Welcome to my Sports Illustrated/TIME magazine blog – Your collector’s guide to the latest hobby updates and insight into what’s trending now.

Happy days are here again!  CGC has a new, upgraded mag holder (as of a couple years ago), and PSA is six months into their initial encapsulated graded magazine launch.  Soooo…. which is the more applicable to the wants and needs of a thirsty group of graded magazine collectors?

I have been buying graded magazines from CGC for about 10 years, having purchases in excess of 3000-4000 mag holders.  I have placed exactly one order with PSA so far because I wanted to compare the merchandise and here is my product comparison/evaluation.

CGC – Approximately two years ago, subsequent to an exhaustive changeover process, CGC brought to market their new magazine holder which is still in production today. 

The new holder actually has been part of a very significant and positive total division makeover involving, work quality, customer service, shipping quality, lead-time, and pricing.  For our purposes, I’m just going to comment on the holder. 

I like the new holder from top to bottom.  It is beefier but not too beefy – holds up much better than their old holder during the shipping process.  It’s the same dimensions as the old holder which is important to me as I inventory a lot of holders at one time and they are all consistent in look and feel plus they fit in the same inventory boxes/shelving, etc.  The material used in manufacturing ends up giving a very clear visual of the cover inside, with no ripples, shading or other inconsistencies that would take away from the presentation.

With regard to the flip, I like the additional information (variations, first cover, etc), the color presentation depending on what is being graded, the grade and logo symmetry, and the consistent placement of one very special word – “subscription”.  When viewing a graded mag, whether it be on eBay, Facebook, auction houses, etc., even with the microscopic print, I can readily identify newsstand or subscription – a big deal and a great time saver.

Another added benefit of this holder is the recess behind the flip which offers a ledge from which to grip the mag.  Comes in really handy when grabbing a handful of mags from the top.

My grade for the upgraded CGC holder – A+.

PSA – PSA deserves a lot of credit for boldly jumping into the mag holder competition.  With respect to comics, it’s a relatively new and smaller market size so there’s a lot of unknowns.  The first thing I noticed about their holder is the weight.  This holder is much beefier which translates to a strong, rugged piece which will hold up nicely in shipping, a real concern in the collectables business.

Although the holder and magazine weight will vary between magazines, the CGC holder and mag used in my comparison is approx 1 pound 1 ounce. The PSA mag and holder is 2 pounds and 2 ounces – double the weight of its competition. 

In my business, I handle boxes with 20 mags/holders inside. That’s a box weight increase of 22 pounds which in my case is a huge drawback.    But, does the extra weight translate into a better, more reliable product?  I’m sure the PSA holder would be more difficult to damage however, my feeling is the CGC holder meets the quality requirement needed to get the product to the customer without damage.  Any more than that is not necessary.  PSA’s shipping prep is engineered and sturdy, but a bit of overkill as well and I believe ends up costing you more as a result. With regard to presentation of the product inside the case, PSA’s holder is as clear and bright as the CGC model. 

The PSA flip shows very little imagination although many customers like the red over the blue.  They seem to be stuck on the “card” holder design.  I’m betting PSA upgrades the appearance of their flip in the near future.  The printing is too small and too much uncaptured space where more information could be given.  

My grade for the new PSA holder – B+.

Perhaps I should give PSA a temporary break because they are the new guy on the block as I feel in time, they’ll incorporate these and other suggestions into their thinking.  But for now, I downgraded the PSA due to the excess weight which, in my opinion, serves no reasonable customer need and causes more stress in handling.  Both holders will do the job equally regarding durability but I think CGC listened and paid more attention to customer suggestions including a nice mix of toughness without the overkill.  

Although some opinions suggest a mag in a PSA holder has greater value. I totally disagree with that presumption and have heard no meaningful facts upon which to base this opinion.   

My overwhelming  preference is the CGC case and the creditability which comes with it.

One suggestion from me, for both companies going forward, would be to offer grading on the pre-1950 BASEBALL magazines (slightly bigger) – a major early pub, or offer the option to grade and encapsulate magazines with variably bigger dimensions.

We are lucky to have such quality workmanship available in both holders.  And the competition is a nice problem to have!

My Ebay handle is “sportsillustrated9.8” and sportsillustrated98.com on the internet, not to be confused with other similar tags.  If you’re interested in one or more of my ebay auctions and you would like to purchase, email me at wylliejohn@yahoo.com to save on taxes, and shipping.

Thanks for your loyal following.  My readers always receive “first among equals” pricing/service.

Many thanks for your continued support and patronage.

On the web – Sportsillustrated98.com