PSA completely unethical

[jkm412]

Originally Posted by sreader3

I still chuckle about the title of this thread.

Most people use PSA because their expectancy value is higher than their grading fees, discounted for inflation and risks of loss. Taking a highly simplified example, if you have a raw card worth $1000 and you think there is a 50% chance it will be worth $2000 after grading and a 50% chance it will be worth $1000 after grading, your expectancy value is $1500 less grading fees, inflation (while you wait) and risks of loss. Let's say inflation and risks of loss total $200, reducing your expectancy value to $1300. You will still pay up to $300 in grading fees (maybe somewhat less if you are risk averse, as most of us are) because your expectancy value will still be greater than the value of your ungraded card.

I am sure there are collectors who have legitimate moral concerns about PSA but this is how many people, myself included (and probably PSA) view the situation.

In sum, it's fine to complain about how PSA has "screwed" collectors, but that sentiment needs to be balanced against the value that PSA has created for collectors.

And, no, I am not on PSA's "payroll." I have met Joe Orlando and David Hall but neither one ever offered me a dime. I do, however, have cards that are worth a lot more because they are in PSA holders.

And your point is what? Mr. Chuckle. As I said I collect track and field cards (hardly an investment decision) I just wanted some nice cards encapsulated. No cards here that I am boasting are worth 50K. So yes they are screwing the average person who does not make a living buying and selling (investing) in cardboard.