@AFLfan said:
mccardguy1 and I have had a nice exchange via PMs. I'm looking forward to chatting with him more about his collection.. Thank you to 70ToppsFanatic and HighGradeLegends for their support. It is appreciated. I now consider this particular issue resolved.
I think we all want the same for this hobby we love!!
Step #1 would be banning Moser from ever submitting to PSA ever again, and all show
promoters to ban him, and ebay ban him.
Step #2 would be anyone who is caught allowing Moser to submit through them will be banned
as well.
We need a Judge Landis to step in at this point.
This is a great start but Moser is not the only problem. There are several big and small time guys making a healthy living off of the collector's need to have the absolute best of the best and are willing to pay for the privilege. The only way to clean up this hobby is to make it no longer profitable for these card altering criminals but that isnt going to happen because the collectors who have the money will pay for the best. It's a vicious cycle that I just do not see ending any time soon.
@AFLfan said:
mccardguy1 and I have had a nice exchange via PMs. I'm looking forward to chatting with him more about his collection.. Thank you to 70ToppsFanatic and HighGradeLegends for their support. It is appreciated. I now consider this particular issue resolved.
I think we all want the same for this hobby we love!!
Step #1 would be banning Moser from ever submitting to PSA ever again, and all show
promoters to ban him, and ebay ban him.
Step #2 would be anyone who is caught allowing Moser to submit through them will be banned
as well.
We need a Judge Landis to step in at this point.
Banning one guy (impossible anyway) does nothing.
We need a database of high quality scans, front and back, of the cards most likely to be altered.
IF Moser is guilty here he's only the tip of the iceberg.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@AFLfan said:
mccardguy1 and I have had a nice exchange via PMs. I'm looking forward to chatting with him more about his collection.. Thank you to 70ToppsFanatic and HighGradeLegends for their support. It is appreciated. I now consider this particular issue resolved.
I’m certain you don’t care nor should you. But I do enjoy how you moderate these forums. Thanks. I only hope that a few years removed from now I can say the same to your successor.
@LOTSOS... Thank you. I'm trying, anyway. I've been a member of several different forums, so I've seen different ways things can be done. Some work better than others. I think that most important thing is that people are respectful in their postings. That doesn't mean that everyone has to agree with everything, it just means they need to disagree civilly.
And who knows, maybe I will be moderating this thing forever. I don't see myself going anywhere anytime soon, at least.
Todd Tobias - Grateful Collector - I focus on autographed American Football League sets, Fleer & Topps, 1960-1969, and lacrosse cards.
@AFLfan said:
mccardguy1 and I have had a nice exchange via PMs. I'm looking forward to chatting with him more about his collection.. Thank you to 70ToppsFanatic and HighGradeLegends for their support. It is appreciated. I now consider this particular issue resolved.
I’m certain you don’t care nor should you. But I do enjoy how you moderate these forums. Thanks. I only hope that a few years removed from now I can say the same to your successor.
+1
Todd has always been top notch.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
@AFLfan said:
mccardguy1 and I have had a nice exchange via PMs. I'm looking forward to chatting with him more about his collection.. Thank you to 70ToppsFanatic and HighGradeLegends for their support. It is appreciated. I now consider this particular issue resolved.
I’m certain you don’t care nor should you. But I do enjoy how you moderate these forums. Thanks. I only hope that a few years removed from now I can say the same to your successor.
+1
Todd has always been top notch.
I agree Tim.
Todd has gone way beyond the call of duty to magnanimously handle rhetoric the likes that I haven't seen here in many, many years.
He's emblematically representing the leadership that only wants the best for PSA collectors.
I am 100% in the camp that PSA obviously has nothing to do with these con men trying to pass alter cards into holders. I mean dang this would be the #1 way to sink your company in the TPG industry.
I would love to see someone though make up some flyers to pass out at the nationals with the names, pics and a quick summary of the scams that the top 8 or so known players in this current round of "altercations". Just imagine how much fun it would be if say Gary Moser shows up to nationals and had multiple people walking up to him asking for him to autograph said flyer.
@AFLfan said:
mccardguy1 and I have had a nice exchange via PMs. I'm looking forward to chatting with him more about his collection.. Thank you to 70ToppsFanatic and HighGradeLegends for their support. It is appreciated. I now consider this particular issue resolved.
I think we all want the same for this hobby we love!!
Step #1 would be banning Moser from ever submitting to PSA ever again, and all show
promoters to ban him, and ebay ban him.
Step #2 would be anyone who is caught allowing Moser to submit through them will be banned
as well.
We need a Judge Landis to step in at this point.
This is a great start but Moser is not the only problem. There are several big and small time guys making a healthy living off of the collector's need to have the absolute best of the best and are willing to pay for the privilege. The only way to clean up this hobby is to make it no longer profitable for these card altering criminals but that isnt going to happen because the collectors who have the money will pay for the best. It's a vicious cycle that I just do not see ending any time soon.
Sadly, I agree with this.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
I don't have time to put my full thoughts down in a way that isn’t likely to get the thread closed, but I'll just say that this is not the attitude or direction that I had hoped PSA would adopt in addressing this mess. I do not think “hey we’re going to miss some, and if you don’t like it don’t buy our cards” is a very good response to the scale and scope of what’s been discovered so far. Nobody, including me, thinks PSA or anyone else is perfect or won’t make mistakes, but I do expect them to be accountable for their mistakes, not just shrug them off in this way.
"When I first came upon PSA and Collectors Universe, I didn't become a supporter because I thought the system was perfect or because I agreed with every grade I saw. In fact, I can remember writing a letter to PSA, sharing my concerns about grading at the time. I became a supporter because it was clear the market was so much better with third-party authentication and grading than without it.
Today, I'm the president and CEO of PSA's parent company and I don't agree with every card, autograph or bat grade issued ... and that's OK. As a collector, I don't have to. Why? Because I don't have to buy it. We have choices, which is part of what makes collecting so much fun. As an individual, I am entitled to an opinion too and it's OK if my personal standard differs from a third-party service. Their job isn't to confirm my opinion; it's to render their own.
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 of making it better. Their expectation of human-based opinion services is simply unattainable. There are realities and limitations to what any third-party service can do.
