Darren's Rovell take on PWCC, etc.

[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?

[swarmee]

There is a whole thread on Blowout critical of Joe Orlando's column.
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1308245

The problem with technology being added to the process is the additional timeline and cost. IMO, you can't add it only to higher level submissions. It has to be all or nothing. A major part of this issue is the submitter slipping high dollar cards in bulk submissions so they'd be graded by less experienced (theoretically) graders. Plus, you can't have a split registry concept where only high value or high grade cards are properly authenticated for one "vetted" registry, and everything else in an "unvetted" registry. A registry divided across itself cannot stand.

So if PSA or Beckett or SGC now have to charge a minimum of $25 to grade any card, will people still submit cards? Will PSA Set Registry collecting die or decrease?
People have already howled about bulk submissions going from $5.50 a card or so to $8/ea in the past three years.

[Beastmode]

Originally Posted by swarmee

There is a whole thread on Blowout critical of Joe Orlando's column.
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1308245

The problem with technology being added to the process is the additional timeline and cost. IMO, you can't add it only to higher level submissions. It has to be all or nothing. A major part of this issue is the submitter slipping high dollar cards in bulk submissions so they'd be graded by less experienced (theoretically) graders. Plus, you can't have a split registry concept where only high value or high grade cards are properly authenticated for one "vetted" registry, and everything else in an "unvetted" registry. A registry divided across itself cannot stand.

So if PSA or Beckett or SGC now have to charge a minimum of $25 to grade any card, will people still submit cards? Will PSA Set Registry collecting die or decrease?
People have already howled about bulk submissions going from $5.50 a card or so to $8/ea in the past three years.

Agreed, and this is where PSA has their head entirely up their ass. The lower tier does work, just make it clear what the process is. Lower tier grading involves no warranty, no checking for trimming, no reviewing of alterations, etc. Take 5-10 seconds looking at the card, then encapsulate. Lots of folks just want their card graded/slabbed, and for the most part, those cards are not altered anyway (commons/modern). The market will determine the value of those cards based on the disclosures of the process for grading. At least we all know what we are buying. No doubt if you have a '55 Clemente, you're not using this process

Then offer the premium service with a different color label. Charge big money for a through review, a real warranty, latest technology, etc. The review would be a flat fixed fee, with a sliding scale for the warranty liability. Disclose the process in detail for the market to digest. You'll have thousands of re-submitter's because the red-cert cards are tainted. Buyers will be wondering why you haven't re-holdered that red-cert vintage card. The cream will rise to the top, and eventually, the unaltered authentic vintage cards will make their way to this high-end label.

The biggest losers of this entire fiasco are card owners with authentic unaltered vintage cards in red-cert slabs. I say this with peace and love, but if your paying anywhere close to retail for any vintage red-cert PSA card right now, you're an idiot.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Beastmode

Agreed, and this is where PSA has their head entirely up their ass. The lower tier does work, just make it clear what the process is. Lower tier grading involves no warranty, no checking for trimming, no reviewing of alterations, etc.

I'm not sure what in my post you're agreeing to. I don't agree with anything you wrote in the first two paragraphs after "Agreed."

[BobC]

Originally Posted by swarmee

There is a whole thread on Blowout critical of Joe Orlando's column.
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1308245

The problem with technology being added to the process is the additional timeline and cost. IMO, you can't add it only to higher level submissions. It has to be all or nothing. A major part of this issue is the submitter slipping high dollar cards in bulk submissions so they'd be graded by less experienced (theoretically) graders. Plus, you can't have a split registry concept where only high value or high grade cards are properly authenticated for one "vetted" registry, and everything else in an "unvetted" registry. A registry divided across itself cannot stand.

So if PSA or Beckett or SGC now have to charge a minimum of $25 to grade any card, will people still submit cards? Will PSA Set Registry collecting die or decrease?
People have already howled about bulk submissions going from $5.50 a card or so to $8/ea in the past three years.

John,

Thanks, had not seen that. Glad to see someone else was taking some exception to the quotes from that letter and what was being said about the collecting community.

Don't disagree with you at all about the technology issues and additional potential costs to grade cards. And that is part of the problem/issue. The TPGs are all for-profit companies. Especially PSA which is part of a public traded company and has all of those shareholders to whom they are accountable to be profitable and make money and the stock price go up for. At the same time, they are supposedly providing a service as a TPG that people in the hobby expect certain things for in return for the money they are paying to PSA (or any other TPG). From all the latest issues and accusations, it seems that whatever the TPGs are doing in their grading of cards, it is not enough to actually be able to detect and point out the doctoring and alterations being performed. So if the TPGs basically can't detect all the alterations being done, or won't do the additional work necessary to find and report it because it would eat into their profits, then collectors have to stop and ask themselves if it is worth it or not to keep paying them for their grading services. But if we pay such a small fee to TPGs so they just basically go through the motions of grading cards and let so much fraud through, we have no one to blame but ourselves for allowing it to happen, and Joe Orlando's comments unfortunately become all the more true.

