What's this SGC rumor????

[thejuanscards]

The 1969 Mantle PSA 6 pictured is mine. Like I state in my ebay description, I expected no higher than a 3 on the card. I had little into it, and only graded it to make an extra 25% or so. This card was in a lot of 85 cards that I graded, and the most came back where they should have. In this case, another card, a 1969 Ron Santo, should have been a 6, but was slabbed as a 3. The Mantle and Santo were 3 or 4 serial numbers apart, not right next to each other.....but I am guessing that somehow they got switched. They might as well take the Santo out of the database, because I cracked it on the day I received it back. The Mantle just makes me sick, though. You can see the corner wear in the picture, but there is also a very obvious crease on the back....and the back has seen better days. I am always hoping for better grades......but this one.....John

[murcerfan]

^^^They might as well take the Santo out of the database, because I cracked it on the day I received it back.

you sent the flip back, right?

[tribefan]

So, what's the rumor?

[christopher.herman]

Originally Posted by thejuanscards

The 1969 Mantle PSA 6 pictured is mine. Like I state in my ebay description, I expected no higher than a 3 on the card. I had little into it, and only graded it to make an extra 25% or so. This card was in a lot of 85 cards that I graded, and the most came back where they should have. In this case, another card, a 1969 Ron Santo, should have been a 6, but was slabbed as a 3. The Mantle and Santo were 3 or 4 serial numbers apart, not right next to each other.....but I am guessing that somehow they got switched. They might as well take the Santo out of the database, because I cracked it on the day I received it back. The Mantle just makes me sick, though. You can see the corner wear in the picture, but there is also a very obvious crease on the back....and the back has seen better days. I am always hoping for better grades......but this one.....John

Very honest. The hobby needs more like you.

[E93]

I submitted several cards at the National and received outstanding service and accurate grading.
JimB

[Jaybird]

Originally Posted by E93

I submitted several cards at the National and received outstanding service and accurate grading.
JimB

+1

[Mrvintage]

Here is my National grading experiences...First off i had a 33 George C Miller that was graded a psa 4(mk). Not wanting the qualifier I take the card to SGC and ask about a crossover. The guys that helps me at the SGC booth says he is one of the grader so I show him the card and he looks it over and says "that shouldn't be a problem" about getting a straight 4 grade so i pay the 20.00 bucks and come back 2 hours later to pick up my card and it is still in the psa holder with a sticker that says it didn't meet the min grade. I cracked out a psa 3 George C Miller and took it to psa and it got bumped to a psa 3.5. I took 3 1996 Ex-2000 Kobe Bryant rookies that were pulled by myself from boxes that same day to Beckett for their raw card review and when I picked them up I had an 8.5, 8, and one that said evidence of trimming....all of the companies make mistakes

[canjond]

Originally Posted by Mrvintage

so I show him the card and he looks it over and says "that shouldn't be a problem" about getting a straight 4 grade so i pay the 20.00 bucks and come back 2 hours later to pick up my card and it is still in the psa holder with a sticker that says it didn't meet the min grade.

I like SGC, but if this happened to me, I would be VERY pissed. I'm happy SGC takes cross-overs seriously, but if a grader tells you "it shouldn't be a problem", you then pay him, and it instantly becomes a problem - well to me that's bad practice.

[JamesGallo]

What is going on here!! Ever since Spence bought in at SGC that place has been a freaking mess. Michael is one of the best employees they have ever had and his customer service is a HUGE reason why I spend so much time and money with SGC. They can't manage to keep one guy happy. I was wondering why I didn't see him at the National and this explains why. IMO I will not be using SGC until this mess gets cleaned up one way or the other. This back and forth is just not acceptable.

I like the graders over there and all, but honestly who is running things from a service point of view. As far as I am concerned the front man, the customer service rep is the face of the company and they keep messing with it. I love SGC and really have always been a huge supporter but this is crap.

One simple question....
How do you ruin a great company in less then 1 year?

Answer-Get bought by JSA.

James Gallo

[cobblove]

I have been having cards graded sence 1998 by PSA, When SGC first came out I used them just as much as PSA bc they were exciting and new, They also had the .5 grade thing. So all is good for the next 10 years for me and then SGC just seems to just D#*K me around. Up untill the last year I used them maybe 2-4xs a year. After the last national I told them I would never use them again. Was not pleased with my customer service at the national and I now shifted towards BVG as well. I sent them 80 cards this national all PRe 1970. Im going to give them a chance which I feel they diserve. They graded all my cards exactly how I felt they should grade.
PSA and BVG for me!!! SGC never again!!

[4815162342]

I feel that the tide is turning.

[alanu]

Concerning BVG, I haven't used them for pre-war and I like BGS for new shiny stuff, but have had some problems with buying higher grade (EX-MT or better) 1950-60's cards and trying to cross them to PSA or SGC, they often come back "evidence of trimming"

[vintagetoppsguy]

When I search "PSA" on eBay, then filter by "Cards" then "Baseball," here are the results:

151,101 Total
40,928 1981-present
99,086 1942-1980
11,760 Pre-1942
1,165 Not Specified

When I search "SGC" and apply the same filters, here are the results:

16,175 Total
1,465 1981-present
8,906 1942-1980
5,895 Pre-1942
121 Not Specified

Here's what that tells me. There are a lot of people submitting modern CRAP (1981 to present) to PSA. The majority of PSA's business is 1942-1980 and I attribute this to the set registry. Pre-War submissions are pretty close (which another member already pointed out).

[jp1216]

I never really liked BGS/BVG in the past. Slabs were bigger, thicker and (IMHO) blurrier. Tough to see the card inside the slab - if you know what I mean.
But, I've crossed a total of 4 cards (all pre-war) from BVG to SGC over the years and every one of them got a +1 bump. Best card was a BVG 1 Cy Young that ended up in a beautiful SGC 20 slab.
No one ever likes to send in cards to a company 'with issues' or change. Think GAI a few years ago. But I'd still trust and use SGC right now.

[cobblove]

"Concerning BVG, I haven't used them for pre-war and I like BGS for new shiny stuff, but have had some problems with buying higher grade (EX-MT or better) 1950-60's cards and trying to cross them to PSA or SGC, they often come back "evidence of trimming"""

Crossing over is the best thing grading companies can do to creat doubt with competitors. Cracking out with cause different results