Brent/PWCC interview on recent controversies

[swarmee]

Wow, it took until 10:33 to hear "We're not a professional grading company."
"We have to accept the grading companies and their assessment of it." Just like the Green PMG Jordan, huh?

So yes, he clarifies that bad erasures are alterations, but good erasures are not.
"That's generally how people feel about it." I have not seen that to be the case with people who are willing to give their opinions on message boards, Leon's preference notwithstanding. Again, if the card is found with writing on the card after it is sold, it's now altered. If there was no evidence of the card with writing on it, it's conserved. Geesh.

"I have never seen the N-7 alteration applied to a single card in 20 years. So PSA has it; I've never seen it used, ever." He agrees that if there was evidence a stain was removed, it should be considered altered. So again, how does the 1951 Bowman Willie Mays apply? How about the alterations that reappear over time because of using solvents to remove stains from cards? "This language [PSA's standards] is 30 years old." How about the WWG DiMaggio that PSA decertified?

Interviewer is definitely giving Brent the home court advantage. Barely talks, lines up softballs.