Darren's Rovell take on PWCC, etc.

[BobC]

""In a letter to his customers on Wednesday, Collectors Universe CEO Joe Orlando doubled down on his company accepting no fault for grading trimmed cards, placing the blame on those involved in the trimming.

“Like most other industries, ours contains a fraction of people who choose to do nothing more than complain about how third-party systems are imperfect, instead of offering feasible or logical ways to make it better,” Orlando wrote. “Their expectation of human-based opinion services is simply unattainable.”"


For purposes of giving credit, the above excerpt and quote are from the Rovell article.


I went into some great detail in an earlier thread asking opinions about the lines that would be at this year's National.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...ht=bobc&page=2

Forgive me in advance for my long posts in that earlier thread (and this one) as I don't just type out one or two line zingers, and try to back up everything I'm saying with solid explanations and facts where possible. Pay particular attention to posts #88, 102, 125 and 127 in that other earlier thread.

Based on my background and knowledge, I believe PSA has some serious financial issues they may be dealing with right now internally. As part of Collector's Universe (CU), a publicly traded company, their external auditors (Grant Thornton out of Newport Beach, CA) should be working on the company's annual audit for their fiscal year ending 6/30/2019 as I'm typing this. Of particular importance will be the reported warranty reserve that CU will end up showing in their financials for this most recent 6/30/19 year-end.

As for the Joe Orlando quote above more or less putting down collectors for merely complaining about the problems, and never offering feasible or logical solutions, I've said this before as to what would possibly be a viable solution to this situation. There needs to be a single, independent, non-profit group or organization comprised, backed and supported by the collecting community and collectors to set up and establish a single set of agreed upon grading and authentication standards, measurements and so on. And this collector organization is not to be directly affiliated or controlled in any manner whatsoever, with or by the TPGs, dealers and auction houses. The determination of grading and authenticating standards and measures should have never been left in the hands of for-profit third party grading companies in the first place. What they have created is a mess whereby each grading company has their own, unique and slightly different way of grading and assessing cards. Each TPG ends up grading the same card differently based on their own internal standards, not those agreed upon by the collecting community as a whole. You can still have independent, for-profit TPG companies to do the grading and authentication work, but they would need to be overseen and certified to do so by this proposed collecting community organization, and subject to complete transparency as to what they do and how they do it, and also be subject to ongoing, periodic peer review as to the work they perform so as to assure collectors they are maintaining the quality and standards of their work they are supposed to be doing, and performing such work in a consistent and agreed upon manner as dictated by the collecting community as a whole, not just by what that particular TPG thinks is okay.

The collecting organization and the collecting community as a whole should be the ones voting on and determining any changes in standards or measures, not the TPGs who do so now arbitrarily when and how they see fit, and to their economic advantage one would assume, not necessarily for the benefit or betterment of the collecting community itself. Also, there should be some standardized and agreed upon training or education (and eventual formal certification) of anyone deemed to be a qualified grader/authenticator of cards. As of now, the TPGs are supposedly doing the selection and training of their graders themselves, and does anyone really know what, if any, specific training and knowledge these graders actually have? It appears that from information available and gleaned from different sources that the current graders used by the TPGs (especially at PSA) are likely spending extremely little time in reviewing and grading every single card they look at, so it is no wonder that there could possibly be so many errors and missed alterations that get by these TPGs and into holders with numerical grades. The TPGs (especially PSA as they are part of a publicly traded company that is accountable only to their shareholders) are interested in profits, not doing what is necessarily right and proper for the collecting community as a whole.

