I Cracked 8 Vintage PSA Cards and Submitted to SGC. Here Are the Results...

[@tommayrant2279]

That '67 Mantle was definitely the deal maker! Thanks for taking the time to do this experiment! Have a very successful National!

[@parkimports]

I haven't really collected cards since 2009. SGC has made collecting fun for me again with their pricing, turnaround times, & overall solid reputation in the collecting community. Thanks for the video.

[@gabriels1163]

They look sooo much better in sgc slabs. I can't imagine choosing psa over sgc for a personal collection

[@theboringchannel2027]

1964 Jim Brown, the Pink Cadillac in the background is his personal car. You will find other cards from that year of his team mates in front of the same car.

[@jpcards]

Really interesting results, yet not all that surprising. Thanks for taking the time to follow through with this, it's very helpful.

[@wheetie7]

Good job chris!! Hope you offer more of these for us following

[@southern7002x]

Nice video Chris! Recently, I had some vintage cards I was considering sending to SGC for grading. You convinced me that was the right choice after watching your PSA reveal video a month ago. Two of the cards were a 1967 Topps Hank Aaron #250 and a 1971 Topps Hank Aaron #400, both in PSA 6. I cracked both of them and sent five additional cards (7 total) to SGC a couple of weeks ago. The order returned today and both of the Aaron cards received a grade of SGC 7.5. Based on the average VCP price this equated to a $125 increase in value for the ‘71 and a $200 plus increase in value for the ‘67. As others have mentioned, they also look great in SGC slabs. All these cards were PC for me.

[@Final50Meters]

SGC is the way to go. Thanks for the info. GREAT VID!

[@Johndeplume.]

Another fantastic upload, Chris. It certainly reinforces, to me at least, the subjecte nature of card grading, and the pitfalls of a company that is a clear market-leader (when you crunch the numbers). Keep up the great content, and thank you for sharing your experiments with us all. Very educational!

[@whitesoxfancardcollector]

Thank you for sharing this with us. I think many of us believed this was a good idea.

[@mywowcards]

I think doing this rewards grading companies for poor standards. I believe Chris lost time and money after factoring payment PSA for the first round of grading fees

[@SACRJC]

Agree with you on multiple points. If I were in your position, I think I would go completely with SGC on vintage cards. Use PSA for the modern, only because of the resale value.

[@randylochtefeld2806]

The profit is less when shipping and insurance is spent for. At shows many times I can buy undergraded cards at big discounts. I do not crack and resubmit, just enjoying them in my PC.

[@georgetravlos1499]

You did the right thing on this. Nice work listening to the comments! Even though the Jordan wasn't part of the original 8 card experiment, you should look at that as a positive in SGC's favor as well!

[@stuke1976]

Appreciate the experiment, Chris! From my experience, PSA is usually at what I expect or higher, SGC a grade lower, but consistant. There are certain graders at PSA that grade lower than expected too.

[@Eugene67]

One item of note - if you are afraid of damaging the card when you crack it out from the slab (like I am), for the same $15 grading fee you can send the slabbed cards to SGC and specify the lowest grade you will accept in your "crossover" attempt to an SGC holder. This will take a bit longer than the regular 5-10 day business day turnaround time but may be worth it if you want to maintain the current grade in a PSA slab. I've used this service a few times and you can include a crossover attempt in your regular raw card SGC grading submissions.

[@williambartenslager4134]

Do you think it affects the grade they issue, for example, SGC sees the card in a PSA 3 slab, and figure they shouldn’t grade it much higher?

[@trollerskater]

A lot of people think the current grade will affect the grader which is why they crack them. Most people will tell you there’s very low success with crossovers

[@RobertLee-wi5kc]

I think it is human nature to look closely but I doubt that all of his cards would have gotten the bump perhaps a few but you can't unsee the PSA grades so it has to affect it.

[@tonyhamilton9764]

The eye appeal on the Doer makes it a premium seller. Put it next to any other 2.5 with edge wear, etc. and this one will sell first every time. It looks so good. Also on a mini documentary or short for PSA they showed them using a scanner. Possibly small creases are seen in a scan and not to the naked eye? The cards in general have great eye appeal.

[@jeffkoll4002]

I have graded with all the four major grading companies. My experience mirrors yours, in that I have seen more inconsistencies with PSA grades than any of the other companies. To call them puzzlers is interesting. I have cracked a few to get comparisons like you did in this video. My experience has been that it’s more like a two grade miss from PSA, so a little bit more off than what you had in this sample. To be clear, I don’t think PSA gets it wrong every time. But when they miss, it seems to be relatively egregious. Thanks for all of your videos! I really enjoy all of your content.

