Quote:
Originally Posted by Promethius88
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth -So why is Steve Sloan telling people with altered cards to contact the seller and only to contact PSA if the seller is "unknown"? I guess he would disagree with you?[
QUOTE=griffon512;1898627]Steve Sloan is making a business decision. You're asking an ethical question. How often do the two overlap?
|
This is simple, in my eyes and I've explained it before. Yes, 100% a business decision and they know they will be most likely be paying out a lot in the future. They are tying to minimize that amount now. They know the majority of these cards were sold by one particular entity which appears to possibly be involved in the fraudulent activities. PSA does NOT have to refund to the original submitter in certain situations as was noted in one of the other 50 threads on this issue. Send the cards back to the seller then they don't have to refund them if they send back to PSA. Love them, hate them....whatever, but it is the smartest way to limit their economic exposure.[/QUOTE]
This argument has proven to me that as much as this industry has evolved and grown over the years its still filled with the same fraud and manipulation it has always had...nothing is going to change.....it’s still the same old same....
PSA is a brilliant business model...