And because of these grading/authenticating standard variances and alleged deficiencies in the work being performed by TPGs, it has left things wide open for card doctors/alterers to step in and take advantage. And since there is no single standard consensus among collectors as to what is exactly considered and acceptable or not acceptable as card alterations/doctoring, it is going to be hard to actually convict someone of wrongdoing. Remember who is considered the grading experts by the collecting community currently (the TPGs). So who do you think would most likely be called into court by defense attorneys to act as expert witnesses in some trial about alleged card alterations? And then remember, if those same TPGs agree and testify that they did erroneously end up grading altered/doctored cards that they could in some instances end up being financially liable for such admissions, do you think that could possibly affect how they would testify in such a case? And then don't forget, the TPGs only give their OPINIONs as to a card's grade or authenticity. And as the old saying goes, "Opinions are like ***holes, everyone has one!" But since those grades are only opinions, what is to stop a TPG from merely testifying they stand by their original opinion? I doubt you could hold someone in contempt or claim they perjured themselves by sticking to an opinion. And since the TPGs are the de facto experts for the collecting community in grading and authenticating, who do you bring in to prove them wrong? Now if you could get one of the card doctors to admit that a particular card graded by that TPG was altered by them, that may help the argument, but do you really think any card doctor will openly admit to what they've done, especially in court? And also don't forget, for PSA's grading warranty to be effective, the current owner of a PSA graded card would have to go back to PSA and give them the PSA graded card, still in its PSA holder, to review and determine if it was erroneously graded due to alterations, doctoring or anything else. But again, who is the sole arbiter as to whether or not that card was graded incorrectly.........PSA! Not the guys on the BO forum doing all the detective work, not any other TPG, not any court, nor you or I.

Joe Orlando would likely not feel my suggestion was a viable or feasible solution though, mostly because it wouldn't be his company calling the shots and making the decisions, and would likely have a negative impact on their business. From a practical standpoint, what I'm proposing would not be something easy or happening overnight either. You would have to organize the collecting community and get a large majority of collectors to buy in and agree to work together, set aside differences and come up with agreed upon standards among all the collectors, and then probably the toughest part, have everyone in the collecting community agree in both word and action to only work and deal with those TPGs, dealers, auction houses and so on that agreed to recognize the collector organization as the sole body to determine and set standards, and to oversee adherence and compliance with those standards, oversights, peer reviews, and so on. You'd likely need to impose some kind of dues/fees for members of the organization to help fund the work and such that would need to be done to oversee and run everything. And you'd also have to find people willing and able to work in the organization to run and manage things. These are not simple things to easily or quickly be put in place or get done. And sadly, because there are so many collectors, dealers and others that currently have significant investments in graded cards, forcing everyone to comply with such new standards and changes would/could call for pretty much having everything re-reviewed subject to the new rules. And doing all this would likely have some serious negative financial implications for a lot of collectors/dealers that like things just the way they are now, and don't want to hear or see any changes to the status quo whatsoever. It would not be a quick or easy fix, and it wouldn't necessarily stop a card doctors/alterer who can do things to cards that really can't be detected in some cases. It also wouldn't necessarily solve the problems or issues with people trying to manipulate the market, shill bidding and other detrimental things in the collecting hobby as outlined in the Rovell article, but at least it would standardize some things and force the TPGs and others to work for and on behalf of the collecting community and collectors, instead of the other way around.

Oh, and the other comments in that Rovell article about the significant sales of stock by the PSA CEO are factual statements. As a publicly traded company, in accordance with SEC rules, they have to report such significant sales of a company's stock by their owners/officers to be fair to the investing public and so they can't supposedly take advantage of insider knowledge to the detriment of investors at large. Collector's Universe, though actually a very small company in relation to most publicly traded companies, had recently been added to the Russell 2000 index, which an investor would normally see as a positive sign for the business and would likely help to see that stock going up in price. The fact that a main officer of that same company would then be selling off a significant portion of their stock could simply be him/her taking advantage of a recent price rise and pulling some profits off the table, or they could have had some recent personal cash needs that prompted them to sell part of their ownership to fund the cash need. Of course, if there was also some potential bad financial news coming down the road that they were aware of that could negatively affect the company's stock price, they may be selling so as to cash out as much as they could and cut their losses before the bad financial news becomes mainstream public knowledge and the stock price takes a serious hit. I'll give all of you three guesses as to the possible motivation for Mr. Orlando's sales of his stock in CU, and the first two guesses don't count!!!

[Dpeck100]

A lot of theories out there on this board with very little research.


Orlando (Joseph J.) Chief Executive Officer D -19,465 Sale 14.39 -0.28 03-Jul-2018 4 21,314 21,314


Here is a sale from Joe last year at this time. The stock is nearly nine points higher and this sale would have resulted in over $172,000 more funds for him.


