such comparisons speculative and likely inaccurate. The old label SGC 60 is a VG/EX card at best... Too much corner wear in addition to the centering. The centering as a sole issue may be stretchable to an EX grade, but the corner wears condemns the card to at best a VG/EX grade in my opinion. >>
Maybe so, but there are a lot of things that can plague this card. I didn't mind the centering as much as I wanted a bold photo, w/ vivid colors and no print lines. The price made it a slam dunk for me, and it was gotten from a very reputable source, so I was not worried about any problems. Regardless of grade, I buy cards for enjoyment, and not for resale. Hell, it could even grade a 2, I would have one of the nicest 2's around.
From my understanding, when you send a card in for the reholder service, the grader reviews the card to determine if it still meets the original grade before slabbing it with the same grade.
<< <i>Does SGC re-case cards in the this holder with the same grade like PSA does with old font holders? >>
In the case of the older generation flips (those prior to the inclusion of the 1-10 scale), the card would be "regraded" to make certain it meets the grade criteria. While no one will ever admit it publicly, this is the result of "protecting" against "modernizing" the grading abnormalities and the leniency of such grades assigned during the time when the founder was the "finalizer." PSA also seems to do the same thing with regard to their cards in their first and second generation holders. In such cases, if the card does not meet the "current" criteria, it is returned in the original holder with the original flip. I have had both companies reholder cards in new holders with the original flips when the holders were either scratched or damaged.
Comments
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
<< <i>Well I thank you for correcting me. >>
You got it Sport...
I always appreciate condescending attempts at sarcasm.
Lol.. yeah you would never do that.
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
<< <i>"I don't understand why some feel the need to attempt to destroy another company to justify their TPG of choice"
Lol.. yeah you would never do that. >>
Are you referring to the fact that in the past I have pointed out that BGS grades sheet cut cards, most specifically OPC? If so, then I am guilty, but I've never done it in an attempt to make any other TPG look better, but rather to point out the fact that BGS has a track record of grading questionable items from specific issues at a rate that far exceeds those of the other 2 of the Big 3. I would be surprised to see you change your mantra and suggest something else.
<< <i>Here are the old SBC labels that I like.
Very similar to the original SGC labels that had the "SG" in the place of the "SB" on the old SBC labels. Also, the serial numbers on the old "SG" labels were not preceded with the SBC or SGC alpha prefix. Sadly, I do not have an example to post, but I'm pretty sure someone here must have an image on their PC and be willing to share.
The first flips were not that exciting to me. I am as vanilla as they come so the green and the placement of the bar code drove me nuts.
They actually corrected it fast and moved the bar code to the bottom left but kept the SG in ghost letters. Then they added the
www.sgccard.com and then they added the 1 to 10 equivalent to the system they were using. I just love those plain, antique ,
black and white labels. Its just one of those things that I can't explain.
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
"Molon Labe"
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
I crossed many cards to SGC based solely on the holder. These are cards that I generally do not intend to sell - PSA outperforms SGC pretty much every single time. I am sure there are an exception here and one there, but please. There is no argument.
I again want to state that I collect SGC cards. I have a lot of them actually. Probably more than some of their biggest "defenders of everything Parsippany and then some".
SGC has fantastic customer service. I have not dealt with PSA in many, many years, so I really cannot compare them to PSA. I never really had a problem with them, other than Joe Orlando and some cat named Charlie. Brian and Sean at SGC are a pleasure, and nice to talk with. Some of the PSA gals are nicer to look at however.
In my opinion, SGC and PSA are equal in terms of grading consistency. They both miss the boat within their standards - which are different by the way.
SGC cards are harder to buy for two reasons - there are not a lot of true auctions on eBay (my guess is that half are fixed price BINs) and the selection is just not there. It does make for an easy search however, and the scans generally give a more accurate feel for the assessed grade.
<< <i>There is no argument. >>
Sure there is!
According to VCP the last two 1962 Lou Brock Rookies graded Sgc 88 sold for $557 and $455.
The $557 beat the last 17 Psa 8's. And the $455 beat 15 of the last 17 Brock 8's.
