Wrestling All Stars BGS VS. PSA: Why it is a no brainer!
Dpeck100
Posts: 10,912 ✭✭✭✭✭
BGS 8.5 Rocky Johnson
This is supposedly Gem Mint centering. The Rocky Johnson card is one of the toughest in all three sets and he is the Rock Dwayne Johnson's father.
Just another blaring example of why PSA dominates. I have no clue what they are looking at. In all honesty I have bought a few cards where I think they will bump because BGS is so stupid but in most cases you are buying a card that is over graded.
BGS 9 Fredie Blassie
This card would have no chance at a straight PSA 9 and some how they give this a Gem Mint grade for centering. Not even close. I think this card grades a PSA 8 if it is lucky and more likely a PSA 7 with this centering. Yet it is a Pop 1 BGS 9. LOL.
The market for these cards is littered with tons of examples like these. This is why you have to really pick and choose your spots with these cards in BGS holders. Some times you win, most times you lose.
This is supposedly Gem Mint centering. The Rocky Johnson card is one of the toughest in all three sets and he is the Rock Dwayne Johnson's father.
Just another blaring example of why PSA dominates. I have no clue what they are looking at. In all honesty I have bought a few cards where I think they will bump because BGS is so stupid but in most cases you are buying a card that is over graded.
BGS 9 Fredie Blassie
This card would have no chance at a straight PSA 9 and some how they give this a Gem Mint grade for centering. Not even close. I think this card grades a PSA 8 if it is lucky and more likely a PSA 7 with this centering. Yet it is a Pop 1 BGS 9. LOL.
The market for these cards is littered with tons of examples like these. This is why you have to really pick and choose your spots with these cards in BGS holders. Some times you win, most times you lose.
0
Comments
No doubt these guys were awesome!
The bottom line is neither of these cards are deserving of the grade and these are just two quick examples of why PSA cards sell for more then BGS almost all of the time.
Since you are such a BGS fan explain how this Fredie Blassie is mint?
Vlad just for you here is a card I won just last night. I put my max in at $300. I would pay $1,000 for a PSA 10 Gem Mint Kerry Von Erich.
The last BGS 9.5 of this card I bought turned into a PSA 8. This one has strong centering and looks nice in the picture but time will tell. If I can get this to cross I win but there is a greater chance it won't and I lose.
I took a chance like I have done many times with BGS cards. If you are serious about putting a set together you can never rule out other grading companies but there is a reason PSA sells for more and no one can dispute that.
<< <i>You find something wrong with everything I have to say so quite frankly your opinion is irrelevant to me. >>
No, I just find your self serving drivel posts annoying. Do you not think promoting this set by keeping information/updates/q&a to one informative thread would make more sense?
<< <i>these are just two quick examples of why PSA cards sell for more then BGS almost all of the time.
<< <i>
You are picking at subgrades of two cards that are graded 9 and 8.5? I just think that's lame. But to respond to your comment, do BGS 10 cards sell for less than PSA 10 cards?
<< <i>If you are serious about putting a set together you can never rule out other grading companies but there is a reason PSA sells for more and no one can dispute that.
<< <i>
Unless I change my mind and go ahead with competing in the PSA Set Registry Master Set of 'The Ugliest Trading Card Sets Ever Produced' (I'm on a list, they said they might do it) I probably won't be working on this set anytime soon. But you are right, since the 4 other people who are doing this set in PSA prefer the cards in PSA holders that probably would drive demand.
Jeff
PSA ALSO has many cards they grade as gem mint, mint, nm-mt that have horrible tilt to them. There is no perfect company and people will always have disagreements on accurate grading.
<< <i>One thing I will say about the Blassie being mint....
PSA ALSO has many cards they grade as gem mint, mint, nm-mt that have horrible tilt to them. There is no perfect company and people will always have disagreements on accurate grading. >>
I don't think anyone in the world disagrees with this.
Dpeck is clearly talking about the way BGS grades this specific set versus the way PSA grades it. There is some valuable information here for those who are interested in chasing this set.
On the Blassie the centering looks good left to right, but from top to bottom it certainly doesn't. Probably more like an 8/8.5 at best.
Seems BGS is harder sometimes on modern cards than the Wrestling All Stars. Maybe just because their inexperience with them. I dunno. I think they look a lot better in PSA slabs anyway.
