CSG Ups Its Game with a New Label and Revised Grading Scale! 1 1

[northkorea]

On 4/4/2022 at 6:43 AM, ne1seenmykeys said:

It depends on what got a 9.5

Just like other companies, they don't just take the average of the 4 subgrades. Different subgrades are weighted differently. 

That's the point. CSG's position is that it DOESN'T matter what the subgrades were. All green 9s, regardless of whether they would currently receive a black 9.5 (based upon known and recorded subgrades), will translate to black 9s. Under the green system black 9.5s simply do not exist. This is akin to NGC's asterisk ("star grade" system) for exceptional eye appeal within a grade. Essentially, a black 9.5 amounts to a subjective decision by the grader (or team of graders) on a card that *technically* merits a 9, but collectors might say "What??? Why isn't this a 10?!?!?!?!"

It would have made more sense to split the 9.5s into upgrade and no upgrade portions, rather than upgrade the entire set and downgrade everything else.

[northkorea]

On 4/4/2022 at 6:36 AM, ne1seenmykeys said:

THIS.

Was at the LCS yesterday and literally everyone said the same thing. It's a Perfect 10, which implies inherent 10s across the board. Having the difference on non-Perfect 10s would have made a huge difference. 

The problem is that including subs for black 10s works directly against what CSG accomplishes by consolidating the PRISTINE tier into the GEM MINT tier.

The more I think about it, I don't mind getting rid of the PRISTINE tier, assuming it wasn't simply a legal decision. By definition, only 10*3+9.5 cards would be the PRISTINE tier, so consolidating green 9.5 & 10 made sense... until they decided to introduce a new 9.5 tier.

If they chose to keep 9.5*3/9 & no sub 9.5s as new 9.5, that could make sense.

So, now there is this problem of 9.5 MINT+ cards that clearly have a defined value in the algorithm, yet the choice to upgrade ALL 9.5 to 10, while upgrading NONE of the 9 to MINT+, created an unnecessary phantom classification. 

[ne1seenmykeys]

On 4/4/2022 at 6:03 PM, northkorea said:

That's the point. CSG's position is that it DOESN'T matter what the subgrades were. All green 9s, regardless of whether they would currently receive a black 9.5 (based upon known and recorded subgrades), will translate to black 9s. Under the green system black 9.5s simply do not exist. This is akin to NGC's asterisk ("star grade" system) for exceptional eye appeal within a grade. Essentially, a black 9.5 amounts to a subjective decision by the grader (or team of graders) on a card that *technically* merits a 9, but collectors might say "What??? Why isn't this a 10?!?!?!?!"

It would have made more sense to split the 9.5s into upgrade and no upgrade portions, rather than upgrade the entire set and downgrade everything else.

As I replied to someone else, you are over-complicating things and I'm simply not going to argue with you or anyone else about it. 

If you don't like CSG or the way they are doing things then just move on to another company. 

Have a great day. 

[northkorea]

On 4/5/2022 at 3:44 PM, ne1seenmykeys said:

As I replied to someone else, you are over-complicating things and I'm simply not going to argue with you or anyone else about it. 

If you don't like CSG or the way they are doing things then just move on to another company. 

Have a great day. 

I'm not the one calling for CSG to include subgrades on non-PERFECT 10s. My point is that it simplifies things from an overall marketability to NOT include those subgrades 

[northkorea]

Ryan, please explain how CSG resolves the following changes in the grading scale:

Old 7.5 NM+: 65/35 centering.

New 8 NM/Mint: 65/35 centering.

Old 8 NM/Mint: 60/40 centering.

New 9 Mint: 60/40 centering & 90/10 centering on reverse.

Old 9 Mint: 55/45 centering.

New 10 Gem Mint: 55/45 centering & 75/25 centering on reverse.

Old 9.5 Gem Mint: 50/50 one way & 55/45 other way centering.

Old 10 Pristine: 50/50 all around centering.

Assuming no grading standards got tougher, is the following a fair interpretation of the changes?

