Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010GBPackers
I actually think that is where the change was needed - with the 9.5 grades. It's true, it will be odd to have old 9.5's having "gem mint" and the new ones having "mint+" but the fact is that the majority of the marketplace never saw these as "gem mint" cards anyway, and if they change the label it can correct some of the confusion. It was primarily collectors who were refusing to see the facts on the ground who were continuing to view these cards as "gem mint."
I'll add this as well, those complaining that this move "devalues thousands of cards" - well, what do you think was happening over the past 10 years as you held on to these cards? They were being devalued by the market the entire time, why are you mad now? BGS 9.5's continuously lost their luster (and value) month after month, year after year. And now that BGS is correcting this truth in the marketplace by making changes, it's their fault?
|
That’s true about BGS 9.5 Gem Mint cards that were “min gem”. They rightly have become less valuable than PSA 10s but maintained value above PSA 9s (which in many instances is also deserved in my opinion). But do you really look at a BGS 10/9.5/9.5/9.5 and think “a PSA 10 is in better condition”? Because I rarely do.