Is Beckett Grading (BGS) in Trouble? We’re Worried

Affiliate Disclosure: When you click links at Only Greats & make a purchase, we may earn a commission. As a free site, we join affiliates like eBay & Amazon to help offset our costs. THANK YOU for your support!

Last Updated On: April 2nd, 2024

A novel idea is only as good as the innovation that follows it. When it comes to the long-term prospects of a company or product, it’s not enough to strike oil once; a company must continually adapt its product to ensure longevity. 

Why do we begin this post with a rather obvious observation from a Business 101 class? Because it applies directly to a pioneer in the sports card field: Beckett Grading Service (BGS). In addition to publishing one of the first comprehensive sports card guidebooks in the late 1970s, Beckett and BGS have regularly formed the upper echelon of card grading services. With such a head start, Beckett and BGS couldn’t possibly fail, right?

Unfortunately, we know that incredible head starts can mean very little in terms of long-term viability. Polaroid, Kodak, and Blockbuster are all examples of once trailblazing industry titans whose clout in their respective fields have diminished considerably (or evaporated altogether).

In recent years, BGS has ceded significant ground to other graders, including SGC and CGC. Additionally troubling is the widening value gap between BGS 9.5 vs PSA 10-graded cards. These headwinds suggest a murky future on the horizon for BGS.  

In this post, we’re going to cover some of the warning signs behind BGS’ waning stature in the hobby, including the BGS 9.5 and PSA 10 value gap, its declining market share, and some hits to its reputation in recent years. We’ll also provide a few counterpoints to a possible “BGS collapse,” hopefully ending the post slightly lighter than it started.  

So, what’s in store for BGS? Let’s discuss. 

Why BGS Could Soon Fail

We’ve identified four key red flags that could signal potential disaster for BGS: a price gap, declining market share, reputational damage, and poor execution. Let’s take each one in turn.

BGS Price Gap vs. PSA Signals Trouble

Markets tend to signal well in advance of trouble impending for a company. Especially public companies. Their stocks plummet ahead of bankruptcy as market participants are well aware of the troubles that lie ahead, and solvency could be in question (ultimately bankruptcy protection follows).

Unfortunately, BGS isn’t a publicly traded company. We can’t scroll to the stock ticker to check its health and viability. But what we can do is see how it stacks up relatively against its top competitor, PSA. We covered the concerning trend in BGS slab values against PSA in great depth in a recent post, and, spoiler alert, it’s not great for BGS.

As that post revealed, the value gap between BGS 9.5 and PSA 10 has widened in recent years. Recall that a BGS 9.5 is a Gem Mint, same as a PSA 10. 

Let’s look at three cards that clearly demonstrate the PSA-BGS gap:

What these figures tell us is where the card market stands today. And that could be true for any number of factors independent of the grading company itself. If we take a closer look, however, we can see that PSA’s values have risen at a considerably higher rate over the card’s lifetime than BGS. This gets to the underlying concern: that BGS’ values aren’t rising similarly.

This makes it very much a BGS problem, rather than an industry or card-centric one. The Ohtani card is a perfect example of this problem.

If we compare these two charts that chronicle the sales history of the Ohtani card discussed above, we see that BGS appears to have a hard $800 ceiling on Gem Mint cards. PSA, on the other hand, has a general floor somewhere around $400-$600, with peaks well over $1,500 for a card that, in theory, should earn the same grade in both places. Meanwhile, PSA has over 10 times more copies graded (3,900+ gems) versus BGS (300+ gems), and still manages to maintain a hefty premium over its rival.

That last part is particularly concerning — while BGS 9.5 slabs have lagged PSA 10s for many years now (for most cards), it’s double trouble when considering there are far fewer BGS 9.5 Ohtanis in the marketplace and yet those slabs can barely keep up with PSA values.

Declining Marketshare

This leads us to the next concerning aspect of BGS’ decline: its loss of market share. Once upon a time, BGS was talked about as the premier grading service. Then it was one of two graders (along with PSA) that made up the upper echelon. But more recently, BGS is now discussed as part of a triumvirate that includes SGC. 

What this equates to is a perception shift in the hobby. BGS is far from the top grader and, frankly, is sometimes listed as a third (or fourth) banana. And the numbers bear that out. If BGS was indeed viewed differently in the hobby, we’d expect to see it reflected in pop counts. And we most certainly do. 

