Make a Suggestion to Grading Companies
 

I thought i would make this thread, so we, all valued consumers, can make suggestions to grading companies, in hopes that they read this thread. I have seen we have a member of SGC and at least one from Beckett, not sure about PSA.


Here is my first suggestion..... For Beckett and PSA, offer a black background option. SGC cards look so much nicer die to the black background. I just think it would be nice to have the option to put your holders on a level playing field!

good luck
 

FUBAR

Although it's been awhile, I seem to recall threads in the past, on a variety of boards, recommending changes to the holder, aesthetic or otherwise (more secure, new tamper-evident features. etc). I also seem to recall they were almost universally panned by collectors, who didn't want to see any lack of uniformity in their collections and who viewed a change in holder as merely a money-grubbing ploy to garner all sorts of resubmissions by the TPG. In that sense, the TPGs are kind of damned if you do, damned if you don't. God forbid the pretty little plastic not look exactly the same on all holders.

there will always be people in find negative aspects no matter what you post. Even if you look for improvements, people will think it is a negative thing somehow!

All i said, is make the background color an option...... so those that prefer clear, can have it, and same with black. Everyone wants tamper proof, that to me isn't a suggestion.......

TPG is about customer service, you would think companies would listen to their customers.


If people don't have anything positive to say, Maybe they shouldn't say it... lets try to make this a positive thread, to maybe bring progression to our hobby

I saw a suggestion on another thread that I strongly agree with. For all cards in Authentic slabs, I would love to see a description of why it was slabbed that way. This would help stop the mystery behind why it was determined to be an "A".

Maybe something like A - TRM, etc....


Rob

I agree Rob, that would be a great idea!!!

I would like to see a descriptive notation on the holder with less emphasis on a numerical grade.

For example, I posted on the main board an Old Judge card I once owned that had a gem front, with perfect photo clarity, but because of some reverse paper loss was graded Poor. Rather than see the grade of 1, which I felt was meaningless, I would rather have seen the label read "NR MT front, reverse paper loss." That tells me everything I need to know about the card. The grade 1, on the other hand, told me absolutely nothing. The card could still have received a grade, in this case perhaps Good or Very Good.

Now of course I know the graders would never phase out the numerical system, but that would be my wish. Switch to a descriptive system with a short but to the point assessment of the card.

Make eye exams a mandatory part of the interview process for all graders !!!!

A Couple of Suggestions
 

First, I too would like to see a reason for the Authentic grade.

Second, a breakdown of the grade would also be nice (something like what Beckett already does). I'm not sure it would completely address Barry's concern, but it would be a good first step. I just think that OJ's are unique in how they are evaluated. But then again, I think that perhaps strip cards are also unique.

Third, there are alot of collectors (esp pre-war) who focus on the different backs. The TPG's should differenciate between them. SGC does a decent job with this, but they don't break it down far enough (like the difference in factories).

Fourth, the price of re-holdering should be lower. Right now the cost to re-holder is basically the same as to have a card graded. If changes are made (like suggested above), we should be able to have them re-identified for a reasonable price. Right now, it's cheaper for me to crack them out and resubmit under a grading special. This of course leads to some problems with the pop reports.

Fifth, share crossover info with the other TPG's.

just my 2 cents

Bruce

SO maybe a grade for the front and one for the back is what you might be interested in??

re: population reports

If you "unslab" a card, can you not report this to the TPG to remove it from their population report?? I would think this would be in the best interest of the card holder as his card would have one less competitor. It would also help eliminate anyone using stolen scans to try to sell a card they don't own.

In the coin world it is very common for dealers to assign 2 different grades to a coin, 1 for the front and 1 for the back. It is not done on graded coins though. I also see many folks describe cards like this. Perhaps it is something that should be considered.

As for the population reports, most TPGs want you to send in the label for them to remove the item from the pop report. I'm not sure how "firm" they are on this request, but I've never received any of my labels back. I've also sent labels back to a company when I send cards to be graded, and I have not seen a decrease in the pop reports. It's only been a few and there might be a delay in removing them, or they may have just graded the same card in the same grade. After saying all this, if the TPGs aren't serious about removing items from the pop reports, then I guess it will really never matter if they "talk" to each other.

Jim (sorry I lost track of this thread)- a separate front and back grade is possible, but not neccessarily the only way to go. Not sure how you would grade the back of an Old Judge or other blank backed card.

But in the example in my previous post, the grade might read: "NR MT front, paper loss on reverse." That at least describes the card to me well enough that even if I didn't see it I would have a pretty good idea of what it looked like. But with a grade of Poor I would have assumed multiple creases, staining, etc., and I would have been way off.

Beckett use to have the 4 individual grades (corners, edges, surface, and centering) that would combine for an overall score, but stopped doing this a couple years ago for BVG. They still do it for BGS (modern cards) I believe. I thought it was a bad move for BVG to stop doing this. The four subgrades were great and I would like to see them reinstate it. Perhaps it added too much time for each submission? Anything on the label that would give a reason as to why it didn't receive a higher grade would make it a better system, IMO.

As a final note, I would like the TPGs to keep the grading objective and not bring eye appeal into the grade. Stick to the facts.

Rob
:)

BGS still does this and as far as I know, your overall grade will never be more then 1 point above the lowest subgrade. so if you get a 9 for 3 categories and a 5 for the other, your grade will be a six!

Another option i wish grading companies had was the option to have it graded as authentic (with no qualifiers) rather then a number grade. It would come with a different style/class of flip. This way you are ensured the card is real and you are buying/selling the card, not the slab!

this is in addition to the suggestion that all cards not able to receive a number receive the authentic tag with qualifiers.