TwoYewts

I have encountered the same issue. I collect more vintage than modern and variations (and obscure issues) that I would have no problem getting notated/graded with PSA or SGC are not considered by CSG/CGC which has been disappointing.

Bitter sweet as most of you have already stated. I have been waiting for the day where CSG would start to grade non-sport cards and since CGC was only doing TCGs it was not the answer. So it looks like I will finally be able to send some non-sport to get graded but at the cost of another label change which will hit the pocket. Been using CSG exclusively after several disappointing interactions with PSA support and issues with their grading consistency. Love the CSG holder, the low submission cost, the change to the black label and the consistency that I have received on my submittals. My PC is small potatoes compared to most of you and as most collectors I like to see a uniform look in my collections. At over 400 slabs that would put me out $2k which is not a cost I wish eat at this time, not to mention the cost that was already paid to move most of my greens to the CSG blacks to get that desired uniform look in my collection. So definitely disappointed that it appears CSG/CGC is sticking it to us collectors again. I believe CSG/CGC should take this into consideration as the collectors that have been with them from the beginning are the ones that they are screwing over the most with another relabeling move. I believe something should be provided to show some sense of gratitude to those collectors that decided to stick with them during the growing pains (I mean besides the multiple relabels this whole "system upgrade" has been annoying at best on how it has been handled and all of the associated glitches that have come out of it). I also believe the September 30th cutoff for $5 reholdering needs to be extended further as even though we are told this combination will happen mid July if the previous system upgrade schedule showed anything is that modifications/changes do not go as planned. So, bittersweet....I'll finally get some non-sport collections graded but it won't be right away since my funds will be spent having to relabel some sets (ugh).

Hello NK, With regards to your question, I found the following on pokemoninvesting.com with regards to Pokemon cards: "These Miscut/Off Centered cards are very rare due to the quality control from WOTC and Nintendo to make sure that most cards come out in decent condition before being packaged into booster packs. Collectors tend to pay a lot more for a Miscut/Off Centered card compared to a really good centered version of the same card. Some collectors even get these cards graded and hope for a "Miscut" placed on their PSA label. " I don't know how true the comment above is and it may simply be a perception thing that has circulated around the TCG collecting community where OC cards are deemed a rarity instead of an instance of bad luck that gets thrown away. But then again, it could be true as I remember how bad Topps quality control was in the past. Hope that helps -TwoYewts

Hello Maribeth, Thank you for the reply. Ok, I would prefer the 1910 T220 Mecca Cigarettes and 1910 T220 Tolstoi Cigarettes set descriptions..wasn't sure if I needed to submit with the set manufacturer or not. Thanks again for the reply.

Hello CSG Support/Moderators, When attempting to request a new Set Type via the "Request a new set type here >" link in the registry, I receive an error (as seen in the screenshot below). I am looking to have the two following sets available: 1910 ATC Champion Athlete and Prize Fighter Series - Mecca Back 1910 ATC Champion Athlete and Prize Fighter Series - Tolstoi Back Let me know if I am doing something incorrectly or if I should go about the request differently. Thank you in advance.

Good to know because I have a Reyauca Ronaldo that was on my list to send in, so I won't bother with that. My recent IT was an 06 UK Traditions Ronaldo. It did not show up during the card submission search so I manually added it figuring I was still good since PSA and SGC have graded copies. But CSG does not recognize the card.

NK, I was under the same impression you were until I happened to look at my cc statement and I saw the full amount charged even though I had a card come back as IT. The card met the size specifications but CSG deemed that it was a card they did not grade. I was a little upset about it because PSA and SGC have graded copies of the card in their registries so I couldn't figure out why CSG would not grade it; but, regardless it is their choice on what they will grade. But then I noticed that I was still charged the full submission cost. I went through their webpage detailing cards that they do not grade and I didn't see mine listed there but i did see that there was a definition for Service Unavailable for cards that are not a size graded by CSG or are "obscure" which is the only thing I can think of why they did not grade my card. But, my card did not come back as Service Unavailable, it came back as Ineligible Type and I am hoping I can be told why because the only difference I see is that one definition is charged a fee while the other is not.

