PSA Response from President Steve Sloan

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Hi Dan,
Welcome back to the board. A lot of us knew 10-15 years ago that altered cards were getting slabbed, and at an alarming rate. I know that when I told collectors about it, they thought it was just some harebrained idea, so most of us didn't publicize it. Now it's out in the open, which is a good thing. Maybe it will finally be properly addressed (not guaranteed).

Hi Barry,

Nice to hear from you.

Your experience back then was the same as mine. My observation over several years with piles of evidence to prove it was that collectors who initially bought graded cards as a safeguard to prevent buying altered cards were later well aware of the prolific problem of doctored cards in slabs yet still continued to buy the graded cards anyway. It was mind boggling, but I've since learned that this psychological disorder is called cognitive dissonance.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

Hi Barry,

Nice to hear from you.

Your experience back then was the same as mine. My observation over several years with piles of evidence to prove it was that collectors who initially bought graded cards as a safeguard to prevent buying altered cards were later well aware of the prolific problem of doctored cards in slabs yet still continued to buy the graded cards anyway. It was mind boggling, but I've since learned that this psychological disorder is called cognitive dissonance.

"SD" or "Stuff Disorder".

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

Hi Barry,

Nice to hear from you.

Your experience back then was the same as mine. My observation over several years with piles of evidence to prove it was that collectors who initially bought graded cards as a safeguard to prevent buying altered cards were later well aware of the prolific problem of doctored cards in slabs yet still continued to buy the graded cards anyway. It was mind boggling, but I've since learned that this psychological disorder is called cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance, or the power of the slab.

[swarmee]

Hey Mr. Sloan, I still don't see this notice posted on the front page of your website... I'm sure you can get it done.

[swarmee]

List of things I'd like PSA to do:
1) Publish the entire list of Moser's submissions and decertify them from the pop report. In the case the proven "before" card was also PSA slabbed, remove that cert from the pop report as well.
2) Inform the public that this was done. SMR Magazine, Set Registry banquet at National, front page of your website. Have a returns line set up at the National for your aggrieved customers.
3) Get PWCC to pay for as much as they can afford.
4) Pay for the rest. It seems your company has not done a reliable job of this in the past; I have seen references to collectors having to "fight tooth and nail" to get reimbursed. This is the kind of thing that will only increase the bad press.
5) Open up your "internal investigation" to an independent auditor. As a publicly traded company, this makes sense, right?
6) Are you and Brent really working with any law enforcement? If so, why has the agency not been named?
7) Name the other "isolated bad actors" that still submit to PSA and decertify their cards. We're at the beginning of a Set Registry year; collectors will have 11 months to refill their sets with cards to replace their fraudulent ones.
8) Retrain your employees. The amount of various alterations detected so far has been vast: trimming, pressing out creases, recoloring, stain removal, claims of reglossing, rebuilding of corners, adding of rough cuts. Reject undersized cards as Minsize. Tighten up the minsiz requirements for sets like T206, 1952 Look N See, etc. Figure out how Moser beat you and think like him to figure out where PSA is sloppy. Maybe start a white-hat submission program to submit cards to your staff anonymously to see if they catch the alterations you claim you can.
9) Add a historical search for cards to your authentication step. Look for cards that have been photographed already on the internet. This will add personnel costs and timeline to your service, but it's required to regain trust. Otherwise, the scandal will continue to occur. Edit: I realize this will restrict you from doing any on-site grading. So be it. Accuracy is more important than speed; surely you agree.
10) Openly disavow (or approve) Brent's Marketplace Tenets. Disavowing them will show that you believe in the collector's agreement with PSA's longstanding definitions of card alteration. If you approve them, you'll have to explain why the company failed so miserably and confirm that if you can't detect alterations, you'll have to concede your corporate expertise lacks.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by swarmee

