Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth
I am not talking about raw cards. Slabbed. Shocking though it is, I observe that people don't care. Card gets outed, registry set owner doesn't care because they have the flip in their registry. I flip your last sentence back at you.  Pun intended.
Or guy needs a PSA 9 for his registry. He'll pay the same for a PSA 9 even if you tell him it's trimmed. The flip is what he wants. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth
No. I accept your premise even if Travis does not. But slabbing changes everything. Yes, it does make it not fraud, because once slabbed, the perception of value from slab and flip negates the prior fraud.
Construct a poll to determine how many set registry guys would give up cards if they knew they were trimmed. I would bet more would keep them than not.
|
I'd still quibble with your premise that set registry owners don't care if they discover that one of their PSA 9 cards is trimmed, and therefore should've been slabbed as altered.
Even if we assume that the registry owners wouldn't remove the PSA 9 from the set, all it proves is that registry owners will act in their self-interest and carry on the ruse for reputation and money, rather than take the bullet for the original card doctor and the corrupt and/or negligent third-party grader.
Instead of polling registry owners to see how many would give up the cards they knew were trimmed, poll them to see how many would replace the outed PSA 9 with a legit one, if presented with the option at no additional cost. Or ask how many would've paid the same price for the outed PSA 9 if they had known it was trimmed. Those kinds of questions are a better gauge of materiality for fraud purposes.
The counterargument that slabbing changes the perception of value doesn't negate the materiality element of fraud; it speaks more to damages.