What occurs to me here is that if we are back to deferring to the subjective eyeball-quality of the card then what value does any graded card offer over raw anymore?
Grading is supposed to reduce the guesswork when transacting cards by unburdening both buyer and seller from applying their individual standards to the product. We collectively defer to a standardized service. So if we are now weighting that standard independently, even in the form of a secondary service, then why bother with the grade at all? Aren’t we back to self-described quality scales that eliminates the contract we’ve entered to defer to a standard?
We already have concepts of “strong” and “weak” grades, which we still understand as a narrow spectrum within a broader standard metric. But the idea that we defer to PSA but then make our own judgment that attempts to negotiate and reconcile that result seems to undermine the point of deferring to PSA in the first place.
If we can’t take a grade at face value, then what is the point? What value does the grade add anymore? Why even ask their opinion?
Eye appeal is already part of the technical grade for MS/PR 60 or better coins as per PCGS’s guidelines.
CAC is a third-party service that stickers graded coins if they are strong for the grade, or better than the grade shown on the holder. Green bean CAC stickers consistently achieve better sales than unstickered coins; and gold bean CAC stickers often fetch some pretty massive premiums.
Personally, I would not mind if a similar service could add value to cards that appear strong for the grade.
As a vintage baseball card collector myself I like the idea generally and see the benefits as a seller, as well.
However, this has to be WOTC strictly and trophies only with a value much higher than $500, maybe $1000? I don’t see the downside really…we’ve all seen that psa 6 that has no scratches, a perfect clean back and a tiny dent vs the psa 6 that has the shredded back so I think the eye appeal marker could be good.
All that being said, I do think this has much more appeal and utility for vintage sports and Magic but I don’t necessarily thinks it’s a bad thing for Pokemon either
I completely agree when it comes to high graded cards as they should all be close to flawless. The differences between two PSA 10 graded cards would be mostly negligible and individuals can decide for themselves which they prefer.
My lukewarm support comes from the fact that lower graded cards achieve their grades for different reasons. A PSA 6 with a tiny indent is much different from an off-centered one with beat edges. I feel like there is room to differentiate eye appeal there even if there is subjectivity.
All that being said I’m not sure if providing this service is necessary or worth the manpower.
That sounds like the same here, no? Eye appeal technically isn’t part of grading guidelines, but PWCC would be the CAC equivalent here.
Idk, maybe I just have a negative bias towards the green beans. I always avoided any coin that had the sticker because I just assumed that it would have an “unnecessary” premium. But that was just my perception. I always felt I could find a coin that was just as good looking that didn’t get green beaned for less cost.
Think of nicely toned, mint-state Morgan Dollars. They’re very appealing, but they wouldn’t freely be given a CAC bean, because PCGS grading standards have already accounted for luster, color, and strike during the grading process.
PWCC isn’t contesting the grade of a card in the way CAC does with coins, I think they’re merely saying that a card is attractive for the grade, not that it necessarily deserves a higher grade.
I hope this explanation provides some additional clarification.
