ethical question

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Please tell me how selling used cars has anything to do with selling baseball cards. One is regulated and has very specific laws and the other has none. We so need that face palm emoji.

It's similar in that they both offer a guarantee and in the event of a claim, you deal with the company that makes the guarantee.

Yes face palm emoji definitely needed.

[jhs5120]

A similar situation has happened to me.

I bought a Ted Williams signed index card from Heritage (part of a lot), it was pre-certified by PSA. I sent the index card to PSA to encapsulate and they determined it was a fake. I went to PSA to refund me the purchase price, they did, and then ripped up the card.

To me, it's TPG first, seller second.

You're buying an item with a warranty. If it's defective, exercise the warranty. That's why it's there.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

A similar situation has happened to me.

I bought a Ted Williams signed index card from Heritage (part of a lot), it was pre-certified by PSA. I sent the index card to PSA to encapsulate and they determined it was a fake. I went to PSA to refund me the purchase price, they did, and then ripped up the card.

To me, it's TPG first, seller second.

You're buying an item with a warranty. If it's defective, exercise the warranty. That's why it's there.

So why is Steve Sloan telling people with altered cards to contact the seller and only to contact PSA if the seller is "unknown"? I guess he would disagree with you?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So why is Steve Sloan telling people with altered cards to contact the seller and only to contact PSA if the seller is "unknown"? I guess he would disagree with you?

Is this a serious question? I think you know the answer to that?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Is this a serious question? I think you know the answer to that?

Yes, it was a sarcastic swipe at Sloan, although as this thread illustrates it's a complex issue. In any case, even under my view of the seller's responsibility, PSA ends up having to make good on the guarantee unless the seller is the submitter.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So why is Steve Sloan telling people with altered cards to contact the seller and only to contact PSA if the seller is "unknown"? I guess he would disagree with you?

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Is this a serious question? I think you know the answer to that?

LOL, gotta agree with David on this one. There is no way that was a serious question.

[Peter_Spaeth]

As a side note, the law always seems to have difficulty resolving situations where both parties are innocent but one gets hurt. It does make for good discussions though.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So why is Steve Sloan telling people with altered cards to contact the seller and only to contact PSA if the seller is "unknown"? I guess he would disagree with you?

You're asking me why a warranty service is trying to avoid people from exercising their warranty?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

You're asking me why a warranty service is trying to avoid people from exercising their warranty?

See prior post, it was a swipe at Sloan's missive.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

See prior post, it was a swipe at Sloan's missive.

I figured it was rhetorical. To me, PSA commands a premium because it has a guarantee. It isn't the registry, or the strict grading (lol), it's the warranty. If they get it wrong, they will reimburse you. They'll huff and puff, but they're pretty reliable with their warranty.

If you are paying a premium for a service that has such a warranty, you should exercise it if there's a problem. Don't go back to the dealer if you get in a car accident. That's why you have insurance.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

I figured it was rhetorical. To me, PSA commands a premium because it has a guarantee. It isn't the registry, or the strict grading (lol), it's the warranty. If they get it wrong, they will reimburse you. They'll huff and puff, but they're pretty reliable with their warranty.

If you are paying a premium for a service that has such a warranty, you should exercise it if there's a problem. Don't go back to the dealer if you get in a car accident. That's why you have insurance.

Great post, I had honestly never though about it that way. Paying the premium for the warranty makes way more sense than any other reason I have heard.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

I figured it was rhetorical. To me, PSA commands a premium because it has a guarantee. It isn't the registry, or the strict grading (lol), it's the warranty. If they get it wrong, they will reimburse you. They'll huff and puff, but they're pretty reliable with their warranty.

If you are paying a premium for a service that has such a warranty, you should exercise it if there's a problem. Don't go back to the dealer if you get in a car accident. That's why you have insurance.

if PSA wont pay it you go back to the dealer....of course i would try PSA first as the easiest method but ultimately its the seller's potential obligation

of course can sue for anything....PSA can still say the card is a PSA 6 despite all of the pictures of prior sales and not pay on the guarantee because of that...then you sue the seller but the seller says you did get a PSA 6...PSA says so.....however now you cant sell the card for the same PSA 6 price because there is a less of a buyer pool

Defense will argue you didnt do due dilligence and you could of seen the prior sale on an easy internet search...and that PSA says its a 6...

it is what it is.....seller could refuse to refund the card but ultimately its always a business decision ......ethical moral decisions happen all the time.....heck on raw cards ...buyers will argue the picture did not show a micro issue and try to return the card.....its just another item on the list..

[griffon512]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So why is Steve Sloan telling people with altered cards to contact the seller and only to contact PSA if the seller is "unknown"? I guess he would disagree with you?

Steve Sloan is making a business decision. You're asking an ethical question. How often do the two overlap?

[Promethius88]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth -So why is Steve Sloan telling people with altered cards to contact the seller and only to contact PSA if the seller is "unknown"? I guess he would disagree with you?[
QUOTE=griffon512;1898627]Steve Sloan is making a business decision. You're asking an ethical question. How often do the two overlap?[/QUOTE]

This is simple, in my eyes and I've explained it before. Yes, 100% a business decision and they know they will be most likely be paying out a lot in the future. They are tying to minimize that amount now. They know the majority of these cards were sold by one particular entity which appears to possibly be involved in the fraudulent activities. PSA does NOT have to refund to the original submitter in certain situations as was noted in one of the other 50 threads on this issue. Send the cards back to the seller then they don't have to refund them if they send back to PSA. Love them, hate them....whatever, but it is the smartest way to limit their economic exposure.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Promethius88

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth -So why is Steve Sloan telling people with altered cards to contact the seller and only to contact PSA if the seller is "unknown"? I guess he would disagree with you?[
QUOTE=griffon512;1898627]Steve Sloan is making a business decision. You're asking an ethical question. How often do the two overlap?

This is simple, in my eyes and I've explained it before. Yes, 100% a business decision and they know they will be most likely be paying out a lot in the future. They are tying to minimize that amount now. They know the majority of these cards were sold by one particular entity which appears to possibly be involved in the fraudulent activities. PSA does NOT have to refund to the original submitter in certain situations as was noted in one of the other 50 threads on this issue. Send the cards back to the seller then they don't have to refund them if they send back to PSA. Love them, hate them....whatever, but it is the smartest way to limit their economic exposure.[/QUOTE]

This argument has proven to me that as much as this industry has evolved and grown over the years its still filled with the same fraud and manipulation it has always had...nothing is going to change.....it’s still the same old same....
PSA is a brilliant business model...