If it were up to them, there would be no umpires in baseball either, because these men don't get every ball and strike call correct. Card and coin graders, like umpires, must make decisions repeatedly in a relatively short period of time. They do the best job they can, but like all people, they are not perfect. They can only judge what they see in front of them and interpret what their eyes are observing. Grading is not conducted in a science lab. It is simply humans looking at collectibles.
The train left the station a long time ago. You can choose to get on board and take the ride, which can occasionally get bumpy along the way, or get left behind with delusions that somehow returning to the Wild West of the 1980s is better than what collectors have today. If you prefer to collect raw cards, that's OK. There are many ways to enjoy our wonderful hobby.
In the meantime, the beat goes on. After 20 years at the company and a lifetime in this hobby, there are a few things I know. There will always be challenges that our hobby will have to face and, unfortunately, there will also be those who choose to spread fear and ignorance. For those of us who love the hobby, there will always be opportunities to improve it by engaging in civil discourse.
More importantly, third-party authentication and grading is here to stay. It makes the hobby better, even though no system will ever be perfect.
Never get cheated,
Joe Orlando
Joe Orlando
President & CEO
Collectors Universe, Inc"
I will only say that I don’t think Mr. Orlando strikes the right tone, using words like “delusion” and “ignorance.” Not the best p.r. work I’ve ever seen.
He probably should of left out the "Never get cheated" this time. I feel like I just got a ticket and the cop told me to have a nice day before he drove off.
My suggestion is that the TPGs purchase a visual inspection machine (they have existed for at least 20 years). These can measure cards, I would assume either at a certain card value level or service level.
These machines are EXTREMELY accurate to .001 of an inch and can print out the results of the measurements.
You could then see exactly how big the card was, how square it was, and if the sides are perfectly parallel to each other. I would think on many cards, centering could also be measured.
This, of course wouldn't solve all the problems, but it would be a step in the right direction.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@JoeBanzai said:
My suggestion is that the TPGs purchase a visual inspection machine (they have existed for at least 20 years). These can measure cards, I would assume either at a certain card value level or service level.
These machines are EXTREMELY accurate to .001 of an inch and can print out the results of the measurements.
You could then see exactly how big the card was, how square it was, and if the sides are perfectly parallel to each other. I would think on many cards, centering could also be measured.
This, of course wouldn't solve all the problems, but it would be a step in the right direction.
I completely agree with this. There are several aspects of the grading process that should not be automated or handled by a machine, but sizing is not one of them. There are readily available systems to measure things very accurately and consistently and I think they should be used in this case.
@JoeBanzai said:
My suggestion is that the TPGs purchase a visual inspection machine (they have existed for at least 20 years). These can measure cards, I would assume either at a certain card value level or service level.
These machines are EXTREMELY accurate to .001 of an inch and can print out the results of the measurements.
You could then see exactly how big the card was, how square it was, and if the sides are perfectly parallel to each other. I would think on many cards, centering could also be measured.
This, of course wouldn't solve all the problems, but it would be a step in the right direction.
Honestly, none of the measurements you’re citing here are considered important by PSA. Extreme accuracy of measurement is not needed when manufacturing specifications of cards are not exact. Squareness, sides being parallel, these things happen to be important to me, but we’ve seen time and again that they aren’t that important to PSA.
PSA does pretty well at measuring centering and detecting undersized cards. The problem is plenty of legit cards are the same size as trimmed cards. Detecting trimming is much more than measurements.
“human-based opinion is simply unattainable...”. OK, but what about the expertise and experience that you also promote to support your service? What about the “Professional” in PSA? What about those really “skinny” 1953 Parkies?
Finally, is making a statement in such an Op/Ed fashion meant to provide comfort or create confusion?
@PaulMaul I agree that extreme accuracy of measurement is not critical. I think consistency is much more important. When someone can send in a card and have it come back with a sizing issue, then send it in a second or third time and have it slabbed that is very inconsistent. I also agree that trimmed cards can sometimes fall into the acceptable size range for an issue so measuring will not always ensure an unaltered card. I think anything within reason that can be done to improve the process sounds like a good idea to me.
I understand that some people may not care for Joe's latest editorial, but my willingness to allow civil debate/discussion does not include blasting the individual. I have deleted one comment already and will shut down the thread if necessary.
Thanks, Todd
Todd Tobias - Grateful Collector - I focus on autographed American Football League sets, Fleer & Topps, 1960-1969, and lacrosse cards.
The train left the station a long time ago. You can choose to get on board and take the ride, which can occasionally get bumpy along the way, or get left behind with delusions that somehow returning to the Wild West of the 1980s is better than what collectors have today. If you prefer to collect raw cards, that's OK. There are many ways to enjoy our wonderful hobby.
Never get cheated,
Joe Orlando
I'm definitely on a ride right now, and the bumpiness is whether or not in some cases I have paid up to five figures for cards that have been altered and slabbed as 8's and 9's.
I feel like that because I don't accept these altered cards in TPG holders as bumps along the way, I've been told I'm a delusional hater. Not cool. What exactly is the point then of having grading guidelines?
@AFLfan said:
I understand that some people may not care for Joe's latest editorial, but my willingness to allow civil debate/discussion does not include blasting the individual. I have deleted one comment already and will shut down the thread if necessary.
Thanks, Todd
Thanks AFL for keeping this open, but please understand that it is simply impossible for Joe to separate his collector side from his CEO of PSA side. His editorial is supposedly as a collector and it is evident that his apparent and real conflict in interest does not allow him to address the views of collectors/hobbyists appropriately, IMO.
@rachelstone said:
I wonder if there is a way to mark a card that has been rejected before returning it, maybe with an invisible ink or some other way.
One thing these scambags seem to do is keep resubmitting cards until they slip through. Destroying their chance to resubmit and in fact branding that card as ungradeable would likely cut into scammers pockets so badly that only the very best might even try it. As it sits, there is no penalty for attempting to pass an altered card.
I think that most honest hobbyists would agree to allow this as a condition of submission. I personally have had a few cards returned ungraded and actually marked them myself so as to avoid accidentally resubmitting or selling them.
I've read reports by some of the internet sleuths out there that claim to have reconstructed large submissions that had insanely high failure rates, 20, 30, even 40% or more cards in a submission rejected. It's not hard to understand that those same cards will be in a future submission, allowing the scammers to recoup their investment sooner or later.