[@nyyanks7]

Saw the end of the video got my answer. Thanks for the video.

[@brutusonbaseball]

Great analysis, thanks Chris!

[@Aut0KAD]

in general, I subtract 1 from the grade on SGC which mostly lines up with this

[@jeffsmith989]

I've been a card dealer since the late 80s. My first 10 years of submitting to PSA I was 90% spot on with my grading. The last 10 years it has dropped to around 80%. Which tells me there is definitely some inconsistenties of late. I use a loop and literally triple check my vintage submissions. The worst thing i remember was when PSA decided to go to half grades. I sent in a bunch of high end 8s hoping for 8.5s. Two came back 7s? Unfortunately Bird/Magic rookie and a 67 Clemente. So then I cracked and sent to Beckett and both came back 8.5s. Quite a hassle but just shows the inconsistencies.

[@MrJmangini]

Rumor is that’s Jim Brown’s Caddy in the background.

[@dynamitelii501]

That 100% is his Pink Caddilac, he requested that he be photographed with it behind him.

[@gridironstars]

Check out the rest of the Browns from that set. All of them have the parking lot background. LOL

[@RWorfel1]

That is NOT Jim Brown’s Cadillac in the background. 100%

[@RWorfel1]

@@gridironstarscorrect, it was Not his car

[@WinningScore-e6z]

Great video, thanks for sharing this one!

[@mookiechillson]

I have found that SGC grades consistently reflect SGC standards more accurately. this experiment confirms my own anecdotal observation. I think this is a perfect example of why, for collectors, SGC has been taking market share away from PSA: their grades and our eyeballs are in harmony.

[@Mr.JonDoE]

Thier grades are slightly higher but bring slightly less money it's almost beautiful how it all works out so harmonic the card in psa holder with a 4 brings same money as the card in sgc 5 it actually is one aspect of grading that this 1 time made complete sense

[@josephdill3776]

Totally agree…..about 2 months after the 2022 induction, I sent a Tony Oliva 1963 Topps rookie to PSA. They gave it a 4 and I assumed it would be a 6 or 7, based off of recent ones that had been graded. I cracked it and sent it to SGC and got a 7.5 on it And at that point, ir had been about 4 months post-induction. I then sold the card (on eBay) for $427 and looked the next week and saw that a PSA 5 had sold for $378. The discrepancy in prices IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS between PSA & SGC. Imo the SGC slabs look WAAAAAAAAY BETTER on most vintage. They grade more fairly and they’re quicker. I wish people would wake up and see that PSA IS A GIANT PONZI SCHEME, built by the hobby elite (who spend so much $ with PSA that they get grades that us collecting peons could never afford). PSA is the sports card equivalent of governmental kickbacks!!! It is DISGRACEFUL!

[@matthewgreeley3099]

​@@Mr.JonDoEagree. From MY experience I believe SGC grades easier.

[@tartuffethespry]

This basically validated PSAs thoughts when you consider SGC is usually a little softer

[@Cards-In-The-Closet]

I’m of the opinion that PSA was softer, and recently started to get get harder.

[@kevinheckeler]

Or... SGC is in line with proper, industry grading standards and PSA is heading off the deep end in overcompensating and going TOO strict. There's charts that outline what constitutes an approximate grade for each major card feature (centering, corners, edges, etc). These things have been known for 75 years in collecting. When Chris says "I think this should get a # ", that's the historic data/standard he's pulling from.

[@scottyboy6269]

Psa waaay softer, clear dimples on cards getting 10’s. people use psa for their horrid grading standards

[@adambye2531]

I don’t want to sound like a conspiracy theorist but I’ve been saying for years that these grading companies are pop controlling those Ray Benge cards.

[@collectorinvestordealer]

Haha love it

[@matthewelliott2213]

I mean, it's easy to see once you realize the grader hates the Packers... just rearrange the letters of Ray Benge and you get Green Bay... hence the low score...😂😅🤣😆

[@bdablader95]

PSA pop controls pokemon, especially XY Evolutions, that's the set responsible for the PSA backup in 2020, clowns were sending in thousands of cards try to get a Gemed master set or hundreds of charizards to pass off to the clowns who think it'll be the next Vase set😂

[@robinrahmani4705]

Wouldn’t be surprised if that is the case. Also, I trust SGC more than PSA when it comes to vintage. I also believe the SGC slab looks better when it comes to vintage. I hope collectors stop giving PSA a big edge when it comes to valuation of vintage cards. They should be held in equal regard

[@diegomeredith-marquez929]

A few years ago, a KZbin channel by the name of Vintage Card Curator made a number of videos scrutinizing PSA's practices ("pop control" allegations, authenticating and grading altered cards, etc.). Well worth checking out even in 2024.

