Great video, PFM. Came here from Scott's recent video. To answer your open question: It seems like the weakest point in this thesis is the emphasis on PSA's lack of ability to resolve 9 vs. 10 grades. PSA 10s (and 9s) are allowed to have some number of minor flaws, and over time that number of allowed flaws has seemingly changed. The idea for a black label is that it has no flaws whatsoever; this seems like it should be a more consistently determinable quality measure.
I agree on that.... PSA 9 it's like 40-50% gold purity with clear impurities. PSA 10 maybe 60% - 100% with no guarantee on the content and quantity of impurities. I suspect black label is 99% purity. kind of 🙂 ... Maybe pokemon should start putting gold inside the cards 🙂
I feel like the only way it would work is if Beckett used a machine to grade. In a perfect world where they programmed it to take into account the thousands of possibilities in card conditions, damage, etc. then theoretically it would spit out the same consistent grade everytime. That would make the grades consistent and you could narrow it down to hairline grades like BGS does now. Until they get machines to do it, it is inconsistent and dependent on the grader. I really like your gold example as I feel that paints a better picture.
I think you do a good job illustrating the issue that comes into play in regards to the ability of the employees to accurately differentiate between the quality of the cards at the highest scores. As you mentioned there's no doubt a margin of error that will continue to exist as a result of the variables that cannot be controlled (the employees/actual condition variation,) and as a result the end grade boils down to luck as the resolving power diminishes. A thought that can't help but cross my mind though is if there's some level of dis-ingenuity in regards to the grading process that artificially inflates the overall rarity/disparity between the higher echelons. As we know the black label is regarded highly due to the significant requirements seemingly associated with the grade, but what if there was some form of internal limitation on how many can be given out to maintain that apparent elusiveness? If more and more become readily available over time, or suddenly appear to have amassed in population, the significance of the grade loses its strength. It would be in BGS's best interest to limit the amount that come into existence further than just based on the quality parameters for this very reason. Obviously this is tin foil hattery, but when dealing with such small margins between the grades as you illustrated, is it really that Farfetch'd :^)? So the overall value comes from its distinguished existence, but its existence comes from an amalgamation of proper parameters being met, as well as a bit of luck and possible collusion. Thoughts? I look forward to more content :^)
The benefit of having a grading scale with such high resolution - especially one totally based on subjectivity - is that BGS can freely control how many Black Labels are generated. It wouldn't surprise me at all if there was some artificial limit to how many are given out, either consciously on the part of the company or subconsciously on the part of the grader. At the same time, this phenomenon opens them up to accusations that certain submitters may preferentially receive Black Labels because of the seemingly trivial difference between a regular Pristine and a Black Label Pristine.
@@SophieExMachina yeah, that's what I was hinting at with my last comment. I didn't want to bring it up in this video because it's a whole other topic and many other people before me have already addressed it
@@ScottMastromatteo I just feel weird now about buying PSA/BGS at all after those scandals, even though I know that it was all about baseball cards. I'm not sure if they'd do it on Pokemon since that's a card game with much less profitability but for me personally the very fact those scandals exist devalues and vilifies gradings a bit. I feel pretty conflicted about the entire system now
I agree with everything you said but you have to understand that people (mostly) don’t look for high grades because they want the better condition card. They want it because the sticker says the high grade. So you may have 2 cards where the black label card is in fact in worse condition then the pristine card, but it doesn’t matter. People buy the card for the label. Think of it this way. You could have a pair of Lee jeans and a pair of true religion jeans and let’s say scientifically the Lee jeans are better quality and last longer. Well people that have the money or buy true religions buy it for the label, not because the quality of better or worse.
![⭐️( ลอยกระทง 2024 ) Ver. แดนซ์ Remix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rMWOLhgXUHc/mqdefault.jpg)
![Vendite di Carte Pokémon BGS 10 BLACK LABEL! Più di 4.000 EURO [MARKET WATCH]](/img/n.gif)
Nice video. Well thought out and well explained. Thanks!