"Live everyday, don't throw it away"
Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
The two points I would make for the sake of the discussion are:
1) BGS does not grade with the same standards they did a few years ago. BGS 9.5 used to equal or exceed PSA 10 standards, especially for modern cards. I believe it is undeniable that that is not the case anymore.
Since 99.9% of the Wrestling All Stars BGS has graded have been in the past two years, that could be an explanation for the poor crossovers.
2) The difference between disagreeing with a PSA grade and disagreeing with a BGS grade is that BGS puts their grades for each category on the holder. WHile I might be mad that my card only received a PSA 8, I don't really have any objective means of arguing the specifics of the grade and have to speculate why THEY thought it got that grade. With BGS, I can look at a card that they gave a centering grade of 9.5 GEM MINT and see that it measured 75/25 top to bottom, and assume that this contributed to the overall grade in a way it should not have. It is much easier to argue specifics than it is to disagree with generalities. I would think having subgrades would make the process more clear, but often with BGS (especially of late) it seems to have the opposite effect.
Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
<< <i>
<< <i>You find something wrong with everything I have to say so quite frankly your opinion is irrelevant to me. >>
No, I just find your self serving drivel posts annoying. Do you not think promoting this set by keeping information/updates/q&a to one informative thread would make more sense?
<< <i>these are just two quick examples of why PSA cards sell for more then BGS almost all of the time.
<< <i>
You are picking at subgrades of two cards that are graded 9 and 8.5? I just think that's lame. But to respond to your comment, do BGS 10 cards sell for less than PSA 10 cards?
<< <i>If you are serious about putting a set together you can never rule out other grading companies but there is a reason PSA sells for more and no one can dispute that.
<< <i>
Unless I change my mind and go ahead with competing in the PSA Set Registry Master Set of 'The Ugliest Trading Card Sets Ever Produced' (I'm on a list, they said they might do it) I probably won't be working on this set anytime soon. But you are right, since the 4 other people who are doing this set in PSA prefer the cards in PSA holders that probably would drive demand. >>
Dude, seriously? You sound like a crotchety old coot. No one wants posts like this here. No one enjoys this garbage that you are posting. Dpeck100 is a valued member here and you attacking him for no good reason shows what kind of person you are. You wanna talk about drivel, read your own posts.
<< <i>Dude, seriously? You sound like a crotchety old coot. No one wants posts like this here. No one enjoys this garbage that you are posting. Dpeck100 is a valued member here and you attacking him for no good reason shows what kind of person you are. You wanna talk about drivel, read your own posts. >>
+1 on the Dpeck comments; no comment on the rest.
Do I have any interest in the Wrestling set(s)? No, not really. Do I have an interest in reading about the interests/passions/obsessions of fellow collectors? You bet - it's the #1 reason I check in here.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
Here is my PSA 9 Fredie Blassie. I think it is fair to say that yes they are more tough in a PSA holder.
I won the BGS 9 Albano and will check it out.
BGS 8.5 Hogan
I am not sure if two cards makes a trend but it appears BGS has adopted PSA's viewpoint on centering. Both the of the sub grades for these cards are much lower for centering then other cards in a BGS slab with similar attributes. In every other case I have seen they simply ignore the top to bottom centering. In this case they didn't.
The Andre got a 7.5 and generally BGS would have given this a 9.5. The Hogan got an 8 and once again this would have generally gotten a 9.5.
This will be something to watch going forward.
If you are an Executive at Beckett and you have some good Analysts, then you are aware of this. But I'd expect their reaction to be to loosen grading guidelines in an attempt to draw in more business. Instead, in the limited examples I've seen recently, maybe they are tightening standards. I think that once you set a grading standard the BEST thing is to stick to that standard and not deviate in either direction. But Beckett is having their a$$ handed to them in the marketplace and they will keep changing things as long as they are in 2nd place, in an attempt to find the perfect "formula" that the market prefers. Kudos to them if they've decided to move toward more strict, than less strict, on centering etc.
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
It has been a while but this topic was discussed and I did a breakdown on the potential revenue decline that Beckett has faced with their magazine sales falling by over 75% from where they were just nine years ago. I think one of the causes for their breakdown was a loosening of standards once PSA began to crush them in overall submissions rates. I have routinely used the data point of 85% market share for PSA and I would not reference that if I did not have an accurate source. That number perhaps has grown since then but certainly has not fallen. BGS had around a 10% share of the market at that time, SGC was 3% and other grading companies made up the remainder. This gap in market share is huge and I personally think the desparity of prices feeds on itself.
