Do You Think PSA and SGC Are Grading Harder Than They Used To? This May Be the Reason Why!!

[@returntocollecting]

Great video Graig! I appreciate all of the homework that you put into it! I think that grading is absolutely tougher now. I think old grading had some accurate grades, but the consistency wasn't there. Now that they are using technology to become consistent, it will cause issues with older graded cards (as you showed with the T206 Mathewson example). My take, I'll buy old or new slabs from either PSA or SGC, but the card has to look the grade to me. If I think the grade is off (card is worse than the grade, I won't buy it). If the card looks better than the grade, I will buy it. My bigger issue is how this impacts vintage much more than modern. I think the majority of vintage cards are already graded under the old process. As the process improves, there aren't any "new" vintage cards (by definition) being created to grade. Primarily, only modern cards will benefit from the new process. Plus, anyone trying to do a crossover or upgrade the slab of an older graded vintage card, will take a huge hit on the grade with these changes. Basically, the position of the grading companies is "we didn't do a great job for the last 20 years, so now we'll try to fix it at the cost of our customers." Not sure that would fly in any other industry... Thanks for sharing this video and sorry for my rant...

[@MidLifeCards]

As always, I think you make some great points. I really appreciate you watching and taking the time to comment, especially such a thorough and thoughtful comment. I always appreciate what you have to say. :-)

[@davidlapointe7446]

Awesome job Graig. I love how relatable u r compared to some of the other guys that r on KZbin regarding the sports card industry. I love your videos, keep up the great work

[@MidLifeCards]

That means a ton. Thanks so much. More than anything, I'm "one of us" to the core. It makes me happy to hear that I come across as part of the group, because that's sure how I feel. Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment. It means a ton.

[@ACollectorsDream]

Excellent video, really appreciate all the research and work you put into these videos. For me, SGC is more consistent overall. Also remember that PSA only added half grades in the last few years. My 53’ Mantle is a 6 and probably closer to 7 but when I graded it no half grades were given. Always buy the card not the grade, which are just opinions of the grader. Thanks again for sharing

[@MidLifeCards]

Thanks Orlando. Quite frankly, I agree that SGC is the most consistent grader.

[@brentrichardsbaseballcards]

It’s not probably, it’s WAY HARDER now. Tech has changed everything

[@MidLifeCards]

Certainly appears that way.

[@danielbernier6095]

Graig. I want to thank you personally for bringing out these informative videos. I'm new this year to buying graded cards. I would say I'm mostly old school when it comes to collecting. As a collector, I appreciate the care a card gets preserving it going forward by having it encapsulated in a holder. I still prefer though a nice looking complete set that can be viewed and enjoyed. I will probably buy more graded cards down the road but sparingly as I'm running out of room. In buying, I find myself trying to take advantage of deals by buying the card and not the grade. You showed great examples of how there have been changes. Hopefully someday grading is consistant.

[@MidLifeCards]

I appreciate the kind words and appreciate you taking the time to watch and comment.

[@ken-pr2df]

Thank you for sharing this video and the time and energy you put into it!! I always continue to learn and be inspired by your content!!

[@MidLifeCards]

Thanks so much. That means a ton.

[@phillipmichalec9486]

I THINK MOST COLLECTORS WANT IS CONSISTENCY. CAN YOU IMAGINE A GRADER LOOKING AT THESE CARDS ALL DAY LONG AND NOT BEING AFFECTED. PLUS YOU HAVE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL GRADERS ON HOW THEY SEE THESE CARDS. THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR KNOWLEDGE.

[@MidLifeCards]

True.

[@cardboardandplastic]

CGC is now grading for half the price of PSA/SGC. $9.60 and the best slab in the hobby. I will use SGC/PSA for cards that different sizes like T206 and 1933 Goudey where they don't have cut outs for those cards and use plastic bags like BGS/BVG. If Beckett starts charging $8 with decent turnaround, I will use them. Paying $20 for someone to look at my card for 30 seconds is insane.

[@MidLifeCards]

My only issue with a company outside of the big ones, is that many collectors aren't willing to buy cards in those holders, should I choose to sell.

[@blueodum]

@@MidLifeCards I think this will change. I'm willing to buy CSG/CGC because I believe they've already proved themselves competent graders. For vintage, I regard them as second to SGC for consistency. BVG I regard as complete garbage.

[@cardboardandplastic]

@@MidLifeCards CGC is a big one. In fact they grade more cards per month than SGC when you combine TCG with sports cards. CGC will never overtake PSA, but SGC is in big trouble with the money behind CGC.

