New BGS turnaround time tracker

[DKsportscardsWI]

Originally Posted by rohara99

Directly from Beckett:

“Quad 9.5s will remain an overall grade of 9.5. With that said we’re still excited about the updates to our grading scale to further evolve with the industry standard and deliver on the desires of the collector.

Moving forward the Gem Mint 10 will posses three 9.5s and one 10 or two 9.5s and two 10s.

Our coveted Black and Gold Pristine grades are not impacted in this change whatsoever. Those grades are the pinnacle of grading in the hobby and will never change.”

So like this:

3x9.5 + 1x9 = 9.5 Gem Mint
4x9.5 = 9.5 Gem Mint
3x9.5 + 1x10 = 10 Gem Mint
2x9.5 + 2x10 = 10 Gem Mint
1x9.5 + 3x10 = 10 Pristine
4x10 = Pristine Black Label

Makes some sense but I still don't understand why they'd bother changing.

Hmmmmmm. then their banner/backdrop at the mint might have to be modified. it showcases quad 9.5s and a Gem mint 10 sticker. haha. quick backtrack from the leak yesterday? or just sloppy marketing?

[DKsportscardsWI]

If they're going so far to make more names, they should just go for it and do even more names.


3x9.5 + 1x9 = 9.5 Gem Mint
4x9.5 = 9.5 Gem Mint Plus
3x9.5 + 1x10 = 10 Gem Mint
2x9.5 + 2x10 = 10 Gem Mint Plus
1x9.5 + 3x10 = 10 Pristine
4x10 = 10 Pristine Black Label

[rohara99]

Originally Posted by DKsportscardsWI

Hmmmmmm. then their banner/backdrop at the mint might have to be modified. it showcases quad 9.5s and a Gem mint 10 sticker. haha. quick backtrack from the leak yesterday? or just sloppy marketing?

Who knows for sure, but likely marketing running wild again. Someone in charge over there needs to get them under control and review this #@#@#@#@ before stuff goes to print.

[rhineland]

This is the dumbest thing they could have possibly done. I seriously cannot believe it.

Instead of bringing clarity to the market while building distinction for the brand, they added even more confusion.

This was a middle-of-the-road strategy where instead of making a hard choice to improve their brand they chose a middle ground that they can’t stand on as a brand. Absolutely pathetic.

[I only pull for]

What's really sad is they are trying to copy SGC and CSG. How the mighty have fallen.

[TBT]

Originally Posted by I only pull for

What's really sad is they are trying to copy SGC and CSG. How the mighty have fallen.

BGS’s opportunity was and still is to reinforce how hard it is to get a BGS 10 grade, thereby:
1) widening the perceived and often-real delta between a BGS 10 and a PSA 10 when it comes to condition
2) reinforcing the importance of sub grades for condition assessments on collectible assets
3) weakening the market’s reverence for the PSA 10 designation
4) increasing the collectibility and value of the BGS 10 grade even above where it sits today
5) helping the BGS 9.5 true gem grade to get back on par with a PSA 10 in terms of market value and eliminating the “crossover” desire
6) sticking a dagger in the PSA 9 grade and making the entire proposition of grading with PSA sort of dubious, especially for higher end cards - because if you don’t hit a PSA 10 you’ve probably lost money, and a PSA 10 isn’t even that special anyway.

Their entire opportunity revolves around the superiority of a BGS 10 to a PSA 10, and the critical role that sub grades play in the equation. This strategy doesn’t entirely miss the opportunity, but man alive, it’s a much more complicated approach than is necessary. I suppose they’re giving people more chances to hit “Gem Mint”, but they’re mistaking the fact that people care more about the grade number than the grade name.

[rohara99]

Originally Posted by TBT

but they’re mistaking the fact that people care more about the grade number than the grade name.

Exactly.

And the only people complaining about this are fans/collectors/resellers of PSA slabs.

Beckett shouldn't care what they think.

[Stackfan]

Don't know about you guys.... but about ~90% of my 9.5 Gem Mint's have at least one 9. So now it looks like we have a 9.5 Gem mint and 10 Gem Mint. Which in theory should raise the value of the 10% of Gem Mint plus , and lower the 90% of Old Gem Mint True & Min i own.... I sometimes wonder if the grader is like well, it's between 9 & 9.5; and based on the other subs, we'll go with one or the other. It just surprises me how little 10 subs they give out; and how most cards include a 9.