[@RawGradeFlip]

It would be interesting to assign the research department the task of taking one of your recent PSA vintage orders and comping out the PSA grade values, the equivalent SGC grade value and maybe SGC +1 grade values and then see in theory what would have been best to send to.

[@bops5555]

I am totally with you on this one Chris I recently sent a Jake lamotta leaf rookie in to P S.A. And it came get back ungraded, Then I cracked it and sent it to SCG, it came back a 5 P S.A. Has really become inconsistent

[@TheCardDeal]

Gotta factor in your time as well. I did this with similar order, 10 vintage cards SGC VS PSA, mine was done in reverse.

[@JacksonLloyd952]

Good stuff

[@davidbrasfield6720]

Appreciate the experiment. I submitted nice 1938 churchman joe louis and jack johnson to psa and they came back 3s. I cracked and resubmitted to psa again and one came back a 5 and 6. Different graders i guess. Nice to get the grades i expected. Too bad only psa made money on the deal.

[@craigs.t.3321]

Not sure if you financially benefited as much your chart says…. Even one grade lower I wouldn’t be shocked if the PSA copy would’ve sold for higher anyway. But def improvement in the brooks psa 3 and mantle authentic. Great video!!

[@pocketfullgold]

I trust Chris and his experience over whoever did the grading for psa. Proves psa is not to be trusted. Yet people slavishly send them their cards.

[@roycehuffman399]

You are very polite, Chris. "Puzzler" sounds like a euphemism for "wrong."

[@dmf1914]

No, not "wrong" but tougher graders. I rather buy those slabs.

[@timotheegoulet1511]

SGC and PSA really needs to include the reason for the rating the card received the rating that it did.

[@thomasshenton577]

It's not what you know, it's who you know. Fact's 💯

[@bobo44donemilking51]

Great video,I haven't sent any vintage to PSA in 2 years

[@willg.2045]

Definitely interesting results, particularly with some cards that were close in grades, but SGC was never below the PSA grade. I assume the Doerr and Benge have some hard-to-see wrinkle that is obvious under magnification but not to the naked eye. I wonder if the PSA guarantee makes them particularly tough graders, particularly after PSA was purchased by a large company that wanted to reign in any grade guarantee claims and make the guarantee less of a liability.

[@chrishayes4166]

That Goudey looked rough in the PSA slab I had a feeling you were SOL on that one with the resub even with SGC's slightly easier usual results. The 2 looks appropriate to me with those rounded corners (surface obviously tougher to gauge via video). I will pay at/near PSA same grade prices for high eye appeal/centered SGC though.

[@stuckin66]

Your experience with PSA crossovers to SGC is similar to mine. Try higher end card crossovers (PSA 7-9) as well... you'll be pleased and surprised.

[@Mr.JonDoE]

The authentic bump to 4.5 was the hit. The rest made absolutely no difference. The bump makes up for the sgc price difference from psa this is the 1 time i actually have to say grading was in balance the psa 5 was worth about the same as sgc 6. For once the grading makes sense. Please more video's like this to help people understand it is what it is but its level across the board.

[@adamlee1562]

I would argue you would have also gotten similar results just sending back to PSA. Would be an interesting for a second test for the "puzzlers". Just got a small order back with a heavy percentage of "puzzlers" myself. Used to be just one or two per order, this last one was 40% of the order total head scratchers

[@djtsuks863]

It may well be Brown's Caddy in the background. But the reason it's there is Philadelphia used that generic photo as the background for many of the Brown's cards that year(it's an obvious photoshop).

[@adamscardcloset9020]

Agree sgc is more consistent with their cards

[@sourcingsailor4987]

Here in Florida there are sports cards shops, whose showcases are filled primarily with SGC graded cards. Prior to Collectors' acquisition of SGC, I always believed it was sad that some people had to be "sold" on SGC and even after the acquisition, i still feel that way. My only concern is SGC's "long-term value, because we all know what happens to 95% of companies acquired by larger companies.

