Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="eddiespin, post: 2963568, member: 4920"][USER=19165]@physics-fan3.14[/USER], by what grading standards are you judging ICG and ANACS? If you have but the slightest clue, you're judging them by PCGS and NGC grading standards, and saying, guess what, they don't grade the same. For every one inconsistent ICG or ANACS grade you find, I'll find ten inconsistent PCGS and NGC grades, as that's how much bigger those markets are. And, don't be ridiculous and make me do that, as you know what I'm talking about. Bottom-line, it's just markets, that's all their plastic is, grading that's inconsistent within those markets, and especially when judged against other markets. You and a lot of others here are just conditioned into accepting PCGS and NGC markets as the primier grading markets without crediting that conditioning to their marketing. There's a reason the housewives in the 1960s paid 3X more for Clorox Bleach than ordinary bleach, and, get a clue, it wasn't because Clorox was better. The Clorox label was stronger. The housewives were paying for the plastic bottles in much the same way we're paying for the plastic slabs.[/QUOTE]