I do agree with many or often times but not "every single time" and there is more than an "exception here and one there". But as Col Slade would say "I'm just too old and too tired."
aconte
<< <i>I have an older labelled SGC card, and I know that this card looks better than some of its PSA counterparts, b/c I was looking for a PSA 4-5 to buy, and I had a hard time finding something in PSA comparable for the grade.
Nice card but I bet if you submit that card today to SGC it gets a 3. No way is that 80/20.
60 EX 5 80/20 or better centering, minor rounding or fuzzing of corners, roughness or chipping along edge (no layering), one VERY slight surface or "spider" crease may exist on one side of the card, gloss may be lost from surface with some scratching that does not detract from the aesthetics of the card.
40 VG 3 90/10 or better centering, corners more rounded--but not excessive, stronger creasing may exist. Poorer focus, registration, and discoloration, and staining are more noticeable.
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
<< <i>
<< <i>I have an older labelled SGC card, and I know that this card looks better than some of its PSA counterparts, b/c I was looking for a PSA 4-5 to buy, and I had a hard time finding something in PSA comparable for the grade.
Nice card but I bet if you submit that card today to SGC it gets a 3. No way is that 80/20.
60 EX 5 80/20 or better centering, minor rounding or fuzzing of corners, roughness or chipping along edge (no layering), one VERY slight surface or "spider" crease may exist on one side of the card, gloss may be lost from surface with some scratching that does not detract from the aesthetics of the card.
40 VG 3 90/10 or better centering, corners more rounded--but not excessive, stronger creasing may exist. Poorer focus, registration, and discoloration, and staining are more noticeable. >>
Have you seen some of the PSA cards in this grade, with roller marks, centering issues, etc? I looked at a lot of Mantles in this 4-5 range, and this was one of the better ones. This card is plagued by centering issues, and I have run across many in PSA holders that were similarly centered w/ no OC qualifier. I assume that you don't buy a lot of vintage, I really would challenge that this would be a SGC 3 if I resubmitted it?
I actually like them and their holders just not the flips. Wish they would change them and lose one of the two
numeric grading scales on the flip.
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
<< <i>
As you can see there is a wide range among the grades, and you really have to see each up close to really see the differences. The clarity of the Mantle varies significantly. Best part is, that I got mine for well under 3K.
<< <i>That last Brock RC to sell had a little shilly help >>
That is a bold statement if you are refering to the latest Sgc 88. I'd also say wrong.
aconte
<< <i>Comparing the front images of those Mantles and attempting to draw a conclusion without being able to view the reverse and and examine for creases and wax stains renders such comparisons speculative and likely inaccurate. The old label SGC 60 is a VG/EX card at best... Too much corner wear in addition to the centering. The centering as a sole issue may be stretchable to an EX grade, but the corner wears condemns the card to at best a VG/EX grade in my opinion. >>
Maybe so, but there are a lot of things that can plague this card. I didn't mind the centering as much as I wanted a bold photo, w/ vivid colors and no print lines. The price made it a slam dunk for me, and it was gotten from a very reputable source, so I was not worried about any problems. Regardless of grade, I buy cards for enjoyment, and not for resale. Hell, it could even grade a 2, I would have one of the nicest 2's around.
<< <i>Here are the second labels that they used.
Does SGC re-case cards in the this holder with the same grade like PSA does with old font holders?
the grader reviews the card to determine if it still meets the original grade
before slabbing it with the same grade.
<< <i>Does SGC re-case cards in the this holder with the same grade like PSA does with old font holders? >>
In the case of the older generation flips (those prior to the inclusion of the 1-10 scale), the card would be "regraded" to make certain it meets the grade criteria. While no one will ever admit it publicly, this is the result of "protecting" against "modernizing" the grading abnormalities and the leniency of such grades assigned during the time when the founder was the "finalizer." PSA also seems to do the same thing with regard to their cards in their first and second generation holders. In such cases, if the card does not meet the "current" criteria, it is returned in the original holder with the original flip. I have had both companies reholder cards in new holders with the original flips when the holders were either scratched or damaged.