Let’s go back to that Joe Burrow Silver Prizm. Keep in mind that this is a fairly new card in a sport not traditionally associated with BGS. Given what we’ve discussed thus far, we’d expect the pop counts to lean away from BGS and toward another like PSA. And it very much does:

This data underscores a recent trend among collectors away from BGS and toward others like PSA or even SGC, which has graded 72 Burrow Silver Prizms. And Gem Rate’s grading recap reports confirm the same:

Two things stand out from these charts. First, and probably most obvious, is that BGS is ceding ground to its competition. PSA was always lightyears ahead of everyone else, but BGS, SGC, and CGC all jockeyed for second place as recently as 2022. The 2023 chart clearly shows that’s no longer the case, with CGC and SGC rounding out the middle tier and BGS a distant fourth.

This brings us to the second concerning trend: not only has BGS lost ground, it’s clearly lost ground while several other graders have picked up steam. This means that BGS (which has seen its sports related grading drop 24% year over year in 2023) has largely not benefitted from expanded interest in the hobby in the same way that PSA, and SGC have.

This is a clear case of anecdotal and data-driven analysis being in complete lockstep: not only is BGS’ demise the word on the street, but it’s clearly bearing out in user submissions and activity.

Reputational Damage

But it’s probably not enough for PSA (or SGC) to offer an alternative product. If that were the case, BGS’ loyal base would likely continue sending cards to its graders for service. 

Unfortunately, BGS has shot itself in the foot on multiple occasions, garnering significant negative coverage as a result. Here are just a few examples:

Fake Slabs / Lack of Accountability

Back in 2015, Beckett was fooled by a caper involving one of the most iconic cards ever printed: a 1952 Mickey Mantle Type 2 card. Initially, the card was graded as “altered,” meaning the grading company believed whoever unpacked the card took steps after the fact to boost its grade (by trimming edges, recoloring, or some other modification, for example). 

The same card was then chemically modified and resubmitted to Beckett for grading. And this time, it earned a BVG 4.5 (BVG is a discontinued Beckett grading service for vintage cards). You can read more about the incident in our post about grading pitfalls.  

In recent years, BGS has authenticated potentially fake (or backdoor) Precious Metal Gem inserts as well. Rather than decommission the cards’ certification numbers similar to how PSA has done in the past, Beckett’s stance is insufficient and contradictory to say the least. Here is their response to Only Greats in regards to one of the cards in question:

Hi, This was discussed with management and this is what we have come up with. We maintain our stance on the current grade of the card in question.

Presently, there is no conclusive evidence confirming the fraudulent authenticity of these cards. Rest assured that we have acknowledge[d] the concerns raised by the hobby community and have decided not to accept these cards for grading at this time.

Fritzie A., Beckett Customer Service, via email

So Beckett stands behind the card’s authenticity/grade, but in the same breath will no longer grade similar cards going forward because of the potential of their inauthenticity. Indecisive much? Left with no choice, collectors have taken matters into their own hands by tracking the potential fakes in altered and fake-card databases.

If that’s not bad enough, auction houses like PWCC happily collect hundreds of dollars in commissions by selling the cards in auctions and pointing to Beckett’s assessment as gospel. Jed Moscot, a sales executive at PWCC, claims that PWCC bears no responsibility for selling these cards in an email reply to Only Greats (February, 2024):

“The answer is a rather straightforward one from our end. We are an auction house and NOT a grader. We rely on PSA, BGS, SGC, and CGC to do their job and authenticate items”, even as PWCC has been alerted to the controversy surrounding these cards by the hobby community.

It’s not a good look. Here are several questionable PMGs graded by BGS, and sold by PWCC within the last year:

Granted, fake or altered cards have fooled several big-name graders, so this is probably more of an industry concern than one limited to just BGS. But what is very much BGS’ problem is a host of scandals that have haunted the company. Even several years ago there was speculation surrounding a BGS employee receiving an unusually high number of BGS Black Label grades. 

As with wrongly grading a fake card, scandals like this severely undermine BGS’ credibility. Is it really a surprise more collectors are turning to alternatives? BGS makes mistakes, and then compounds them by not taking accountability — which brings us to our next topic.

No Grade Warranty

BGS does not warranty its grades. This is important because say, for instance, you purchase a BGS slab with a fake card encased inside. If you had graded with PSA or CGC, you might be able to recoup some of the money from your purchase due to each company’s warranty. 

