Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth
Once you get decades deep into this, it really is impossible to fix in any systematic way. This is why I think all these guys saying oh give Nat Turner a chance are just engaging in wishful thinking. I mean what's he going to do, pull a disco inferno and "burn that mother down"?
|
Hmm...Let's see how this adds up.
1. PSA's business model is based in large measure on the volume of cards graded.
2. For PSA to grade a large volume of cards, they need both enough graders and a high rate of cards graded per hour.
3. The value of a card increases significantly with each bump up in grade, which at the higher end of the grading spectrum amounts to huge dollar increases.
4. For a card worked on by a skilled card doctor, there is little chance the alteration will be detected unless the grader is knowledgeable about the manufacturing process associated with that particular issue and has sufficient time to examine the card.
Question:
Do 1, 2, 3, and 4 add up to:
5. So therefore it is likely the card will be accurately graded and any alteration detected, or
10. There is little possibility the grader will detect the alteration.
I do not profess to be an expert in securities law, but it seems to me that now that graded cards routinely sell in 7 figures and are being marketed in ways that cross into public oversight with attendant fiduciary obligation on the part of people promoting these investments, these people are taking a significant legal risk if the economic consequences of what IMO is the fraud of PSA's business model ever comes to fruition.