What will Collectors Holdings do with SGC?

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by raulus

Could also be a combo deal over time. Unplanned, but perhaps triggered by all of the knock-on effects, including some of the trepidations expressed in this thread about the future of the business.

Maybe #1 to start. Then after a year or two, switch to #3. Then another year or two down the road, #4 becomes an inevitability.

Very true. We may see several of these scenarios play out over time. I was thinking where would be after 2 to 5 years. But a lot of things can change in that period of time, and if we look out at a further timeline, there is much more uncertainty.

[UKCardGuy]

I hope, I'm wrong but I think they'll run SGC separately for a while. Next they'll find ways to add features for SGC (probably small ones). Then they'll start to raise prices

At some point we'll get something like this:

... "since we bought SGC we've been investing in new feature to benefit our customers. We feel the time is right to raise our prices so that we can continue to offer collectors the best service possible."

[puckpaul]

I dont think a 78% market share company should be able to buy a 7% player. Hope it gets rejected.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by puckpaul

I dont think a 78% market share company should be able to buy a 7% player. Hope it gets rejected.

At a glance it would seem to entrench PSA's monopoly position, and/or threaten to substantially lessen competition by taking away the one competitor who arguably could constrain PSA's pricing. These are the basic principles that inform the Merger Guidelines. No clue how the government would view it though, if they have a view at all. May not care. I guess if I were defending it I'd say the entry barriers to starting a grading service aren't that high, so PSA is also constrained by potential competition. Also deal may be under filing thresholds under Hart Scott Rodino Act making review unlikely.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

At a glance it would seem to entrench PSA's monopoly position, and/or threaten to substantially lessen competition by taking away the one competitor who arguably could constrain PSA's pricing. These are the basic principles that inform the Merger Guidelines. No clue how the government would view it though, if they have a view at all. May not care.

I wonder to what extent it makes a difference that this is a weird backwater part of the economy. We're not talking about groceries or internet service. This is a service that a tiny minority of Americans will ever use or even come into contact with, and it's definitely an optional service. Extra so for people who are part of our world, yet are loud and proud antigraders, like Jingram.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by raulus

I wonder to what extent it makes a difference that this is a weird backwater part of the economy. We're not talking about groceries or internet service. This is a service that a tiny minority of Americans will ever use or even come into contact with, and it's definitely an optional service. Extra so for people who are part of our world, yet are loud and proud antigraders, like Jingram.

Well you saw how much the government cared about rampant card doctoring, although maybe not a fair analogy. But yeah, doesn't seem like something that would be of great concern. Also deal may be under filing thresholds which makes review unlikely. Private parties can also sue of course.

[jjbond]

and I just sent SGC my largest grading order ever. Sigh....