The first graded cards I ever purchased were BGS graded Roger Clemens and Ken Griffey Jr. cards in the 2005 to 2006 time frame. Periodically I would check the prices of the 1989 Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr. and I began to see that PSA graded examples were selling for more. I realize the BGS 10 does indeed sell for much greater then the PSA 10. This was the start of the demise of BGS in my opinion.
When I first puchased graded Wrestling All Stars I really had no allegiance to either company. Once I got to the point of submitting cards myself I did a search of closed prices on EBAY of baseball, basketball and hockey cards and it instantly became clear which third party grader had higher selling prices and market share and I chose PSA. This did not keep me from buying BGS graded cards initially but overtime as I built out my sets and needed cards that could crossover I became much more critical of BGS graded cards.
I am not sure what BGS can do at this point to turn around the ship. It is hard to change the rules in the middle of the game per say and increase the strictness of your standards but it may turn out to be a wise move if they try it. If this leads to higher selling prices it may lead to more submissions. It is hard to tell.
I think one of the greatest examples of the imbalances in prices is the 1993 SP Derek Jeter. Using recent sales on EBAY a BGS 9.5 has averaged $1,889. The PSA 10 in the SCP auction went for over $24,000. Over 12 times as much.
<< <i>
BGS 8.5 Hogan
The Hogan got an 8 and once again this would have generally gotten a 9.5.
This will be something to watch going forward. >>
The Hogan looks way O/C top/bottom to get more than a PSA 7, possibly an 8.
By the way, Thanks for your posts. While I don't collect wrestling, I find the information very interesting.
Actually, based on your enthusiasm, I did buy a box of 87 OPC to rip on a rainy day.
I think a grade of an 8 is fair for centering as the left to right centering is very strong. That being said it is certainly not Gem Mint.
If you decide to rip the OPC good luck with finding a nice Bret Hart. There are no PSA 10's from the Topps or OPC and while I don't see this being a huge card the first one would do fairly well and perhaps clear $100.
<< <i>IMO this Beckett Hogan would get a PSA 7 at best as T/B centering falls between the 70/30 to 75/25 guidelines:
WOW! Really!!!!
Unbelievable!
The 1982 B if they are short are indeed trimmed.
The 1983 set all of the cards are the large one's and measure 1/8 of an inch larger then a standard trading card.
PSA has started kicking back the shorter version for MIN SIZE REQ and I was stunned when I got two that rejected for this as I have others that are the same size.
In terms of the cards referenced what makes it so much tougher to get the high grades from PSA is that many of these cards come with terrible top to bottom centering and PSA has always been tough on that.
Here is a nice Hogan.
1982 PSA 9 Hulk Hogan
There was a time when they were essentially winning the race and have since lost at least 35 percentage points of market share or more to their direct competitor.
A few people on a message board did not make that happen.
If this was a public company people would be calling for them to go out of business.
Personally I think having more then one choice is good but it doesn't change the facts of what has happened.
In terms of the modern market I did a search some time ago and I believe BGS has a greater market share but from others comments it appears that is shrinking too.
At the end of the day most get cards graded for the enhancement in value and liqudity and clearly PSA's value proposition is intact.
I get that, in general, PSA cards sell for higher prices than BGS cards of equivalent grade. As a collector primarily of vintage baseball, my collection is comprised mostly of PSA cards.
But I also know that there are many people out there who have beloved collections in BGS holders. I personally just don't see the TPG landscape as a zero-sum, winner-take-all competition that should be viewed solely through the prism of things like market share and value propositions.
I think there is room in the industry for both companies, in addition to SGC, and clearly when it comes to BGS and PSA they each have more or less staked out their own territory. For certain cards, such as the Wrestling All Stars about which you are so passionate and experienced, I have no doubt PSA (and in large part the Registry) make PSA a better choice-- especially in terms of realized value.
But many other collectors whose opinions I respect choose BGS for their cards and are happy with that choice. Especially for modern, where BGS parses things to a finer degree with the use of subgrades; when talking about cards not plagued by factory quality control issues I believe a card should be graded the way BGS does it.
In the end I just think that when reading things like 'PSA dominates,' and prognostications that seem to indicate BGS is a doomed company, were I a BGS collector that would really be raining on my parade-- when in fact the prices realized for many seminal BGS cards (Jordan Stars, Jordan Fleer RC in BGS 10, modern autos) are incredibly robust.