[@valdynsakai5051]

Thanks for your video! It’s good that grading is getting harder because in some point in time I will need to take a inventory and get some kind of value for insurance purposes.

[@MidLifeCards]

Appreciate it.

[@brutusonbaseball]

Great video, thanks for doing all the research on this and presenting. I totally agree that grading has changed, as technology evolves it has to change! I think the biggest difficulty right now with the new technology and evaluating older grades using the eye is on the surface. This new technology seems to be really hard on surface imperfections that can't be seen very well with the eye or even a magnifier. That's the one area that makes me pause a bit when pick up older slabs.

[@MidLifeCards]

I 100% agree. Appreciate that kind words.

[@davidallen2133wolfy]

Thanks Graig for all your hard work and research on these issues great video again as usual

[@MidLifeCards]

Thanks so much. That truly means a lot. I put a lot of thought into how to present this information to everyone. It's a difficult subject...but I do think it's a topic we all need to continue to follow and be aware of what's happening behind the scenes. :-)

[@ncvikingsfan8161]

Enjoyed this topic. I just got back my first ever submission from SGC and was very pleased with the grades; they appeared to be consistent with what i expected. Don't like the visible variations of PSA cards with same grades. Anyway, appreciate your video! 👍

[@MidLifeCards]

Appreciate that. Glad to hear that your submission went well. I think SGC does a really great job. I also think PSA has a lot going for them as well. Ultimately, I want collectors to continue to have a handful of viable options because competition breeds improvement for us and lower prices!! :-)

[@TheCardDeal]

Also keep in mind new collectors, don't go by "new label" design. Many people resend in slabs to get replaced with new label and case, but will always have the original lower certification label. So best to focus on both.

[@MidLifeCards]

I totally agree. I've talked about that in some recent videos as well. Quite frankly, I don't think PSA should replace the flip (label) when they reencapsulate cards. They should only replace the plastic. But, that's just my opinon.

[@TheCardDeal]

@@MidLifeCards Makes sense, I know for me and my OCD, I do like the uniform look when I have my slabs displayed. But I am more focused now on obtaining more cards not money for plastic. PC cards can wait and slowly trickle in when I send a 20.card order I try to do 5 PC and 15 to trade and sell. Keep up the good content, appreciate you taking the time to be helpful and informative. We need all the new collectors we can get to keep the hobby thriving with honest people. It gets overshadowed by the "noise" at times. ⚾️🇺🇲✌🏽

[@kenrogers2179]

Vintage-only collector here... It has everything to do with how the question is asked and unless the question takes into account PSA/SGC use of new tech to grade, then the reps at PSA/SGC can understand the question broadly and give us an evasive or disingenuous response. With PSA under Joe Orlando, he was quoted as saying that vintage cards are graded with an understanding of the limitations of their manufacture, so fuzzy edges and light print bubbles are supposed to be diminished in importance when grading. But the absolute feast these companies are now enjoying makes it very much in their interest to keep us hungry for good grades and, in my fairly broad experience with grading(hundreds of cards at both SGC and PSA) the grading standards have very much tightened up. What else are they going to say? "Yeah, back in '92 when we(PSA) started we were making things up as we went along, blah, blah, blah..." Probably not going to happen. A good analogy is to the Genealogical/DNA businesses(23 and me, etc)... As more and more folks sign up and add their info the databases become truer representations of the population that they derive from... In the case of trading cards, PSA and SGC have to guard against the pop counts tilting too heavily toward the top or that set's value is going to stall or even possibly depress in value. Again, not talking 'grand conspiracy' stuff here, just small , deliberate pressures that can be put into the system to achieve the desired outcome 'generally'. And I'll add that, in my experience SGC is ruthless regarding centering and less so on corners and edges. PSA much tougher on corners and edges. Both about the same for surface. Thanks for the thoughtful vid!

[@MidLifeCards]

I think the quote from Joe Orlando that you included is a very telling one about some of the changes that may have taken place since he isn't running the show. Appreciate the response, as always!!

[@OlSargeCollects]

Solid informative video. Thanks for putting in the time to compile the information and then sharing with us!

[@MidLifeCards]

Appreciate you watching and taking the time to comment. Always glad to hear when my content is helpful to others.

[@TheGodfather1955]

As a collector rather than a seller, it can be a mixed bag. I won't buy a high end card unless its authenticated and graded. (I prefer the look of the SGC slabs) But my main reason to have any of my cards graded is for my wife to have something to go by in case (heaven forbid) something happens to me. I have quite a few valuable cards. Also, in grading the back of the card does matter. A perfect front means nothing with someone's felt tip marker on the back.

