Industry participants' response to scandal so far -- report card

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Unless there are reports that PSA and PWCC haven’t been refunding clients, I don’t believe F and D respectively is appropriate. I could be wrong though.

Sloan specifically said contact the seller, not us. Why should I assume PSA is refunding people? The burden is on them not us at this point. Has anyone indicated PSA refunded them? Has PSA accepted responsibility for ANYTHING? Please.

And how many people have said PWCC refunded them? One guy maybe, or two? Again, with all the nonsense they've pulled off for years, the burden is on them to show their good faith in my eyes. And it wouldn't even be good faith, really, more like desperation.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Sloan specifically said contact the seller, not us. Why should I assume PSA is refunding people? The burden is on them not us at this point. Has anyone indicated PSA refunded them? Has PSA accepted responsibility for ANYTHING? Please.

And how many people have said PWCC refunded them? One guy maybe, or two? Again, with all the nonsense they've pulled off for years, the burden is on them to show their good faith in my eyes. And it wouldn't even be in good faith, really, more like desperation.

I have yet to hear anyone vent about not receiving a refund. If PSA was being difficult with victims (many are on this board), I'd imagine we would hear something. Again, I could be wrong, but I'd imagine PSA and/or PWCC are requesting victims sign NDAs.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

I have yet to hear anyone vent about not receiving a refund. If PSA was being difficult with victims (many are on this board), I'd imagine we would hear something. Again, I could be wrong, but I'd imagine PSA and/or PWCC are requesting victims sign NDAs.

No, a guy just posted yesterday about a PWCC refund, he did not mention an NDA. Why you would give these people the benefit of the doubt at this point, given all that has transpired, after years of fraud and incompetence and coverups, is beyond me, but whatever we all have our perspectives.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

No, a guy just posted yesterday about a PWCC refund, he did not mention an NDA. Why you would give these people the benefit of the doubt at this point, given all that has transpired, after years of fraud and incompetence and coverups, is beyond me, but whatever we all have our perspectives.

I saw this quote in someones signature line and I think it fits perfectly.
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”

[drcy]

I should be on that list, saying "They're a bunch of bloody wankers."

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

No, a guy just posted yesterday about a PWCC refund, he did not mention an NDA. Why you would give these people the benefit of the doubt at this point, given all that has transpired, after years of fraud and incompetence and coverups, is beyond me, but whatever we all have our perspectives.

I look around and see no one complaining about refunds, it's not so much a "benefit of the doubt" as a reasonable guess that people are receiving refunds.

[RedsFan1941]

peter do “other auction houses and dealers” know they are to report to you what they have and haven’t been doing? does pwcc know it’s supposed to keep you posted on refunds it has made? I would assume if you are grading all of these businesses, you have requested they keep you informed so you can make accurate assessments and not ones that are just based on what you’ve heard or read in an auction house’s blog post. otherwise you appear to be trying too hard to stay relevant in this mess.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by RedsFan1941

peter do “other auction houses and dealers” know they are to report to you what they have and haven’t been doing? does pwcc know it’s supposed to keep you posted on refunds it has made? I would assume if you are grading all of these businesses, you have requested they keep you informed so you can make accurate assessments and not ones that are just based on what you’ve heard or read in an auction house’s blog post. otherwise you appear to be trying too hard to stay relevant in this mess.

Misunderstood your post intiially, sorry. But leaving aside your stupid ad hominem remark, yes I think these hobby leaders (the other AHs and dealers) should be coming forward like a few have done and giving us their perspective. They're not shy about reaching out when they want to promote their auctions, how about reaching out when there is great uncertainty and people don't know what to make of the situation? As for PWCC, they massively breached the public trust to the tune of 70 percent of this forum not dealing with them. The way to try to restore confidence would be by telling the public what they are doing to restore that trust, not secret payments with an NDA.

[oldjudge]

With all due respect to the smaller auction houses, the only statements I'd like to hear are from the Heritages and REAs of the world. The others are not significant in the general scheme of things.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Misunderstood your post intiially, sorry. But leaving aside your stupid ad hominem remark, yes I think these hobby leaders (the other AHs and dealers) should be coming forward like a few have done and giving us their perspective. They're not shy about reaching out when they want to promote their auctions, how about reaching out when there is great uncertainty and people don't know what to make of the situation? As for PWCC, they massively breached the public trust to the tune of 70 percent of this forum not dealing with them. The way to try to restore confidence would be by telling the public what they are doing to restore that trust, not secret payments with an NDA.

PWCC and PSA are making secret payments and securing NDAs? What’s the source for that? And what’s a secret payment?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

PWCC and PSA are making secret payments and securing NDAs? What’s the source for that? And what’s a secret payment?

That was Jason's theory. You have to read his post.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...8&postcount=23

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

That was Jason's theory. You have to read his post.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...8&postcount=23

But admittedly based on his imagination and nothing concrete. You understand that it makes no sense for PWCC or PSA to insist upon an NDA.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

But admittedly based on his imagination and nothing concrete. You understand that it makes no sense for PWCC or PSA to insist upon an NDA.

That's been my point, as I have posted several times.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The way to try to restore confidence would be by telling the public what they are doing to restore that trust, not secret payments with an NDA.

Oh my bad. I thought you suggested that they were making secret payments with an NDA. And how is a payment secret? Like it just ends up in your account without anyone telling you it’s coming?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Oh my bad. I thought you suggested that they were making secret payments with an NDA. And how is a payment secret? Like it just ends up in your account without anyone telling you it’s coming?

No I was saying it would make no sense to do that if they wanted to restore trust, and a few posts before I pointed out there were no NDAs because a guy had just posted about a PWCC refund and did not mention an NDA.

I guess I was using secret payment in the sense of not known to or knowable by the public, not hidden from the recipient, although maybe not the best wording.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

No I was saying it would make no sense to do that if they wanted to restore trust, and a few posts before I pointed out there were no NDAs because a guy had just posted about a PWCC refund and did not mention an NDA.

I guess I was using secret payment in the sense of not known to or knowable by the public, not hidden from the recipient, although maybe not the best wording.

I hear you. But without an NDA recipients coukd happily and publicly announce their good fortune at receiving refunds. And the first refund sent out by PWCC or Beckett oe PSA is one more than Mastro et al. ever paid out, even as sentencing was upon them and they had a reason to try to look good for the judge. Every dollar paid by the Mastro gang and their coconspirators had to be dragged out of them via civil litigation or a threat to sue.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If someone is defrauded and their trust abused then reimbursed is that good fortune or just what they are entitled to, I might quibble with the language although I recognize the comparison.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by calvindog

I hear you. But without an NDA recipients coukd happily and publicly announce their good fortune at receiving refunds. And the first refund sent out by PWCC or Beckett oe PSA is one more than Mastro et al. ever paid out, even as sentencing was upon them and they had a reason to try to look good for the judge. Every dollar paid by the Mastro gang and their coconspirators had to be dragged out of them via civil litigation or a threat to sue.

always interesting to look what he quotes given who he represents now