Perfectly fine grading company, and having owned many slabs across both them and PSA, I do not find there to be any major discrepancies in grading standards. My CGC 9’s look like PSA 9’s, and my CGC 10’s look like PSA 10’s, with a small margin of error. My preference for PSA comes down to collection conformity, as opposed to having bias towards their actual grading process.
While it’s impossible to deny the PSA premium in the market, it’s allowed for me to find phenomenal condition cards in CGC slabs at bargain prices.
They’re going to do just fine long term as a market supplement to PSA. They just need to be more prudent about avoiding “scandals.”
if u mean “10” aka the old 9.5 yeah that grade is pretty trash… but if you look at pristine almost all of them are 5 or less (and 5 is actually pretty high)
I’ve never graded with them, but their slab clarity is still the best IMO. Slabs that are designed to be very hard to scam with will be important as long as the financial incentive to scam remains high. No respect for their grading practices (autos, test cards, etc). If I were a 100% optimizer, I would use them for grading flips for sure. But I’m not. And while PSA makes some bad over grading mistakes, I am DONE sending my vintage to PSA because I am very satisfied to conclude to my satisfaction that PSA is grading vintage harsher than ever before. I did pretty well cracking CGC and crossing to PSA but my last two subs were murderous. So, I won’t be buying many/any CGC slabs for now since I believe they grade easier than PSA, I like my PSA collection continuity, and I can’t even cross a 9 for a 9 given the difference in grading standards for what I mostly collect and grade. Modern I’ll still throw to PSA. But without the crossover incentive, I have little use for CGC anymore, honestly.