Old 7.5 centering = New 8.0 centering

Old 8.0 centering = New 9.0 centering.

Old 9.0 centering = New 10.0 centering.

If that is the case, would a card that previously graded 9/10/10/10, with the 9 being centering, now grade out as a perfect 10?

It seems the other subgrades are more subjective in their definitions, and didn't really change, with respect to the numeric value. Additionally, the new grading criteria allow for more liberal definitions of reverse centering (similar to PSA).

For me, I don't mind paying $12 (vs $10, or $5 with the current discount) to participate in the grade inflation, but I don't want to pay the $12, if there's ANY chance that the grades won't be upgraded, if the old version included subgrades. After all, I've already paid $20 ($12+$9 for subs) per bulk submitted card with subs, so, at this point, it's paying $32 per card bulk for the upgrade vs $25-$30 per card bulk without the upgrade... which amounts to a downgrade.

Ryan, can you please find someone who can properly answer the question?

As an example, if a card previously graded 7 (centering 6, 10/10/10 for other subs) due to 75/25 reverse centering and 55/45 front centering, the centering would now be a 10 (according to the new definitions). Would that make the card now a perfect 10, instead of a 7? That's what the definitions seem to imply. If so, it's ridiculous that the $10 ($5) reholder would result in a new 7, while a $12 regrade would result in a new perfect 10.

[Josh66]

On 3/25/2022 at 11:34 AM, kiddk1 said:

what about those of us that submitted early and bought in to your company and are now stuck with the old crappy label?

My company will be filing a class action lawsuit against CSG, and you're welcome to join. Not only did they change the entire look of their slabs, they SECRETLY lowered ALL grading standards and bumped up 9.5 cards to 10's. And the new 10's are EASIER to get now than 9.5s were. This company needs to and will be sued 

[PunsRTonsOfFun]

On 4/11/2022 at 4:26 AM, Josh66 said:

My company will be filing a class action lawsuit against CSG, and you're welcome to join. Not only did they change the entire look of their slabs, they SECRETLY lowered ALL grading standards and bumped up 9.5 cards to 10's. And the new 10's are EASIER to get now than 9.5s were. This company needs to and will be sued 

You realize a 9.5 in the old label was Gem Mint just like a 10 in the new label, right? Your cards aren’t getting a bump. The grade (Gem Mint) just now corresponds to a different number on a scale. They could have switched to letters with A being Gem Mint, it doesn't change the condition of the card. The actual number is irrelevant, it's the grade (Gem Mint) that matters. Then again, I suppose if people actually understood this, they wouldn’t have needed to change it.

Also, where is your proof they lowered standards and 10s are now easier to get?

[northkorea]

On 4/11/2022 at 3:23 AM, PunsRTonsOfFun said:

Also, where is your proof they lowered standards and 10s are now easier to get?

I wouldn't say they lowered standards, per se, but they did change the definition of grades "8" through "10" to include lower quality cards. For what it's worth, I can't imagine many courts even agreeing to hear a lawsuit based upon that specific argument. In order for a lawsuit to be tenable, there has to be some sort of loss by the proclaimed aggrieved.

Possible situations where a class could be established:

1) Those who previously paid for subgrades who are now being charged to relabel their holders due to the scale change. This wouldn't be a concern, if CSG would simply adjust the registry points to automatically rebalance the former 9.5 and 10 graded cards to meet the new standard.

2) (This is a much smaller pool, but possess a higher likelihood to claim loss.) Those who paid for subgrades, but have mechanical errors or otherwise incorrect data on the label of their holders. In order for their cards to be correctly identified, they would need to have the flips changed to the new flips. This means they would lose the benefit of subgrades. An easy remedy would be for CCG to simply refund or credit these individuals for any fees paid for the subgrades.

3) (A broader pool of #2, and the most likely to establish a "class".) Any who paid for subgrades should be offered a chance to have their cards relabeled with associated fees waived. The customer would still need to pay shipping both ways, but they wouldn't be responsible for the reholder or regrade (whichever is deemed appropriate) fees. The only reason I include the "regrade" possibility is for those cards, which aren't green 9.5, that would see a bump in grade under the published as new, no subs, grading standards.