[@kennethschumacher7078]

I sent 15 cards to PSA and was majorly disappointed . Some of them I am the original owner and I've had since I was a kid and they were kept in an album . I had a Jerry rice rookie , Steve Young rookie's that were absolutely beautiful . Sharp corners very well centered and came back with moderate grades . Next time I will go to Beckett or SGC

[@imamisfit445]

They just sit back, collect the money and hope people resend them back to collect more.

[@kevinheckeler]

There's often no other explanation than this. And I'm not one for wearing tin foil hats. Or PSA is just so bad at what they do. Either way, this reflects poorly on them.

[@marcamy]

Jim's caddy was a 9 back in that day of the photograph. Today it has no original parts, and does not run, so it's now an "Authentic Altered". ;)

[@Philly_Joe]

Thank you for the very interesting experement! Other than the Mantle, I would have not cracked the PSA slabs and resubmitted - risk / reward not woth it to me.. PS - Mntle is probably worth abot $100 more non-auction from when yoiur analysis was done. Good stuff!!!

[@ACollectorsDream]

Great stuff, congrats

[@oximo_]

Chris you didn’t pick any outliers. Its well-known PSA has become super strict on vintage as of late. Although it sucks to have a low-grade, the well-known vintage collector will know the difference between a new and old serial number. The condition contrast is so vast. I’ve seen quite a range of sales history vary between the same card/grades depending on how recently it was submitted.

[@aarond23]

I think its interesting they were all so close

[@Mountainrock70]

Ive found I like my cards in one screw or magnetic holders best. Anyone who has collected a long time can look at a card and be within a grade at worst case. No need to waste our money. Sure go grade that Mantel RC but… I have a lot more cards, because I don’t give my money to graders.

[@mjrsportscards]

Thank you for sharing! Considering the grading fees.. do you feel like this was worth it?

[@ktc629]

There has to be a creas in that ray benge.

[@JC-pu7gi]

I did the same Please Submit Again and every card got 1 to 3.5 better I don’t trust these people with my cards GO SGC

[@dbpyr2]

Extremely interesting

[@kevinheckeler]

You didn't factor the cost (and loss) of the original PSA grading into the equation. Had you not sent them to PSA in the first place you'd be well ahead versus now where you effectively paid them to drop the ball. It's definitely a feather in SGC's cap if you don't want to roll the dice with PSA's "outlier" results, which for all you know could be more often than you might realize.

[@markstein1916]

Not only did you receive better/more consistent grades... the aesthetics and overall presentation of the cards is infinitely better in the SGC slabs. So much more attractive than the unflattering PSA slabs, it's not even close. People are finally waking up to this, it seems.

[@approachingtarget.4503]

I'll stick with old faithful. Mint,good,fair,used. The way it has been graded by those who lived it.

[@andrewg5672]

I think i would have to DISAGREE with you on a previous point you made that psa is grading tougher to meet the demands of the market. They are clearly grading tougher in order to skew and control pop reports as this is reflected in your grade assessment, SGCs and even mine (i thought most were way undergraded by psa as well just by eye test). In no way did psa reflect what any of us thought and knowing the trends of the market where psa high grade brings top dollar, their actions actively prove that. It is major a statistical anomaly to have most cards grade higher and not a single one grade lower. Literally near impossible unless they are making a statement to selectively make things more difficult to grade higher. Earlier you said their standards have changed as the consumer have changed, but this is NOT what consumers want and its unfortunate what you had to go through. The only way now is to grade SGC or alternative, and it starts with dealers like you... I would put personal values over card value and psa obviously just doesnt care anymore as they get backlogged and raise prices with near none customer service, subpar standards, and artificially lowering grades as is the case here. They dont care anymore so why should we?

[@matthew1072a]

The one grade higher on average is typical because PSA grades tougher and why they sell for more. The authentic is because PSA looks at every card under a blue light in a dark room which SGC does not! They are not as thorough. PSA saw something on it which is very common for older cards. Also you CANNOT look at these cards with your naked eye and expect to see what the graders are seeing with a loupe.

[@chucksadler9968]

Ive sent card to psa expecting an 8 and received a 10. Ive also sent in perfect cards that come back as an 8. One batch gets an accurate grade and the next is all over the place. Their quality control and consistency is garbage for the past few years.

[@nathanmulkey]

NOPE

[@jeffniles7121]

Have you seen some PSA 10 off centered. PSA owns you literally

[@richardbianco9674]

@matthew1072a that is completely wrong. Differing light sources is used by all the major grading companies and has been talked about by them. The authentic was because psa deemed it to small. Which back then was common and expected considering the printing and cutting processes used back then.