Hello CSG Moderators/Support, Hoping to get a clarification between a card being classified as Ineligible Type or as Service Unavailable. Over the past orders I have submitted, I have had a couple of cards that came back as Ineligible Type. The cards in question were not listed on the "Cards We Do Not Grade" Page (https://www.csgcards.com/card-grading/cards-we-grade/#sports-cards-no-grade) and when submitting them I was unable to find them using the card search; but, I also did not see any mechanism during the submission process where I could chat/contact a CSG service agent to verify that the card I was submitting would be graded by CSG. So, what I am asking is why were these cards classified as Ineligible Type instead of Service Unavailable. From reading what CSG classifies as Service Unavailable, I see: "When a card is either of a size CSG currently does not grade, or is an issue that is obscure, it may be returned as “Service Unavailable.” Submitter is not charged the grading fee." So I believe the cards submitted were of acceptable size; but, they were not manufactured by your more well known card manufacturers so wouldn't that fall under "obscure"? I ask because I see that Inelgible Type cards still incur a grading fee whereas Service Unavailable cards do not. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Dan

Good question. As a hobbyist collector who sends in cards primarily for preservation/authentication in order to be able to complete and showcase sets with a uniform look, I believe any price point within the $10 - $15 range for cards valued under $250 is reasonable. It fills the void that was left by PSA once they removed their low price point for subscriber bulk orders and grading specials. As a vintage collector, I have several sets that I would love to send in to have encapsulated. As we all know, many cards within a set do not carry the value of the more sought after cards and therefore I can't justify paying over $15 for common cards just to complete a graded set. At the current price point that CSG offers for bulk, a collector like myself can send in a set and not break the bank to encapsulate in order to add it to their PC. I don't know how feasible that price range would be for CSG to permanently maintain with the cost of materials on the rise; but, even just offering "Grading Specials" as they are currently offering is a welcome opportunity for me to send in another set or two to be graded.

For what its worth I'm a fan of CSG's services and hope that they end up deciding to keep a low submission cost so that non commercial hobbyist collectors like myself can continue to grow their collections without breaking the bank. Don't forget that CSG still has a whole other community to tap into with regards to non-sports trading cards. Whether they decide to finally start grading non-sport under the CSG logo (which as a collector I hope is the case for uniformity in my PC) or expand CCG's offerings, I believe they would do well in this market. I know there have been several requests posted on these forums for CSG to start expanding in this area to compete against PSA and SGC. As has been mentioned, I find the CSG holders and the grading consistency of the orders I have submitted my biggest factor in continuing to use CSG's services. I have submitted to all of the major grading agencies and I find CSG the most reliable when it comes to the grades I expected the cards to receive (while finding PSA the absolute worst). I submit mostly for PC purposes and the occasional cards I put up for sale are strictly ones that have been replaced by higher graded versions so the ending sale price doesn't concern me too much but as an investor I can see the concern some of you have expressed when comparing CSG sell comps to PSA sell comps. I agree with Micky 8 though in stating that too many collectors have been drinking the PSA Kool Aid and I know several that have been badly burned by what I feel is rushed through grading spending money to only then crack out the ridiculous low balled cards they receive back from PSA. In the end I don't think CSG is going anywhere but up. They are large enough to compete, have been in the collectibles grading industry long enough to know how to survive and I believe will retain enough of a collector base to continue to provide service and expand.

Lol you are welcome. Hope it turns out well! Like I mentioned I have used it on other vendor slabs that are in my PC and it has turned out pretty good but those slabs are not as crystal clear as CSG so I just hope the polishing does not affect the clarity. Maybe try on a section on the back of a slab by the label first before using it on the front anywhere. Good luck.