These are simply solutions that CSG could implement that would assist in a defense against a class action being established. Then again, CCG might choose to simply ignore the pleas from customers until someone actually files a lawsuit against them.

[Devo33]

Instead of a refund they could offer a credit to those 20% or so who paid for subgrades. I only submitted 5 cards with subgrades so I have no bearing on the group as a whole but I do feel for those who sent in bulk orders with subgrades. This was my first order with CSG and I absolutely will submit again because I value their strict grades. There's just one other problem. As was mentioned before, those strict standards remain EXCEPT for centering. 3 of those 5 cards I submitted were short of a 9.5 because of the old centering guidelines. So do I send them back to get re-slabbed with the new label and a 9, or crack them open and re-grade at a full fee for the chance at a 9.5? But is that just the new standard for a 10 I have no idea.

I think at the end of the day CSG got a little greedy and tried to capitalize on a hot market and now they are scrambling to undo a rookie mistake. Problem is they are not rookies and they should have done better market research. 

[northkorea]

On 4/11/2022 at 6:39 PM, Devo33 said:

Instead of a refund they could offer a credit to those 20% or so who paid for subgrades. I only submitted 5 cards with subgrades so I have no bearing on the group as a whole but I do feel for those who sent in bulk orders with subgrades. This was my first order with CSG and I absolutely will submit again because I value their strict grades. There's just one other problem. As was mentioned before, those strict standards remain EXCEPT for centering. 3 of those 5 cards I submitted were short of a 9.5 because of the old centering guidelines. So do I send them back to get re-slabbed with the new label and a 9, or crack them open and re-grade at a full fee for the chance at a 9.5? But is that just the new standard for a 10 I have no idea.

I think at the end of the day CSG got a little greedy and tried to capitalize on a hot market and now they are scrambling to undo a rookie mistake. Problem is they are not rookies and they should have done better market research. 

The idea of a refund was solely for the, quite limited, situation of an individual who received a card back with subgrades that had mechanical errors on the label. Since subgrades would no longer be included on the corrected label, the owner would need to choose between having an incorrectly identified card with the subgrades that they paid for or receiving a correctly identified card flip that would be absent the subgrades that they previously had paid for.

[CGCRyan]

On 4/10/2022 at 11:21 PM, northkorea said:

Ryan, please explain how CSG resolves the following changes in the grading scale:

Old 7.5 NM+: 65/35 centering.

New 8 NM/Mint: 65/35 centering.

Old 8 NM/Mint: 60/40 centering.

New 9 Mint: 60/40 centering & 90/10 centering on reverse.

Old 9 Mint: 55/45 centering.

New 10 Gem Mint: 55/45 centering & 75/25 centering on reverse.

Old 9.5 Gem Mint: 50/50 one way & 55/45 other way centering.

Old 10 Pristine: 50/50 all around centering.

Assuming no grading standards got tougher, is the following a fair interpretation of the changes?

Old 7.5 centering = New 8.0 centering

Old 8.0 centering = New 9.0 centering.

Old 9.0 centering = New 10.0 centering.

If that is the case, would a card that previously graded 9/10/10/10, with the 9 being centering, now grade out as a perfect 10?

It seems the other subgrades are more subjective in their definitions, and didn't really change, with respect to the numeric value. Additionally, the new grading criteria allow for more liberal definitions of reverse centering (similar to PSA).

For me, I don't mind paying $12 (vs $10, or $5 with the current discount) to participate in the grade inflation, but I don't want to pay the $12, if there's ANY chance that the grades won't be upgraded, if the old version included subgrades. After all, I've already paid $20 ($12+$9 for subs) per bulk submitted card with subs, so, at this point, it's paying $32 per card bulk for the upgrade vs $25-$30 per card bulk without the upgrade... which amounts to a downgrade.

Ryan, can you please find someone who can properly answer the question?