These are stock option related sales.


Here is the recent one.


Orlando (Joseph J.) Chief Executive Officer D -5,326 Sale 21.89 -0.12 01-Jul-2019 4 28,780 28,780


So what is your theory on why he didn't sell them all?


Orlando (Joseph J.) Chief Executive Officer D 12,792 Acquisition 0.00 0.00 24-Sep-2018 4 34,106 34,106


The hatred for PSA seems to completely cloud rational thought process here.

[samosa4u]

https://www.psacard.com/articles/art...-retrospective

If you want to see Joe O's full response, then click the above link.

Joe is speaking very broadly here. If I was someone who didn't know anything about this scandal, and I were to read his post, I would still not know anything about it.

He states how a lot of individuals do nothing but complain about the errors TPGs make and provide no logical solutions on making it better. Furthermore, he states that "their expectation of human-based opinion services is simply unattainable." I just feel that a lot of these trimmed cards that were outed on the Blowout Forums were not measured. Don't graders have some measuring devices on their desks? How often do they use them and how long does it take to measure a card? Is that asking for a lot?

His conclusion was the worst part. He states that "there will also be those who choose to spread fear and ignorance." It's called awareness, Mr. Orlando. Those guys over at the Blowout Forums have made me aware of this problem, and now I am very careful about what I buy and that's a good thing, no?

I'm not going to stop purchasing PSA graded cards, and from time-to-time I will submit my cards in for grading as well, but like most people on here, I'm just very disappointed in the way PSA handled this whole thing.

[Republicaninmass]

Who is Darren Rovell, the next up and coming Keith Olbermann with less collector knowledge and even less fan base? Sorry if I should know who he is, but seems like another "contributor". I guess it adds more eyes to the story

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Who is Darren Rovell, the next up and coming Keith Olbermann with less collector knowledge and even less fan base? Sorry if I should know who he is, but seems like another "contributor". I guess it adds more eyes to the story

He was the primary business reporter on ESPN until he left last year. Far from a
"contributor." Of course, a simple Google search could have answered your question.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I thought he did a nice job of presenting a lot of material in a coherent and organized way.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I thought he did a nice job of presenting a lot of material in a coherent and organized way.

I thought he did as well.

Has anyone heard if any members of the media, local or national are going to be doing a piece from the National on the scandal ?

IBD would seem like a good fit......exposing the market manipulation

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

He was the primary business reporter on ESPN until he left last year. Far from a

"contributor." Of course, a simple Google search could have answered your question.

Action network didnt ring any bells, plus AFTER I Google searched, it seemed he was most recently relevant for creating controversy and was incentivised to move to Action. No Olbermann multi million dollar deal. Hes being praised on blowout as the second coming, just curious why. I guess he has a platform, and was business oriented with ESPN, apparently hes now focused on gambling, but it helps spread the word.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Action network didnt ring any bells, plus AFTER I Google searched, it seemed he was most recently relevant for creating controversy and was incentivised to move to Action. No Olbermann multi million dollar deal. Hes being praised on blowout as the second coming, just curious why. I guess he has a platform, and was business oriented with ESPN, apparently hes now focused on gambling, but it helps spread the word.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

It's harder hitting than the prior NYT and WaPo pieces, which is a good thing.

[benjulmag]

Bob,

That is a very informative and well thought out post.

The biggest obstacle I see to implementing what you are outlining is a conceptual one -- collecting by its nature is subjective. Therefore, the notion of having some universal objective grading standard that all TPGs would be bound to follow strikes me as being inconsistent with why people collect in the first place -- personal enjoyment. One person's 8 could be another person's 3, and vice versa.

In my ideal grading world, the sole purpose of a TPG is to opine if the card is genuine and what, if anything, has been done to it. There would be no numerical grades. At that point, armed with that information, a prospective purchaser can decide how much he/she is willing to pay.

