Quote:
Originally Posted by drc
If the PSA LOA (some might call it 'provenance') is just the one LOA from the first sale (and that was reused for the second sale), it would appear PSA did nothing errant. All the restoration and resale would have happened after the fact. And there's no evidence PSA issued a second LOA. In fact, my guess is they didn't.
|
Sorry, but this does not fit the narrative the OP wishes to convey.
I read the Hauls of Shame article. While rife with innuendo and unrelated red herrings purely meant to embarass, I didn't see a shred of evidence a new LOA was issued since the original.
Incidentally, I continue to see statements implying there will be indictments handed down (wishful thinking) to PSA/DNA in regard to the Mastro case. Do these people realize that the card grading component PSA, is not the same as the autograph authentication division PSA/DNA? Or do they realize that but just throw PSA/DNA into the article to muddy them up?