I think I used up my one remaining brain cell on this thread. David, why don't you think Kevin actually called?

I don't know, Peter. x2drich2000 made a very good point. Would a CEO of a company really discuss a confidential matter like that with someone who had no involvement at all - especially a matter that could have had legal consequences?

Are you f***** stupid or what?

Nice one, Kevin. When the LIES are exposed, resort to name calling.

kids...cover your ears!

Only for believing you

David- do you have little man's syndrome? Grab a set and call Joe, He already knows that you are an idiot, but he wants to talk to you....

Another signature net54 car crash.....

For some real fun, come back tomorrow and read all the edited posts.

Matt posted the whole thing here. He has no expectations of privacy about it, obviously. I don't see any issue with Joe discussing it with someone who calls and asks.

F--- off. :D:eek:

I don't blame Joe for not posting anything on the board about this: it's his call. PSA gets bashed everyday here and if he doesn't want to put his finger into one of the nine holes in the dike, it's his choice. He also surely knows that whatever he writes out here will be dissected for days to come.

The OP seems like a reasonable guy and isn't bashing Joe all that much -- he's obviously pissed, for reasons that are PSA's fault and not his. I think PSA handled it mostly well (I'm discounting anything that Joe is alleged to have said on the phone). My only problem is that if Joe is so hot to talk to anyone on the board about what occurred, why would he ban the OP on the CU boards? No discussion there but plenty of discussion on the phone? How many businesses are bashed publicly without any censorship? Hell, if you buy a camera on the Canon website they allow their customers to blast the hell out of a product for everyone to see. So do many other companies. Why is Joe so damned thin-skinned that he would immediately shut down any opposing public viewpoint? It smacks of paranoia and lends credence to the claim that PSA has something to hide. PSA made a mistake -- it happens. Not the end of the world.

Half the people bashing PSA on these boards came over here to do it because they can no longer post on the PSA boards. Trying to silence the complaints with banishment isn't working for them.

Guilty feelings to cover-up the whatever wrong doing might've been.

We all "know" or have been "told" how much more super high grade and super under graded PSA cards sell for. So I'm always shocked how often they have to be bumped for price reductions via the BST.

lol

When a price reduction is really not necessary at all. Just consign it and watch it set a world record high price.

Who puts their finger in a dike anyways

Here is my take on this: The grading services started with the mission to grade and authenticate baseball cards. That's a good thing. But a whole other cottage industry has evolved, and that's what most of us call the grading game. There is such an incredible amount of money to be made by simply getting a half grade bump on high grade cards, that there are any number of people whose entire business model is simply looking for cards that are ever so slightly undergrded, since the half grade bump will put perhaps thousands of dollars in their pocket. And since we all agree the difference between say an 8.5 and 9 is virtually imperceptible and entirely arbirtrary, there is a feeling among many that these bumps may be given gratis to their best customers who are simply willing to play the game. It's a system clearly stacked in favor of the big guys, and as many have said TPG are in the business of minting money. This is a really bad sign for the future of this hobby, and with all the attention paid to auction house shilling, I think there is another very big issue that the hobby will soon have to come to terms with. The grading game comes with some serious repercussions.

Better that than a business model based on looking for ex and exmt centered cards that can be improved.

Let me put it in perspective Peter: If you had a 52 Topps Mantle graded 8.5, and you had an opportunity to have it bumped to a 9, that label change would put your kid through four years of college. Isn't that a bit of scary thought? Wouldn't you begin to wonder what really might be going on behind the scenes?

If it deserved a 9 and is not altered, no. I am much more concerned about people buying 5s and 6s and manufacturing 8s and 9s.

This thread is hilarious.

"Joe Orlando needs to answer my questions!"
"I just spoke to him, he'd like you to call him.. Here's his number."
"I'd rather just complain!"

If you have questions, call the guy. Matt obviously doesn't have a problem with making this issue public, so I don't see a reason for Joe not to discuss this issue over the phone.

"Joe needs to come on the forum and tell his side of the story!"
"Joe would love to discuss this with anyone who calls"
"Does anyone else think it's horrible Joe will discuss a private matter with anyone?"

Hilarious.

