Evan Mathis Trimming Anything and Everything to Sell via Probstein, PWCC, & COMC

[MoreToppsPlease]

Originally Posted by unclemonkey

You should know when you are being trolled. Not everything is literal.

I was continuing to use the same metaphor!

[ken161]

Originally Posted by Scottish Punk

Agreed. Once a card is slabbed it becomes a commodity. I think once the verdict of the FBI is done and BODA tired of outing cards, things will mostly go back to what it was before. A lot of collectors will still collect labels and will be OK with it as long as they sell to the next guy. I really am rooting for a big market shift but I am not optimistic. PWCC will do some behind the scenes deal and stay in business, the TPGs will just keep on trucking along.

In the future, I don't know how Joe Orlando or any other TPG bigwig could stand in front of a large gathering of collectors and crow about how they are looking out for the best interests of the hobby.

Actually, let me rephrase that -- I don't know how ole Joe could do it with a straight face.

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by MoreToppsPlease

A hobby where the third party reviewer becomes the first party (replacing the collectible) requires either regulation or new impartial third party reviewers.

Independent, third party “white hat” card doctors that ethically publish how effective grading companies detect their alterations are completely necessary.

They would be banned after one published report.

[unclemonkey]

Originally Posted by MoreToppsPlease

I was continuing to use the same metaphor!

Ah... not sure whether to feel good or bad about my lasting contribution being "licking" added to the lexicon of card grading.

[MoreToppsPlease]

Originally Posted by pspa123

They would be banned after one published report.

Not if the grading companies were *required* to allow submissions from *registered* white hats.

In other words, grading companies would be forced by the feds to allow third parties to check the validity of their "work" given they've failed so miserably in doing that work in the past. So, enter the "white hats" who work like Consumer Reports. These white hats would completely document everything and ethically publish their work where it will be easy to locate.

In order for the grading company "police men" (ha ha) to continue to operate, they've shown they need to be policed themselves.

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by MoreToppsPlease

Not if the grading companies were *required* to allow submissions from *registered* white hats.

In other words, grading companies would be forced by the feds to allow third parties to check the validity of their "work" given they've failed so miserably in doing that work in the past. So, enter the "white hats" who work like Consumer Reports. These white hats would completely document everything and ethically publish their work where it will be easy to locate.

In order for the grading company "police men" (ha ha) to continue to operate, they've shown they need to be policed themselves.

Forced by the "feds"? In what context, are you suggesting TPGs would agree to this as part of a plea bargain? What crime are you contemplating they are going to be charged with? The "feds" don't just force companies to do things in connection with an investigation.

[WalterAZ31]

Hopefully this doesn’t get swept under the rug, especially now involving a fairly known former NFL player.

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by MoreToppsPlease

Not if the grading companies were *required* to allow submissions from *registered* white hats.

In other words, grading companies would be forced by the feds to allow third parties to check the validity of their "work" given they've failed so miserably in doing that work in the past. So, enter the "white hats" who work like Consumer Reports. These white hats would completely document everything and ethically publish their work where it will be easy to locate.

In order for the grading company "police men" (ha ha) to continue to operate, they've shown they need to be policed themselves.

Every suggestion you have gets crazier and crazier. You can’t honestly believe this is realistic.

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by pip

You're probably right about that. Their attitude and responses to the crisis thus far definitely point in that direction. Denial married with indignation. It's the opposite of the way a responsible and ethical business would operate.

This is David Hall's and Joe Orlando's vision, I fear. Cater to the insiders and stifle any and all hard questions and dissent. When necessary, play ostrich and deny. You can see Joe's instincts even on a recent analyst call, where he directed the operator to pass over a tough questioner. I doubt it will meaningfully change under current management.

[vintg]

Originally Posted by 3124508 on COMC

PSA would hold no blame if they didn’t claim to not grade altered cards. They need to change their grading standards and then start issuing refunds.

especially coming from 312.....


one of the top posts of 2019


there's certainly more that could be added, but concise and right to the point.

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by pspa123

This is David Hall's and Joe Orlando's vision, I fear. Cater to the insiders and stifle any and all hard questions and dissent. When necessary, play ostrich and deny. You can see Joe's instincts even on a recent analyst call, where he directed the operator to pass over a tough questioner. I doubt it will meaningfully change under current management.

It is the right play for their company. The customers who have been wronged are not customers of PSA. They are customers of the trimmers. PSA is forcing those customers to go back to who they purchased the item from, with few exceptions. And now they are just flatly denying that some of these cards are even trimmed to begin with.

PSA is making it clear now that if you want restitution from the company, you will have to go through the courts to get it. How many have the means to do that? I suspect the ones who do are getting taken care of either by PSA or by Brent, etc.

The question I have going forward is what kind of legal weight does PSA's guarantee carry?

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

It is the right play for their company. The customers who have been wronged are not customers of PSA. They are customers of the trimmers. PSA is forcing those customers to go back to who they purchased the item from, with few exceptions. And now they are just flatly denying that some of these cards are even trimmed to begin with.

PSA is making it clear now that if you want restitution from the company, you will have to go through the courts to get it. How many have the means to do that? I suspect the ones who do are getting taken care of either by PSA or by Brent, etc.

The question I have going forward is what kind of legal weight does PSA's guarantee carry?