In regard to the concern as to how PSA can be found to be liable under their guaranty if the grade is nothing more than an opinion, I don't think they will be that easily let off the hook. I believe if litigated a court would rule in such a way that would give economic substance to the guaranty, which would not be the case if all PSA has to say they in good faith stand by their original grade. PSA charges up to $5K to grade certain cards, and for that money I can't imagine they would not have a lot of explaining to do if a numerically graded card is objectively found to be altered.

This then raises the question how can one objectively determine alteration and thereby meet the legal standard of proof if one cannot remove it from the slab without voiding the guaranty? I can think of at least two ways -- (1) certain trimmed borders when magnified will show sufficiently clear differences when contrasted with untrimmed borders to persuade a trier of fact that the initial grade was incorrect; (2) Removing the card from the slab under appropriate video recorded supervision, which could then permit a scientific analysis of the borders to determine if they exhibit chemical characteristics indicative of recent exposure to the atmosphere (i.e., they were trimmed). I suspect other scientific tests could also be performed to detect other alterations (e.g., addition of coloring, chemical cleaning).

PSA of course will argue that the removal from the slab voids the guaranty. Given the extreme difficulty/impossibility of proving alteration by leaving the card in the slab, coupled with using the video recording to establish to the court's satisfaction that the alteration did not occur after the removal (thereby addressing the concern behind the prohibition against removal), I believe there is a real shot a court would rule the guaranty is not voided.

That to me is the biggest risk PSA faces -- being wiped out financially, as I believe their contingent liability grossly exceeds their capability to absorb it.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Bob,

That is a very informative and well thought out post.

The biggest obstacle I see to implementing what you are outlining is a conceptual one -- collecting by its nature is subjective. Therefore, the notion of having some universal objective grading standard that all TPGs would be bound to follow strikes me as being inconsistent with why people collect in the first place -- personal enjoyment. One person's 8 could be another person's 3, and vice versa.

In my ideal grading world, the sole purpose of a TPG is to opine if the card is genuine and what, if anything, has been done to it. There would be no numerical grades. At that point, armed with that information, a prospective purchaser can decide how much he/she is willing to pay.

In regard to the concern as to how PSA can be found to be liable under their guaranty if the grade is nothing more than an opinion, I don't think they will be that easily let off the hook. I believe if litigated a court would rule in such a way that would give economic substance to the guaranty, which would not be the case if all PSA has to say they in good faith stand by their original grade. PSA charges up to $5K to grade certain cards, and for that money I can't imagine they would not have a lot of explaining to do if a numerically graded card is objectively found to be altered.

This then raises the question how can one objectively determine alteration and thereby meet the legal standard of proof if one cannot remove it from the slab without voiding the guaranty? I can think of at least two ways -- (1) certain trimmed borders when magnified will show sufficiently clear differences when contrasted with untrimmed borders to persuade a trier of fact that the initial grade was incorrect; (2) Removing the card from the slab under appropriate video recorded supervision, which could then permit a scientific analysis of the borders to determine if they exhibit chemical characteristics indicative of recent exposure to the atmosphere (i.e., they were trimmed). I suspect other scientific tests could also be performed to detect other alterations (e.g., addition of coloring, chemical cleaning).

PSA of course will argue that the removal from the slab voids the guaranty. Given the extreme difficulty/impossibility of proving alteration by leaving the card in the slab, coupled with using the video recording to establish to the court's satisfaction that the alteration did not occur after the removal (thereby addressing the concern behind the prohibition against removal), I believe there is a real shot a court would rule the guaranty is not voided.

That to me is the biggest risk PSA faces -- being wiped out financially, as I believe their contingent liability grossly exceeds their capability to absorb it.

Corey,

You are absolutely right, too many people have too many different ideas on what should be what. I said one of the main problems would be getting everyone to actually agree on a single set of standards and then trying to get everyone to follow it. Your thoughts about having TPGs merely authentic a card and then leaving it to collectors to decide what shape it is in makes the best sense to me also. Unfortunately too many people that have gotten into cards view them not just as hobby collectibles, but as investments that they hope continue to rise in value. And that is the inherent problem when you get a hobby where some are in it for fun and to collect, whereas others are in it for business and profit. Because of the people that are in it for potential investment/profit, you end up needing to keep some grading system in place because unlike artwork where each piece is an original one-of-one, there can be hundreds or thousands of a particular card and the grading is what can differentiate a rare, almost perfect condition card from a similar one in just VG shape. And therein because of that condition rarity is where the perceived increase in value comes from, at least to a pretty good majority of card collectors. And because of the financial/investment side of the hobby that exists, having an agreed upon, single set of standards would make it easier for people to relate and compare graded cards across the board.

