Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth
Suppose PWCC knew the card was from Gary and that he had or likely had altered it (hypothetically of course)? Change your analysis, Ryan?
|
Its not PWCC's card. I suppose they can refuse to sell it, but its not their property to dispose of. In the case where PWCC knows its from Gary and/or likely has been altered, then can (1) not allow the owner to use PWCC to sell it, (2) get a re-evaluation and disclose, or (3) just list/sell it, not ask for a re-evaluation and not disclose their suspicions. But it is not their property to dispose of.
I would hope PWCC did #1, like Brian of Mile High just did with the Tiger Woods. But if PWCC does #2, then I cannot fault them (the link does not go to listing so I do not know what kind of disclosure was made); assuming the disclosure is real and informative, they are selling their client's property and being honest about what is being sold.
Look, I am not a defender of PWCC at all. But if someone comes to an AH with a PSA numerically graded card, and the AH has reason to believe that PSA is wrong and the card is likely altered, I think making a full and honest disclosure, while not ideal, is acceptable.
Ben, with regards to your post, I dont think you are implying anything of me, but to be clear, I have never altered a card in my life (I did cut 1986 Topps cards off the bottom of the boxes!).