List of things I'd like PSA to do:
1) Publish the entire list of Moser's submissions and decertify them from the pop report. In the case the proven "before" card was also PSA slabbed, remove that cert from the pop report as well.
2) Inform the public that this was done. SMR Magazine, Set Registry banquet at National, front page of your website. Have a returns line set up at the National for your aggrieved customers.
3) Get PWCC to pay for as much as they can afford.
4) Pay for the rest. It seems your company has not done a reliable job of this in the past; I have seen references to collectors having to "fight tooth and nail" to get reimbursed. This is the kind of thing that will only increase the bad press.
5) Open up your "internal investigation" to an independent auditor. As a publicly traded company, this makes sense, right?
6) Are you and Brent really working with any law enforcement? If so, why has the agency not been named?
7) Name the other "isolated bad actors" that still submit to PSA and decertify their cards. We're at the beginning of a Set Registry year; collectors will have 11 months to refill their sets with cards to replace their fraudulent ones.
8) Retrain your employees. The amount of various alterations detected so far has been vast: trimming, pressing out creases, recoloring, stain removal, claims of reglossing, rebuilding of corners, adding of rough cuts. Reject undersized cards as Minsize. Tighten up the minsiz requirements for sets like T206, 1952 Look N See, etc. Figure out how Moser beat you and think like him to figure out where PSA is sloppy. Maybe start a white-hat submission program to submit cards to your staff anonymously to see if they catch the alterations you claim you can.
9) Add a historical search for cards to your authentication step. Look for cards that have been photographed already on the internet. This will add personnel costs and timeline to your service, but it's required to regain trust. Otherwise, the scandal will continue to occur.
10) Openly disavow (or approve) Brent's Marketplace Tenets. Disavowing them will show that you believe in the collector's agreement with PSA's longstanding definitions of card alteration. If you approve them, you'll have to explain why the company failed so miserably and confirm that if you can't detect alterations, you'll have to concede your corporate expertise lacks.

I agree there are things that PSA can do to improve its product.....but, I think that is missing the main point.

In the movie "Other People's Money" Danny DeVito in arguing that technology had made the product the target company was selling obsolete analogized to a company that made buggy whips when the automobile became commercially available. No matter what that company could possibly come up with to try to improve the quality of its buggy whips, it did not matter because people were now driving automobiles.

In the case of baseball card grading, where 5,6, and even 7 figure cards have replaced yesteryear's era of 2, 3 and 4 figure cards, the financial rewards of expert alteration have made PSA's method of grading cards obsolete. To say it another way, unless and until a TPG begins to use the best commercially viable methods technology has to offer to evaluate cards, altered cards will continue to slip through.

It is for that reason why I have stopped purchasing graded cards that have no provenance -- the leap of faith required to believe the card is accurately described by the flip is simply too great.

To those who will respond that my view that a person cares the card is not altered and will look to buy the card, not the flip, represent the exception, not the rule amongst collectors/investors, perhaps that is true. But as I've said before -- I believe that as people really begin to understand how commonplace alterations are and the absurdity of form ruling over substance when one is spending 5, 6, and 7 figures on an item, the s*#t will hit the fan and things will change.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Corey do you have any specifics on what technology TPGs should be using, and its cost?

[swarmee]

Start up your own company, show proof of concept, go on Shark Tank. Then come back to me. All we have is buggy whips.

[MULLINS5]

PSA already grades conserved cards with an A.

But, if they want to take a page from the comic book community, then PSA needs to have a different color label for "restored" grade.

These cards would sell for less than red flip numerical grades.

There's no reason for debating conservation. What Moser did to his cards was OK. Brent selling them was OK. The issue here is that they defrauded buyers by selling something vastly different than advertised to make money for themselves - and PSA's involvement, for now, remains a question.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Corey do you have any specifics on what technology TPGs should be using, and its cost?

Peter, in response to this issue there have been posts by those with expertise in this area who opine the technology exists and would be cost effective. There have also been posts saying that for certain high valued cards, PSA charges up to $5K. At that level, I would think a submitter should get more than a cursory look by a person who might have little experience in knowing the different kinds of card sets and the physical characteristics those cards should be expected to exhibit.

From my experience with forensic analysis, I believe detecting trimming, the addition of color, and the pressing of corners is something that can be done. And given the enormous volume of cards PSA grades each year, I would think investing in such equipment would be profitable.

As to the point that for now all we have is buggy whips, that might be true. But then at least call it what it is and stop the pretense that the services PSA offer without making the investment into new technology can provide the assurances submitters believe they are getting and are paying for.