As long as scamming collectors by fooling PSA is profitable, it will continue to be done. By tagging trimmed cards and not allowing them to be resubmitted, PSA increases the risk taken by those who are tempted to try to bump a card through alterations. Cracking a slab to alter a card and being caught by PSA will then carry a penalty.
One woman's thoughts....
It would be nice for collectors, but marking or confiscating bad cards just won’t fly. You’re basically asking PSA’s opinion on your card and seeking their stamp of approval. They are free to withhold that, but they have no legal right to confiscate or deface your card in the process. An altered card isn’t illegal to own, they just don’t have any right or basis to take such actions.
I believe that PSA's statement was tone deaf. At what point is PSA going to accept some responsibility for the mess that the hobby finds itself in today? I think we'd all appreciate hearing something along the lines of "Sorry. We've made mistakes and we're working to do better in the future." The customer base needs some reassurances for the future.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
@AFLfan said:
I understand that some people may not care for Joe's latest editorial, but my willingness to allow civil debate/discussion does not include blasting the individual. I have deleted one comment already and will shut down the thread if necessary.
Thanks, Todd
Thanks Todd.
I certainly see a lot of people complaining and not offering any solutions. I don't see why I would get "blasted"?
PaulMaul, I think you misunderstood what I was getting at. I worked with a "View Precis" machine. Without getting into a long technical explanation, they can very quickly do these measurements and determine how close a card is to the desired size. If these measurements were in a database of information, you could look it up and see how short it was, or if the card was actually rectangular. If this information was used in conjunction with photographic records, you might even be able to prove a card has been trimmed, if it was cracked out cut and resubmitted.
One way to detect trimming would be that if both sides were not parallel, a paper cutter would usually cut both sides so that they were very close to being parallel.
I am not suggesting this be done on every card, but just telling people to "look closer" or "try harder" is going to have a limited effect.
@AFLfan said:
I understand that some people may not care for Joe's latest editorial, but my willingness to allow civil debate/discussion does not include blasting the individual. I have deleted one comment already and will shut down the thread if necessary.
Thanks, Todd
Thanks AFL for keeping this open, but please understand that it is simply impossible for Joe to separate his collector side from his CEO of PSA side. His editorial is supposedly as a collector and it is evident that his apparent and real conflict in interest does not allow him to address the views of collectors/hobbyists appropriately, IMO.
I just don't understand what you mean here. It just happens that I spent 24 years working at a fairly high tech circuit board manufacturer and I used some equipment that I thought would possibly help with this issue.
I am only trying to offer solutions. Blaming PWCC, Moser and TPGs isn't going to get us anywhere.
By the way, I am a small business owner, so I guess I AM a CEO. LOL
@rachelstone said:
I wonder if there is a way to mark a card that has been rejected before returning it, maybe with an invisible ink or some other way.
One thing these scambags seem to do is keep resubmitting cards until they slip through. Destroying their chance to resubmit and in fact branding that card as ungradeable would likely cut into scammers pockets so badly that only the very best might even try it. As it sits, there is no penalty for attempting to pass an altered card.
I think that most honest hobbyists would agree to allow this as a condition of submission. I personally have had a few cards returned ungraded and actually marked them myself so as to avoid accidentally resubmitting or selling them.
I've read reports by some of the internet sleuths out there that claim to have reconstructed large submissions that had insanely high failure rates, 20, 30, even 40% or more cards in a submission rejected. It's not hard to understand that those same cards will be in a future submission, allowing the scammers to recoup their investment sooner or later.
As long as scamming collectors by fooling PSA is profitable, it will continue to be done. By tagging trimmed cards and not allowing them to be resubmitted, PSA increases the risk taken by those who are tempted to try to bump a card through alterations. Cracking a slab to alter a card and being caught by PSA will then carry a penalty.
One woman's thoughts....
It would be nice for collectors, but marking or confiscating bad cards just won’t fly. You’re basically asking PSA’s opinion on your card and seeking their stamp of approval. They are free to withhold that, but they have no legal right to confiscate or deface your card in the process. An altered card isn’t illegal to own, they just don’t have any right or basis to take such actions.
I agree that marking the cards with invisible "ink" would not be a great idea. I think confiscating would be worse.
Offering solutions is a good idea though.
Sorry if I offended anyone in any way, that was not my intention.
Have fun collecting!
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
Wow. To use the umpire analogy - MLB has invested in technology to help umpires call balls and strikes and is experimenting with this in the Atlantic League. I would much rather have had Mr. Orlando tell us what PSA has in the pipeline and what they are investing in improvement than to complain about us having fear that some of our favorite cards in PSA holders have been permanently altered and ruined.
Complaining about the complainers does not move the discussion forward. Talking about substantive ways to get better does.
@AFLfan said:
I understand that some people may not care for Joe's latest editorial, but my willingness to allow civil debate/discussion does not include blasting the individual. I have deleted one comment already and will shut down the thread if necessary.
Thanks, Todd
Thanks Todd.
I certainly see a lot of people complaining and not offering any solutions. I don't see why I would get "blasted"?
PaulMaul, I think you misunderstood what I was getting at. I worked with a "View Precis" machine. Without getting into a long technical explanation, they can very quickly do these measurements and determine how close a card is to the desired size. If these measurements were in a database of information, you could look it up and see how short it was, or if the card was actually rectangular. If this information was used in conjunction with photographic records, you might even be able to prove a card has been trimmed, if it was cracked out cut and resubmitted.
One way to detect trimming would be that if both sides were not parallel, a paper cutter would usually cut both sides so that they were very close to being parallel.
I am not suggesting this be done on every card, but just telling people to "look closer" or "try harder" is going to have a limited effect.
@AFLfan said:
I understand that some people may not care for Joe's latest editorial, but my willingness to allow civil debate/discussion does not include blasting the individual. I have deleted one comment already and will shut down the thread if necessary.
Thanks, Todd
Thanks AFL for keeping this open, but please understand that it is simply impossible for Joe to separate his collector side from his CEO of PSA side. His editorial is supposedly as a collector and it is evident that his apparent and real conflict in interest does not allow him to address the views of collectors/hobbyists appropriately, IMO.
I just don't understand what you mean here. It just happens that I spent 24 years working at a fairly high tech circuit board manufacturer and I used some equipment that I thought would possibly help with this issue.
I am only trying to offer solutions. Blaming PWCC, Moser and TPGs isn't going to get us anywhere.