Big changes all to raise the stock of the 10 Gem Mint plus. Maybe to have it align better on sites like market movers; but you still have Gem Mint 10 and Pristine 10; you still have Gem Mint 9.5 and Gem Mint 10.


They didn't mention it, and i couldn't find it on their website/twitter about the announcement. I imagine it's safe to say, 10,10, 9.5, 9 is still a 9.5 Gem mint.

I wouldn't say this completely nukes BGS; but it's additional confusion , instead of educating new customers to the process. As others mentioned, theres other areas that need fixing. You'd think you'd roll this out with some "collectors" special ; 10$ card; - 50 card max; 60 day TAT. You gotta earn happy customers that want to do repeat business. It's frustrating being a BGS supporter.

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by rohara99

Directly from Beckett:

“Quad 9.5s will remain an overall grade of 9.5. With that said we’re still excited about the updates to our grading scale to further evolve with the industry standard and deliver on the desires of the collector.

Moving forward the Gem Mint 10 will posses three 9.5s and one 10 or two 9.5s and two 10s.

Our coveted Black and Gold Pristine grades are not impacted in this change whatsoever. Those grades are the pinnacle of grading in the hobby and will never change.”

So like this:

3x9.5 + 1x9 = 9.5 Gem Mint
4x9.5 = 9.5 Gem Mint
3x9.5 + 1x10 = 10 Gem Mint
2x9.5 + 2x10 = 10 Gem Mint
1x9.5 + 3x10 = 10 Pristine
4x10 = Pristine Black Label

Makes some sense but I still don't understand why they'd bother changing.

What about 10/10/10/8.5? What about 10/10/10/9? What about 10/10/9.5/9?

[2010GBPackers]

Originally Posted by TBT

BGS’s opportunity was and still is to reinforce how hard it is to get a BGS 10 grade, thereby:
1) widening the perceived and often-real delta between a BGS 10 and a PSA 10 when it comes to condition
2) reinforcing the importance of sub grades for condition assessments on collectible assets
3) weakening the market’s reverence for the PSA 10 designation
4) increasing the collectibility and value of the BGS 10 grade even above where it sits today
5) helping the BGS 9.5 true gem grade to get back on par with a PSA 10 in terms of market value and eliminating the “crossover” desire
6) sticking a dagger in the PSA 9 grade and making the entire proposition of grading with PSA sort of dubious, especially for higher end cards - because if you don’t hit a PSA 10 you’ve probably lost money, and a PSA 10 isn’t even that special anyway.

I agree with most of this, especially the bolded. Their most recent communication was much easier to understand than the photo with 9.5 x 4 being Gem Mint 10. Now, I'm not so bent out of shape about their decision. It actually makes sense to shake up their tiers in order to claw back some of the market share they've lost. I only have one BGS card and was planning on trying to cross it at the National, which I still may do, but seeing as it's a 9.5 x 3 with a 10 corners, upgrading to a Gem Mint 10 label isn't a bad option either.

[rohara99]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

What about 10/10/10/8.5? What about 10/10/10/9? What about 10/10/9.5/9?

Ask Beckett.

But you already know the answer anyways... they'll still remain 9.5's as they always have.

[rhineland]

Coming back to this thread after a few hours just to reiterate how completely unnecessary and insanely stupid this decision is.

I can only applaud them for coming up with an idea so bad that it never, ever would have entered into my imagination when coming up with ways to improve BGS' business.

[gameissued]

Yep.. I have a decent amount of older label 9.5, 9.5, 9.5, 9. It was very magical how almost every card came back with one 9 sub with all else 9.5 (very few 10 subs assigned even if it deserved it). You know, back when even a min BGS 9.5 was better than a PSA 10 and sub-grades were included/standard!

Originally Posted by Stackfan

Don't know about you guys.... but about ~90% of my 9.5 Gem Mint's have at least one 9. So now it looks like we have a 9.5 Gem mint and 10 Gem Mint. Which in theory should raise the value of the 10% of Gem Mint plus , and lower the 90% of Old Gem Mint True & Min i own.... I sometimes wonder if the grader is like well, it's between 9 & 9.5; and based on the other subs, we'll go with one or the other. It just surprises me how little 10 subs they give out; and how most cards include a 9.

Big changes all to raise the stock of the 10 Gem Mint plus. Maybe to have it align better on sites like market movers; but you still have Gem Mint 10 and Pristine 10; you still have Gem Mint 9.5 and Gem Mint 10.


They didn't mention it, and i couldn't find it on their website/twitter about the announcement. I imagine it's safe to say, 10,10, 9.5, 9 is still a 9.5 Gem mint.