Because of the perceived differences in some TPGs to others, and the effect they can have on a card's value, we already have it now where people just pay more or less for cards of supposedly similar grades solely based on who graded it. How many threads and discussions have there been about how say a PSA 6 of a certain card will always bring more money than that same exact card in a comparable SGC or BGS 6 holder? If you can get a collector group/organization to agree upon and then enforce a single set of standards, and force the TPGs to follow it, there would be a benefit for both true hobby collectors as well as those in it more for the business/investment aspect. You would get graded cards to be uniform and comparable across all grading companies and this could help to eliminate the inconsistencies among graded cards and perceived values. You could also have the hobby/collecting group become the party that keeps track of the graded cards across the entire hobby and not just have certain TPGs set up their own registry. That way all collectors could have their graded cards registered and tracked by that one collecting group, and include all graded cards regardless of the TPG. The collecting group would then require the TPGs as part of what they would have to do to continue to be a licensed grading company, to share with them information about all newly graded cards so there would be a single unified registry that all members of the collecting community could access and use. One of the benefits would be that if someone went to crossover a graded card from one TPG to another that the TPG doing the re-grade would be required to inform the collecting group registry the information as to what holder they took the card from, and what holder they now put it into. The registry group could then remove the old, broken-out graded card from the registry and replace it with information of the new, regraded one. That way the people in the hobby would be able to have a better idea of how many of a particular card are actually graded and in existence. It would also help to make it easier to track graded cards, especially if as part of such an overall hobby group run registry the TPGs were also required to supply images of cards they are grading as well for comparative purposes. With a registry and database like that you could watch what is happening to cards a lot better than it is now. Of course someone could still just break a card out of a holder and not tell anyone, and there is also the problem of how do you get all of the graded cards that are already out there into such a registry to make it more valuable and meaningful. While nothing is perfect or foolproof, it could help to cut down on the abuses and shenanigans of card doctors because there would be one source and data base you could watch and better track graded cards from. In a more perfect world, that would have been something to have started out with from the beginning of the graded card era. Now it may be too little, too late to try and impose such a group to oversee and change the hobby and how it functions.

[benjulmag]

Bob,

I hear you and I suppose if the objective is to address the concerns of those who are in this hobby not for the pleasure but instead for the investment potential, what you are proposing can't hurt.

That said, IMO the bigger problem which still needs to be addressed is that the current business model of grading cards (reliance on visual inspection) is outdated and cannot keep up with the advances in altering and counterfeiting, much the same way police radar devices soon become obsolete once the latest radar detector hits the market. So even if there was a unified grading system all could agree on, that still doesn't mean there will be any reduction in altered cards receiving numerical grades.

What I like most about your proposal is the idea of a single unified registry. It is the PSA set registry that causes PSA cards to sell at higher prices than identically graded cards from another TPG. It would not surprise me if polled a majority of knowledgeable collectors would rate SGC as having better graders, but those same people would still want their cards slabbed by PSA because the cards would fetch higher prices.

In another thread there was a discussion of forcing PSA to include other TPGs in its set registry. Among the comments to that idea was the firm view that it would be met with howling resistance from many well-heeled collectors who believe much of the value and prestige of their collections reside in their place in the PSA registry.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Bob,

I hear you and I suppose if the objective is to address the concerns of those who are in this hobby not for the pleasure but instead for the investment potential, what you are proposing can't hurt.

That said, IMO the bigger problem which still needs to be addressed is that the current business model of grading cards (reliance on visual inspection) is outdated and cannot keep up with the advances in altering and counterfeiting, much the same way police radar devices soon become obsolete once the latest radar detector hits the market. So even if there was a unified grading system all could agree on, that still doesn't mean there will be any reduction in altered cards receiving numerical grades.