There is no quick and easy fix if the majority of the hobby really wants more accurate grading of cards and better work at detecting and reporting on alterations and doctoring. But as for requiring grading costs to go up to achieve that, that may end up being a necessity to get more accurate work being performed by the TPGS. One of the pluses behind having a single hobby group determining grading standards and techniques, and then also requiring TPGs and their graders to be authorized/licensed by the hobby group, is that you then get more standardized grading among all the TPGs, not just this one or that one that caters to a particular collectors needs or whims. And if there is a standard grading system among all the TPGs, they can then be more competitive in the pricing of their services. Currently one TPGs card in say a 6 grade sells for more or less than a similar card graded a 6 by a different TPG. So naturally people will look to get their cards in the TPG holder that will sell for the most money. But if the TPGs all have to abide by similar grading standards, the differences in values assigned to similarly graded cards between the TPGs should be minimized and there should be no significant difference in which TPG someone uses then. In that case, the TPGs will end up having to possibly be more competitive in pricing to gain business, and thus help to control costs to collectors. The PSA registry was a great marketing idea by them to develop a unique customer service and niche whereby people would gravitate towards them because of the perceived (and in reality actual) additional value having their card in a PSA holder would bring.

But does the majority of card collectors actually all participate in and utilize the PSA Registry to have all their cards listed and compared against sets of other collectors? My guess is the answer is no and that only a fraction of the total card hobby collecting community fully participate in everything the PSA Registry has to offer. I know I personally couldn't care less about the PSA Registry and have no need or desire for it whatsoever. However, if you had a single, collector backed hobby group that standardized everything and kept its own registry across all the different TPGs, that to me would be much more meaningful for all collectors as there would be a single database people could look at to determine how many of a particular card have been graded and are out there. They could also show off and compare their graded cards/sets despite not having all their cards in just one specific TPG holder. It would/could also help to eliminate the need, cost and hassle of having to cross-over cards to get them into a specific TPG registry, and so on. Now you could set up a registry like that for all collectors through a hobby based group, and a TPG like PSA could still keep and maintain their own, PSA only, graded Registry. So if someone really wanted to just participate in the PSA Registry experience, and didn't care if their highly graded cards were altered/conserved/restored/whatever, that would be their business, and they could do what they wanted to.

Truth is that too many people have too much tied up in their cards that they will not want to change things dramatically from where they are now. Purist card collectors who do not want altered/doctored/conserved/restored cards being given numerical grades and devalue such altered cards, treating them as merely authentic, will potentially look at cards graded by such TPGs that don't seem to care about their inability to detect and report such alterations, and value them less in the future. They would view that TPGs cards as more suspect as to unreported alterations, especially for higher grades. But there are a lot of people who get into cards for the investment/profit to be made. They're just looking for the $s and don't care as much about the purist collectors ideals. Sadly, I think the purists will lose out to the sheer numbers of those who just want the nicest, highest graded cards, and don't worry as much about whether or not the card was somehow doctored. They figure if when they look at it they can't tell or see any alterations, and a reputable TPG didn't find any issues, who else is going to having issues with such a card. And therefore, the card is good to go in their eyes. Eventually what I think will happen because of the pervasive and prolonged history of card doctors operating in the hobby is that no one will be able to definitely prove or disprove if every doctored/altered card currently in a TPG holder, is actually altered/doctored. Instead, TPGs may finally start (reluctantly) to address the card alteration issue and spend more time to detect and report such work done by the card doctors. Then over time, the collecting community will become more aware of these changes and certain TPG holders will be recognized as older, before the crack down on alterations started, and those older. graded cards will be valued downward by collectors accordingly. Kind of like how when people now see a card in an old holder, say GAI, and they bid less for it than if it was in a comparably graded holder of one of the current main TPGs. We shall see.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by BobC

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?

NO we responded to BS posts like this.

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!!!



You seem like a well informed person. I am surprised you would make this post without attempting to check facts.


I confirmed with Joe that this was indeed a cashless stock option exercise. He has not sold a single share above the amount needed to pay the taxes and take delivery of the remaining shares.

Nice try but you completely failed.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The Form 4 says the sale is to pay taxes look at the FN. This is a public document.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...X03/rdgdoc.xml

And Dave it does look like he has a trading plan.

