Quote:
Originally Posted by nolemmings
The issue is one of trimming--an unaltered vs. altered card. Whether a card is trimmed or not is a question of fact, not opinion. It either happened or it didn't, and if it did, it cripples the card's value. Now who you believe to establish whether a card is trimmed is one thing, but if it happened, it happened. Frankly, SCG is almost a red herring here. Suppose I was the world's foremost authority on trimming, and I could show you that this card was trimmed. Then SGC's involvement is immaterial-- I bought an altered card. Any card that carries a numeric grade implicitly warrants that the cards is unaltered, and every seller selling such a card had better stand behind it, or, at a minimum (and this might not be good enough if he has actual knowledge of the trimming) expressly state that he makes no assurances that the card is authentic and unaltered. That's my position in a nutshell, although the seller's representations about an early GAI submission provides additional fodder, IMO.
|
If that's your position, then you lose. Period! It is one TPG's word against another and you have no way to prove which is right. Both are professional (although some could argue the point about GAI) grading companies paid to render an opinion. If you did not trust GAI, you never should have bough the card. On the other hand, if you approach it from the angle that you bought a M101-5 and received an M101-4, I think you have a case for a SNAD - although I believe you knew what you were buying all along.