[Brent G.]

Originally Posted by pbspelly

I used to be a reporter. It's closer to 95%, unless the interviewee won't say anything or gives you one word answers, which is not a problem you have with Bill Mastro. I understand that Brian is not a reporter, but he was way too much of an "agree-er" and explainer (and almost an outright apologist), for Mastro, rather then just letting him talk. That whole fawning part about wanting Mastro in the Hall of Fame was painful to listen to. Mastro didn't need that. He did fine on his own, and I came away with more respect for him. I do think the landscape was very different back then before grading companies came into play, and there emerged such a focus on pristine unaltered cards. I think back then there was more of a focus on present appearance than on provenance and original condition. And he's right that most of the legendary paintings in museums have been restored and touched-up in some way. I actually believe that Mastro may not have had devious intent from the beginning. But he should probably have spoken up at some earlier point. I am also very curious whether the guy who bought it from Mastro for $100,000 asked him if it had been altered in any way, and if so, how did Mastro respond. That is a question Brian should have asked. Because that goes to the heart of his culpability, perhaps more than the actual act of cutting the card. But I did find myself liking Mastro. We are all imperfect.

As a former journalist — I agree in full. With something like this, you ask a question and get out of the way. Wayyy too much talking over the person everyone is here to see.