"Explanation of Responses:
1. Sale of shares under 10(b)5-1 Plan to satisfy withholding taxes on shares that vested on June 30, 2019."

Rovell should have checked his facts. There is plenty IMO to fault Joe for these days but dumping stock is not one of them.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The Form 4 says the sale is to pay taxes look at the FN. This is a public document.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...X03/rdgdoc.xml

And Dave it does look like he has a trading plan.

"Explanation of Responses:
1. Sale of shares under 10(b)5-1 Plan to satisfy withholding taxes on shares that vested on June 30, 2019."

1. Sale of shares under 10(b)5-1 Plan to satisfy withholding taxes on shares that vested on June 30, 2019.


As easily as you found that Peter obviously Darren could have too. I bet he knew why and just wanted to add some gas to a fire because most would believe his BS.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

NO we responded to BS posts like this.

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!!!



You seem like a well informed person. I am surprised you would make this post without attempting to check facts.


I confirmed with Joe that this was indeed a cashless stock option exercise. He has not sold a single share above the amount needed to pay the taxes and take delivery of the remaining shares.

Nice try but you completely failed.

I did state facts. How else do you think people were able to pull up and find such records of what he was selling as far as the shares he had in CU? I also said he could be selling to pull cash off the table, or that he could have a cash need (like selling enough shares to cover the taxes on exercise of his stock option). I also said that it could be possible for someone with knowledge or concerns about upcoming company issues to look to start selling off shares to protect their investment, and that was one of the reasons that people in his position in a publicly traded company are required to report transactions involving their stock holdings, so there is transparency and the investing public can use that information as they see fit. I never said he was selling his shares because the company was suddenly having issues. I was also attempting to make a joke when I finished by saying I'd give everyone three guesses as to his motivation for selling, and the first two don't count.

I, like you, also thought it was unnecessary to include that part about the stock sales in the article as well, with the implication by the author more or less questioning why Mr. Orlando was selling so many of his shares. (What I think is actually more important is the level of stock activity of the company officers going forward now that these issues are starting to coming out.) But it wasn't BS the author of the article was including, just a statement of facts that the reader could then interpret as they saw fit. That a lot of readers may have interpreted the inclusion of that specific information in the the article as an implication that Mr. Orlando may be selling off his stock in the company because of the issues also mentioned in the article just goes to show how uniformed the average person can be about such things in the business world. I don't think anyone earlier in the thread had brought up and touched on that part of the article yet. I did it merely trying to point out that there were various valid reasons for someone like him to be selling his shares in the company, aside from dumping his stock because of potential concerns and issues.

The article stated that Mr. Orlando had been selling shares back before these issues started coming out a few months ago, so I didn't need to do specific research and call Joe Orlando personally to ask him why he was selling shares in his company. Since he had been doing it prior to all these current issues coming out I pretty much knew he had other valid reasons for selling off portions of his stock holdings, and suspected that it may involve stock options, taxes, or a myriad of other reasonable reasons. I also know that a majority of the readers here aren't going to be that knowledgeable about stock options, tax implications, and so on, and thus instead of going into the specific details about whether or not he had a 10(b)5-1 plan in place or whatever, I just stated that there were potentially other valid reasons for him to be selling his shares, and wanted to be sure to point that out. I was actually coming to Mr. Orlando's defense by noting that there are other perfectly acceptable reasons for him to have been selling shares, and figured it would also make the readers think twice when they realized that anything he or any of the other officers of CU did in regards to activity with their stock ownership in CU would be subject to public reporting and scrutiny. With that kind of oversight and required reporting, the last thing you would think that on officer of CU would do is start dumping their stock at the the first sign of of issues like the one out there now.

So my post is BS and I totally failed, huh? Well, I think I totally succeeded and actually hit it out of the park, to coin a baseball related analogy!!! I wanted to take a look at different parts of that article and focus on some of the items, good and bad, that were mentioned and that I didn't think people may have been paying enough attention to. That part about the stock sales was unnecessary, but still a factual part of the article though the author's spin on it made it seem there was an implied attempt by Mr. Orlando to dump his stock in CU. I may have somewhat awkwardly tried to put forth the idea that there were other reasons for such stock sales that were not insidious or related to insider type trading, and tried to keep the comments straightforward and simple without going into a lot of complicated specifics about options, taxes filings and so on, that a lot of readers would have no idea about or understand. I was hoping to get the readers to think more for themselves about what was being said, and in your case, it looks like I succeeded, even though you apparently misinterpreted my intentions and a lot of what I was saying and trying to do. You went out and did the follow-up research to show everyone exactly what the reasoning was for Mr. Orlando's stock sales and how they were not some plan to dump his stock because of the things that are going on. That is fantastic!!! So you did take what I was saying and think and act upon it as I had hoped, and then did an even better job, albeit in a lot more technical way, than I in re-explaining to everyone why that part of the article, though basically factual, was really unnecessary and biased in the way it was presented. So in the end I succeeded as I hoped and got the message I wanted out to everyone, with your help for the more technical side of the issue!!!