As an example, if a card previously graded 7 (centering 6, 10/10/10 for other subs) due to 75/25 reverse centering and 55/45 front centering, the centering would now be a 10 (according to the new definitions). Would that make the card now a perfect 10, instead of a 7? That's what the definitions seem to imply. If so, it's ridiculous that the $10 ($5) reholder would result in a new 7, while a $12 regrade would result in a new perfect 10.

Here is some information that I was provided by our graders:

A Gem Mint 9.5 green label is the same grade as a Gem Mint 10 black label. The grade is the same, only thing that changes is the terminology. 

Everything Mint 9 and below is the exact same. Nothing is being re-graded when it is submitted for crack and cross with the exception of any Pristine 10 green label will be reviewed for a possible Perfect 10 black label.

We did add the back centering specifications, which we had not previously added to the scale. We did make some very minor adjustments to the scale to be more aligned with the current market.

[Warner85]

Does anyone (including CSG) have a new label perfect 10 and can post what it looks like? I know it’s early and they’re rare but I’m curious if it’s only subgrades added. From what I’ve heard so far it’s just subgrades which is kind of pointless  (according to csg). Is the label on a perfect 10 really not a different color or anything like that?

[northkorea]

On 4/12/2022 at 11:06 AM, Warner85 said:

Does anyone (including CSG) have a new label perfect 10 and can post what it looks like? I know it’s early and they’re rare but I’m curious if it’s only subgrades added. From what I’ve heard so far it’s just subgrades which is kind of pointless  (according to csg). Is the label on a perfect 10 really not a different color or anything like that?

They haven't designed the new label yet, from what I understand.

[716breakers]

So before I do my first submission with CSG let me get this straight... They made a better label but got rid of sub grades??

[northkorea]

On 4/19/2022 at 8:41 AM, 716breakers said:

So before I do my first submission with CSG let me get this straight... They made a better label but got rid of sub grades??

They got rid of the OPTION for subgrades. You had to pay for them, initially. Since they felt usage wasn't significant (20% penetration was the quoted number), they decided to get rid of them altogether.

As someone who once had an order that I didn't request subgrades on get subgraded (and charged for it), I can see how removing the option might simplify the process. 

[northkorea]

On 3/25/2022 at 7:31 AM, CGCRyan said:

Just in time for The MINT Collective, CSG is delivering a one-two punch: a fresh label along with market-friendly updates to its grading scale.

Certified Sports Guaranty® (CSG®) is excited to reveal its brand-new certification label! The bold yet refined design is the result of months of research and development, including market studies, focus groups and extensive testing.

Ryan,

Tell the marketing department and the web administrators:

"The website should have ZERO Green label cards visible."

Also... "There should be no sub-grade cards shown."

[sheldonm85]

On 3/31/2022 at 12:57 PM, CGCRyan said:

Yes, all CSG Gem Mint 9.5s in the old green label will still cross to Gem Mint 10s in the new black label, the cost per card will just be the regular ReHolder fee of $10 per card.

I have 2 old Gem Mint 9.5s coming back as new 9.5 Mint Plus, so I already know this statement isn't true. Anything that can be done about this?

[CGCRyan]

On 4/26/2022 at 12:40 PM, sheldonm85 said:

I have 2 old Gem Mint 9.5s coming back as new 9.5 Mint Plus, so I already know this statement isn't true. Anything that can be done about this?

Sent you a DM.

[northkorea]

On 4/26/2022 at 6:40 AM, sheldonm85 said:

I have 2 old Gem Mint 9.5s coming back as new 9.5 Mint Plus, so I already know this statement isn't true. Anything that can be done about this?

If this is true, were the two old ones 9/9.5/9.5/9.5 subgrades?

[sheldonm85]

On 4/26/2022 at 5:20 PM, northkorea said:

If this is true, were the two old ones 9/9.5/9.5/9.5 subgrades?

"If this is true" Lol, yeah it's true. Yes, that's what the subgrades were and I've already been told they're looking into what happened and they'll get it fixed.