[@MidLifeCards]

I think your situation describes how many of us feel. Well said.

[@jasonjanega3537]

Great content! I do think it has gotten harder, that being said technology has advanced, therefore grading has gotten harder. Advancement in the tech finds things we couldn’t see from several years ago. It’s a good thing.

[@MidLifeCards]

Agree and agree. Well said.

[@DoubleDvintagebaseballcards]

Graig great video well done. I agree with everything you said in this video. I think the main point for me that people need to be aware of is some old grades hold up 100% to todays standard as you share the same thoughts. I love the technology PSA is using lets just have consistency and I think AI is the future for that to happen. 🤙🏻🤙🏻

[@MidLifeCards]

Thanks so much for the kind words. I worked hard to try to present this information in a fun way way. I got a little creative on a way I thought was interesting yet informative.

[@bradfountain1827]

I recently sent in 4 vintage cards to SGC to be re-graded because the slabs were scratched. I removed the cards from the slabs because I was curious how the grades would come back. The cards were carefully removed and immediately sent out in the identical condition. Two of the cards were graded in 2019, and 2 of the cards were graded in 2023. As for the 2019 cards, one was graded a "3" in 2019 and came back as a "2.5", and the other one was a "2.5" and came back as "Authentic". As for the 2023 cards, one was a "2" in 2023 and came back as a "1", and the other one was a "2" and came back as "1.5". So I would say that technology has changed the grading results, and is definitely much harder now. Appreciate the video

[@MidLifeCards]

It certainly feels like grades are tougher, and technology could be part of it. But, it's hard to know if/what has changed in the grading process.

[@s.macintosh-jc9rf]

Hi Graig, Thank you for this video because it’s necessary. I have always respected grading companies, but I no longer get my cards graded. I will buy low graded cards sometimes but I am not wedded to graded cards. I just enjoy raw cards and trusting my own eyes to tell me if I want the card. I don’t sell cards so grading is not integral to me. Thank you for listening to my opinion. I think that everyone must let people have their own opinions without getting personal about it. Have a great evening Graig, Peter

[@MidLifeCards]

Thanks Peter!!

[@jojomazz8671]

You’re right with those comparisons. Maybe the advancement of technology and tougher grading, brings back value to 8’s and 9’s in modern cards.

[@MidLifeCards]

Good point.

[@4TheGame2016]

Great job explaining your opinion

[@MidLifeCards]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@Crocpoet123]

well done sir. You are doing good work in the hobby.

[@MidLifeCards]

Thanks so much. That means a lot. Truly appreciated.

[@evanfraser64]

Enjoyed that a great deal. Do your opinions change when you discuss the high end of the grading scales-lets say 8 and 9 for 1960s-1970a?

[@MidLifeCards]

Tough question. Personally, I'm ok with PSA and SGC starting to use computerized software to improve their consistency and quality of grading. My only concern is if the calibration matches the "old" rubrics used from those companies. I like advancement and improvements in grading, I just want the grades to be consistent over time. To me, it seems like 8s and 9s are VERY hard to get in any card before 1980. It happens, but it's rare.

[@jamespinette9403]

Thanks for the very informative video Graig, nicely done as usual. One of the takes I get on this is : as I have noted numerous times is that SGC has always been the more consistent grader. When you compared the old vs newer PSA cards with the same grade, it was very obvious that the older one was not close to the newer graded card. When you did the comparison to the SGC cards, you had to note the minor difference by circling the small mark on the card otherwise the cards were identical at least by my observation. Let me know your disagreements. Lastly, I get that they are trying to improve the process, but I don’t think the grading Standards have changed,( centering, corners, etc.), so if a card is 60/40, very minute corner issues, it should still grade within that set standard regardless of the methods used…..😮

[@MidLifeCards]

Agreed, well said. And yes, for those two SGC cards, I felt they were very similar other than the print marks.

[@williambartenslager8040]

Another way of looking at the situation, is that the pop counts are sort of misleading. For example, I am putting together some team sets in PSA 9 or 10. I might be needing a common 1970 card, with a PSA 10 pop 5 and PSA 9 pop 40. When I see a 9 for sale, it might be off centered enough that the card would not get a 9 if submitted today. How many of the pop 40 are truly a 9, or would grade a 9 today? Sometimes I will still buy the card, because the pop counts are so low and they rarely come up for sale.

[@MidLifeCards]

Good point.

[@WilliamScott-ug9df]

Very informative and certainly new to me

[@MidLifeCards]

Glad it was helpful. I really appreciate you taking the time to watch and comment.

