Would this reduce fake PSA's?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6f5cf/6f5cf5bddea710f8689ae10278d185689232499b" alt="kgibson"
I was reading the thread "Another fake PSA Mantle RC", which caused me to think about this. So we now have people that put fake cards in fake PSA holders with fake flips. The only thing that is legit is the cert number because if they use a fake number, that can easily be discovered by checking the cert number on the PSA site. Wouldn't it be nice if when we check the certnumber with PSA, it came up saying something like card in private registry and not for sale, or card currently for sale. PSA could allow us as the owner to choose the option in our inventory or our registry. When I buy it, I list it as not for sale. When I decide to sell it, I change the status to show it's for sale. It seems to me this would be an inexpensive way to make it difficult for the crooks to use legitmate cert numbers. They may be able to counterfeit cards, slabs, and flips, but the only way I see they could get past this is if they hacked in to PSA's website. I may be missing something obvious but thought I'd throw it out there to brainstorm and see what you think.
"You know we just don't recognize the most significant moments of our lives while they're happening. Back then I thought, well, there'll be other days. I didn't realize that that was the only day."
0
Comments
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
<< <i>something has to be done or bgs will win the day because of their holders >>
If it was only about the holders, you might have a point. But BGS has already shot themselves in the foot with regard to generating the "proper" market share to be a player in the vintage game. Their vintage credibility is virtually nil... (I'm sure someone will drudge up an example or two of prices realized, but as a collective whole, with regard to vintage, they are seriously lacking).
<< <i>
<< <i>something has to be done or bgs will win the day because of their holders >>
If it was only about the holders, you might have a point. But BGS has already shot themselves in the foot with regard to generating the "proper" market share to be a player in the vintage game. Their vintage credibility is virtually nil... (I'm sure someone will drudge up an example or two of prices realized, but as a collective whole, with regard to vintage, they are seriously lacking). >>
wouldn't disagree with you there but bgs will be fine with the modern cards and their holders. When will it take psa to change their holders to make them "tamper proof"?