Hello TennisCardCity, I have used the following polishing kit with varying degrees of success. All depends how deep the scratches are but light surface scratches usually buff out without issue. I have tested it on PSA with success and SGC, I have yet to use it on CSG slabs so I do not know if using the polish will badly affect the clarity of the CSG slab. But, for $20 it may be worth a shot in your situation NOVUS 7100 Plastic Polish Kit - 8 Ounce https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002UCYRZU/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Hello Jpica1983, It appears that the double hologram error variation has occurred with other cards of the set as well. There is one of Joe Oliver up on eBay currently (item number 352990095124) and George Brett (item number 394105621131). I don't know the frequency or rarity of the error but nice find either way. Happy Collecting! TwoYewts

Agreed. FedEx is the absolute worst delivery service. Any issues I have ever had with items being delivered has been with FedEx and similar to what NK described with boxes being torn and product being blatantly looked through. I have stopped using FedEx as a delivery service for several years now and would definitely not choose them.

Well, both back and front are from the 93-94 Topps Stadium Club set but they are the back and front from separate cards (Woolridge and Majerle cards). Can't explain what you have there to be honest. Found something similar if you look up item number 324353347982 on eBay. Sort of the same type of print error you may have there.

Hello Sandra, The CSG Registry is for graded cards, that is why you are being asked for a CSG number. Clicking the yellow add card button is how you add graded cards to your profile. Entering the CSG registry number will find the graded card in the registry and assign it to your profile. Hope that helps.

Hello Admins, Hoping you can help out with the following scenario. I have (2) 1995-96 Collector's Choice #324 Michael Jordan Scouting Report cards (numbers 1007213083 and 1013529011). 1007213083 is the variation of the card with the Player's Club symbol on the front as seen below: While 1013529011 is the variation without the Player's Club symbol in the lower left corner (as seen below): So although they are the same card number, etc. they are technically two different cards/variations but when I try to add both to my Michael Jordan Player Set I get a notice that whichever card is already in the collection will get replaced with the other as seen below: Could you please remedy this at your convenience since they are technically two distinct versions of the same card. Thank you in advance! Dan

New label is not bad but for those of us early adopters with OCD and have sent in complete sets if I wanted to update any cards in the set, it will no longer look uniform unless if I send in the rest of the cards to reholder. Kinda stinks.

Hello Admins, Just noticed that the slot for the following card should be corrected to show the correct card number: #52 1998-99 Upper Deck MVP Michael Jordan Should be #51 1998-99 Upper Deck MVP Michael Jordan Thank you in advance!

Hello Admins, Please add the following slot to the Michael Jordan Player set: 1998-99 Upper Deck Black Diamond #7 Michael Jordan CSG 8.5 1012326005 Thank you!

Hello Admins, Please add the following slots to the listed player sets: Cristiano Ronaldo Player Set 2020-21 Topps Chrome UEFA CL Joga Bonito #JB-1 Cristiano Ronaldo CSG 9 1014991010 2018 Panini Prizm World Cup Connections #C-16 Cristiano Ronaldo/ Joao Moutinho CSG 9 1009509004 Kobe Bryant Player Set 1999-00 Upper Deck Ionix #25 Kobe Bryant CSG 8.5 1006632037 Thank you!

Hello Maribeth, When I attempt to add a card I get the following except for a few of them: The competitive CSG Registry doesn't accept this card yet, but we’re just getting started! I would say 45 out of the 50 give me this message if I try to add them. Thanks, Dan

Hello Admins, I need slots added to the following set: 1938 Cartledge Razors Famous Prize Fighters I need cards #1 to #50 added they range from CSG number 1014216001 to 1014216050. Do I need to list out each card or are you able to add them via the CSG number? Thanks

Hello Admins, Please add the following cards to their respective Player Sets: Michael Jordan Player Set 1991-92 Fleer Pro-Vision #2 Michael Jordan CSG 8.5 1003705114 Kobe Bryant Player Set 2018-19 Panini Prizm Dominance #6 Kobe Bryant CSG 9 1014676009 Thank you in advance!

Hello Admins, Please add the following slot to the Kobe Bryant Player Collection 1996-97 Score Board All Sport PPF #11 Kobe Bryant CSG 8.5 1003680252 Thank you!