By the way, I am a small business owner, so I guess I AM a CEO. LOL
@rachelstone said:
I wonder if there is a way to mark a card that has been rejected before returning it, maybe with an invisible ink or some other way.
One thing these scambags seem to do is keep resubmitting cards until they slip through. Destroying their chance to resubmit and in fact branding that card as ungradeable would likely cut into scammers pockets so badly that only the very best might even try it. As it sits, there is no penalty for attempting to pass an altered card.
I think that most honest hobbyists would agree to allow this as a condition of submission. I personally have had a few cards returned ungraded and actually marked them myself so as to avoid accidentally resubmitting or selling them.
I've read reports by some of the internet sleuths out there that claim to have reconstructed large submissions that had insanely high failure rates, 20, 30, even 40% or more cards in a submission rejected. It's not hard to understand that those same cards will be in a future submission, allowing the scammers to recoup their investment sooner or later.
As long as scamming collectors by fooling PSA is profitable, it will continue to be done. By tagging trimmed cards and not allowing them to be resubmitted, PSA increases the risk taken by those who are tempted to try to bump a card through alterations. Cracking a slab to alter a card and being caught by PSA will then carry a penalty.
One woman's thoughts....
It would be nice for collectors, but marking or confiscating bad cards just won’t fly. You’re basically asking PSA’s opinion on your card and seeking their stamp of approval. They are free to withhold that, but they have no legal right to confiscate or deface your card in the process. An altered card isn’t illegal to own, they just don’t have any right or basis to take such actions.
I agree that marking the cards with invisible "ink" would not be a great idea. I think confiscating would be worse.
Offering solutions is a good idea though.
Sorry if I offended anyone in any way, that was not my intention.
@AFLfan said:
I understand that some people may not care for Joe's latest editorial, but my willingness to allow civil debate/discussion does not include blasting the individual. I have deleted one comment already and will shut down the thread if necessary.
Thanks, Todd
Thanks Todd.
I certainly see a lot of people complaining and not offering any solutions. I don't see why I would get "blasted"?
PaulMaul, I think you misunderstood what I was getting at. I worked with a "View Precis" machine. Without getting into a long technical explanation, they can very quickly do these measurements and determine how close a card is to the desired size. If these measurements were in a database of information, you could look it up and see how short it was, or if the card was actually rectangular. If this information was used in conjunction with photographic records, you might even be able to prove a card has been trimmed, if it was cracked out cut and resubmitted.
One way to detect trimming would be that if both sides were not parallel, a paper cutter would usually cut both sides so that they were very close to being parallel.
I am not suggesting this be done on every card, but just telling people to "look closer" or "try harder" is going to have a limited effect.
@AFLfan said:
I understand that some people may not care for Joe's latest editorial, but my willingness to allow civil debate/discussion does not include blasting the individual. I have deleted one comment already and will shut down the thread if necessary.
Thanks, Todd
Thanks AFL for keeping this open, but please understand that it is simply impossible for Joe to separate his collector side from his CEO of PSA side. His editorial is supposedly as a collector and it is evident that his apparent and real conflict in interest does not allow him to address the views of collectors/hobbyists appropriately, IMO.
I just don't understand what you mean here. It just happens that I spent 24 years working at a fairly high tech circuit board manufacturer and I used some equipment that I thought would possibly help with this issue.
I am only trying to offer solutions. Blaming PWCC, Moser and TPGs isn't going to get us anywhere.
By the way, I am a small business owner, so I guess I AM a CEO. LOL
@rachelstone said:
I wonder if there is a way to mark a card that has been rejected before returning it, maybe with an invisible ink or some other way.
One thing these scambags seem to do is keep resubmitting cards until they slip through. Destroying their chance to resubmit and in fact branding that card as ungradeable would likely cut into scammers pockets so badly that only the very best might even try it. As it sits, there is no penalty for attempting to pass an altered card.
I think that most honest hobbyists would agree to allow this as a condition of submission. I personally have had a few cards returned ungraded and actually marked them myself so as to avoid accidentally resubmitting or selling them.
I've read reports by some of the internet sleuths out there that claim to have reconstructed large submissions that had insanely high failure rates, 20, 30, even 40% or more cards in a submission rejected. It's not hard to understand that those same cards will be in a future submission, allowing the scammers to recoup their investment sooner or later.
As long as scamming collectors by fooling PSA is profitable, it will continue to be done. By tagging trimmed cards and not allowing them to be resubmitted, PSA increases the risk taken by those who are tempted to try to bump a card through alterations. Cracking a slab to alter a card and being caught by PSA will then carry a penalty.
One woman's thoughts....
It would be nice for collectors, but marking or confiscating bad cards just won’t fly. You’re basically asking PSA’s opinion on your card and seeking their stamp of approval. They are free to withhold that, but they have no legal right to confiscate or deface your card in the process. An altered card isn’t illegal to own, they just don’t have any right or basis to take such actions.
I agree that marking the cards with invisible "ink" would not be a great idea. I think confiscating would be worse.
Offering solutions is a good idea though.
Sorry if I offended anyone in any way, that was not my intention.
Have fun collecting!
He was talking about Joe Orlando.
OH! Now I get it! LMFAO
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@AFLfan said:
I understand that some people may not care for Joe's latest editorial, but my willingness to allow civil debate/discussion does not include blasting the individual. I have deleted one comment already and will shut down the thread if necessary.
Thanks, Todd
Thanks Todd.
I certainly see a lot of people complaining and not offering any solutions. I don't see why I would get "blasted"?
PaulMaul, I think you misunderstood what I was getting at. I worked with a "View Precis" machine. Without getting into a long technical explanation, they can very quickly do these measurements and determine how close a card is to the desired size. If these measurements were in a database of information, you could look it up and see how short it was, or if the card was actually rectangular. If this information was used in conjunction with photographic records, you might even be able to prove a card has been trimmed, if it was cracked out cut and resubmitted.
One way to detect trimming would be that if both sides were not parallel, a paper cutter would usually cut both sides so that they were very close to being parallel.
I am not suggesting this be done on every card, but just telling people to "look closer" or "try harder" is going to have a limited effect.
@AFLfan said:
I understand that some people may not care for Joe's latest editorial, but my willingness to allow civil debate/discussion does not include blasting the individual. I have deleted one comment already and will shut down the thread if necessary.