What I like most about your proposal is the idea of a single unified registry. It is the PSA set registry that causes PSA cards to sell at higher prices than identically graded cards from another TPG. It would not surprise me if polled a majority of knowledgeable collectors would rate SGC as having better graders, but those same people would still want their cards slabbed by PSA because the cards would fetch higher prices.

In another thread there was a discussion of forcing PSA to include other TPGs in its set registry. Among the comments to that idea was the firm view that it would be met with howling resistance from many well-heeled collectors who believe much of the value and prestige of their collections reside in their place in the PSA registry.

Corey,

I'm with you. There has got to be a better way to look at and grade/authenticate these cards, and to pay attention to alterations and such to them. With all the advances in technology and computers and so on, you would think someone could come up with a slightly more automated way to view and assess these cards than someone just spending a minute or two at most in looking at them. The human error factor is too great and allows for too many errors and mistakes, even without the altered cards that are being pushed through the system. Again, the idea of having a single, hobby collecting group that runs things and sets standards, including the licensing of TPGs to do grading, would also include standardized testing and procedures all the TPGs would/should have to be doing, at a minimum, in looking at and authenticating cards, as well as the grading of them. I'm not just talking about a hobby/collecting group setting single grading standards for the TPGs, but also establishing rules for how they do their work and what efforts, procedures and such they need to perform. The TPGs need to be transparent in what they do and how they do it, and also need to have some centralized rules to follow. Same thing goes for the actual graders. Who exactly certifies them as "experts", and what exactly did those so-called experts do or learn to get such a designation? As best as I can tell, the TPGs hire people with some card knowledge and then teach them what they want them to look for and do in grading and authentication. I may be wrong, but that sure seems to be how they work things now. I would also have the hobby/collecting group be the one to set the standards for determining and licensing card graders, and not leave that to the individual TPGs to just hire and train whomever they want either.

I also find it quite fascinating that throughout this thread, different people have criticized the Rovell article author about his putting out ideas and such to stir people up and sensationalize the issue with his supposed unfounded opinions and ideas. If that is all a lot of people responding to this thread are getting out of this article, they really aren't doing a good job of reading and comprehending everything that is being said in it. What most amazes me is that no one else seems to have picked up on that one quote from Joe Orlando's letter to his customers that was included in the article where he basically chastises people in the hobby for just complaining about things and trying to blame others (ie: PSA) for these problems. He calls them out and sort of insinuates they are more or less a fraction of the people in the overall hobby community who are just whining and complaining, and don't offer any solutions or ways to make things better. And then even more over the top was the follow-up quote from his letter where it states, "Their expectation of human-based opinion services is simply unattainable." I wonder how many people who actually read that article really paid attention to that line, and nearly choked while reading it?!?!?

Talk about insulting people in the hobby and putting them down! He more or less just dismissed everyone who is bringing up these these issues and their concerns and questioning PSA's part in it by not being able to detect the alterations, deflecting any guilt or liability on PSA's part, and basically saying that unless you people have a better idea on how to do things, stop complaining and whining!!! And I don't know about everyone else, but I thought the reason and expectations of buying a card that is graded by a TPG is that the card itself is authentic, and it is properly graded, including the identification of doctoring or alterations and the reflection of such work done on a card to its grade. And that following such a review and grading process, the card is then encapsulated in a tamper resistant holder for protection and given a unique identifying number for identification purposes. If those expectations of people in the hobby are simply unattainable, then what exactly in his mind is the purpose of a TPG company in reviewing and grading cards and what is attainable??? And notice he specifically used the phrase "human-based opinion services" to accentuate the fact that PSA only gives someone's opinion, and that it only a human opinion and therefore subject to typical human error.

