Poll Should GA disclose that the PSA 6.5 and SGC MIN SIZE Dimaggios are same card?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by raulus

Nor do they focus on the flaws, even for unmodified cards.

Instead the marketing is focused on: "pack fresh", "looks nicer than the grade", "creamy white borders", "shiny gloss", "razor sharp corners", etc.

And that's the way it should be. Whether we as buyers pay attention to the puffery or not is entirely up to us. But representing the seller, they're going to do their level best to whip up interest from bidders.

Or as Leon likes to say: caveat emptor.

Caveat emptor ain't the law though. The law says you can't conceal known material facts. Caveat emptor feels like yet another variation of the endless efforts people make to excuse fraud.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Caveat emptor ain't the law though. The law says you can't conceal known material facts. Caveat emptor feels like yet another variation of the endless efforts people make to excuse fraud.

Good point.

I guess the question then will always boil down to who knows what, and whether that thing is material.

In the context of a bump in grade, is that material? It seems like you don't think it is if you're moving from one number grade to another higher grade.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by raulus

Good point.

I guess the question then will always boil down to who knows what, and whether that thing is material.

In the context of a bump in grade, is that material? It seems like you don't think it is if you're moving from one number grade to another higher grade.

Generally, I would say no. In the specific context we've been discussing, I think yes, I would err on the side of disclosing. I mean if you were selling the PSA 6.5 to a close friend, and knew it had been MIN SIZED by SGC, would you really not tell him? Hard to believe. To be clear, I view this as a judgment call in light of all the points made here and in the other thread. I think it should be disclosed, not that it must be. Thus the framing of the question.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Generally, I would say no. In the specific context we've been discussing, I think yes, I would err on the side of disclosing. I mean if you were selling the PSA 6.5 to a close friend, and knew it had been MIN SIZED by SGC, would you really not tell him? Hard to believe. To be clear, I view this as a judgment call in light of all the points made here. I think it should be disclosed, not that it must be.

But you wouldn't tell him if it got bumped from a 6 to an 8?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by raulus

But you wouldn't tell him if it got bumped from a 6 to an 8?

I probably would, but that's a personal choice to be completely transparent. I would feel obligated on the MIN SIZE.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I probably would, but that's a personal choice to be completely transparent. I would feel obligated on the MIN SIZE.

A bump from a 6 to an 8 is not material but a Min Size to a grade at another TPG is? The difference in value from a 6 to 8 is significant on cards from all eras.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I have already explained why I think these are different in terms of disclosure. I am sure you disagree, but I am not going to repeat it yet again.