Crossover Issue

[ScottFandango]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

I guess I'm just unlucky, SGC has never and I mean never missed paper loss or pencil marks on any of my submissions. I disagree with the assessment that they are more lax on both of those than PSA.

i have had many SGC 10 that would only become PSA authentic, due to paper loss...

also since they dont designate pencil mark like PSA (MK qualifier) you will usually get a card to go from SGC 30 to PSA 3 MK.... A BIG DIFFERENCE

[ScottFandango]

just to make it clear, i dont think crossovers work either way

i think PSA would be just as stingy on SGC cards that someone wanted to cross...

also, most of my experience comes in low grade pre war, and there is a big difference when you include a qualifier or not (pencil marks)...

that is why i think the PSA outsells SGC in similar low grades, because you dont know if the SGC card has pencil mark or not!!!!!!

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by ScottFandango

i have had many SGC 10 that would only become PSA authentic, due to paper loss...

also since they dont designate pencil mark like PSA (MK qualifier) you will usually get a card to go from SGC 30 to PSA 3 MK.... A BIG DIFFERENCE

There is a R303 on ebay now that has paper loss on the front (it appears) and is a PSA 4! I have seen many a PSA card with paperloss graded much higher than Authentic. Maybe your unlucky too!

[dancollins]

Unfortunately I did consent because I did not specify a minimum grade. It was actually wrote on the form "any numerical grade" I guess the reason I was so pissed off and lashed out like I did is because we do all know the issues with PSA and I would have never ever ever and never have submitted a crossover to PSA without a minimum grade and I was expecting a non bias opinion from SGC and I do not feel I received one. Again when I looked through the cards that they downgraded I could see there point on several of them but there were quit a few that I did not see the grade as being accurate, and with SGC's customer service blowing PSA's away I guess in my mind I am holding SGC to a higher standard and I don't feel I received that standard. All of the grading companies have different standards in grading and I see that especially now and another thing I think most people do not realize is that each grading company may grade specific sets differently and that is my experience. No matter what by mentioning this experience may help us all and may make the grading companies at least discuss this issue internally to better themselves. Well at least SGC will, PSA probably dont even read this board.

[BCauley]

Ugh. Each day I go to work in the morning I say that when I get home that night I'm going to get stuff ready to mail out to SGC. The past few days I get on and see this thread which then reminds me that I forgot to do it again and am just too tired to be bothered with it right now.

[T206Collector]

Dan,

I give you a lot of credit for how your opinions and statements have evolved in this thread. You're cearly a smart guy that got totally "F'ed" by the system -- you thought you assumed some risk, but not this much. You're totally justified in wanting to kick someone's teeth in. I would, too. But, in the end, I think you understand that it was unfortunately your risk to assume under the circumstances. Certainly lessons to be learned by all here.

[Bridwell]

Dan had mentioned earlier that he likes to collect a registry set and have the whole set in matching holders. I do, too. The cards look great that way and they rate well on the registries. A set of half SGC and half PSA looks bad, in my opinion. I don't blame him for trusting that SGC would grade his cards fairly, and without bias. He was willing to live with some downgrades so he didn't specify minimums. I agree with Dan and others who think there was bias by SGC.

SGC and PSA act like two neighborhood kids, trying to prove one is tougher than the other.

Ron R

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by Bridwell

I agree with Dan and others who think there was bias by SGC.

SGC has no incentive to undergrade PSA cards. It would only hurt their business to do so.

[Al C.risafulli]

My feeling is that if you submit a card in a holder, you're doing it with the knowledge that the grader can't see the edges, and can't examine the card as close up as they could if the card was raw. As such, your grader might go a little more conservative.

I have no concerns that PSA or SGC are biased against one another's holders. They want the cards IN their holders - not out of them.

-Al