Posted By:
Josh WulkanEd,
I guess my only response is that in the case of "obvious" error by a grading company, we would and often do, take it back to them and ask them before we would run it in our auction. I am not convinced, in the case of the E94 Young that we are discussing, that there is an "obvious" error by PSA. This would be evident by the number of people in this thread who do not agree that the card has been altered or trimmed.
Certainly, from an ethical stand point, if a card came to us with such an obvious error by a grading company, we would ask them to please re-evaluate the card, as we are not looking for those kinds of problems within our auction.
I will give you an example of just such a case. About 2 years ago, we were given a 1958 Topps Ted Williams #1 that was graded a MINT 9 by GAI. When examining the card, it appeared that the card may have been dropped on the top edge of the holder, thus making the top corners "dinged" yet it still resided in a MINT 9 holder. I took the card back to Steve Rocchi and showed him the problem. He agreed that it should not be in the holder. I had him contact our consignor and they worked out some satisfactory deal to have the card removed from the market. Whether GAI, PSA or SGC or anyone else, this is the type of action we would take in "obvious" errors.
I hope that clears up any confusion about our policies.
thanks
Josh