Gem rates for PSA, SGC and BGS

[netmasters]

I knew SGC was tough (but fair and accurate) but even this shocked me. I can see why everyone loves PSA and SGC more lol. Remind me again why we are paying so much more for PSA 10's.....

[discodanman45]

The SGC stat is misleading. They have SGC 9.5 as well. PSA not having a 9.5 makes things harder to compare.

[Springerj23]

The column on the left I can believe, but something on the column on the right isn't adding up.

The Gem rate should also increase as this reflects as the era cards becomes more recent. I don't feel like this is depicting market share though. Is the column on the right saying how many each entity graded of those areas (market share) or is it saying the percentage of gems of each era of all cards graded by each entity?

If its the latter, without knowing how many each entity graded, it doesn't show a whole lot. Now I can make an assumption on who graded the most (PSA), and to me it shows they are tougher than both maybe combined, but due to lack of clarity, that is just an assumption.

[Scottish Punk]

Originally Posted by discodanman45

The SGC stat is misleading. They have SGC 9.5 as well. PSA not having a 9.5 makes things harder to compare.

ya, you will need to add the 9.5 into the 10's for SGC. Would also apply for BGS.

I don't quite understand what the last column is telling me. The 30% doesn't fit into any narrative I am trying to decipher.

Edit: I think I got it. Each of the columns adds up to 100%. It is the spread of graded items in each decade. The 30% for SGC is high because of all the prewar graded.

[i4gotmyid]

Originally Posted by discodanman45

The SGC stat is misleading. They have SGC 9.5 as well. PSA not having a 9.5 makes things harder to compare.

I think 9.5 for sgc is call mint+ and only 10s are gem mint which is why I think they listed it this way. If SGC doesnt view 9.5's as gem's, wouldnt the chart be misleading to include them?

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by i4gotmyid

I think 9.5 for sgc is call mint+ and only 10s are gem mint which is why I think they listed it this way. If SGC doesnt view 9.5's as gem's, wouldnt the chart be misleading to include them?

It is misleading to include them and it is misleading the way that they have them in the chart. SGC has a Mint plus and PSA/BGS doesn't.

[netmasters]

Originally Posted by discodanman45

It is misleading to include them and it is misleading the way that they have them in the chart. SGC has a Mint plus and PSA/BGS doesn't.

But in theory a PSA 10 = BGS 9.5 = SGC 10

That is what each company considers Gem. What is misleading?

[SupermanBrandon]

Each person can read this exactly how they want to. Fans of each or all can tell a story for their favorite.

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by netmasters

But in theory a PSA 10 = BGS 9.5 = SGC 10

That is what each company considers Gem. What is misleading?

If PSA had a 9.5 grade, there would be many 10's that would get knocked down to a PSA 9.5. You can't compare SGC/PSA Gem rates because of this. You also can't compare PSA 9's to SGC 9's because of this as well. The only similarity is the actual word "Gem Mint," however that word is used differently in the grading rubrics as well. SGC could just as well called a SGC 9.5 "Gem Mint minus" instead of "Mint Plus."

[netmasters]

Originally Posted by discodanman45

If PSA had a 9.5 grade, there would be many 10's that would get knocked down to a PSA 9.5. You can't compare SGC/PSA Gem rates because of this. You also can't compare PSA 9's to SGC 9's because of this as well. The only similarity is the actual word "Gem Mint," however that word is used differently in the grading rubrics as well. SGC could just as well called a SGC 9.5 "Gem Mint minus" instead of "Mint Plus."

OK so you agree we should be paying more or at the very least equal for SGC 10's than PSA 10's since in theory every SGC 10 is a PSA 10 but not every PSA 10 is a SGC 10?

[towerymt]

Originally Posted by SupermanBrandon

Each person can read this exactly how they want to. Fans of each or all can tell a story for their favorite.

Yup.

Such as...people send better stuff to PSA and worse stuff to SGC. Could be why the high gem rate at PSA relative to SGC. Pure speculation.

This data doesn't explain anything about how tough any of these companies grade cards.

[oddstuff]

Originally Posted by netmasters

But in theory a PSA 10 = BGS 9.5 = SGC 10

That is what each company considers Gem. What is misleading?

BGS calls a BGS 9.5 final grade gem mint...but in the hobby, there are different valuation for the various forms of 9.5s due to BGS cards with subgrades. A "minimum" BGS 9.5 has three 9.5s and a 9.0. Most would consider this card to be a PSA 9 or even lower as an example. A BGS 9.5 with two 10s and two 9.5 subgrades some may consider to be superior to a PSA 10 as another example.

[Onepocketj]

Originally Posted by towerymt

Yup.

Such as...people send better stuff to PSA and worse stuff to SGC. Could be why the high gem rate at PSA relative to SGC. Pure speculation.