Excellent analysis Barry. The best (or worst) example was the 1973 Topps Art Shell card going from an 8 to a 10.

In keeping with the topic at hand, I also see serious repercussions when a company president continues to alienate his customer base. It is inevitable that those collectors will sell off their collections which adds to the supply on the open market which will drive the values of the cards downward which in turn devalues other hobbyist's collections. If I had a lot of money tied up in PSA cards - which I did at one time, but don't anymore - I would be demanding changes in Collector Universe's management.

No doubt Peter that is a very serious problem too. I was just focusing on one issue that came to mind as I was slogging through this thread. The TPG will have some major issues to deal with down the road.

True. Plus it's apparent that Joe loves his significant other very much.

Peter- just to add, if it deserved a 9 then why wasn't it a 9? Where is the accuracy with so much money at stake?

Another dike:D

Great points Jeff! In my mind Joe's response or reply whether written or verbal at this point in time matters not at all, not to me personally. In the vast world of the consumer market, how many other companies would go so far out of their way to not only cut all ties with a consumer, lose future business and beyond all that try to censor that consumer, over what amounts to a conversation and exchange that occurred over the phone?

These actions by PSA, regardless of what Matt may have said to Joe (short of personal threats or threats of violence which Matt obviously did not make) should be unacceptable for ANY company.

That's not how it went down at all. You're putting your words in quotations as if that's what was actually said. Until Kevin mentioned it in post #80 ("I still would like to hear Joe's side of this"), no one even suggested that Joe come here and give his side of the story. It was Kevin that suggested that.

I could care less about Joe's side of the story. Sure, if he wants to come here and tell it, I will certainly listen with an open mind, but I'm darn sure not going to ask him to come here and I don't read in this thread where anybody else asked him to either. So what are you talking about?

Kevin supposedly called him, but can't tell us what he said?!? Come on, isn't that behaving like a third grader playing the 'I know something you don't know' game? Funny, but I think everybody pretty much feels that Joe's side of the story is irrelevant, otherwise somebody would have called him other than Kevin (supposedly).

As we know, accuracy in grading is a false precision. I bet I would not grade 100 cards perfectly consistently and neither would you.

Exactly Peter. We agree on that. Then why are cards graded using a scale that suggests precision? If you can't tell a 7 from a 7.5, or an 8.5 from a 9 without any discernable objective criteria, then why feign precision? Why not use an adjectival system instead. You wouldn't walk through a museum and say, I give this Picasso a 92 but the Renoir only an 85. That makes absolutely no sense. But given the very subjective system used for grading baseball cards, we have this silly numerical scale. Why?

Because that's what people want. Market economy. Simple as that.

You're wasting your time. In every thread which deals with fraud or criticism of a sacred cow in the hobby, there are a bunch of posters who will do all that they can to derail the thread or stop the criticism for reasons which have nothing to do with the truth -- usually it's financial motive. It happened with Mastro, it happened with Memory Lane, it happened with PWCC and it's happened with PSA.

Let us now praise sacred cows...

Agreed.

Ironic this comes out now?

The Importance of Grading Context - by Joe Orlando

And his closing, right above his signature!

Most importantly...NEVER GET CHEATED!!!

Where can I order one of these? Do you accept paypal gift?

Make that 2, I wear an XL. :D

"Never get cheated....except by us. Then it's ok and expected and if you don't like it we'll ban you from our boards."

Yeah but that's tougher to fit in a sig line Jeff. :)

I like the new Wagner flip.

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...s/small/55.jpg

Love the T-Shirt!

Now that's a t-shirt I'd buy...with the slogan on the back..."Never get cheated....except by us. Then it's ok and expected and if you don't like it we'll ban you from our boards" ...and thr monkees on the front!!!!!

FML that is funny.

Those are not just monkeys, those are their graders. :D

Great thread
Would read again
5 stars
:D

David, here was your quote from earlier in this thread:

Now you're clarifying that with:

So basically, now most people are saying that they really don't care what Joe's side of the story is, but this thread just gives everybody another opportunity to trash PSA, which many posters, of course, are more than happy to do.

With what we know about PSA they deserve some trashing, and it's understandable that it happens on this board because dissension is not allowed on their own forum.