We want more content
I was hoping this was gonna be 13 minutes of a piece of paper that said “no”
Great video, PFM. Came here from Scott's recent video.
To answer your open question: It seems like the weakest point in this thesis is the emphasis on PSA's lack of ability to resolve 9 vs. 10 grades. PSA 10s (and 9s) are allowed to have some number of minor flaws, and over time that number of allowed flaws has seemingly changed.
The idea for a black label is that it has no flaws whatsoever; this seems like it should be a more consistently determinable quality measure.
I agree on that.... PSA 9 it's like 40-50% gold purity with clear impurities. PSA 10 maybe 60% - 100% with no guarantee on the content and quantity of impurities. I suspect black label is 99% purity. kind of 🙂 ... Maybe pokemon should start putting gold inside the cards 🙂
I still love this video
I feel like the only way it would work is if Beckett used a machine to grade. In a perfect world where they programmed it to take into account the thousands of possibilities in card conditions, damage, etc. then theoretically it would spit out the same consistent grade everytime. That would make the grades consistent and you could narrow it down to hairline grades like BGS does now. Until they get machines to do it, it is inconsistent and dependent on the grader. I really like your gold example as I feel that paints a better picture.
I think you do a good job illustrating the issue that comes into play in regards to the ability of the employees to accurately differentiate between the quality of the cards at the highest scores. As you mentioned there's no doubt a margin of error that will continue to exist as a result of the variables that cannot be controlled (the employees/actual condition variation,) and as a result the end grade boils down to luck as the resolving power diminishes. A thought that can't help but cross my mind though is if there's some level of dis-ingenuity in regards to the grading process that artificially inflates the overall rarity/disparity between the higher echelons. As we know the black label is regarded highly due to the significant requirements seemingly associated with the grade, but what if there was some form of internal limitation on how many can be given out to maintain that apparent elusiveness? If more and more become readily available over time, or suddenly appear to have amassed in population, the significance of the grade loses its strength. It would be in BGS's best interest to limit the amount that come into existence further than just based on the quality parameters for this very reason. Obviously this is tin foil hattery, but when dealing with such small margins between the grades as you illustrated, is it really that Farfetch'd :^)?
So the overall value comes from its distinguished existence, but its existence comes from an amalgamation of proper parameters being met, as well as a bit of luck and possible collusion. Thoughts? I look forward to more content :^)
The benefit of having a grading scale with such high resolution - especially one totally based on subjectivity - is that BGS can freely control how many Black Labels are generated. It wouldn't surprise me at all if there was some artificial limit to how many are given out, either consciously on the part of the company or subconsciously on the part of the grader. At the same time, this phenomenon opens them up to accusations that certain submitters may preferentially receive Black Labels because of the seemingly trivial difference between a regular Pristine and a Black Label Pristine.
Look up the BGS black label scandal
@@SophieExMachina yeah, that's what I was hinting at with my last comment. I didn't want to bring it up in this video because it's a whole other topic and many other people before me have already addressed it
@@ScottMastromatteo I just feel weird now about buying PSA/BGS at all after those scandals, even though I know that it was all about baseball cards. I'm not sure if they'd do it on Pokemon since that's a card game with much less profitability but for me personally the very fact those scandals exist devalues and vilifies gradings a bit. I feel pretty conflicted about the entire system now
Resolving power 😮
I agree with everything you said but you have to understand that people (mostly) don’t look for high grades because they want the better condition card. They want it because the sticker says the high grade. So you may have 2 cards where the black label card is in fact in worse condition then the pristine card, but it doesn’t matter. People buy the card for the label. Think of it this way. You could have a pair of Lee jeans and a pair of true religion jeans and let’s say scientifically the Lee jeans are better quality and last longer. Well people that have the money or buy true religions buy it for the label, not because the quality of better or worse.
CGC: 98 - 99.99%, +/-3%, $150
Hi
This is fun and all but please inform yourselves on the BGS black label scandal
Hi