Thanks, Todd
Thanks AFL for keeping this open, but please understand that it is simply impossible for Joe to separate his collector side from his CEO of PSA side. His editorial is supposedly as a collector and it is evident that his apparent and real conflict in interest does not allow him to address the views of collectors/hobbyists appropriately, IMO.
I just don't understand what you mean here. It just happens that I spent 24 years working at a fairly high tech circuit board manufacturer and I used some equipment that I thought would possibly help with this issue.
I am only trying to offer solutions. Blaming PWCC, Moser and TPGs isn't going to get us anywhere.
By the way, I am a small business owner, so I guess I AM a CEO. LOL
@rachelstone said:
I wonder if there is a way to mark a card that has been rejected before returning it, maybe with an invisible ink or some other way.
One thing these scambags seem to do is keep resubmitting cards until they slip through. Destroying their chance to resubmit and in fact branding that card as ungradeable would likely cut into scammers pockets so badly that only the very best might even try it. As it sits, there is no penalty for attempting to pass an altered card.
I think that most honest hobbyists would agree to allow this as a condition of submission. I personally have had a few cards returned ungraded and actually marked them myself so as to avoid accidentally resubmitting or selling them.
I've read reports by some of the internet sleuths out there that claim to have reconstructed large submissions that had insanely high failure rates, 20, 30, even 40% or more cards in a submission rejected. It's not hard to understand that those same cards will be in a future submission, allowing the scammers to recoup their investment sooner or later.
As long as scamming collectors by fooling PSA is profitable, it will continue to be done. By tagging trimmed cards and not allowing them to be resubmitted, PSA increases the risk taken by those who are tempted to try to bump a card through alterations. Cracking a slab to alter a card and being caught by PSA will then carry a penalty.
One woman's thoughts....
It would be nice for collectors, but marking or confiscating bad cards just won’t fly. You’re basically asking PSA’s opinion on your card and seeking their stamp of approval. They are free to withhold that, but they have no legal right to confiscate or deface your card in the process. An altered card isn’t illegal to own, they just don’t have any right or basis to take such actions.
I agree that marking the cards with invisible "ink" would not be a great idea. I think confiscating would be worse.
Offering solutions is a good idea though.
Sorry if I offended anyone in any way, that was not my intention.
Have fun collecting!
He was talking about Joe Orlando.
OH! Now I get it! LMFAO
I think graygator posted a statement issued by Joe Orlando. I've always found your posts to be very intelligent. I wish I could say the same about myself, but I know people view me as the forum clown. I've accepted that.
I think graygator posted a statement issued by Joe Orlando. I've always found your posts to be very intelligent. I wish I could say the same about myself, but I know people view me as the forum clown. I've accepted that.
I will admit, I had my doubts about you, BUT I kept my mouth shut and noticed that while I don't always "get" your humor. You are not the forum clown in my mind.
But don't quit your day job. ;-)
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
I think graygator posted a statement issued by Joe Orlando. I've always found your posts to be very intelligent. I wish I could say the same about myself, but I know people view me as the forum clown. I've accepted that.
I will admit, I had my doubts about you, BUT I kept my mouth shut and noticed that while I don't always "get" your humor. You are not the forum clown in my mind.
Given his most recent statement, here is an interesting retrospective view that has somehow vanished from the PSA article archives:
Taking My Hacks: Whack Jobs – The Issue of Card Trimming
Joe Orlando - January 20, 2004
Trimming. To card collectors around the globe, this is treated like a four-letter word -- the really bad kind. No, I am not talking about what should be done to my Aunt Gertrude's mustache or to the back of one of my best friends (just kidding, I don't have an Aunt Gertrude). I am talking about card doctoring.
What is trimming exactly?
Well, in a nutshell, it's what some people do in order to enhance the edges or corners on a card. This, in turn, will enhance the overall grade of the card. With the prices realized for ultra high-end cards, it's no wonder that some people lower themselves to try this. These guys smell money like a Great White smells blood.
Back in the day, trimming was a bit more crude. Despite what many would consider obvious today, the old school brand of trimming did work for a while before the advent of grading. I can still remember seeing these severely whacked cards at card shows and commenting to a dealer, "Are there such things as 1954 Topps minis?" After PSA really caught on by the mid-1990s, many of the more prominent card doctors vanished.
Today, there are those who are still trying it. Some of them are butchers and some of them are master artists, but it doesn't, in any way, change the approach of PSA graders. The tools have changed in some cases and the skill level of the whackers has heightened but so has the awareness of our experts -- that's what they are paid to do -- and that's why people have so much faith in the PSA process.
The biggest point of confusion with trimming comes when a collector notices a card that is slightly undersized -- even in the PSA holder. I hear the cries, "That card looks small, it must be trimmed -- trimmed I say!" Nothing could be further from the truth. Is size one factor that may tip off a grader that a card could be altered? Of course -- but size alone, in this case, does not matter.
I can remember opening vending cases from the early 1970s where the cards came in a variety of sizes. Pre-war cards, especially, were cut very inconsistently. To most, the size differences are subtle but when placed in a holder, the card's size is more apparent. My point here is simple. Cards can come in different sizes straight from the factory -- straight out of the pack -- straight from a vending case. Experienced hobbyists know this but many do not.
There are more important questions when attempting to spot trimming.
Do the corners flare out or dive in unnaturally?
Is there solid consistency to the stock and/or grain of the card?
Is the cut consistent with the year or issue?
Is the card cut from a sheet?
Do the edges possess an unorthodox waviness?
These factors, amongst other things, enter into the mind of each grader as a card is evaluated and graded. Does the size matter too? Sure it does, but that is not the most important factor that a grader considers. Technically, you could have an oversized card that is trimmed or a severely undersized card that is unaltered. These are extreme cases but actually plausible scenarios.
Just as in the everyday world of criminal justice, it's up to the authorities to keep up with or stay a step ahead of the criminals in order to prevent crime and catch them. As the world's sportscard grading authority, we take the same approach and will accept nothing less from our staff.
The Bullet needs to be chewed on by someone and that bullet is every single card that has been identified as altered should be systematically DESTROYED. That’s the bottom line, this complete nonsense of labeling a flip “Altered or Authentic” is as laughable as 90% of the Pop Reports, slabs can and do get cracked out and resubbed MULTIPLE times. That is the only way to fix this mess the way I see it. That being said as far as who is responsible and who should bite said bullet is a different story, I don’t have enough knowledge to know who is 100% guilty or involved or not.
