The Response

[Zach Wheat]

Wow, there are just a lot of questions that beg to be answered....

Z Wheat

[thehoodedcoder]

If Rick banned Joe from submitting to him, between the two of them we should have a great conversation about what was said and why.

Based on what was said on the board, there have to be opposing view points between the two of them or one of the two of them is down right lying about something.

Or am I missing something?

Kevin

[Sean1125]

I don't have the cahonas to crack most cards but I've had reviews go from

SGC 6---> PSA 6.5----> SGC 7
PSA 4---> SGC 5
SGC 5---> PSA 5.5

Really goes both ways... I am sure many members here know Johnny Adams, I believe his entire business model is based on cracking cards and I know for a FACT he does not alter them - I believe if Joe had the same model then it is in the realm of possibilities.

[barrysloate]

I think one of the biggest problems is the tremendous inconsistency with grading. If a card can get resubmitted and get a two and even three grade increase then I would no longer have much faith in third party grading. They need to do a better job.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I think one of the biggest problems is the tremendous inconsistency with grading. If a card can get resubmitted and get a two and even three grade increase then I would no longer have much faith in third party grading. They need to do a better job.

Better some innocent inconsistency than doctoring. With all the threads and all the pics I can't recall now which cards are claimed to be Joe's.

[barrysloate]

I don't see it as so innocent Peter. Graders have a tremendous amount of power. A bump of even one grade, say from a 7 to an 8, on an expensive card may create thousands of dollars of added value. Therefore, they need to be really accurate and really consistent every time, something they clearly are not.

[Thirteen]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I think one of the biggest problems is the tremendous inconsistency with grading. If a card can get resubmitted and get a two and even three grade increase then I would no longer have much faith in third party grading. They need to do a better job.

I completely agree Barry. I'm an Engineer and the biggest problem I see is a flawed grading process. It's obviously big money to get those bumps so I can see why people resubmit and don't blame them. But 2 grade bumps should not happen in my opinion. Didn't they add half-grades to add even more differentiation between condition? Fix the process.

[Bocabirdman]

*

[CMIZ5290]

guys, back on topic? Again, I would like to see Rick come on and answer questions pertaining what really started this thread in the first place...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

guys, back on topic? Again, I would like to see Rick come on and answer questions pertaining what really started this thread in the first place...

And how many times has THAT been said on this forum.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

And how many times has THAT been said on this forum.

Maybe he's waiting for that apology first.

[conor912]

Joe, I don't know you and I'm still holding out judgement until I see hard proof one way or the other, but that was some fantastic spin. You dodge specifics with the best of them and should consider running for office.

[the 'stache]

I'm half asleep, so please bear with me, but I felt compelled to see where this discussion has gone in the last few hours.

Have we really gotten to the point where we can take the same card, submit it to PSA three times (without making a single alteration, or even a pencil mark erasure), and get three vastly different grades?

I understand no matter how stringent the guidelines are for grading at a given tpg, there's always going to be a human element. Mistakes are going to be made, especially considering the sheer volume of cards being handled and graded. But what does it say about the quality of PSA's service when three different individuals (hypothetically speaking), all of them well educated, and with thousands of hours of practical experience in their chosen field, could have such varied opinions on the same piece? PSA is supposed to be the industry leader. There's only so many variables involved in grading.

To use an analogy, when you have a prize fight, you'll have three different judges sitting ring side. A boxing match can go up to twelve rounds, three minutes each. Even with all that's going on, the judges at the end of the match will present their cards, and while there will be some variance in scores, they are usually pretty damned close.

There's no flurry of activity in grading a card. These graders are looking at one card. They will have magnification to see every detail. They'll have ideal lighting to view the card. So how could three so called "experts" have such wildly different opinions? How the hell would that possible? Do the graders not have sufficient time to examine the card as needed? I thought, too, that each card was viewed by multiple graders. If one grader is off in their opinion, wouldn't the second opinion normalize the skewed marks?

If I'm a grader, and somebody sends me a card that is going to sell for five figures, I'm going to take the time necessary to critique every element of the card accurately, knowing full well that the amount of money changing hands is directly tied to my efforts.

This is not right. It just isn't. This doesn't pass the smell test.

[botn]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

guys, back on topic? Again, I would like to see Rick come on and answer questions pertaining what really started this thread in the first place...

That would not put it back on topic. This is not a thread for Rick to respond to. This is all about Joe and his explanation. There needs to be another thread for Rick to explain why he supposedly banned Joe from doing business but Joe is doing business with him.

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by botn

That would not put it back on topic. This is not a thread for Rick to respond to. This is all about Joe and his explanation. There needs to be another thread for Rick to explain why he supposedly banned Joe from doing business but Joe is doing business with him.

Greg...Probably right, I was just hoping to get some kind of clarification from Rick.

[Runscott]

Whenever I'm feeling iffy about trusting someone and I bring up the 'touchy' topic to them, I always feel better when I get a short confident response. If I get a long drawn-out one with loads of detail, I remain nervous and doubting.

That saying still holds true: "Me thinks the lady doth protest too much."

I know very honest dealers/sellers in this hobby and in others who have been questioned publicly. They simply never respond - nothing at all. I've spoken with some of them on the phone and they say that they have no respect for all the b.s. that goes on in internet forums, that they don't enjoy participating, and that their reputation can stand on what others say about them publicly, both good and bad. For the honest ones, such a strategy works perfectly.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Runscott

That saying still holds true: "Me thinks the lady doth protest too much."

Nice. Even more apropos: "It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."