I also believe, as discussed in another thread, that it is specious logic to compare a PSA 9 to a BGS 9, because they are essentially different languages. BGS cards can be low end or very high end for the grade, depending on subs, and this is a double-edged sword. When a BGS card has subs below its overall grade, it will sell for much less than the PSA counterpart. But when the subs are all the same or even higher than the overall grade, such a card-- especially in the modern space-- will usually be closer to or even greater than its PSA counterpart.
In the end, as a collector, I think it should be all a personal/subjective choice based on eye appeal of the actual card in question to the buyer/collector/beholder-- and less about which plastic tomb, which flip, which company, which grade. After all, we see every company missing the mark on cards here and there, leaving us all going, 'How in heck did that card get that grade?' Be it over or under grading. Ultimately, and this is just my collecting philosophy and thus an opinion worth what I'm charging for it, if one selects cards based solely on the condition of the card itself and buys cards they love, they can never go wrong.
Now when it comes to liquidity and value down the line-- for those collectors concerned with value and resale (and not everyone is, especially when buying to keep til you croak)-- then it might be time to consider questions like, "What slab commands the highest dollar for this particular card?" But truth is, if one scrutinizes the card within the holder hard enough when considering a purchase, it will almost always turn out right. Lots of us know when they see a card that is truly mint or GRADE X, and will get that grade at any company if submitted raw. Sometimes it may take a few subs to find graders who agree, but it usually happens if one is really focused on the card and its quality.
Again, this is just my opinion; I just believe that the card is king, and if the focus is always on the card, the choice of TPG is almost rendered moot.
Personally since I plan on holding my cards for the foreseeable future I determined early on that PSA was the best choice for me. Others may choose BGS.
Business in many ways is a competition and the sales volumes reflect the attitudes of market participants. In my posts I am referencing this and I personally believe this is one of major reasons the gap continues to widen in realized prices.
At this time the market collectively has chosen PSA. This could change perhaps in the future but at this moment in time they dominate. This is not disputable.
I personally would not invest a great deal in BGS graded cards but if you choose to that is great and David Peck's opinion should naturally have no bearing on your decision nor should it have any impact on others.
At this time I still have a handful of expensive cards in BGS holders and I realize there have been many nice cards graded by Beckett. That being said when a company sees their business essentially collapse there has to be some reason behind it and pointing this out is not bashing the company.
Nokia used to dominate the handset market and over the years their market share has declined substantially and the company is a fraction of what it once was. The graded card industry is no different and BGS used to compete head to head with PSA in the number of cards they grade and now they don't. This is just a fact.
<< <i>Competition is a good thing and I'm sure there will be plenty of it going on as long as there is plenty of money to be made in this industry.
IMO the best move for Becket would be to tighten up their grading standards as it seems PSA has done over the last decade.
As we've seen the '70s really take off as of late and now the 80s are coming up there is plenty of opportunity and incentive for TPGs to evolve so that they can compete at their highest levels.
Things are just getting started. >>
Who cares!!!!
This card just hit EBAY recently and may confirm a trend is in place. BGS gave this example a 6 for centering. I have seen 9.5's with the same centering.
Going forward this is going to be very interesting to track.
BGS 9.5 Andre
I would say the centering is pretty close on both. PSA ranks the Hogan a 7 for centering and BGS ranks the Andre for the equivalent of a 10.
The Andre I would imagine will get some action regardless. Finding one with mint corners is a feat in itself.
Always looking to buy or trade for Andre the Giant autographs
psacard.com/psasetregistry/non-sports/famous-personage/andre-giant-master-set/alltimeset/180400
<< <i>PSA grading is so tough on these cards now. >>
Making DPeck's sets all the more unreal!
Looking to BUY n332 1889 SF Hess cards and high grade cards from 19th century especially. "Once you have wrestled everything else in life is easy" Dan Gable
<< <i>
<< <i>IMO this Beckett Hogan would get a PSA 7 at best as T/B centering falls between the 70/30 to 75/25 guidelines:
WOW! Really!!!!
Unbelievable! >>
They measure centering top of arch to bottom of arch.
https://kennerstartinglineup.blogspot.com/
<< <i>
<< <i>PSA grading is so tough on these cards now. >>
Making DPeck's sets all the more unreal! >>
Thanks Rob. I still have 2,000 or so raw cards and none are going to grade high. I am tapped out on any cards from the set to submit.
9.5 Hogan
8 OC Hogan