I think BVG is so far behind because their vintage never crosses over at the same grade. It's usually 1 or sometimes even 2 grades higher than it should be. They also let more trimmed/altered cards slip by. I currently own a pre-war BVG slab with a numerical grade that very obviously measures short.
Their BGS brand for modern cards, on the other hand, seems to be a high quality product and sells even better than PSA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwolf1963
Curious with the SGC adopting the PSA club pricing model and increased rates if Beckett has changed their model at all?
I know there's the never-ending debate on PSA vs. SGC - likes, dislikes, values, consistency, etc - but I rarely hear/see BVG thrown in? I know, I know, BVG resale values pale in comparison (especially to PSA), but I always wondered why? Aside from not liking the bullet-proof holders, I never understood why they are a distant 3rd option and/or garner so much less on resale? The cards that I have seen them grade seem to be fairly consistent - at least as much as PSA and SGC, if not even better. Everyone here has some horror story over PSA grading a creased or paper-loss card (especially prewar) as 4, 5 or better. And those damn qualifiers - inconsistency - one card with worse centering has no qualifier vs. another of the same card which does. I've also heard the common perception that PSA grades bigger spenders less stringently. True or not, if that perception is common place .. and if consistency is very much in question, why then doesn't that chip-away at the perceived value? Isn't that a core reason for why BVG grading is less in-demand/less resale value?
I really not a fan (or hater) of any of them - just curious how/why BVG fell to the 3rd string depths.
|