I wouldn't say this completely nukes BGS; but it's additional confusion , instead of educating new customers to the process. As others mentioned, theres other areas that need fixing. You'd think you'd roll this out with some "collectors" special ; 10$ card; - 50 card max; 60 day TAT. You gotta earn happy customers that want to do repeat business. It's frustrating being a BGS supporter.

[I only pull for]

Originally Posted by TBT

BGS’s opportunity was and still is to reinforce how hard it is to get a BGS 10 grade, thereby:
1) widening the perceived and often-real delta between a BGS 10 and a PSA 10 when it comes to condition
2) reinforcing the importance of sub grades for condition assessments on collectible assets
3) weakening the market’s reverence for the PSA 10 designation
4) increasing the collectibility and value of the BGS 10 grade even above where it sits today
5) helping the BGS 9.5 true gem grade to get back on par with a PSA 10 in terms of market value and eliminating the “crossover” desire
6) sticking a dagger in the PSA 9 grade and making the entire proposition of grading with PSA sort of dubious, especially for higher end cards - because if you don’t hit a PSA 10 you’ve probably lost money, and a PSA 10 isn’t even that special anyway.

Their entire opportunity revolves around the superiority of a BGS 10 to a PSA 10, and the critical role that sub grades play in the equation. This strategy doesn’t entirely miss the opportunity, but man alive, it’s a much more complicated approach than is necessary. I suppose they’re giving people more chances to hit “Gem Mint”, but they’re mistaking the fact that people care more about the grade number than the grade name.

According to the graphic (I just read on the other thread that BGS posted to Twitter, I believe), 9.5s with one 9 will now be called mint +. That will devalue millions of cards Beckett has graded 9.5 gem mint with 1 9. I personally feel like BGS just devalued roughly 10-20 cards in my PC.

[rhineland]

If CSG is paying attention, now would be the time to offer the following promo: every BGS 9.5 submitted for crossover gets a 10. Just like their old label 9.5s did. They’re the only company that could credibly offer this given their history.

I guarantee they would get a lot of people’s cards.

I’m really hoping this is all just an April Fool’s joke.

[majestik101]

Originally Posted by I only pull for

According to the graphic (I just read on the other thread that BGS posted to Twitter, I believe), 9.5s with one 9 will now be called mint +. That will devalue millions of cards Beckett has graded 9.5 gem mint with 1 9. I personally feel like BGS just devalued roughly 10-20 cards in my PC.

Same. This is nothing more than a ploy by them to have us re-submit the cards to them for a new grade flip. More money in their pocket. You best believe they won't do that for free, or at a discount. I imagine it would cost anywhere from $60-$75 plus shipping for a re-slab. In which case, they can go pound sand.

[gameissued]

Seriously has to be an April Fools joke, if this holds true a sh*load of everyone's BGS collection just got devalued. The starting *10* label should actually start with the Min Gem (9.5, 9.5, 9.5, 9) if they are actually going through with this 10 label plan.

BGS 9.5's have been the equivalent to Gem 10 from other companies for years and now BGS themselves saying 9.5's are no longer 10's! LoL, even a quad 9.5 is no longer a 10 in their book. What a disaster! The ship is sinking and they want to take everyone with them.

Originally Posted by I only pull for

According to the graphic (I just read on the other thread that BGS posted to Twitter, I believe), 9.5s with one 9 will now be called mint +. That will devalue millions of cards Beckett has graded 9.5 gem mint with 1 9. I personally feel like BGS just devalued roughly 10-20 cards in my PC.

[Stackfan]

I’m genuinely curious if BGS looked at their population of cards that fall into these categories. I’ve got like 500 BGS slabs, and only like 30 qualify for their new 10 Gem mint. (Some of which not worth even paying for an upgrade). So the 470 other true gem and min gems are now just mint plus?!?

Why would I pay more money to BGS to further devalue the card?? For new subs I’d have like a 5% chance at a 10, unless they just start grading easier, which hurts their millions of existing cards.

I gotta think PSA, SGC, and CSG are already thinking about special to cross over.


Just seems odd how a 9.5 final grade or sub grade was consider gem mint. Now it’s Mint plus, and the card has to be partially pristine to be a gem mint.

[TBT]

Originally Posted by I only pull for

According to the graphic (I just read on the other thread that BGS posted to Twitter, I believe), 9.5s with one 9 will now be called mint +. That will devalue millions of cards Beckett has graded 9.5 gem mint with 1 9. I personally feel like BGS just devalued roughly 10-20 cards in my PC.

