![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Just wondering about others experience, Can we assume that a BCCG 9 would at least grade out a a PSA 7? I have occasionally seen a few vintage graded BCCG 9 that I considered purchasing but never took the chance.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I think my dealer friend Tony put it best in this article. "well, I don't know why" with reference to BCCG.
Keep in mind this is from 2005. http://www.monstercards.net/columns/psa060205.html |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Yep...
__________________
Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Currently working on 1956, '63 and '72 Topps complete sets. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
"In an effort to reach our wider audience, BCCG was created as a high-volume grading service intended to provide collectors with an attractive and affordable alternative to other graded card products. Simplified 10-point grading scale No internal sleeve Quality archival protection Sonically sealed/tamper-proof protection" In this old post, you can actually see how their numbers compare to the norm. In my opinion, this is a 100% deceptive. What is the purpose of this other than to deceive? "BCCG has a completely different grading scale from any of the other grading companies including Beckett. The BCCG grading scale is: BCCG 10 Mint or Better = BGS 9 or Better BCCG 9 Near Mint or Better = BGS 7 or Better BCCG 8 Excellent or Better = BGS 5 or Better BCCG 7 Very Good or Better = BGS 3 or Better BCCG 6 Good or Better = BGS 2 or Better BCCG 5 Poor or Better = BGS 1 or Better" In this older post, it sounds like you also thought the same once upon a time? http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=220046 Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEgaZGrf2gg
__________________
52 Topps cards. https://www.flickr.com/photos/144160280@N05/ http://www.net54baseball.com/album.php?albumid=922 Last edited by irv; 12-19-2018 at 08:34 AM. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
If people can't be bothered to read the words on the flip, that sounds like their problem, not BCCG. And the link you posted only shows that I would be disappointed getting a card graded by BCCG, not that they're scammers.
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Agree technically that they are not scammers. But it is a very odd practice and overall business model. Unethical? No. Extremely frustrating? Yes.
__________________
Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Currently working on 1956, '63 and '72 Topps complete sets. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The BCCG model is absolutely a play to the low information/less experienced collector. It is a means of getting poor condition cards into the hands of collectors who will think they have a a high quality card when they do not. It is also a tool for predatory sellers masking junk as high quality.
It is not illegal and does not impact me but they are attempting to take advantage of those who are uninformed. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Adam (Exhibitman) noted the exact reason for BCCG. Without going into gruesome detail, BCCG was a great and terrible decision for BGS at the same time.
Rich
__________________
Look for our show listings in the Net 54 Calendar section |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bccg vs raw | cardsnstuff | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 28 | 07-17-2017 06:39 PM |
Bccg | Manny Trillo | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 12 | 11-03-2016 04:00 AM |