Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman
SGC has also moved the goalposts, but just not by quite as much. 6s to 8s are now 5s to 7s there.
|
In my first post on this topic today I opened with the fact that SGC has done the same thing. In fact SGC tightened up before PSA did.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Snowman
I do think he is in denial though. Or at least he presents that way publicly. He laughs it off and excuses it away every time it gets brought up in interviews. He blames it on submitters being noobs/ignorant and essentially engages in condescension frisbee with his customer base. I like Nat for the most part, but it's a bad look. He's not listening to his customers.
Perhaps he could be persuaded if the situation were right and the data was well presented. But setting that table in the first place and getting him to join you is the challenge.
|
Nat is denying which is different than being in denial. Again, in my first post I noted that in interviews when this has been brought up he chuckles and says nothing has changed and it has to be our expectations. Again, this is business for him. Unless people talk with their money by not using them, he is gonna laugh all the way to the bank and make zero changes.
To that, when Joe was in charge at PSA he did the same thing. He would say the graders have not changed the standards but then you would see shortly after that the standards would loosen up.
__________________
I'm a data scientist who works on problems that are very similar to the problem of "AI" card grading. Here are some links to some of my thoughts on the topic.