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?

[RichardSimon]

"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?"

Thank you Mark for that one. I could not agree more.
+1!!

[packs]

The conflict of interest is my biggest contention. Yes, I do think that a TPA can be complicit in giving favorable treatment to individuals, like the Wagner situation you brought up. But that end was for publicity, not to sell a fake Wagner that was holdered as real to generate that publicity. The Wagner was still an authentic card and PSA had no ownership of it.

My main contention is that an individual who certs their own items for their own resale could be a dangerous model for the hobby should one of those individuals find themselves in some trouble. I don't think you run that same risk with the TPA.

[drcy]

My philosophy is a collector shouldn't collect anything he can't authenticate himself.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by packs

The conflict of interest is my biggest contention. Yes, I do think that a TPA can be complicit in giving favorable treatment to individuals, like the Wagner situation you brought up. But that end was for publicity, not to sell a fake Wagner that was holdered as real to generate that publicity. The Wagner was still an authentic card and PSA had no ownership of it.

My main contention is that an individual who certs their own items for their own resale could be a dangerous model for the hobby should one of those individuals find themselves in some trouble. I don't think you run that same risk with the TPA.

The publicity you refer to was worth millions of dollars to PSA. They would not be anywhere near where they are now if they had not fudged the authentication of that card. So even though it did not result in a dollars profit at point of sale it was worth it to them to authenticate a card that is obviously trimmed. Corporate financial interests over integrity, every time.

[packs]

I realize that but again that has nothing to do with the conflict of interest we're talking about re: autographs and authentication. PSA did not own the card. It would have been a different situation if a high level employee owned the card and then sold the card with PSA's grade. That didn't happen. But there are people with stellar reputations who do cert their own items for sale in their own stores. That is a conflict of interest to me. That model works for those people because they have great reputations and people trust them, but I don't think that model would work for the hobby as a whole because it would be easy to violate that trust.

[Lordstan]

I understand what you are trying to say, but you are getting caught up in a matter of semantics. Regardless of what you wish to call it, if a company knowingly authenticates something dubious like the Wagner, then it is a bad thing.

The term Certification of Authenticity is factually incorrect and that is where the real rub is. What does Certification mean? It's only an opinion that the item is real. Same thing for grading. The grade is their opinion based on a set of criteria, but it is still only an opinion. We all know how many times people will see cards the same grade, but are significantly different. NO ONE can certify in the way they the are implying, which is a type of guarantee, that an auto is authentic unless the certifier witnesses the item signed.

The are offering opinions. THAT IS ALL. So why is the opinion of the dealer selling of less value? Shouldn't they want to stand behind their product? It isn't actually good to have a dealer that is willing to put down on paper that they think the item is real and are actually guaranteeing something in that they will give money back should the item be fake. The TPAs aren't guaranteeing anything at all.

The value of any one opinion comes from 2 things. 1) your understanding of their knowledge of the subject and 2) you trusting that they opinion they are giving you is unbiased.
Well based on the number of mistakes, including obvious ones, and the fact that you do not know who is reviewing your submission, I think it is reasonable to question their expertise. Second, considering them knowingly doing things like slabbing and grading the Wagner card for their own corporate and personal benefit I think it is also reasonable to have some questions regarding their trustworthiness.
Obviously you feel differently. If you choose to trust the TPAs with items in your collections and items you buy it is certainly your right to do so.

What David said is the key,
"My philosophy is a collector shouldn't collect anything he can't authenticate himself."

If more people actually put in the time to educate themselves this whole discussion would be mute.

[packs]

I agree with your last statement. I remember not too long ago one of the TPG's started grading and auctioning their own materials and that rubbed some people the wrong way. That's the kind of issue I'm angling at when it comes to autos and dealers.