[@jude999]

No "think" about it; it is obvious. Its really sad that the head of PSA is being so dishonest. Thank you for keeping the heat on this. They are in a contest to see who can be the hardest grader. I think a company would get a leg up if they graded in the real world. Why would you want to find a crease you can only see with an electron microscope? Its ridiculous. Wow. Fascinating examples, that Matthewson with corner loss would probably get an "A" today.

[@MidLifeCards]

That Mathewson getting a 2 is complete insanity and is proof of how far things have come.

[@jude999]

@@MidLifeCards Yep. The scale for T-Cards is really 1-5 which bodes well for my Caramel Cy Young that got a 2 from SGC a few years back when it looks like a 6.

[@enalbsnave]

Nat Turner saying nothing has changed confirms what I already thought about PSA….. arrogant company who thinks they can say whatever they want and do whatever they want with zero consequences. Grading HAS changed, no question. Can’t wait for the day when PSA is removed from their pedestal. That being said, most of my cards are in PSA holders 😂😂

[@MidLifeCards]

LOL. It's tough. I want all of the companies to be successful so there's competition, which breeds improvement. But, I also want PSA to feel the pressure to improve their customer service. I don't want them to fail, but I want there to be 3 or 4 quality options/choices.

[@davidwilson1669]

Great show today. Really hit home for me. I have a 58 Mays all star psa 8. Sounds great right ? It’s one of the earliest grades given and if you know those cards they have a tendency to have the white fish eye dots on the blue background and a smidge of snowing on the elbow. So because of this they gave the grade a qualifier of PD. I’m Thinking about having it re slabbed into updated holder and while doing that also request a regrade. If they grade it a 7 or 6 would you keep the 8 w qualifier or accept new grade. People always ask if I want to sell and have offered me anywhere between $1k and $400. I don’t have any immediate interest to sell but your explanation of perception of old Vs new holders has me thinking that maybe if it’s in a current holder w 8 and qualifier it will actually yield more in new slab vs old outdated slab due to the perception grading is harder today. What are your thoughts?

[@davidwilson1669]

Also I’ll be at Burbank show and hope to see you there. Keep up the great work that you do to educate us on the vintage market.

[@MidLifeCards]

That's a really tough question. Personally, qualifiers kind of drive me crazy, so I'd likely regrade it, but I'm scared of what they do to the grade, now.

[@MidLifeCards]

I was looking at flight prices last night. Really on the fence. If I end up going...if you see me, I hope you'll stop me and say hello!!

[@davidwilson1669]

Thanks Graig. Greatly appreciate you taking the time to respond and I will definitely hit you up if you make it down this way. Keep up the great work and content. It really helps people like myself to navigate this amazing yet sometimes confusing hobby. You and other great influencers are really a God send to us all. Your wisdom instills confidence and knowledge that allows us to make better decisions in building our collections. 💪🏼🔥👊🏼

[@MidLifeCards]

@@davidwilson1669 Thanks so much for the kind words. It truly means a lot.

[@mookiechillson]

Hey Graig - I think your probing of this question is super useful. I also think that when looking backwards at PSA and SGC labels I think there's a clue to the looser standards of yesteryear in Beckett grading. You should go back and listen to Dr. James Beckett's podcast interview with the consigner Rick Probstein - episode 980. At around the 6:30 mark Probstein gives his opinion for how Beckett can start to return to the competitive marketplace and his idea is to eliminate BVG, the vintage grading vertical at Beckett. Dr. Beckett responds with the origin story for why his company felt they needed to create BVG in the first place and it was because PSA, they felt, was grading vintage cards on a looser scale (without disclosing) and giving more favorable grades. Now - is this proof that it was happening? No, but apparently Beckett was convinced enough that they decided to create a whole new brand/label to compete against them (which is proof enough for me). BVG began in 2001 - which is right around gen 3 or 4 of the PSA label (guessing from your earlier video) which means those cards are the ones the professional graders at Beckett thought were being graded in a lax fashion. Take a listen, if you haven't already... it's fascinating!!

[@mookiechillson]

Here's that Dr. Beckett interview - really good stuff! kzbin.info/www/bejne/kH6tcolspZWtntU

[@MidLifeCards]

I'll have to check it out.