But BGS offers no such warranty or protection for cards that it grades. In fact, the company explicitly states otherwise in its Terms of Service: 

Customer agrees to return any incorrectly described item to Beckett upon request at any time, and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Beckett and its affiliates against all losses and/or claims (including attorney’s fees) caused by the circulation or sale of a mismarked or inappropriate item or any unauthorized use of a Beckett certificate or label

Beckett Terms of Service

Piss-Poor Customer Service

Another hit to BGS’ reputation has come in the form of lackluster customer service. This might well be viewed as an extension of the warranty problem from above (a lack of a warranty isn’t a death sentence for a positive customer experience, but it certainly trends in the wrong direction). 

But rather than allowing us to bloviate about these problems, let’s offer up a real-world example from user @Flatch16, who discussed a particularly nasty encounter at Beckett’s grading booth at the Dallas Card Show in March 2024. Here’s how it all went down, with a rather sweet Bobby Witt Jr. 2020 1st Bowman Chrome Orange Refractor Autograph at the heart of it all:

Here day 4, Dallas [card show], we’re standing outside of the Beckett room. As many of you have, we’re having a big issue with Beckett. They promote their self to be one of the industry standards here, in the industry – in the card hobby. But we have a major issue.

We gave them this card two days ago. They had no problem sending it back to us ‘Altered’. 24 hours later after we sold it to [a customer], he regraded it, comes back Beckett 9 [Mint]. In the meantime, we lost $1,500. We bring them the problem, talk to them about it. They tell us nothing they can do about it. Don’t want to call anybody, nothing. We’re sorry. Not even offer to refund us our grading. So we’re out $1,500. They don’t care. So we all know they’re not industry standards.

There’s a reason why no one uses them. This is another reason why you shouldn’t. Beckett, down here [gestures towards ground]. Shouldn’t be in business anymore. That’s how they want to deal with people and their customers who spend thousands of dollars grading with them every year. Think it again.

So once again, they graded it ‘Altered’ 24 hours ago. Less than 24 hours later, they regrade it from Altered to Beckett 9. We’re out $1,500. They’re up $650 in grading costs…they’re winning. And they don’t care about [customers]…and they don’t care about why PSA, SGC, everybody is crushing them. So, low standards here at Beckett [points card in hand to Beckett banner]. Let everybody know.

@Flatch16 via X platform (formerly Twitter)

In many cases, a poor customer service experience is just that: poor customer service. But for @Flatch16, this experience cost him over $2,000 when considering the difference in sale price and the price for the altered grade.

A Personal Anecdote

Unfortunately, @Flatch16’s experience isn’t uncommon. In fact, we at Only Greats have encountered our own serious problems with BGS’ service and lack of accountability. In a previous post, we discussed a personal experience in which BGS lost a Charizard card valued at roughly $7,000 (and which later spiked in value to $60,000).

You can read all about our well-documented (and ultimately futile) efforts to relocate the card, which included complaints to both the FTC and BBB, but the point remains: BGS is very much in prove-it mode when it comes to a positive user experience.

Poor Execution

Recently, BGS has struggled mightily with executing and implementing changes to keep up with the times. And nowhere was this more apparent than its effort to change its grading scale, evidently in an attempt to keep up with PSA. 

About a year ago, BGS announced that it would be offering a BGS 10 Gem Mint, which was previously reserved for 9.5 grades. This would put its scale more in line with other graders like PSA. 

In a vacuum, this sounds great. But here’s the issue: BGS currently offers two different 10 grades, one for Pristine Black Label cards and another for Gold Label Pristine cards. So adding a third 10 made an already unnecessarily complicated grading structure even more mind boggling. 

The execution was so poor that 48 hours and a boatload of criticism later, the company reversed course and opted to keep its older grading structure. But the lack of wherewithal to see this coming is tremendously concerning. It speaks of sloppiness, which is gradually becoming a general theme of this post.

Positive Developments & Counterpoints

All may not be lost, however. And that’s a pretty big emphasis on the “may,” as Beckett is no longer granted the benefit of the doubt based on the awful track record laid out above. Here are a few potentially positive indicators that Beckett can turn things around:

Executive Management Changes

In 2022, Beckett made a change in leadership by hiring Kunal Chopra as its new CEO. Chopra, who arrived at Beckett with a background in retail and tech, had no experience in the collectibles sphere. Instead, he promised to catapult Beckett into the 21st century by developing alternative products through use of blockchain and NFT.

