This kind of stuff is all over the place. It seems everybody has his or her way of spinning the facts or leaving them out in this case to make a sale. I agree 100% true and direct honesty would be super but it’s not going to happen sort of like wanting world peace.
Example below not picking on these guys alone but here’s one that stuck out as a scratch head moment…
“we are totally mystified as to why this card did not receive a mid-grade assessment? Steadfastly scouring the card for any possible paper loss or diminutive damage to the surface, we cannot locate any such blemishes, leaving us to only assume there is some microscopic like flaw(s) only evident via a high-powered lens. Yet, if a virtually undetectable flaw is the issue relating to the assigned grade, we would think the card should merit “at least” a VG assessment. Unquestionably, the overall aesthetics are consistent with a VG/EX to EX grade, and one can only ponder the nature of the current grade.”
http://www.goodwinandco.com/LotDetail.aspx?lotid=22332
Really totally mystified? It’s a mystery of the greater universe that Hawking himself could lend no rhyme or reason to as to why this card is a 1. There was no way to contact PSA and ask how did this happen…why has this anomaly occurred? There was no powered lens or equipment budget within reach of Goodwin & Company review this card….oh the humanity.
All in all just busting balls here can’t fault them for trying to sell a card it’s their job. However one could easily say also they weren’t too forthcoming or as forthcoming as they could have been either on a card for sale.
Translation of the above original write up. Card has an obvious flaw somewhere but is super nice for the grade and we would like to leave a little room for romance for our bidders so that we can maximize the sale.
Something to consider IMO when getting upset on this Mano’s deal.
Cheers,
John