[@stuke1976]

This video is a good topic for discussion. From what I've read and heard, AI is assisting with grading, and allowing the grading to go faster. The final grade is still done by humans. AI allows for less mistakes, but the human factor is still there. I belong to a sub group, and there are certain graders they give nicknames to, like the 9inator. Entire order groups come back as 9's, are resubbed and many of them come back as 10's. I'm still getting good grades/expected grades from both companies. I don't mind the old slabs either. If you look at the cards, as you did in the video, you can choose which ones to buy, I think you mentioned that too. I rarely buy graded cards, I usually buy ungraded and send them in. Rare cards, as in the cards being rare, not the grades, I'll buy graded like the 1967 Topps Test Tony Oliva Disc I recently bought. IMO, it's the perspective that has changed, because AI is in the conversation.

[@MidLifeCards]

Well said. Totally agree.

[@far_north_magic5852]

I think it has gotten a bit hard for 10s and tech helping lead to more consistent results is good. I also have watched a bunch of grading reveals with the people basically thinking that they should be entitled to a 10 even when they admit a card has a minor visible flaw. The few times I sent cards in 20 years ago we went over then with a loupe and every thing to make sure we weren’t wasting our money. I think that people send too many cards in expecting 10s when the quality of the cards is also lower alot of the time.

[@MidLifeCards]

10s are getting super tough, and virtually impossible for any card that isn't straight out of a pack.

[@far_north_magic5852]

@@MidLifeCards ya definitely. I guess I just also expect 10 to be a exceedingly hard to get to justify the multiplier

[@hawaiiactionfigureguy4847]

Awesome video and I totally agree

[@MidLifeCards]

Thanks so much!!

[@ZiggyNo]

Do I think one group of wizards are using more powerful magic than the other group of wizards? Yes. It's all magic, so yes, I believe anything is possible. I am with you. PSA is a good company with some issues. Authentication of autos is important to me, so I only think of PSA or BGS. It upsets me SGC has done zip to change or make collecting better. All grading companies are looking for ways to increase speed and volume. All companies are trying to make money, not all want or need to be 1# in market to be profitable or successful either. They hobby pushed for PSA growth and we fed this monster. The others are doing very well too. They all have seen amazing growth in revenue, new employees and market awareness. Thanks for sharing the examples are great. The generations of slabs is so important, but few understand it. Gemamint would be AI right? It is probably identifying when the same #ed card is regraded. Also the high image scans for app reveal. we could crack some old PSA slabs and resub to see.

[@ACD1994]

Well said

[@MidLifeCards]

Great points, as always. For me, it's all about trying to bring awareness to collectors. As long as people understand the changes and and what's going on, I feel like I'm at least doing something to help the process.

[@johnterry4987]

Maybe there is some value in buying older slabs?

[@MidLifeCards]

Value compared to the grade, yes. Value compared to the quality of the card, maybe.

[@darren2147]

Can anybody confirm or deny that PSA is way tougher on centering now?

[@kenrogers2179]

I think SGC is tougher on centering... PSA tougher on corners and edges

[@MidLifeCards]

I've always felt like SGC is tougher on centering than PSA.

[@michaelroot1960]

PSA early on gave out higher grades in order to please the hobby and gain more market share. It was only when they got the reputation as the place 9’s go to get a 10 label did they get a little stricter on grading.

[@MidLifeCards]

That's a really really interesting point. We obviously don't have any proof of this being true, but it does make sense.

[@blueodum]

I think this is true, but less relevant in vintage, as both 9s and 10s are very rare.

[@LetsStormTheTeaCupRide]

How is it assisting the grader? Why shouldn't the grader just take those numbers and apply it to the card eliminating the human error? Vintage aside, the issue I have is when ultra modern cards are sent in and they get an 8 and send it again and this time it gets a 10. As a pure vintage collector (dealer part of me aside), I always buy the card and NEVER the grade. Another top notch video from yourself.

[@MidLifeCards]

Appreciate it, and I think you bring up a terrific question.

[@blueodum]

I also try to, but online it can be difficult to get enough info from the pictures to make a determination. Thus, we should expect the grading companies to be consistent. As far as raw cards go, a seller that fully and accurately describes the card should be our first choice.

[@Stacks5497]

I was so fed up that i went to Tag for modern cards , At least the grades are consistent and they tell you where the flaws are on the card .

[@MidLifeCards]

I am REALLY interesting to see what happens with TAG moving forward. To be honest, I could see one of the big grading companies buying them out and utilizing their technology.

[@hjordan1782]

If implemented properly, the new technology being implemented could improve PSA's image of appearing very subjective in its grading. Personally, I think this subjectivity and some level of translation of this mentality into customer relationship management has hurt PSA at least in the intermediate term. Long term, who knows where PSA will stand versus other grading companies. Right now, PSA may offer the best value if you get a 10 grade, but I don't know that this trend will continue in the long run. Consumer indifference has had an impact on quite a few companies, and now it looks like PSA is heading in that direction.