I've only been hearing about how people have been taking their altered/doctored cards back to PWCC to receive refunds. Has anyone actually started or tried taking their PSA graded cards that have been shown to be doctored and/or altered back to PSA yet? And if so, what was the result, are they getting the chance to either have PSA buy back the card, or refund the difference between the incorrect and correct grades? People may be opting to just go to PWCC because they seem to be refunding people's money without too much, if any, hassle. But that just possibly play's into PSA's hands by not subjecting them to their possible warranty guarantee and doesn't give them any financial responsibility. Unless of course after refunding people's money PWCC is then taking the cards they now own back to PSA for the warranty guarantee themselves. That is probably why some people have speculated and made suggestions that they think PSA may be working with PWCC in funding them for these refunds PWCC is making. Or does PWCC then try going back to the people that consigned the card's to them originally to get back the money they received for them. I guess at the end of the day it would be nice to know what happens to these altered cards. For all we know, they could end up in someone else's hands out there and be sold to an unsuspecting and unknowing collector. Or they could be sent back to a TPG for proper grading as altered/authentic. I would hate to think they would end up being destroyed by someone as they are still actual, authentic cards, but who knows for certain what is happening to them?

[MULLINS5]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

A lot of theories out there on this board with very little research.


Orlando (Joseph J.) Chief Executive Officer D -19,465 Sale 14.39 -0.28 03-Jul-2018 4 21,314 21,314


Here is a sale from Joe last year at this time. The stock is nearly nine points higher and this sale would have resulted in over $172,000 more funds for him.


These are stock option related sales.


Here is the recent one.


Orlando (Joseph J.) Chief Executive Officer D -5,326 Sale 21.89 -0.12 01-Jul-2019 4 28,780 28,780


So what is your theory on why he didn't sell them all?


Orlando (Joseph J.) Chief Executive Officer D 12,792 Acquisition 0.00 0.00 24-Sep-2018 4 34,106 34,106


The hatred for PSA seems to completely cloud rational thought process here.

Not a fan right now is PSA, but I don't think his stock selling is anything sinister.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by MULLINS5

Not a fan right now is PSA, but I don't think his stock selling is anything sinister.

The CFO has done the same thing both years at the exact same time. He still has over 200k shares. Yeah just diving out of the stock.

People should look stuff up before they make wild accusations. There is no downside to saying the stuff because a lot of people want to believe it and quickly get out the pitchforks.

[Dpeck100]

This is Darren Rovell.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58MJrealc9I

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

This is Darren Rovell.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58MJrealc9I

I just wasted 33 seconds of my life....thanks David !!! LoL

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

I just wasted 33 seconds of my life....thanks David !!! LoL

I remember when this first surfaced and I was like WTF this dude is brutal.

He was on CNBC for a few years so I was very familiar with him.

It makes sense why he wants to go after people.

[japhi]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

The CFO has done the same thing both years at the exact same time. He still has over 200k shares. Yeah just diving out of the stock.

People should look stuff up before they make wild accusations. There is no downside to saying the stuff because a lot of people want to believe it and quickly get out the pitchforks.

I know that you live in this world, is it that common for a CEO to but low sell high like this? Moving around up to 40% of his holding? I would think at minimum it is a tell to the market that a new high is in. Would be interesting to follow his buy and sell patterns to see what the next 180 days looked like.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by japhi

I know that you live in this world, is it that common for a CEO to but low sell high like this? Moving around up to 40% of his holding? I would think at minimum it is a tell to the market that a new high is in. Would be interesting to follow his buy and sell patterns to see what the next 180 days looked like.

Joe Orlando in reality has never owned a ton of stock.

In many cases when someone exercises options they sell enough to pay for the taxes to keep the remaining shares. I can't say for certain but that is what it looks like took place recently.

It also appears he was at the mercy of the market a year ago when their stock was down because of their coin division and he was forced to leave a nice chunk of money on the table with that sale.

If someone wanted to evaluate whether or not insiders were selling they should watch the CFO who has a much larger share position and his sale was just over 1% of his holdings.

These sales were clearly planned with the exact timing of last years sales so I wouldn't read anything into it one way or another. These guys are not Carl Icahn and aren't totally swimming in money so it is natural to see some selling and increase in current share count at the same time.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Dave I haven't looked at the filings but maybe you have, does he actually have a 10b5-1 trading plan in place? If so then it means less than nothing.

[CurtisFlood]

I'm glad I have very few graded cards to present at the National. I have usually sold 95 % raw material.