All I can say is "Wow" I wish Mr. Orlando and PSA the best with their future endeavors. This little fish is getting out of the pond. Way to blame the guys doing the work for you.Your company should have been doing this work after the first few of these tampered with cards came to light.
I’m wondering if PSA will take Q & A’s at the PSA luncheon at the National. I can probably answer that now for everyone, NO! When will PSA finally discuss the giant elephant in the room? I’m not the smartest guy, but I know it’s extremely hard the sweep an elephant under the rug. I’m 100% invested in PSA, plus I’m stock holder so I want answers. I truly feel like the kid outside the Chicago court house as Joe Jackson walks by after hearing the White Sox fixed the WS. “Say it ain’t so Joe’”. Baseball took a huge hit after the Black Sox scandal, but thank God there was a guy named Babe Ruth who resuscitated the game of baseball. Is there a Babe Ruth out there to save TPG?
"EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE WALL" - JACKIE MOON
I have to admit, I was really disappointed by the tone of this letter from Joe. I love PSA, I always have, I think it's the reason many of us are here. They've done a lot to enhance the ways I enjoy the hobby (Registry, etc). I've defended them throughout this process to many people, but this just seems tone-deaf.
This year marks the 20th year that I've been submitting cards to them, ever since I was just a teenager. Not once along the way have I questioned giving them my business, but this certainly makes me think PSA isn't necessarily on my team. I was fine with some lack of transparency given that this is a fluid situation and one that probably involves the authorities, but this just isn't cool.
As I read again I truly hope the train left the station and bumpy road are not foreshadowing some sort of conservation vs. alteration change in PSAs definition of what they will grade.
This whole bazaar take by Joe Orlando has me more angry than I was before about this fiasco. My ire was almost exclusively directed at PWCC and the card doctors. I was waiting for PSA’s next move and trusting that this was being taken seriously. They asked for patience and then we get this.
I really feel for the known victims of this fraud. I hope for the rest of us that the hard work of the Blowout Boys do not turn up any of our cards. It does not seem like those who make the most $ off our love of this hobby respect us. It seems more like they think we are fools.
“Never get cheated” as a sign off. Because of course if you did it is just a bump in the road and you are ignorant to complain.
@shagrotn77 said:
I believe that PSA's statement was tone deaf. At what point is PSA going to accept some responsibility for the mess that the hobby finds itself in today? I think we'd all appreciate hearing something along the lines of "Sorry. We've made mistakes and we're working to do better in the future." The customer base needs some reassurances for the future.
Comments
This is a great start but Moser is not the only problem. There are several big and small time guys making a healthy living off of the collector's need to have the absolute best of the best and are willing to pay for the privilege. The only way to clean up this hobby is to make it no longer profitable for these card altering criminals but that isnt going to happen because the collectors who have the money will pay for the best. It's a vicious cycle that I just do not see ending any time soon.
Banning one guy (impossible anyway) does nothing.
We need a database of high quality scans, front and back, of the cards most likely to be altered.
IF Moser is guilty here he's only the tip of the iceberg.
I’m certain you don’t care nor should you. But I do enjoy how you moderate these forums. Thanks. I only hope that a few years removed from now I can say the same to your successor.
Kevin
@LOTSOS... Thank you. I'm trying, anyway. I've been a member of several different forums, so I've seen different ways things can be done. Some work better than others. I think that most important thing is that people are respectful in their postings. That doesn't mean that everyone has to agree with everything, it just means they need to disagree civilly.
And who knows, maybe I will be moderating this thing forever. I don't see myself going anywhere anytime soon, at least.
+1
Todd has always been top notch.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I agree Tim.
Todd has gone way beyond the call of duty to magnanimously handle rhetoric the likes that I haven't seen here in many, many years.
He's emblematically representing the leadership that only wants the best for PSA collectors.
Hey Todd, keep up the good work sir!
I am 100% in the camp that PSA obviously has nothing to do with these con men trying to pass alter cards into holders. I mean dang this would be the #1 way to sink your company in the TPG industry.
I would love to see someone though make up some flyers to pass out at the nationals with the names, pics and a quick summary of the scams that the top 8 or so known players in this current round of "altercations". Just imagine how much fun it would be if say Gary Moser shows up to nationals and had multiple people walking up to him asking for him to autograph said flyer.
Sadly, I agree with this.
I don't have time to put my full thoughts down in a way that isn’t likely to get the thread closed, but I'll just say that this is not the attitude or direction that I had hoped PSA would adopt in addressing this mess. I do not think “hey we’re going to miss some, and if you don’t like it don’t buy our cards” is a very good response to the scale and scope of what’s been discovered so far. Nobody, including me, thinks PSA or anyone else is perfect or won’t make mistakes, but I do expect them to be accountable for their mistakes, not just shrug them off in this way.
https://psacard.com/articles/articleview/9922/taking-my-hacks-collectors-universe-retrospective
"When I first came upon PSA and Collectors Universe, I didn't become a supporter because I thought the system was perfect or because I agreed with every grade I saw. In fact, I can remember writing a letter to PSA, sharing my concerns about grading at the time. I became a supporter because it was clear the market was so much better with third-party authentication and grading than without it.
Today, I'm the president and CEO of PSA's parent company and I don't agree with every card, autograph or bat grade issued ... and that's OK. As a collector, I don't have to. Why? Because I don't have to buy it. We have choices, which is part of what makes collecting so much fun. As an individual, I am entitled to an opinion too and it's OK if my personal standard differs from a third-party service. Their job isn't to confirm my opinion; it's to render their own.
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 of making it better. Their expectation of human-based opinion services is simply unattainable. There are realities and limitations to what any third-party service can do.
If it were up to them, there would be no umpires in baseball either, because these men don't get every ball and strike call correct. Card and coin graders, like umpires, must make decisions repeatedly in a relatively short period of time. They do the best job they can, but like all people, they are not perfect. They can only judge what they see in front of them and interpret what their eyes are observing. Grading is not conducted in a science lab. It is simply humans looking at collectibles.
The train left the station a long time ago. You can choose to get on board and take the ride, which can occasionally get bumpy along the way, or get left behind with delusions that somehow returning to the Wild West of the 1980s is better than what collectors have today. If you prefer to collect raw cards, that's OK. There are many ways to enjoy our wonderful hobby.