Just for the record, I am not against PSA, or any of the other TPGs, if that is what you were thinking. I am also not necessarily for them either. I am for the basic collectors in this hobby who want to enjoy and have fun with it. I'm not for or against the dealers or auction houses, and I'm even not necessarily for or against the card doctors either. There is even an acceptable time and place for the card doctors and I'm sure there are some collectors who actually appreciate what they do and desire their services. What I'm against is that apparently due to greed or other unknown reasons, some of these people get involved in using these techniques and services to alter/restore/conserve (whatever you want to call it) cards to sell to others who maybe do not have the same acceptance and desire for such altered cards and are unknowingly being sold such altered cards at inflated prices due to the non-disclosure of such alterations. I'm just for seeing people in the hobby not getting ripped off or taken advantage off in what they are looking for and expecting to get when they purchase something. As far as I'm concerned, if PSA wants to accept certain otherwise undetectable alterations as okay and leave them as graded so people can include them in their PSA Registry sets that way, that is totally fine with me. I just don't like the idea that someone who is more of a hobby purist and does not want altered/doctored cards in their collection, or doesn't mind having them as long as they know they have been altered and are appropriately graded and priced, gets taken advantage of when being sold an altered card that is not appropriately graded and marked as such. That is all part of the beauty and the bane of this hobby, that there are many different types of collectors with different needs, wants, desirabilities, expectations and standards. I just don't like seeing any one part of the collecting community possibly being taken advantage of because of the way other collectors look at things or find different things acceptable to them that others don't. As long as everyone has full disclosure concerning things they are buying, it is then up to each individual collector to determine what he/she thinks something is worth to them. I just think that if we had an independent, non-profit collecting group that oversaw the hobby and set consistent standards and expectations for everyone, it would help. Maybe not a perfect solution, but certainly couldn't be much worse that it is now when the for-profit companies and people involved in the hobby are pretty much in control of everything.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by BobC

Just for the record, I am not against PSA, or any of the other TPGs, if that is what you were thinking. I am also not necessarily for them either. I am for the basic collectors in this hobby who want to enjoy and have fun with it. I'm not for or against the dealers or auction houses, and I'm even not necessarily for or against the card doctors either. There is even an acceptable time and place for the card doctors and I'm sure there are some collectors who actually appreciate what they do and desire their services. What I'm against is that apparently due to greed or other unknown reasons, some of these people get involved in using these techniques and services to alter/restore/conserve (whatever you want to call it) cards to sell to others who maybe do not have the same acceptance and desire for such altered cards and are unknowingly being sold such altered cards at inflated prices due to the non-disclosure of such alterations. I'm just for seeing people in the hobby not getting ripped off or taken advantage off in what they are looking for and expecting to get when they purchase something. As far as I'm concerned, if PSA wants to accept certain otherwise undetectable alterations as okay and leave them as graded so people can include them in their PSA Registry sets that way, that is totally fine with me. I just don't like the idea that someone who is more of a hobby purist and does not want altered/doctored cards in their collection, or doesn't mind having them as long as they know they have been altered and are appropriately graded and priced, gets taken advantage of when being sold an altered card that is not appropriately graded and marked as such. That is all part of the beauty and the bane of this hobby, that there are many different types of collectors with different needs, wants, desirabilities, expectations and standards. I just don't like seeing any one part of the collecting community possibly being taken advantage of because of the way other collectors look at things or find different things acceptable to them that others don't. As long as everyone has full disclosure concerning things they are buying, it is then up to each individual collector to determine what he/she thinks something is worth to them. I just think that if we had an independent, non-profit collecting group that oversaw the hobby and set consistent standards and expectations for everyone, it would help. Maybe not a perfect solution, but certainly couldn't be much worse that it is now when the for-profit companies and people involved in the hobby are pretty much in control of everything.

Not wanting to get the least bit involved in the Joe Orlando Stock Sale speculation/discussion...

I think the vast majority of your last paragraph (in bold) did indeed hit it out of the park. This is where the TPGs have failed us. I only take exception to the portion highlighted in Red. But for the most part, some very good perspective IMO.