[@MidLifeCards]

I completely agree. I feel the exact same way. PSA needs to do something to help their inconsistency image.

[@patrailriders6284]

Another timely hot topic! I stumbled on this really old video with Joe Orlando recently kzbin.info/www/bejne/jonMlWmMha-tbM0. In it he says "Reading the grading standards and identifying defects on a card is one thing, but how you interpret those defects is the key to understanding how the graders evaluate the cards." It makes sense, but the word "interpret" still bothers me. They also talk about the importance of eye appeal - which goes back to your cruicial point about buy the card, not the grade. I just got a 72 Topps Willie Mays back from PSA that I thought was a 7 at best, but they gave it an 8.5. I think it had a lot to do with eye appeal because it's centered about as perfectly as a card can be and the color is beautiful, even though the corners are slightly frayed (under a loop) and there are a few print marks. I'm learning a ton from your videos, thanks!

[@MidLifeCards]

Congrats on the Mays. I don't blame Joe Orlando for being vague in that comment. At the end of the day, they want "gray area"...and grading is exactly that. It's an opinion that falls between black and white. It's tough, and I don't envy the position they're in having the scrutiny. But, I also think it's important for us collectors to stay current on what's going on behind the curtain at the grading establishments. Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment. Appreciate the positive feedback.

[@ACD1994]

PSA has become stricter with their grading standards even with vintage, but I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing, though this may be an unpopular opinion. Of course, when submitting cards we want great results, but it shouldn't be easy. Cards do get under graded, but there are also cards over graded, I doubt anyone would complain about that lol. So it all balances out, but in general I try to focus more now on the eye appeal rather than the actual grade itself. Not all grades are created equal. At the end of the day, though buying graded or submitting cards to get graded, is just a choice. Basically, paying for someone's opinion. Whether it's PSA, SGC, or another companies. We're all going to have different opinions and perspectives, so we might not agree with the grade that comes back, and that's just part of the game. Not sure what else to say about that. An important aspect, though that's hard to argue however, is the authentication. A reputable company (hopefully) correctly standing by that the card, is authentic, not fake.

[@MidLifeCards]

As always, I think you make terrific points.

[@the90schildmashups92]

so 9's may be become more of the common grades if 10's are issued less, then more ppl would pay up more for a 9 since it's harder to find a 10 but 10's will increase in value. Something like that

[@MidLifeCards]

I think you nailed it.

[@billyv604]

Yes

[@MidLifeCards]

Simple but good answer.

[@gabeh7923]

One other thing: that Mickey Mantle graded a “4” with trashy corners is an eyesore. Nonetheless, tons of collectors who collect strictly on the grade listed on the slab will still go gaga over it. Gimme me one graded a “2” or a” 3” with nicer corners any day.

[@MidLifeCards]

Well said. 100% agree.

[@661fish4]

Excellent video. Thise old grades were the standard. PSA was the standard. They are controlling pop reports period. They manipulate the hobby. Facts

[@MidLifeCards]

I wish there was a whistleblower that could confirm some of these topics. But, otherwise, I don't know if they are facts or assumptions, but I'm certainly open to the fact that this is happening.

[@661fish4]

@@MidLifeCards I told you there is one. He worked for them. He doesn't want to be implicated.

[@Crownjewelcardz]

​@661fish4 no way for real ?

[@billyv604]

I’m sending all my old PSA labels in to be changed for the new labels ! $$$$$

[@MidLifeCards]

$25 each. Not cheap.

[@blueodum]

Yes, but the cert number doesn't change. Unless you are saying that PSA buyers are really dumb. Come to think of it, that is not completely implausible...

[@davelachey8118]

I've seen enough evidence with my own grading and buying slabs to believe PSA grading has gotten "consistently" harder. Maybe it's technology. Being a much larger company than SGC I suspect PSA's ability to control quality has been more difficult, but if they are now employing technology in their process it will reduce the inconsistencies, and maybe that's what we are seeing. If not technology, then possibly their QA practices have improved. I'm in favor of reducing human error. And after all, if these companies want to remain competitive and grade cards for under $20, they will need to employ more technology. As an IT guy I have to believe a machine can be programmed to grade a card based on standards and tolerances.

[@blueodum]

Very difficult in vintage, but I'd wager that ultra modern could soon be graded by machine and just QC'ed very quickly after.

[@MidLifeCards]

I tend to agree with all of this comment. Well said.