[@matthew1072a]

@@jeffniles7121look at their grading standards. It’s printed on the website. It literally says a 10 can be 60/40. They have been know for going easier on centering for decades.

[@juanharrington2109]

I have been collecting for along time and have yet to send any of my PC cards to get graded with concerns over the different grading companies practices. I am curious on vintage cards if they grade based on the time period of the card at all. My opinion a grading of a modern card vs vintage should be different. A modern card graded a 10 is not equal to a 10 of a vintage card coming from lets says 1959. Printing practices, packaging, etc were different back then compared to now. What are your thoughts on the differences?

[@David-fv7zg]

Did I hear you say you submitted PSA grades to SGC as well? I couldn't tell from the rewind, if so, Im not sure this would be a fair eval, I would like to see them go with no info.

[@dynamitelii501]

Are you using magnification when looking these over? As always, SGC actually gives you what you pay for when you submit. PSA tends to only give around 60-80% of what you pay for...great company to support along with all the lemmings!

[@Kbunk_Youth_Football_Wrestling]

I would think most low to mid grade vintage would be the best for SGC in terms of being a dealer. There's not a big difference in prices as those cards usually aren't something that set registry people are looking for. Also, a lot of collectors of those types of cards already use SGC or don't have any issue with buying the slabs....they usually aren't as wedded to PSA.

[@richardbianco9674]

@Kbunk_Youth_Football_Wrestling bingo. When sgc finally gets it's set registry together, this may change though. But that is the one major factor especially with higher graded cards

[@jp82cards30]

those Doerr grades are a joke, a very minor stain on the back of the card should not knock that down so low.. i can see it being a 6-7 range knocked down to like a 4-5, but 2 suggests it's almost ruined

[@gabriels1163]

Sgc does poor for auctions but as a buy it now you can get about the same as psa.

[@sethanderson3130]

Besides the '67 Mantle, you wouldn't have gained anything from submitting to SGC--therefore, PSA would still make the most sense financially for reselling. However, you did get video revenue I assume for this project so it was worth the effort. I love this type of video segment you create. Thank you

[@markstein1916]

Re-selling is not the only factor. Anyone who wants to display their cards (and isn't vision-impaired) would prefer the aesthetics of the SGC slab. And recent data shows SGC quickly gaining ground + even surpassing PSA in many cases.

[@kurts6741]

More proof that grading is subjective, which is why I have a problem with grading.

[@twoshedsjohnson8540]

My last 2 PSA submissions have seriously turned me off to getting cards graded as an investment business model. Any grading "surprises" were always a worse grade than expected, never higher. Just too many "puzzlers" that got me pretty pissed. I have one more submission and that will be the last chance for PSA. If I get burned there, I'll be closing my account with them.

[@garygor1960]

@@twoshedsjohnson8540 do you use a magnifying glass for the corners and edges? Do you measure at least to 1/64 of an inch tolerance?

[@twoshedsjohnson8540]

@@garygor1960 I do use a lighted magnifying glass and am thorough checking corners/edges/surface. Will say though that PSA contacted me about my recent submission and wanted me to confirm/accept 3 grades that would push the value of the graded card over the dollar limit for that submission. Getting them back today, so excited to see if this will be a redemption for them. Crossing my fingers.

[@dot2562]

shoulda send dem back to psa and check out their.... consistancy

[@davidwilsing1545]

What’s the asking price on the Musial?

[@thomasshenton577]

Beckett brings more value... Real collector's want that. J.s

[@nyyanks7]

Chris, can you check the graders notes on the Doerr ?

[@collectorinvestordealer]

Neither company provides grader notes

[@adamroth8634]

You should crossover the Brooks and Mantle to PSA and see what they do.

[@richardbianco9674]

@adamroth8634 they were already in psa slabs, and graded terribly hence the reason to crack and send to sgc

[@adamroth8634]

@@richardbianco9674 I think the point of the crossover back to psa is he could probably get a 4.5/5 on the Brooks and a 3.5/4 on the Mantle after first getting a 3 and an auth respectively.

[@richardbianco9674]

@@adamroth8634 there's no point now. The amount spent to do that would end up having a net loss. With these grades, value is pretty much equal anyway

[@nicholasb8799]

That Mantle was nice!

[@DavidThompson-n5i]

I thought SGC was on the rise but I now worry about it since SGC got bought out. Technically, a card can be perfect but if stained is considered fair (2) condition. Maybe you got one of those jerk graders who undergrads vintage cards because they are old. Maybe PSA intentionally undergrads nice vintage cards then targets them for purchase to put a higher grade (then sells them for a nice profit). I wouldn't bet against it,

[@NuthinFancyCollectibles]

They do look better in the tux.