This data doesn't explain anything about how tough any of these companies grade cards.

Exactly. I hear so many people say, I don't think this will get a PSA 10 so I'll send it to BGS or SGC. The data above proves nothing.

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by netmasters

OK so you agree we should be paying more or at the very least equal for SGC 10's than PSA 10's since in theory every SGC 10 is a PSA 10 but not every PSA 10 is a SGC 10?

I would never buy a PSA 10 or a SGC 10. The subjective nature of these grades and the increased multipliers is absolutely ridiculous. Also, the price of cards doesn't just deal with the grade given. PSA has a registry and also people prefer their slabs. SGC slabs are larger, thicker, and have more people that don't like how they look.

We can argue prices and people can speculate on a million different factors. Some people argue that people send better cards to PSA and lesser cards to SGC, which I believe is complete nonsense with PSA being essentially shut down. I have been selling or trading the majority of my PSA 10's because of the 10x multipliers it has for some of the cards I own. People want to believe that a "Gem Mint" card it perfect, but the majority of them would regrade as PSA 9, SGC 9.5, or BGS 9's if cracked and resubmitted.

[rohara99]

Originally Posted by oddstuff

BGS calls a BGS 9.5 final grade gem mint...but in the hobby, there are different valuation for the various forms of 9.5s due to BGS cards with subgrades. A "minimum" BGS 9.5 has three 9.5s and a 9.0. Most would consider this card to be a PSA 9 or even lower as an example. A BGS 9.5 with two 10s and two 9.5 subgrades some may consider to be superior to a PSA 10 as another example.

Also True Gem BGS 9.5's have lower gem rates then PSA 10's.

[SupermanBrandon]

The ole "such and such grades harder" is just personal feelings. It's impossible to actually know. It's just an opinion based on that person's personal experience.

[towerymt]

Originally Posted by Onepocketj

Exactly. I hear so many people say, I don't think this will get a PSA 10 so I'll send it to BGS or SGC. The data above proves nothing.

My personal example / experience...I had two very nice Soto golds. One I thought had a slight chance at a PSA-10 and one I thought had almost no shot. I sent the better one to PSA and it got a 9. I sent the lesser one to BGS and it got a min-gem (9.0 corners). About what I expected. But now, based on the holder, the lesser condition card (in my amateur opinion) is "worth" more because of the "gem mint" grade. The PSA-9 has a pretty good shot at a true gem crossover (again, in my opinion), but I like it as is for my PC.

I think PSA-9s are generally a great buy, and BGS min-gems are the worst. That, or BGS-10s with 9.5 corners.

(click for full size)

[grade]

Pay more for Pop report and utility to registry of PSA cards?

[k13]

As long as psa 10's sell the best it does not matter if gem rate was 100%.

[netmasters]

Originally Posted by oddstuff

BGS calls a BGS 9.5 final grade gem mint...but in the hobby, there are different valuation for the various forms of 9.5s due to BGS cards with subgrades. A "minimum" BGS 9.5 has three 9.5s and a 9.0. Most would consider this card to be a PSA 9 or even lower as an example. A BGS 9.5 with two 10s and two 9.5 subgrades some may consider to be superior to a PSA 10 as another example.

Pricing does not come close to reflecting this.

[netmasters]

Originally Posted by towerymt

Yup.

Such as...people send better stuff to PSA and worse stuff to SGC. Could be why the high gem rate at PSA relative to SGC. Pure speculation.

This data doesn't explain anything about how tough any of these companies grade cards.

I would agree people send cheaper cards to SGC but they don't send worse quality cards especially ultra modern cards. There would be no point. You would lose money on a 9 and the premium is not worth it on a 10. I use SGC and PSA a lot. SGC is much tougher and the numbers prove it. This "send better cards" is an excuse that is not backed up by much.

[netmasters]

Originally Posted by grade

Pay more for Pop report and utility to registry of PSA cards?

What % of people sending to PSA are honestly using the registry?

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by netmasters

What % of people sending to PSA are honestly using the registry?

Not many people right now, but a lot of people buying off the secondary market are registry users. At $100 plus a card, the majority of cards being sent are by flippers. I was using the registry last year when I could submit, but I got turned off and started using SGC more for my PC.

[ChaseUA]

Could also be a result of people being selective on what they send to PSA and being more open to send cards with obvious issues to SGC?

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by ChaseUA

Could also be a result of people being selective on what they send to PSA and being more open to send cards with obvious issues to SGC?

The majority of cards being graded by PSA right now are still bulk submissions from early last year where everyone sent in hundreds of cards to slab anything over $5 raw. PSA is grading under $15 a card still with value/collectors club, while SGC is grading cards for $30 each. So you could say that people are being more selective with SGC since it is over double the price to grade with them.