PSA vs. SCG -- Discount Valuation

[Archive]

Posted By: CoreyRS.hanus

Jim B, I'm more than happy to call Joe Orlando. I had asked Leon to do it because I thought representing this board he would have the most credibility. Then when Joe did not return his call, I thought Steve, based on his comments that Joe always returned his calls, would have a good chance of getting through. If that doesn't work or if Joe doesn't fully respond, then I have no problem placing the call.

As to comments bemoaning that it is only a few of us who are dissatisfied, to that I'll say you've got to be kidding. The issue we're talking about here is whether PSA is allowing PSA-graded cards that they know or reasonably should know are altered to be returned to their owners in their original slabs. I think this is an issue that is of concern to the majority of hobbyists. Too I feel based on all the threads/posts on this issue over the past number of months, there are many people who have reasonable questions as to exactly what PSA does. I think MikeU hit it on the head when he asks not whether PSA will say the right thing over the phone to someone, but whether they are willing to change their official statement and say altered cards will be taken out of circulation and fair compensation given to their owners. IF PSA will be willing to do that, then I will be satisified.

Such a public statement will have legal consequence. It will mean that if anybody has a PSA-graded card that is found to be altered, PSA is on the hook to remove the card from the holder and compensate the owner. Going further, it will also mean the card owner will not be at the mercy of PSA's assessment whether the card is altered. If someone with established expertise can as a matter of law establish that a card has trimmed borders, or rebuilt corners, or added coloring, or indeed to go further exhibits such characteristics that PSA as a matter of practice uses as a basis to reject other cards as altered, then PSA will have to provide compensation.

One last point. While designating a numerical grade may be an art not a science (and to repeat, my issue with PSA does not concern whether they give a card the correct NUMERICAL grade), detecting alterations in many instances is a science. With many types of alterations, an expert will be able to prove that (i) a card is either altered or (ii) exhibits such characteristics that were used as the basis for PSA to reject other cards as altered. So any qualification by PSA in any offical statement that PSA is to be the sole judge whether a card is altered would be a disreputable manuever intended only to make worthless the legal consequence of their statement.

So, let's see what they're willing to do as regards their official statement.

EDITED to add that it was not PSA's original statement about their re-submission policy that started the whole hulabaloo about what they do with altered cards. Rather it was Jim C's description of his deal with PSA that raised (at least in my mind) the question whether PSA would knowingly return altered cards in their original holders. Yes, I know I'm being accused of distorting what Jim C said and being a conspiracy maniac, but I still think that it doesn't take anything more than English 101 to come to the interpretation I did (see my March 25 10:47pm post on this thread which quotes exactly the exchange between Barry Sloate and Jim C). But again, let's wait to see what PSA will do with their official statement and let's make that the final determinant.