More additions at PSA Autograph Authentication

[Lordstan]

ok. I understand what you mean, but the head of PSA, for example, doesn't authenticate or sell anything to my knowledge. He would not be able to affect the results outside of putting pressure on the workers to give favor to one submitter over another, but an authenticator could. If anyone working in authentication wanted to pass something due to financial gain, they could. I am not saying they have, but they could, just like an individual. Being part of a TPA does not prevent the individuals from acting poorly. In the case of JSA, the owner is the lead authenticator so could absolutely affect the decisions directly and indirectly if he wanted to.

How about TPAs giving preference to Auction Houses so that a) get more business from those auction houses b) get more name recognition and validation in the general public's eyes by claiming that they are approved and required by those auction houses? Both of those things end up increasing the bottom line for the company on the whole and, given that many executives have compensation packages that take into account the profit of the company as part of the calculation, it is certainly within the reasonable realm of possibility to happen. You don't think an auction house might consider getting a different authenticator to replace one that rejects everything?

I could see why you doing the actual certification of things you sell would be a conflict of interest. I think having an authenticator giving up their buy/sell business makes sense, but none of what you said proves the point that TPAs are a necessary evil. Bad things can be done by both the company and individual, both of which turn out bad for the consumer. At least it is easier to prove and hold individuals accountable rather than a large corporation.

EDIT: also, you don't think that management at the highest level was not involved in the Wagner fiasco? It is the most visible and well known item of any type in our hobby. Somehow a card that virtually anyone with eyes can see was trimmed was slabbed as an 8. You don't think, in this type of situation, that the management team doesn't have something to gain by giving it that grade despite it's question? Now think about if a private person was grading it. You don't think a private person would not have suffered much more dramatically had they done the same thing?