[irv]

Originally Posted by Timbegs

I think a big reason is to have something of significance that is different from PSA. From a legal standpoint, I'd guess there was some issue with having the exact same 1-10 grading system as a new niche market entrant against the biggest, most established market competitor. Beckett also differentiated their product with a grade breakdown; I'm sure this is no coincidence. But, I'm not a lawyer, either. Just an educated guess.

However, I also remember reading somewhere that part of the rationale was the recognition that half point grading (and perhaps in the future, even smaller incremental grading) was inevitable. A 'better than average' 5 that could almost be a 6 can be 5.5! So, they set their scale 'wider' so to speak to be able to better distinguish between cards of different caliber within the grade. I believe PSA may have been first in half point grading but SGC was not far behind at all. And when PSA start giving out tenth of a point grades, SGC will have a complete, 1-100 scale to match. In line with that differentiation, SGC 98 is a card that is by all reasonable standards (read PSA and Beckett) a '10.' However, SGC reserves the 100 PRISTINE grade for that '10' that is literally flawless in every sense that a card can be. PSA can't really distinguish their 10's even though subtle differences among 10's must exist.

I think SGC's holder looks MUCH nicer than the PSA holder. Go look up your favorite card on ebay, sort by highest price and be objective on two similar graded cards. Which holder makes the card look better? Since I think it's clearly SGC and I only buy and keep, when I get cards graded they're for me and I want them to look their best.

All three companies miss. All three companies have tried to do things to innovate - some initiatives being better than others. However, what no one can beat PSA in is longevity and resale value and they're not unrelated. However, I think SGC does a great job every step of the way.

Great analogy, Tim.