In the meantime, the beat goes on. After 20 years at the company and a lifetime in this hobby, there are a few things I know. There will always be challenges that our hobby will have to face and, unfortunately, there will also be those who choose to spread fear and ignorance. For those of us who love the hobby, there will always be opportunities to improve it by engaging in civil discourse.
More importantly, third-party authentication and grading is here to stay. It makes the hobby better, even though no system will ever be perfect.
Never get cheated,
Joe Orlando
Joe Orlando
President & CEO
Collectors Universe, Inc"
I will only say that I don’t think Mr. Orlando strikes the right tone, using words like “delusion” and “ignorance.” Not the best p.r. work I’ve ever seen.
Yaz Master Set
#1 Gino Cappelletti master set
#1 John Hannah master set
Also collecting Andre Tippett, Patriots Greats' RCs, 1964 Venezuelan Topps, 1974 Topps Red Sox
He probably should of left out the "Never get cheated" this time. I feel like I just got a ticket and the cop told me to have a nice day before he drove off.
My suggestion is that the TPGs purchase a visual inspection machine (they have existed for at least 20 years). These can measure cards, I would assume either at a certain card value level or service level.
These machines are EXTREMELY accurate to .001 of an inch and can print out the results of the measurements.
You could then see exactly how big the card was, how square it was, and if the sides are perfectly parallel to each other. I would think on many cards, centering could also be measured.
This, of course wouldn't solve all the problems, but it would be a step in the right direction.
I completely agree with this. There are several aspects of the grading process that should not be automated or handled by a machine, but sizing is not one of them. There are readily available systems to measure things very accurately and consistently and I think they should be used in this case.
Kris
My 1971 Topps adventure - Davis Men in Black
Honestly, none of the measurements you’re citing here are considered important by PSA. Extreme accuracy of measurement is not needed when manufacturing specifications of cards are not exact. Squareness, sides being parallel, these things happen to be important to me, but we’ve seen time and again that they aren’t that important to PSA.
PSA does pretty well at measuring centering and detecting undersized cards. The problem is plenty of legit cards are the same size as trimmed cards. Detecting trimming is much more than measurements.
“human-based opinion is simply unattainable...”. OK, but what about the expertise and experience that you also promote to support your service? What about the “Professional” in PSA? What about those really “skinny” 1953 Parkies?
Finally, is making a statement in such an Op/Ed fashion meant to provide comfort or create confusion?
@PaulMaul I agree that extreme accuracy of measurement is not critical. I think consistency is much more important. When someone can send in a card and have it come back with a sizing issue, then send it in a second or third time and have it slabbed that is very inconsistent. I also agree that trimmed cards can sometimes fall into the acceptable size range for an issue so measuring will not always ensure an unaltered card. I think anything within reason that can be done to improve the process sounds like a good idea to me.
Kris
My 1971 Topps adventure - Davis Men in Black
I understand that some people may not care for Joe's latest editorial, but my willingness to allow civil debate/discussion does not include blasting the individual. I have deleted one comment already and will shut down the thread if necessary.
Thanks, Todd
I'm definitely on a ride right now, and the bumpiness is whether or not in some cases I have paid up to five figures for cards that have been altered and slabbed as 8's and 9's.
I feel like that because I don't accept these altered cards in TPG holders as bumps along the way, I've been told I'm a delusional hater. Not cool. What exactly is the point then of having grading guidelines?
Thanks AFL for keeping this open, but please understand that it is simply impossible for Joe to separate his collector side from his CEO of PSA side. His editorial is supposedly as a collector and it is evident that his apparent and real conflict in interest does not allow him to address the views of collectors/hobbyists appropriately, IMO.
It’s our fault for trusting too much.
It would be nice for collectors, but marking or confiscating bad cards just won’t fly. You’re basically asking PSA’s opinion on your card and seeking their stamp of approval. They are free to withhold that, but they have no legal right to confiscate or deface your card in the process. An altered card isn’t illegal to own, they just don’t have any right or basis to take such actions.
I believe that PSA's statement was tone deaf. At what point is PSA going to accept some responsibility for the mess that the hobby finds itself in today? I think we'd all appreciate hearing something along the lines of "Sorry. We've made mistakes and we're working to do better in the future." The customer base needs some reassurances for the future.
Thanks Todd.
I certainly see a lot of people complaining and not offering any solutions. I don't see why I would get "blasted"?
PaulMaul, I think you misunderstood what I was getting at. I worked with a "View Precis" machine. Without getting into a long technical explanation, they can very quickly do these measurements and determine how close a card is to the desired size. If these measurements were in a database of information, you could look it up and see how short it was, or if the card was actually rectangular. If this information was used in conjunction with photographic records, you might even be able to prove a card has been trimmed, if it was cracked out cut and resubmitted.
One way to detect trimming would be that if both sides were not parallel, a paper cutter would usually cut both sides so that they were very close to being parallel.
I am not suggesting this be done on every card, but just telling people to "look closer" or "try harder" is going to have a limited effect.
I just don't understand what you mean here. It just happens that I spent 24 years working at a fairly high tech circuit board manufacturer and I used some equipment that I thought would possibly help with this issue.
I am only trying to offer solutions. Blaming PWCC, Moser and TPGs isn't going to get us anywhere.
By the way, I am a small business owner, so I guess I AM a CEO. LOL
I agree that marking the cards with invisible "ink" would not be a great idea. I think confiscating would be worse.
Offering solutions is a good idea though.
Sorry if I offended anyone in any way, that was not my intention.
Have fun collecting!
@JoeBanzai, They are all talking about Joe Orlando, not JoeBanzai.
Wow. To use the umpire analogy - MLB has invested in technology to help umpires call balls and strikes and is experimenting with this in the Atlantic League. I would much rather have had Mr. Orlando tell us what PSA has in the pipeline and what they are investing in improvement than to complain about us having fear that some of our favorite cards in PSA holders have been permanently altered and ruined.
Complaining about the complainers does not move the discussion forward. Talking about substantive ways to get better does.
He was talking about Joe Orlando.
OH! Now I get it! LMFAO
Nice to see members injecting some comic relief here, whether intentionally or unintentionally!
Who is Joe Orlando?
I think graygator posted a statement issued by Joe Orlando. I've always found your posts to be very intelligent. I wish I could say the same about myself, but I know people view me as the forum clown. I've accepted that.
