1949 Jackies on Memory Lane
 

These two cards are up for auction on Memory Lane. As of right now, the PSA 9 is Edging out the SGC by about 10%. In my mind, the SGC example BLOWS AWAY the PSA by any measure (most notably the registration, the whiter borders, and that awful print-Mark). I am extremely interested to see which carries the day: the card or the holder.

My bet is on holder. By more than 10%. But yea, the sgc card looks way nicer. If they were both in psa 9 holders I would easily bid 20-30% more for the sgc card.

I don't disagree with you Jesse, but how crazy is that? It is simply mind-numbing.

...and what's with that "O" on the cap? Print defect?

Yes. They are called "fisheyes".

Or could just be Bo Jackson's cap?

Yea I agree - The SGC card should blow the PSA out of the water at the final hammer...the card - not the holder - after 20ish years of looking at slabs - I may be there..........

Normally in these threads I don't see the big deal, or even disagree with the premise completely. But this one is spot on, the SGC is SO much nicer it's mind-blowing.

If only they had some way to indicate that the card had a major print defect but was otherwise in mint condition.

one good thing you will never ever see a Fake with a printers defect
 

Hickey

here is a detailed description
A hickey is a small spot or imperfection that appears in print on images or flat tints. It is sometimes called a bulls eye or fish eye. The problem is most visible in areas of heavy ink coverage.

There are two types of hickeys:

Void hickeys are blank, unprinted spots in a printed area.
Doughnut hickeys are solid printed areas surrounded by a circular unprinted area. Doughnut hickeys produced by particles of ink skin collecting on the blanket or plate are called ink hickeys.
Hickeys are caused by dirt, paper fibers or hardened specks of ink on the printing plate or blanket. On offset presses the addition of a special roller, called a hickey-picking roller, can minimize the effects of hickeys.
one good thing you will never ever see a Fake with a printers defect
also with PSA you can look up Cert and Population report easily , try looking up cert at SGC not as easy

Some people must care about the PSA registry. I would buy the SGC card all day over the PSA graded one.

LOL. Someone really clever could come up with a two letter abbreviation, I bet.

Just a fact of life, in most cases, SGC flips are going to sell at a discount to the equivalent PSA flip. Outside this forum, most people prefer PSA, especially for post-war and modern, as evidenced by the relative pops.

SGC card has a better looking front than PSA no argument
 

SGC card is better aesthetic looking card than PSA no argument not even close .
Under normal circumstances with identical cards PSA 9 will almost always out perform SGC ,this SGC card may be nicer but will still sell for less

And the funny thing is that if you tried crossing the card to psa, they wouldn't give it a 9 even if it warrants it. Their "objective" grading standards would fly out the window in the interest of protecting their brand. It's really the fault of the consumer for feeding into this nonsense. How a person in search of a high grade 49 Bowman Jackie, who has the option between these two cards, could actually CHOOSE the PSA (at a greater cost at that) is beyond me. The fisheye alone is enough to tilt the balance, never mind the substantial difference in registration and the color of the borders. The "it's just the way it is" mentality doesn't sit well with me. We on this board are the collectors/Consumers. We are part of the problem, and could be part of the solution if we shift the paradigm, and stop blindly accepting "the way it is."

Bingo!

It happens time and time again...When Suzuki was around, people were saying their cars were really nice. The Verona was a top shelf car for a discounted price compared to a Honda. You got more bang for your buck. Now Suzuki is gone, and Honda is still around.

Try watches if you want to see absurd pricing based on brand name. You can pay thousands for a watch with literally the same movement, and similar quality fit and finish, as a watch at a fraction of the price. Only difference is the brand.

With watches, the watch itself is the product. With grading, the card is the "product" (for lack of a better term). You can sell a Patek in a Seiko box, and it's still a Patek.

No, it's a good analogy. Same watch different brand; same card different flip.

The watch brand is more akin to 1949 Bowman vs Leaf than it is to PSA vs SGC.

We can agree to disagree.

Agreed. Which is not to say there is no validity to your analogy. There is. I just don't think it is completely analogous.

This is a chronograph made by a meticulous one man shop in China. Whatever you think of the style, in hand it is just as nice or nicer in terms of quality than similar watches by the medium tier Swiss brands such as Tag, Baume and Mercier, etc. The movement is probably better than the generic ETA ones they use. It cost all of $400; change the name to one of those Swiss companies and it sells for multiples of that.

is it really "mind numbing" that psa's registry can impact the selling prices of high-grade cards?

this has been a reality in the hobby for years.

IMO it's not just the registry. On commons that is certainly most of the explanation, but on stars and HOFers, I think many people just perceive the company as better.

Agreed....interested in seeing where the final sales prices.

Z

PSA has the marketing in their corner. Once upon a time for modern cards the perception was that a BGS 9.5 was harder to score than a PSA 10 and sold at a slight premium. Now the PSA 10 sells at a substantial premium.

This is a somewhat different case of course, as we can all see which of the two cards is nicer this time, but I don't put much faith in PSA slabs as a better long-term investment than SGC slabs. Over say 25 years, maybe the discrepancy remains constant, maybe it increases, maybe it decreases, maybe it flips. But paying a premium for a card that looks worse seems like the behavior of a bad investor (as opposed to either a collector or a good investor).

P.S. The '49 Bowman Jackie is an ugly card anyway.