In addition, Chopra made improving the customer experience a tenet of his leadership vision: 

The experience for the collector as a whole has just been lacking from Beckett’s standpoint. If you go on our website, for example, it’s a little dated; it isn’t the right modern consumer experience out there, so we want to really focus on that. We want to really build out a strong collector consumer experience for collectors and become a platform for collectors to really be able to manage their entire portfolio of alternative investments. We look at cards, comics and other collectables just as investments at some level, so giving them a platform to really be able to manage that entire portfolio in a modern-like manner is number one.

Sports Daily Digest

Chopra didn’t last long. Less than a year later, Beckett turned to Kevin Isaacson to fill Chopra’s seat after the latter departed. And if Chopra was an outsider, Isaacson is about as beltway as it gets: he has nearly three decades of experience in the hobby, including creating the Industry Summit. 

It’s unclear exactly what Isaacson’s vision is for the company. But after Chopra’s less-than-thrilling tenure, it’s fair to wonder if Isaacson will swing in the opposite direction.

Black Label Still Commands Attention…For Now

While BGS’ grading system can be difficult to figure out, the tip-top of the scale remains a strong contender in the marketplace. The BGS 10 “Black Label” is reserved for cards that receive a perfect 10 in all four subgrades.

And for now, those Black Label cards’ values are holding up even in the face of BGS’ general decline. This is likely due to the super-rare nature of a BGS Black Label — the Black Label rate for cards tends to be less than 0.1%, with some cards like the 1986-87 Fleer basketball set holding a Black Label rate of 0.0013%.

Granted, if quality control continues to be an issue or trust in BGS’ grading continues to erode, questions will likely be asked of even the Black Label (not to mention the BGS Black Label scandal referenced earlier).

TCG Grading Marketshare Growing

If there’s an opportunity for BGS to expand, the growing TCG grading market might provide such an opportunity. Last year, 7.7 million TCG cards were graded, representing roughly half of all cards graded and 74% more than the prior year. 

And Beckett graded around 372,000 of those cards. It’s a small slice, especially compared to PSA’s 5.7 million TCG grades, but roughly half of all BGS grades were TCG last year, with 60% growth over 2022. This could reflect a change in BGS’ traditional base of users (which have skewed a bit older and more baseball-centric) and be just the opportunity to expand that BGS needs. 

If BGS can harness this growing interest in grading Pokémon and other game-base cards, it might well find a way out of its deep hole, albeit, not in its former bread and butter sports categories.

Final Thoughts: Potential Fallout From BGS Failure

That BGS is taking proactive steps toward improving itself via management shakeup and Black Label remains a popular product are at least somewhat positive indicators for a path forward. 

But it’s time for a wake-up call for those pining for the days when BGS stood atop the crop of graders. At best, BGS finds its way back to a duopoly with PSA. More realistically, and if BGS survives, it is jostling in a four-way three-way battle with PSA, and CGC, with PSA all but confirmed to be acquiring SGC.

For my money, here’s where BGS’ real problem lies: it feels like your dad’s grading company. I can’t completely quantify why that is; perhaps it’s the older-feeling slab, the fact that Beckett as a company has been around the block a few times, or that Beckett feels more closely associated with baseball cards, which would also be your dad’s sports card of choice. 

And that’s a complex perception to shake. But if BGS can’t bridge its status as a former industry pioneer to a nimble, modern, and reliable service, it’s vulnerable to becoming the grading system’s version of Blockbuster — or saved by a competitor via acquisition if they’re lucky enough.

While perceptions take time to change, they require fundamental shifts in terms of customer service, reliability, and trustworthy. Whether or not folks find BGS’ slabs less aesthetic than PSA’s is a trivial concern to these core principles, which need urgent addressing. And judging by new CEO Kevin Isaacson’s lack of social media presence or publicly-stated vision, we’re not holding our collective breath and neither should you.

Have you noticed changes in the grading hobby? What are your thoughts on the perceived decline from BGS? Are they the next illegitimate grading service, or is it just smoke? What do you think happens with existing BGS slabs if they go broke? Let us know in the comments!