Darren's Rovell take on PWCC, etc.

[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.