[@blueodum]

I'm all for using technology to assist in grading, but it should not materially change the grading standards overall. I think SGC understands this, but PSA doesn't seem to. Another thing that should not happen is that graders who grade modern should not grade vintage. They are so different that I believe a grader should specialize in one or the other. As an example, if you look at a typical vintage card, there are undulations or graininess inherent in the card board itself, and should in no way be viewed as condition flaws. Other issues, such as factory creases or fish-eyes or roller lines can be considered production defects and affect condition.

[@MidLifeCards]

I totally agree with EVERYTHING in your comment. Well said.

[@word.723]

The following is from PSA's website: "While it's true that a large part of grading is objective (locating print defects, staining, surface wrinkles, measuring centering, etc.), the other component of grading is somewhat subjective. The best way to define the subjective element is to do so by posing a question: What will the market accept for this particular issue?"

[@MidLifeCards]

Great points!!

[@blueodum]

I don't agree that staining and surface wrinkles are objective. They are tricky bastards! How big they are, where they are located, etc. A faint stain should not be penalized as much as one that blocks out some of the printing on the back. You have to subjectively assess the impact of each defect.

[@word.723]

@@blueodum I would say that wether or not staining and surface wrinkles exist is objective. They can either be detected, or they cannot. I agree with you on the overall grade impact being more subjective than PSA admits.

[@gabeh7923]

Yes! You should buy the card and not the grade. Eye appeal means more to me than physical grade 99.9% of the time. The same goes for coins and postage stamps.

[@MidLifeCards]

Agreed.

[@joedill4311]

The 1956 Topps Mantle co.parison was embarrassing. The top card would grade as a 1 or MAYBE a 1.5 today. Unless the back is completely removed from the bottom one, or there's a significant crease we can't see, it may grade BETTER with technology than it was graded by the naked human eye. There has to be significant damage we cannot see if this card has been graded in the past year or two. So I guess the point i would make is that grading is far less subjective in 2023. Its more nuanced by technology. I honestly don't like the new implementation. But I also DESPISE advances past human error. I guess I also don't like a 66 Clemente to come back an sgc 6 when it looked like an 8, pre-submission. Pros and cons.

[@MidLifeCards]

I totally agree. That top Mantle was YIKES!!

[@williambartenslager8040]

Using technology is not AI. AI is machine learning, so the computer improves its performance. This means the grades would change over time as the machine evaluates more cards, which means inconsistency. People are throwing out the AI term because it's trendy, but don't really understand what it is.

[@MidLifeCards]

Fair enough.

[@RDCards]

Interesting

[@MidLifeCards]

I found it interesting and thought it would be good to share what I found.

[@jamesirwin2048]

It’s all about the tuxedos!!

[@plb3733]

I think it’s hilarious that SGC markets that jagged,cheap black insert as a tuxedo.

[@MidLifeCards]

They do seem to be increasing in popularity.

[@jamesirwin2048]

@@MidLifeCardsI just feel that the tuxedos really make the cards pop, I pick cards to be graded by SGC depending on how I think they’ll look, PSA although you can get more money, to me their slabs are boring. Just my opinion.

[@eurostar0711]

4:50 they are using that technology because of TAG grading using technology to grade cards, so there is no human bias in card grading. Tthe QR code on their slabs so you can scan it and see all the data yourself, thats something that no other grading company is doing right now. But i know you are trying to sell people on PSA so their slabs can continue to sell for higher, you are doing the video for self-interest just like Geoff Wilson does.

[@MidLifeCards]

Well, I appreciate you watching and commenting. But, I've got to be honest...I have never done a video for self interest. I have had multiple companies (that everyone in the hobby has heard of) that have asked to partner with me. In EVERY instance, I have turned down their money, because I want my videos to remain independent of outside influence. So, after turning down a LOT of money from some of these companies, I do take offense when someone sells I'm doing anything for self serving interest. That said, we're all entitled to our opinion.

[@stevesousa1475]

Crack old slabs of both PSA and SGC graded cards and resubmit and you will see a lower grade the majority of the time

[@MidLifeCards]

Agreed. Most would see lower grades, but some do hold up.

[@billyv604]

PSA is not the same. Right

[@MidLifeCards]

I agree.

[@pyrorye-80]

Psa probably wont admit this openly because it will kill all the old grades that people have paid for. Those 2 mantles you showed are a prime example. They are completely different cards and arent worth close to the same price but both carry a 4 now. Bad news imo

[@MidLifeCards]

You may be right. But, if they do admit it, I would think it would help people to understand that they're taking steps to improve their consistency issues.

[@pyrorye-80]

@@MidLifeCards very good point and keep the videos coming. Love your content!

