I dont really mind if people flip cgc or any company but there is some obvious reason that there are tons for sale that I am missing. And I dont think it is all extras from PC, from the people I have met anyway
Why can’t we all just get along? 
If you don’t like CGC, then don’t use them.
If you don’t like BGS, then don’t use them.
If you don’t like PSA, then don’t use them.
6 Likes
For TCG it’s ALL PSA and cgc. BGS is deceased and has the lowest resale from what I see anecdotally on ebay/pwcc (besides sgc)
4 Likes
I like all of them, I just want to know why people send huge bulk subs to cgc to resell because it is objectively not a good idea. there must be some reason besides PC rejects
Cause you get your cards back in less than a week and don’t have to sign up for collectors club at $99
6 Likes
Bingo.
You’re assuming that BGS and PSA have kept standards perfectly consistent over time, too. There has been a huge amount of hate toward BGS recently in the MTG world for having dramatically changed their standards. And the change is much more dramatic than any shift that CGC has been accused of.
PSA standards over time are tough to compare because PSA’s grading scale is based more on “eye appeal” than supposedly objective metrics like centering/surface/edges/corners. So if PSA’s standards shifted over time, it would be much more difficult to prove it. Whereas with BGS/CGC, it’s much more apparent when standards shift.
5 Likes
If you are grading for PC the turnaround from 1 week to 1 month isnt really an issue. And yeah a membership is a big one. I guess that could stop flippers from using psa, still seems like basic math may suggest psa is still better to flip with
I personally view old CGC labels as considerably different as many have shown here on this forum. BGS has been fairly consistent to me and so has PSA. Maybe its opinion though, and maybe the real answer really is that 99$ membership. I am definitely not suggesting people should use bgs. I see no reason besides PC for bgs, and cgc but apparently others see more of cgc than I do
BGS doesn’t grade nearly enough Pokemon cards to establish any sort of trend re: their grading harshness. CGC grades 5x as many Pokemon cards, and has much faster turnarounds, so it’s obviously going to be much easier to recognize trends.
And I agree with you re: CGC for flipping. Purely for flipping, people should probably be using PSA right now (and they generally are). CGC subs are much lower than they were a year ago precisely because there are fewer people grading with them to flip.
3 Likes
It’s tough to know. Technically, you are supposed to be sending bulk cards with less than $200 value to psa and $250 to cgc. If every card is on the higher end of that value range and cgc sells for 10-15% lower on average in a 9, as an example, then yes PSA is a no brainer. In a 10, it’s always a no brainer. But for $75 cards or whatever, I would think the grading time savings and less money locked up would be a big deal for cash flow purposes.
3 Likes
the only reason I say BGS has been consistent is because I personally have graded maybe 300 cards with them and usually I can guess within a .5 grade. They dont grade much because the market has decided that BGS is basically only for PC which I think is totally fine. The market has not quite decided that for CGC though which I just did not understand because it appears that there is quite a significant portion just for flipping. It just makes me think I am missing something about CGC and I like to dive deep into these things. I really dont dislike cgc at all (I have quite a lot of it and it is not all for cracking), but I have to be honest I just dont understand CGC or their clients as well as I do PSA and BGS
3 Likes
the only reason I say BGS has been consistent is because I personally have graded maybe 300 cards with them and usually I can guess within a .5 grade
I can say the same thing for CGC, though. It’s more a reflection of your pre-grading skill than it is their consistency.
The market has not quite decided that for CGC though which I just did not understand because it appears that there is quite a significant portion just for flipping.
A year ago, I would’ve totally agreed with you. But CGC subs are down dramatically because of PSA’s reopening and way fewer are being listed on eBay. So I think that CGC is largely in the same category as BGS right now – basically just a viable option for PC cards.
but I have to be honest I just dont understand CGC or their clients as well as I do PSA and BGS
Well, my rationale for using them is that I prefer the product they produce – particularly the case. In terms of resale value, PSA is of course superior.
1 Like
are they really down on submission amounts? I dont know why I still get the vibe many people are subbing to cgc just to resell. I know a lot of the larger bgs users and none do it for purely for resale because its just not worth it. And the change in their standards to the point where it was literally impossible to get 10s until they went public on the pop report and now it happening once or twice per sub (seemingly) is something I just can’t get over personally. It just feels like it was such a corporate move and I hate stuff like that
1 Like
Just look at the graphic that pokecollectoramy posted – 8% decrease compared to last month (I think?). Aside from that, I haven’t actually looked into the data – I just assumed that their submissions were down significantly because there are way fewer slabs being listed on eBay.
And the change in their standards to the point where it was literally impossible to get 10s until they went public on the pop report and now it happening once or twice per sub (seemingly) is something I just can’t get over personally. It just feels like it was such a corporate move and I hate stuff like that
I don’t doubt that this is true with modern, but with WotC/EX I think this is really more illusory than anything else. For instance, for early EX:
RS total CGC 10 holo pop: 1
RS total CGC 10 ex pop: 0
SS total CGC 10 holo pop: 2
SS total CGC 10 ex pop: 1
DR total CGC 10 holo pop : 5
DR total CGC 10 ex pop: 15
TMTA total CGC 10 holo pop: 5
TMTA total CGC 10 ex pop: 4
We’re talking about an average CGC 10 pop of <1 for any given ex or holo from the first 4 ex sets.
And for e-Series:
Expedition total CGC 10 holo pop: 5
Aquapolis total CGC 10 holo pop: 13
Skyridge total CGC 10 holo pop: 58
Even for Skyridge, that’s an average CGC 10 pop of <2 for any given holo.
(Just used early EX and e-Series as examples because that’s what I care about lol).
I still feel like i see a new cgc 10 wotc holo every single week on ig. Which simply didnt happen even 1 time before the pop report. I didnt have any before the change so it does not effect me financially but i dont like it because it was imo the most obvious coroprate standard change ive ever seen. I probably placed too much monitary trust in grading but it just rubs me the wrong way and idk if ill ever change my mind on that. not saying i wont use them or condem people who do but it was pretty obvious to me. I am happy to critisize all grading companies. I actually think the new standards are better but still i personally was put off by some actions they took.
Well yeah the CGC 10 rate for WotC/EX has increased because it was very nearly 0% before lol. But if you look at the actual pop report, there are still a trivial number of 10s.
Personally, I think it’s a positive change. I’m happy that they realized the scale was fucked. The standard was unreasonably difficult before. Now it’s at least possible (albeit still very tough).
And I’m saying this as someone whose collection lost quite a bit of value from the change, because I have a LOT of old cert CGC 9.5 WotC/EX holos lol. The cards I already owned lost value, but the change has made it actually possible to complete my goals 
.
2 Likes
I agree. Maybe i am just too stubborn on the issue. Idk why i feel like i was influenced by the pop report thing even though i had 0 into it at the time. I think competition is good and i really like the goals you are working on too. Theyre pretty similar to mine but more gem mintier lol
1 Like
I see little to no reason to use CGC outside of specialist cases like errors or for grade optimization on dented cards (but even in that case use BGS because they’ll give a 9 to a dented card). PSA is cheaper, provides better secondary market value and liquidity, and is the hobby standard.
I did one CGC order awhile ago before they changed their grading standards, got a bunch of 8.5s, and didn’t look back. I can see the value for some people, but I really do question what value CGC is providing (outside of turnaround time, and that advantage is very quickly decreasing) at a higher price level.
4 Likes
More lenient on fossil/jungle silvering and errors are the only time I use CGC.