Quote:
Originally Posted by benjulmag
It makes sense that if the technology exists to in a cost-effective way provide a significantly more reliable method of "grading" cards that it is just a matter of time before such a service is introduced to the market place.
Whether PSA would be the one to do it, that is another question. If it is PSA, that would be some spectacle -- PSA offering a new service that would put into plain view all the trimmed/altered cards that were missed by its old service. Just curious -- would a submitter be willing to pay a company for a service that shows that the company misgraded the card initially? In my view the reason many of the cards were misgraded initially was not because the old grading methods could not reasonably spot the alterations. They were initially misgraded because of sheer incompetence. So why then should someone have to pay the company to get it right the second time? And even if PSA would not demand the submitter pay if the re-grade established the initial grade was wrong, what about their warranty that accompanied the initial grade? I would think the first thing the submitter would do is demand PSA buy back the card. Then we would be getting into the whole mess of whether PSA would be required to make good on its warranty and the legal issues that could follow. In fact, the more I think about it, given this contingent liability, I question whether PSA would have any incentive to offer a more-technologically advanced grading service? .
|
Collectors Universe can simply start or invest in a competing company with better technology that is separate and avoid the need to refund original people duped by owning cards incorrectly graded by PSA. A great way to hedge their bets. Premiums for PSA opinions should fall no doubt.