From economics explained, twice baked jake, pokenav and now frostedcariubou who still don’t know how to do research. At least she time stamps it, but watch the PSA analysis part where she says people put PSA 10? in titles because they know it’ll get crossgraded easily since PSA gives out 10s so easily. I don’t expect channels like economics explained to know the details of a hobby, but people like her whose whole channel is pokemon, make these videos informing newcomers incorrectly. idiots like Pokenav telling people that PSA is a monthly subscription for $25 or $50 a card. This gave me a pretty good laugh at how bad SOME of the information is.
a quote “at this point you’re paying for your grades. you’re paying for better, easier grades for your cards because more of your cards are going to come back 10s”
Depends on the subgrades, which is why this is misleading argument. There is a strong case that majority of CGC/BGS 9.5/9.5/10/10 are stronger than average PSA 10, but most 9.5/9.5/9.5/9.0 are not.
t I would say a good percentage would be equivalent. I also remembered that each company appears to have a bias towards certain features. PSA seems to be very harsh on any holo surface wear and corners, but BGS is harsher on centering and edge. This is obviously my opinion, but having any significant white on a corner would almost certainly not crossover. As you mentioned it can be very misleading and there is a lot more nuance to grading.
A lot of people here cringed at the lower grades BGS gave some to some of Leonhart’s cards. Each company has it’s faults.
The one thing alot of people don’t seem to account for is that the grading process is different for every single card that goes through. Human error, how the grader was feeling that day, whether your cards are going through at the beginning of someone’s shift or the last 5 minutes. At the end if the day, people are paying for an opinion, and you are never going to have a flat standard throughout.
Has there really been a detailed analysis done? I think there has been pretty big analysis done for BGS VS PSA so I would say that it is fairly consistent in the community that BGS grades harder than PSA…but CGC? I don’t think there has been much analysis here to make a solid conclusion.
It may be a pretty limited sample size, but I would say after receiving 100+ cards back from CGC, the majority of 9.5s would be candidates for 10s at PSA. I have also seen many others have a similar experience.
It’s the consensus that CGC grades harsher than PSA.
CGC cards go for such a DRAMATICALLY lower price than PSA that there are for sure people buying CGC cards on ebay, cracking them open, and submitting them to PSA.
If you’re a collector, it seems best to buy CGC. You are getting the same or better quality card for 60% of the price.
If you’re an investor, PSA cards are the easiest to sell and most liquid.
If you try and invest and wanna sell your CGC slabs on ebay you will get murdered.
Perhaps BGS grades harsher at the 10 (Pristine) level, but if anyone is telling you that BGS grades harsher than PSA across the board, they’re probably selling you BGS cards.
It’s in fact well known that people will send their high value cards with small edgewear, print lines, or off-centering into BGS in hopes of a 9.5, because that grade is more lenient. (edit: perhaps ‘lenient’ isn’t the best word, it encompasses more classes of cards and therefore has the effect of being more lenient) BGS’ lower grades are also ridiculously inconsistent and lenient. There’s a reason that Snap Bulbasaur and Illustrator are graded with BGS.
All grading is subjective. That’s why there is a term for “Strong” or “Weak” 10’s. PSA cases don’t have sub grades so we aren’t privy to what the breakdown would be. Its easier to compared CGC with BGS because of the subgrades, but at the end of the day, it’s all subjective.
Forgive me, but this is just bullshit. There is no consensus on anything CGC as of yet. And the big CGC sellers are not selling their cards for 60% of PSA value. Sure, some CGC certainly sells for less, but that is not mirrored across all cards. This is what happens when the rumor mill gets going and you base your E4 posts off of instagram/facebook chatter.
The big problem we have is that grading companies have human graders. There will always be inconsistencies as there will always be human error. Throw 1,000 of the same card in the same condition at any of these grading companies and you will end up with a variety of different results. Unfortunately it’s the larger inconsistencies that get all the attention. This is why you shouldn’t only look at the grade of a card, you should look at the card itself.
I believe that only one of my 76 PSA 10 Pichu cards is questionable, and it’s a card I’ve been looking to replace for a while now - on a bad day it’d be a PSA 9 but on a good day it’s a PSA 10; the grade it received is entirely down to how much attention the grader was paying at the time.
Without a large sample size it’s going to be very difficult to ever accurately compare the different grading companies with one another, and even then it’s going to all depend on what mood the grader is in that day.
In my view until we get fully automated grading (which is a long way off) there’s no point bickering over whose slabs better represent the true condition of the card. Right now grades are just a professional suggestion to the condition of a card rather than a 100% accurate analysis. At the end of the day the best thing you can do is use that professional suggestion as the baseline towards making that opinion for yourself by looking at the card itself.
I see you’ve fallen into the (quite classic) Pokemon hobby position of making a ridiculous, sweeping, unsupported point and then finding 1 (one) sale to back it up. If we’re playing that game, CGC 8s are worth the same as PSA 9s:
Obviously based off this one sale I’ve found, PSA is a horrible grading company and if you try to sell your PSA slabs on ebay you’re gonna get murdered.