[@phillipmcdoniel2236]

PSA continues to be harsh on vintage, thanks for sharing this

[@bourbonbeltcards6392]

I’d love to own the Doerr if you’re selling, Chris!

[@bobsbbcards]

Why grading companies don't give notes to justify the grades is beyond me. 🤨

[@corfreaky]

What would you say are your situational requirements for submitting one to SGC versus PSA?

[@kc8767]

Overall vintage just looks better in SGC slab

[@warderjack]

Those 1998 Upper Deck Black Diamonds look great, but are a tough grade. I'm making a set of football from that year, and it's hard to do much better than 8/8.5.

[@jordanmouw878]

And they all went up on appearance being in a TUX!

[@jimbobrobertson3285]

As always, thanks for the videos!! Super helpful, I will be using SGC for vintage

[@DiamondyardSportscards]

Great video, Chris. Further community evidence PSA’s 19 year-old graders are ill trained, overworked, and careless.

[@goldennuggetofwisdom5068]

You didn't add the psa grading costs. Did u buy them already slabbed?

[@JoshHallUtah]

Chris, really nice work as usual. This was really interesting. I don't know if you're familiar with my Frank Robinson rookie situation, I can send you the details. It's pretty wild. They're Just wildly inconsistent. It depends on the greater. It makes me wonder if long-term AI is the answer...

[@collectorinvestordealer]

I am not familiar with your Frank Robinson RC

[@JoshHallUtah]

@@collectorinvestordealer I didn't think so I'll show you the story it was quite the grading adventure

[@kenrogers1948]

The only issue that i have with your experiment is that I have subbed hundreds of times with SGC and PSA and it has been my experience that SGC is more lenient than PSA regarding corners, so I would expect this batch to do a little better with SGC... In your original post I felt that there were several blunted corners in this collection that you missed or discounted... Usually, vintage cards are similar in most respects: corner condition matches surface condition matches edges, etc... But this lot has really nice surfaces and while that's good the grading process is one of subtraction, so i think the blunted corners are the culprit here... thanks for the vid!

[@nathanmulkey]

not sure you are enlightening Mr. Chris Sewall. I'm guessing he absolutely did not "miss" or "discount" this vintage batch.

[@kenrogers1948]

@@nathanmulkey Anyone who grades lots of vintage cards overlooks defects from time to time(myself included)... I think my comments were pretty constructive and I doubt Chris will understand them as anything else...

[@chadcory9690]

I only use sgc I don't like psa. If I buy a card graded by psa I crack it and send to sgc if it's not a 10. If it's a 10 I keep is psa

[@markstein1916]

Chris, you are sooooo polite! Sorry you had to waste more time and money on grading, due to PSA's incompetence. But perhaps you'll make it back if/when you go to sell these cards with their proper new grades. Thanks for the update!

[@mywowcards]

Did you really add value for yourself doing this? What was the cost to first pay PSA for their service in your calculations? Also your time to go through this exercise?

[@geedubb-q1u]

With PSA purchasing SGC, is this an attempt to pump up the new business model?

[@nathanmulkey]

not trying to split hairs here but it is notable that PSA did NOT purchase SGC, COLLECTORS UNIVERSE (the parent company) did.

[@jeffniles7121]

​@@nathanmulkeywell said people get confused

[@AtomicZombieAndroid]

haha, win win win! psa sgc and you all made money

[@Red-mp3to]

The problem is obvious...and I'll state the obvious. The problem is that the "major companies" rely on human beings to complete the grading. So naturally you'll get, and continue to get, puzzlers. I'm convinced the only accurate rating would be through these computer generated grading companies (ie: TAG, AGS, etc). I refuse and will NEVER submit any of my cards to PSA, SGC or any other human graded company. I've watched too many of these sort of videos and have learned that lesson without having to spend one penny.

[@farrenthorpe]

Do you use different lights or magnifying glasses or rulers to analyze card condition before sending them in? I'm often surprised how lighting can change the way I assess card condition.

[@collectorinvestordealer]

I do not but maybe thats something I should consider.

[@TalkingBallCards]

Very cool experiment! SGC gets most of my vintage and I do pretty well value wise. They just get it right more often.

[@TomHickey-m8b]

What is your booth number at the National? Location hint?

[@collectorinvestordealer]

Its #420. Im set up with "Lewisville Cards"