Saw that too. Truly insane and much worse than it originally seemed. I think they’ll go out of business if they do this.

[Havemercy]

I wonder how much blow you gotta do to be so high that instead of adding Gem Mint+, you'd rather devalue an untold number of previous quad 9.5s that were your standard Gem Mint. I don't really use BGS like that but for people that prefer them for their collection that's just salt in the wound.��

I can't figure out exactly what their intended effect was, but pretty sure they're not getting what they were hoping for.

[Trueblue]

Can someone insert the hysterically laughing gif. That's how PSA senior leadership is reacting right now.

It's annoying because the crossover and crack/resub volume will increase turnaround time for my PSA submissions.

[mc1]

Originally Posted by rohara99

Ask Beckett.

But you already know the answer anyways... they'll still remain 9.5's as they always have.

What are they going to call them? Mint+ ? Thats going to be very confusing for the average collector.

Originally Posted by TBT

Their entire opportunity revolves around the superiority of a BGS 10 to a PSA 10, and the critical role that sub grades play in the equation. This strategy doesn’t entirely miss the opportunity, but man alive, it’s a much more complicated approach than is necessary. I suppose they’re giving people more chances to hit “Gem Mint”, but they’re mistaking the fact that people care more about the grade number than the grade name.

Disagree. What percentage of their cards are 10s, pristine or black labels. 1-2% or much less than that? They need to KISS.

[TBT]

Originally Posted by mc1

What are they going to call them? Mint+ ? Thats going to be very confusing for the average collector.



Disagree. What percentage of their cards are 10s, pristine or black labels. 1-2% or much less than that? They need to KISS.

Yeah, my comment was made before seeing the image they published and their plan to downgrade 85% of existing Gem Mint 9.5s to the term Mint+. I agree with you that they should keep it simple. But I think they held the logical high ground by equating “gem mint” with 9.5. To me, that actually was keeping it simple versus PSA. On a scale of 1-10, 10 is perfect or flawless or “pristine”. There can be no better score. Intuitively, very few cards should be called flawless and receive a 10. PSA’s scale leaves a lot to be desired for high end collectors for this reason. But rather than just acknowledging that there is actually an opportunity to highlight cards in between gem mint and pristine with a Gem Mint+ designation, BGS decided to change their 20+ year definition of what “gem mint” is. And they seem to be doing so in an effort to attract the less sophisticated low-end PSA 10 flipper crowd than the more sophisticated high-end collector crowd with which they actually had a strong value proposition.

A true case study in mismanagement. I hate to say it because I preferred BGS’s system for my collection, but I don’t know why they’re really needed any more after this change. They’re effectively validating PSA’s grading scale and helping to alleviate the flaw in it while also conceding that they themselves have “done it wrong” for over 20 years.

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by rohara99

Directly from Beckett:

“Quad 9.5s will remain an overall grade of 9.5. With that said we’re still excited about the updates to our grading scale to further evolve with the industry standard and deliver on the desires of the collector.

Moving forward the Gem Mint 10 will posses three 9.5s and one 10 or two 9.5s and two 10s.

Our coveted Black and Gold Pristine grades are not impacted in this change whatsoever. Those grades are the pinnacle of grading in the hobby and will never change.”

So like this:

3x9.5 + 1x9 = 9.5 Gem Mint
4x9.5 = 9.5 Gem Mint
3x9.5 + 1x10 = 10 Gem Mint
2x9.5 + 2x10 = 10 Gem Mint
1x9.5 + 3x10 = 10 Pristine
4x10 = Pristine Black Label

Makes some sense but I still don't understand why they'd bother changing.

At least you got to have this dream for 24 hours.

[rohara99]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

At least you got to have this dream for 24 hours.

Dare to dream brother..... dare to dream.

As a diehard fan of Beckett (specifically their subgrades and inner sleeve) this might push me over the edge to change. I'll wait and see how it shakes out (I still think Beckett has to pivot from this change due to backlash) but the OCD I have of needing my PC to all be in the same slabs leaves a daunting task to crack and sub to PSA.

My major hold up at this point is the paper cards bouncing around in PSA slabs... drives me up the wall.

Edit: Like you posted in the other thread Beckett isn't going to have any BGS 10's out there, their pop of 10/9.5/9.5/9.5 is so low they're screwed. They'll have to pivot from this change IMO. And the fact that they dont know this or didn't check their own god damn pop reports is infuriating.