They control the guarantee because they can always say our graders stand behind the grade, and force you to sue them (in California) over what is still an opinion. Good luck with that.

I just dealt with a slightly different situation, where there were two cards with the same cert number, a high grade major rookie. The only reasonable explanation was that one was a Mexican fake. As I understand it, they recerted BOTH.

[tconte]

Originally Posted by pspa123

They control the guarantee because they can always say our graders stand behind the grade, and force you to sue them (in California) over what is still an opinion. Good luck with that.

I just dealt with a slightly different situation, where there were two cards with the same cert number, a high grade major rookie. The only reasonable explanation was that one was a Mexican fake. As I understand it, they recerted BOTH.

For real? They potentially gave a new cert # to a bad card possibly?

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by tconte

For real? They potentially gave a new cert # to a bad card possibly?

For real, bro. And they knew the background when they recerted the second. I guess, possibly, there was another explanation for the duplicate certs?

[itradeerrors]

Originally Posted by pspa123

For real, bro. And they knew the background when they recerted the second. I guess, possibly, there was another explanation for the duplicate certs?

Mechanical error, just ask any PSA lemming.

[pip]

Originally Posted by pspa123

They control the guarantee because they can always say our graders stand behind the grade, and force you to sue them (in California) over what is still an opinion. Good luck with that.

I just dealt with a slightly different situation, where there were two cards with the same cert number, a high grade major rookie. The only reasonable explanation was that one was a Mexican fake. As I understand it, they recerted BOTH.

That's incredible -- certifying a card that was not encapsulated or graded by their company. I would think that this single act could open them up to all kinds of liability. Even a person off the street can understand the incongruity that there cannot be two different cards with the same serial number. And if PSA cannot determine that one is not legitimate then they have zero standing as a company that certifies authentic sports cards.

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by pip

That's incredible -- certifying a card that was not encapsulated or graded by their company. I would think that this single act could open them up to all kinds of liability. Even a person off the street can understand the incongruity that there cannot be two different cards with the same serial number. And if PSA cannot determine that one is not legitimate then they have zero standing as a company that certifies authentic sports cards.

It was a shock to me. I am just hopeful either my information about the first card being recerted was wrong, or there is some explanation I have overlooked.

To be clear, as I understand it the Mexican "fakes" are fake flips and slabs, but the cards may be altered and authentic not counterfeits.

[vintg]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

It is the right play for their company. The customers who have been wronged are not customers of PSA. They are customers of the trimmers. PSA is forcing those customers to go back to who they purchased the item from, with few exceptions. And now they are just flatly denying that some of these cards are even trimmed to begin with.

PSA is making it clear now that if you want restitution from the company, you will have to go through the courts to get it. How many have the means to do that? I suspect the ones who do are getting taken care of either by PSA or by Brent, etc.

The question I have going forward is what kind of legal weight does PSA's guarantee carry?

they (the end purchaser) RELIED on psa authenticating it as non- altered.

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by vintg

they (the end purchaser) RELIED on psa authenticating it as non- altered.

Which doesn't contradict what you bolded.

[vintg]

what about the hundreds of thousands of cards bought at card shows over the years
that the purchaser has NO IDEA who the seller was ???

makes no sense. purchaser is in possession of a PSA slabbed card.

their has to be culpability on their part.

[Astros19]

Originally Posted by HarryLime

This is just a general question for the board and I'm curious where people land on this.

Is it reasonable to expect 100% accuracy from PSA?

Arthur

I liken it to purchasing a home and having a home inspector take a look at the property before I drop a lot of money on it.
Would I expect them to be 100% accurate?
Probably not, but I damn sure would expect them to be looking out for my interests, not the sellers.

[JoeAdam]

Originally Posted by Astros19

I liken it to purchasing a home and having a home inspector take a look at the property before I drop a lot of money on it.
Would I expect them to be 100% accurate?
Probably not, but I damn sure would expect them to be looking out for my interests, not the sellers.

This is a great analogy. The expectation of 100% authentication is unreasonable. However, if they are not working to protect the buyers and in fact are colluding with certain customers, that is fraud, plain and simple.

On a side note, can we get a new forum just for PSA/BGS posts? I think it's annoying to have these in each section. It's good stuff, and useful, just should be separated.

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by JoeAdam

This is a great analogy. The expectation of 100% authentication is unreasonable. However, if they are not working to protect the buyers and in fact are colluding with certain customers, that is fraud, plain and simple.

On a side note, can we get a new forum just for PSA/BGS posts? I think it's annoying to have these in each section. It's good stuff, and useful, just should be separated.

The buyer pays the home inspector. The submitter, not the marketplace buyer, pays TPGs. World of difference.

[JoeAdam]

Originally Posted by pspa123

The buyer pays the home inspector. The submitter, not the marketplace buyer, pays TPGs. World of difference.

True. But indirectly the buyers (marketplace) pays the TPGs because if the buyers didn't see the added value the sellers would never submit in the first place. I understand it's different, but the TPG's have to look out for the buyers because if they don't then they don't have a business.

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by JoeAdam

True. But indirectly the buyers (marketplace) pays the TPGs because if the buyers didn't see the added value the sellers would never submit in the first place. I understand it's different, but the TPG's have to look out for the buyers because if they don't then they don't have a business.

They seem to have a very good business.