I think most collectors assume a card like that has already been submitted for a cross to a psa 9 and didn't make it. I sure would have tried. The perception is that PSA's standards are tougher and that it's difficult to cross straight across. I have no data to back that up, other than the couple of times I've tried to cross sgc to psa and failed.

Peter I don't really think the watch analogy fits in this case. People associate value and quality with a watch brand just like they do with cars, clothes, etc. That new Hyundai may claim to have the same features as an s550, but I'm not going to drop 100k on one.

Right but my point is that at least in watches, and I don't know about cars, there is no good reason IMO to associate that quality and value with the higher priced brand. You can get the same or a higher quality watch for much much less. So I think it's right on point. It's the same phenomenon that leads people to pay more for the PSA brand.

Did you know that Mercedes once purchased their clutches from Ford?

Same clutch different holder.

QED

https://memorylaneinc.com/site/lots/...searchin=title

25% spread now with 2 weeks to go

I think a more apt comparison would be if two identical watches were offered for sale in different boxes/cases.... with people willing to pay more just because they liked a certain box/case better.

The watch analogy would be fine, except if you wear a $10,000 designer watch that's very effective at signalling to rivals, potential mates, etc. that you have high status and wealth. That signal may be worth more than $10,000.

You could try strapping a PSA graded '52 Topps Mantle to your wrist, but I wouldn't expect you'd derive much social benefit from it.

LOL too funny. In this day and age you can probably achieve the same effect with a PSA graded Mantle by posting one on your Facebook page though.

Funny you should say that Glenn. I had a similar thought when making the distinction, but didn't care to get into it. Potential clients don't care if my CJ Cobb is in a PSA or an SGC holder, but you better believe they are looking at my wrist.

Can banter all you want but its put your money where you mouth is...people will say buy the card not the holder...but when is there money and its over $10,000 they suddenly dont follow their logic..

$200 dollar cards is a lot different and easy to follow that philosophy..

But for the big dollar cards....sell the holder not the card always wins

For example:

https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...ription-071515

https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...umbnail-071515

Wow! I thought a side-by-side was appropriate. Maybe I was born to collect and not "invest," but I'm on the SGC one here ALL DAY as well. I would definitely put my money where my mouth is (as only Jake can put it) if I were in the market for a high-grade 52 mantle. Once again, it isn't even close.

Scans could be part of the perceived difference. We have seen repeated evidence here that scans can change the appearance of a card for better and for worse.

The SGC Mantle is substantially nicer but the prices also reflect that.

The SGC sold in May 2016 for $215.000 almost 40% higher than the
PSA which sold for $155,350 in November 2016.

I think part of that may be due to the market drop from its (manipulated) peak in the spring/summer of 16.

Why can't it be both? If I was looking for a PSA 9, I wouldn't buy this PSA Robinson because of the print mark. I wouldn't buy SGC because it won't cross. Why pay 9 price for an 8 (or less)?

[QUOTE=orly57;1684875]Funny you should say that Glenn. I had a similar thought when making the distinction, but didn't care to get into it. Potential clients don't care if my CJ Cobb is in a PSA or an SGC holder, but you better believe they are looking at my wrist.[/QUO

Do people actually still wear watches? I haven't worn a watch 10 times since I bought my first smart phone.

That Mantle is different because people pay big premiums for dead centered 51 and 52 Mantles. In the case of the 52 it can be more than double what a card in that grade would typically sell for. Both cards are very hard to find centered. A scenario like that it what it will take for an equivalent sgc grade to outsell a psa in the same auction.

right its just talk when you say 'If i were in the market' Go and buy a sgc 7 for more than the psa 7 goes and then talk about how pretty the card is....talk is cheap

I bought my sgc 5.5 1914 CJ Cobb for more than this psa 5 sold for (last public sale of a psa 5). Is that good enough for you? This is well over your made-up 10k threshold right? And since I'm not buying an sgc or a psa 7 mantle based on a dare from the forum-clown, you will have to take my word for it.
If you had read all the posts, you would know that the SGC Mantle at issue actually outsold that psa mantle, so it appears that a CARD collector actually did put their money where their mouth is.

Cherry picking two cards is not a meaningful comparison, for one thing you are leaving out the market trend between the two points of sale. Look at the overall pattern of SGC.

1/14/17 Memory Lane Image 55 $104,400.00
12/9/16 Goodwin Image 5 $87,846.00
10/30/16 Goldin Image 13 $82,075.00
8/28/16 Heritage Image 5 $89,625.00
5/14/16 Heritage Image 13 $215,100.00

And PSA.

2/4/16 Goldin Image 10 $183,750.00
11/19/16 Heritage Image 12 $155,350.00
11/3/16 Sports Card Link Image 27 $149,513.00
8/28/16 Heritage Image 11 $203,150.00
8/20/16 Memory Lane Image 37 $157,200.00
8/19/16 Mile High Image 20 $164,884.00
6/10/16 Goodwin Image 5 $218,650.00
3/7/16 eBay Image pwcc_auctions s***e 87 $161,100.00

I didn't pick those cards. Someone else did. And I'm not debating that psa gets more than sgc, I am merely addressing the fact that IN CERTAIN INSTANCES it is absurd.

I never said you did, did I? :)

But yeah, I don't dispute that sometimes one sees really stupid prices.

To be clear, my post was in response to the claim that the PSA card always sells for more than the SGC card in the same grade. The use of "always" is a dare to cherry-pick on the grounds that it isn't actually possible to find a contradictory example.