Posted By:
Al C.risafulliI've already given my two cents on this issue, but I figured I'd give two more, just to make sure what I wrote was not misconstrued in any way.
I do not envision a high-powered association with the ability to act as a police force that will fine people who do not behave a certain way, blackball people who do not ascribe to a set of standards, or create definitions that will force collectors to build their collections a certain way. Nor do I envision a high-powered association that will cater to a market niche.
I am not one to make suggestions that will prevent anyone from making an attempt at earning a living. There's too much hearsay in this hobby as it is, and cards change hands too many times that the risk of blackballing someone for selling an altered card THAT THEY DID NOT ALTER is a risky proposal.
What I'm saying is that if collectors had a resource that they could turn to - even if they paid for a "membership" - where they could educate themselves, they would have the ability to make the proper buying decisions. I think people should be able to decide for themselves whether they want to avoid people who sell altered cards without disclosure (or even WITH disclosure). What's missing is the INFORMATION. If a collector does not know how to tell that the Goudey Ruth they're eyeing has rebuilt corners, and they really like the card, they're going to buy it regardless of whether the seller has adopted some Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval or not. But if they can detect the alteration, maybe they won't buy the card.
Hopefully if this happened with enough frequency, the bad apples would be forced to adopt better business practices if they wanted to continue to be relevant in the marketplace - and if they didn't, they'd go away through natural selection.
-Al