SCD article
 

More emphasis on the fact that the cards currently "found" to be likely altered are only a small fraction of the total cards graded.

More emphasis on PWCC as the main auction company affected (the lone gunman theory). Also emphasis on the fact that legitimate "bumps" do happen. My comment/response: If grading is accurate, then anything other than a half point bump for a card graded before half points is an error.
https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...oring-scandal/

This will continue to be the mantra of PSA / Beckett / etc. Even if 1,000 cards are proven to be altered/recolored, this will be talked about in the context of "1000 out of 2 million). (0.05% error rate or 99.95% accurate). My comment/response: I think the problem is much more pervasive and one cannot conclude every card not proven altered is clean/good.

I am pessimistic than the scandal will cause much change as a result. I believe that the "Scandal" will die down as a result.

Tony

Look how long fake autographs have been around and known about. Yet, there's tons of signed stuff sold daily.

Cards will be no different.

The 1000 cards are, in turn, part of submissions probably totaling 10,000 cards. Does anyone realistically think only one card per sub is bad? Does anyone realistically think this is the only person altering cards? Not sure that line of magical thinking is going to persuade, even from the PSA spin masters.

"Even if 1,000 cards are proven to be altered/recolored, this will be talked about in the context of "1000 out of 2 million). (0.05% error rate or 99.95% accurate"

This begs the question of how many others they didn't catch (anyone with a half a brain and honesty knows there are more). And, if they were fooled by these thousand, how can they, of all people, be the ones able to tell us those were the only ones they didn't catch.

And if that is their PR mantra, that just shows the hobby that they are liars. And beyond the stupid and someone lacking common sense, the #1 type of person you don't have going into authentication is a liar. Authentication and authentication theory is a field of mine-- I work for museums, am professionally certified in museum sciences, wrote two peer-reviewed textbooks on the subject used in university museum studies graduate school programs (link), and was a museum studies research coordinator at the University of Washington--, and honesty and sincerity are required qualities. If a student was caught cheating on a test or paper, there is no way I would allow them to be an authenticator.

If PSA can't be honest and sincere about their authentication work, they should not be, and never should have been, in the authentication business. As simple as that. Authentication is an intellectual and academic field about finding and expressing facts and knowledge, not an "insurance" or "financial backing your investment" business.

And if collectors think it's okay for an authenticator of their items to lie, deny, cover up facts and lie about their authentication capabilities, they have oatmeal for brains, or, as is obviously the case for many dealers and collectors, not really using them as authenticators.

And I'll say it-- as I've said it many times before-- the grading systems and registry system are intellectually dishonest ('intellectual honesty' and 'intellectual dishonesty' are big words with me) and long have been. Anyone with mathematical, scientific or statistics background, or even basic logic and common sense, would see the gaping holes and logical/mathematical nonsense in the registry numerical system. The registry is fine as an ilde game or a fun website for posting your collection, and if collectors use it as that that's fine by me, but that hobby pricing is in part based on it and the hobby takes the numerical rankings seriously is nonsensical.

And, while I'm a lawyer and may not know law on the chatboard, a link to show that I know what I'm talking about in the fields of authentication, philosophic logic and scientific/knowledge models/representations. Link

Problem is the 1000/2,000,000 argurmnet is stupid.

I don't care on what percentage of the total cards submitted do they miss an alteration. I care about on what percentage of ALTERED cards do they miss the alteration.

Here's another article...and perhaps a counter to the "lone gunman" theory. However, the author has no shortage of his own legal woes,....so as my dad would say "when getting information, consider the source".

That said, I found it fascinating. This was 5 years ago and I had totally and completely forgotten about it, which I guess is part of the problem. The Moser paragraph towards the bottom seems, well, particularly of the moment.

What's the lone gunman theory, that there's one card doctor? If so, that is so far from the truth...

I was referring to the OP.

Ah my bad I am reading too many threads lol. But no, there are many gunmen, not just PWCC.

Bitching and complaining will not change anything. Never using their service or buying a card slabbed by them might it’s gonna take way more people then me boycotting their service and brand.. It’s all about money...if people continue to buy and use their service business will remain as usual.
The reason people use and buy their product is because they believe it will bring them the most money when they sell. This will continue to be the case until people stop drinking their kool aid and wake the hell up.
It’s very sad but absolutely nothing is gonna change at Newport Beach.....to many people continue to sub with them and buy their slabbed cards even after all this. They obviously can’t do their job correctly. Moser even arrogantly says so in the NYT article. It’s like catch me if you can dummies, PSA can’t catch me so up yours...my cards are slabbed what are you gonna do .

Just goes to show you that money isn't a measure of logic.

I haven't mentioned it in a while, but completely agree with you David!! I have a couple of registry sets - and have studied the Roberto Clemente master set very closely. No clear logic to the weighting. I have actually pointed out a number of weighting inconsistencies which PSA did change - so many more if it weren't so serious it would be funny.