[@MidLifeCards]

@@pyrorye-80 Thanks my friend.

[@wayneburbrink1215]

Sgc in my opinion has always graded harder than psa , graded with both company’s long ago

[@MidLifeCards]

It's an interesting debate, for sure.

[@billyv604]

New PSA generation should hold more value

[@MidLifeCards]

To most people it does.

[@marshallkahn9029]

Didn't you just make a video on how we should let the other guy get the card graded?????? So why worry???

[@MidLifeCards]

I appreciate you watching and taking the time to comment.

[@michaelmccormack494]

Graig: It's very simple, very despicable. How do you protect your name and industry? Simple: reputation, which means, the work already done. How do you protect the work already done? Assimilate, isolate, identify the cloistered, and make the ongoing work and workmanship a little worse, or in this case, less accurate to the REPUTATION side of things, not to the side of the soundness and strength that once existed. The millionaires grading has made are flush with accurately (highly) graded cards. Those cards only escalate in value as fewer and fewer such grades are given. All Western markets are heavily manipulated when there is a boatload of money to be made within them. It's ugly, and our hobby is gone. I don't want to ride in the derby anymore, and that is a small-timers' ultimate reality. It will be a business of millionaires and no one else in the future. The common man is being shown the highway -- sadly, it appears it's either that or learn to be completely content with only raw cards. I'm removing myself before being pushed out of the door. And you know, it feels right, much as for my 54 years of collecting I have loved the pasteboard in every one of them. (Caveat: I may be speaking only of one grading company, but sharks and blood in the water definitely are what they seem to be, are not illusory in the least).

[@MidLifeCards]

I totally understand that some people have had really bad experiences and/or have really negative feelings about one or some of the grading companies. I totally get it. My hope, however, is that it not ruin the hobby for you.

[@michaelmccormack494]

@@MidLifeCards Graig, I'm in a major enthusiasm slump with it right now. 54 years a collector and it took the haunting specter of the avarice in profit gone seriously amok to drive me here. It's been threatening to for several years now... When the subject/product is all but ignored at the altar of what its value is, rehabilitation is needed...

[@suzie9874]

Well my views are as follows. Once a grade has been given to any card. The company should have to stand behind that grade. What i mean is. If card A in bad shape gets a 4. Card b in better shape. That you can clearly see is a better card. Yet receives the same grade or lower grade. The company should be sued over this. They should not be allowed to slap any grade they want on a card. This is a business after all. PSA has full pictures of cards they have graded. A card should be graded against other cards. Not singled out to be graded on a card by card basis. This is a major problem with grading. It is all just an opinion of the grader. There is nothing there to give a why is it being graded to this number. Look at Geoff and the video he did on the PSA 10 1952 Mantle. That should never have been given a grade of 10. It is a great card. But it is not a 10. The SGC 9.5 graded Mantle looks much much better. Another downside to grading cards is it depends on who you are. If you send thousands of dollars a month to PSA there is a big chance your cards get a better grade. That is just bad for the hobby.

[@MidLifeCards]

Whenever humans are the judge, there will always be errors and the chance of some sort of corruption. I have no idea what goes on behind closed doors at any grading company, but the possibilities that COULD be happening, certainly make us wonder.

[@billyv604]

And they can’t change the grade

[@billyv604]

@@BringingTheHeat-VBC just saying if I wanted the label changed, they can’t regrade the card and change the grade. Got it?

[@bobo44donemilking51]

Older PSA cards should be devalued like bvg

[@MidLifeCards]

To a lot of people, I think it is.

[@laknicks]

PSA Grades to control pop reports

[@MidLifeCards]

I know a lot of people feel that way.

[@snakeonia7542]

It hasn’t gotten harder imo.

[@MidLifeCards]

Fair enough.

[@lightseek88]

This guy is starting to sound like the chasing cardboard guy contradicting himself within a few sentences he says quote " I have no skin in the game....most of my collection is in PSA slabs".

[@MidLifeCards]

Well, I appreciate your watching and taking the time to comment. As someone who isn't planning on selling 99% of my graded cards, I stand by my comment, but certainly respect what you're saying. :-)

[@CarlJohnson5342]

Sgc is tougher than PSA

[@MidLifeCards]

There are times I think I agree. Other times I think PSA has moments where they're tougher. I just like having choices.

[@mackymintle7806]

Grading is a Flim-Flam…

[@MidLifeCards]

Certainly feels that way at times. Especially recently.

[@jerrelbean]

I had emailed the seller of the mathewson on the far left with missing corner. It should be a PSA 1.

[@MidLifeCards]

Agreed.