[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

No surprise to me at least that PSA would not accept evidence of trimming by Blowout. What would be the implications if they did? IMO PSA's contingent liabilities grossly exceed their net worth given the amount of altered cards that have received grades. The problem is proving that such as to be legally able to invoke their guarantee. So if PSA were to concede that evidence of trimming by Blowout in and of itself requires it to make good on their guarantee, that concession could have significant adverse financial consequences.

EDITED TO ADD that regardless what Blowout did or did not find, the notion that a company will objectively evaluate whether it needs to make good on a guarantee is unrealistic. The entire concept behind the legitimacy of TPG is based on the principle that the grading company has no economic stake in the outcome. So we are to believe that a TPG will objectively evaluate that it made a mistake, the consequences of which will be to trigger a significant financial liability? Your Kool-Aid better be pretty strong to swallow that one.

Yup. When it costs you 20K to admit you were wrong, and there are no consequences to insisting you were right even if you were wrong, which do you pick?

I would guess this was not really left to the judgment of a grader. Or the grader was smart enough to know what he was supposed to conclude.