To ensure no future confusion, please refer to me from now on as Mr Banzai in the future ;-)
I will admit, I had my doubts about you, BUT I kept my mouth shut and noticed that while I don't always "get" your humor. You are not the forum clown in my mind.
But don't quit your day job. ;-)
Thank you.
Given his most recent statement, here is an interesting retrospective view that has somehow vanished from the PSA article archives:
Taking My Hacks: Whack Jobs – The Issue of Card Trimming
Joe Orlando - January 20, 2004
Trimming. To card collectors around the globe, this is treated like a four-letter word -- the really bad kind. No, I am not talking about what should be done to my Aunt Gertrude's mustache or to the back of one of my best friends (just kidding, I don't have an Aunt Gertrude). I am talking about card doctoring.
What is trimming exactly?
Well, in a nutshell, it's what some people do in order to enhance the edges or corners on a card. This, in turn, will enhance the overall grade of the card. With the prices realized for ultra high-end cards, it's no wonder that some people lower themselves to try this. These guys smell money like a Great White smells blood.
Back in the day, trimming was a bit more crude. Despite what many would consider obvious today, the old school brand of trimming did work for a while before the advent of grading. I can still remember seeing these severely whacked cards at card shows and commenting to a dealer, "Are there such things as 1954 Topps minis?" After PSA really caught on by the mid-1990s, many of the more prominent card doctors vanished.
Today, there are those who are still trying it. Some of them are butchers and some of them are master artists, but it doesn't, in any way, change the approach of PSA graders. The tools have changed in some cases and the skill level of the whackers has heightened but so has the awareness of our experts -- that's what they are paid to do -- and that's why people have so much faith in the PSA process.
The biggest point of confusion with trimming comes when a collector notices a card that is slightly undersized -- even in the PSA holder. I hear the cries, "That card looks small, it must be trimmed -- trimmed I say!" Nothing could be further from the truth. Is size one factor that may tip off a grader that a card could be altered? Of course -- but size alone, in this case, does not matter.
I can remember opening vending cases from the early 1970s where the cards came in a variety of sizes. Pre-war cards, especially, were cut very inconsistently. To most, the size differences are subtle but when placed in a holder, the card's size is more apparent. My point here is simple. Cards can come in different sizes straight from the factory -- straight out of the pack -- straight from a vending case. Experienced hobbyists know this but many do not.
There are more important questions when attempting to spot trimming.
Do the corners flare out or dive in unnaturally?
Is there solid consistency to the stock and/or grain of the card?
Is the cut consistent with the year or issue?
Is the card cut from a sheet?
Do the edges possess an unorthodox waviness?
These factors, amongst other things, enter into the mind of each grader as a card is evaluated and graded. Does the size matter too? Sure it does, but that is not the most important factor that a grader considers. Technically, you could have an oversized card that is trimmed or a severely undersized card that is unaltered. These are extreme cases but actually plausible scenarios.
Just as in the everyday world of criminal justice, it's up to the authorities to keep up with or stay a step ahead of the criminals in order to prevent crime and catch them. As the world's sportscard grading authority, we take the same approach and will accept nothing less from our staff.
Dead link: https://www.psacard.com/articles/art...-card-trimming
Joe O said:
This is disappointing because I think Joe O is level-setting our expectations and that their investigation will result in very little/nil.
I am in Finance. Joe’s statement is just like my CV saying I am human and I look at numbers.
The Bullet needs to be chewed on by someone and that bullet is every single card that has been identified as altered should be systematically DESTROYED. That’s the bottom line, this complete nonsense of labeling a flip “Altered or Authentic” is as laughable as 90% of the Pop Reports, slabs can and do get cracked out and resubbed MULTIPLE times. That is the only way to fix this mess the way I see it. That being said as far as who is responsible and who should bite said bullet is a different story, I don’t have enough knowledge to know who is 100% guilty or involved or not.
All I can say is "Wow" I wish Mr. Orlando and PSA the best with their future endeavors. This little fish is getting out of the pond. Way to blame the guys doing the work for you.Your company should have been doing this work after the first few of these tampered with cards came to light.
I’m wondering if PSA will take Q & A’s at the PSA luncheon at the National. I can probably answer that now for everyone, NO! When will PSA finally discuss the giant elephant in the room? I’m not the smartest guy, but I know it’s extremely hard the sweep an elephant under the rug. I’m 100% invested in PSA, plus I’m stock holder so I want answers. I truly feel like the kid outside the Chicago court house as Joe Jackson walks by after hearing the White Sox fixed the WS. “Say it ain’t so Joe’”. Baseball took a huge hit after the Black Sox scandal, but thank God there was a guy named Babe Ruth who resuscitated the game of baseball. Is there a Babe Ruth out there to save TPG?
I have to admit, I was really disappointed by the tone of this letter from Joe. I love PSA, I always have, I think it's the reason many of us are here. They've done a lot to enhance the ways I enjoy the hobby (Registry, etc). I've defended them throughout this process to many people, but this just seems tone-deaf.
This year marks the 20th year that I've been submitting cards to them, ever since I was just a teenager. Not once along the way have I questioned giving them my business, but this certainly makes me think PSA isn't necessarily on my team. I was fine with some lack of transparency given that this is a fluid situation and one that probably involves the authorities, but this just isn't cool.
Currently Collecting:
Flickr: https://flickr.com/gp/184724292@N07/686763
As I read again I truly hope the train left the station and bumpy road are not foreshadowing some sort of conservation vs. alteration change in PSAs definition of what they will grade.
This whole bazaar take by Joe Orlando has me more angry than I was before about this fiasco. My ire was almost exclusively directed at PWCC and the card doctors. I was waiting for PSA’s next move and trusting that this was being taken seriously. They asked for patience and then we get this.
I really feel for the known victims of this fraud. I hope for the rest of us that the hard work of the Blowout Boys do not turn up any of our cards. It does not seem like those who make the most $ off our love of this hobby respect us. It seems more like they think we are fools.
“Never get cheated” as a sign off. Because of course if you did it is just a bump in the road and you are ignorant to complain.
I think Joe is right, it is clear the TPG’s can’t consistently validate cards. Good on him for being transparent and buyer beware.
Graded cards have definitely jumped the shark when the prez of a grading company says “hey, what do you want us to do”?
100% tone deaf.