PSA has had ample opportunity to come on here and give their side of the story. They have failed to do so. Can't say they don't know about it because they obviously pulled the card. Inquiring minds want to know! Here's their chance!
<< <i>Whats to say PSA hasn't contacted the seller to negotiate the return and correction of grade and the seller was uncooperative? Any reasonable person would have to think that a publicly traded organization like PSA would at least try to do the right thing. >>
For you to assume that PSA tried to contact him to negotiate the return of the card is just as irresponsible for me to assume they haven't. I didn't say that because I don't know that and the seller didn't say. However, if they did and just because he chooses not to, that does not give PSA the right to pull the certification number. Whether you agree or disagree that the seller should return the card, it is still his card and he can LEGALLY decide what to do with it - keep it, sell it, trade it, destroy it or whatever. I see a big law suit there and I am sure the attorneys on this board will strongly agree.
<< <i>Based on the OBVIOUS overgrade and the ridiculous price asked by the seller, I take the seller's comments with a grain of salt. >>
This is my favorite line. So, if I am understanding you right, it is the seller's fault that it is an "OBVIOUS overgrade" and we should take what he says with a grain of salt? I think we all agree that it is definitely not a 10, but he didn't grade it and maybe we should take what PSA has to say (or won't say) with a grain of salt since he will at least give his side of the story, but PSA refuses to talk about it.
I am not sure what makes this seller any different from the sellers of the other PSA 10's that were recently talked about? I didn't see anybody bashing the 2 sellers of the PSA 10 Nolan Ryans when they were obviously not 10s. I didn't see anybody yesterday bashing the seller of the Chris Carter PSA 10 when it was obviously not a 10. Can somebody please explain the difference to me and what makes it okay in certain circumstances to sell a card that is "an OBVIOUS overgrade," but not okay for others? I really want to know the difference??? I am not trying to re-hash this arguement and I may even be wrong about this, but help me to understand the difference? What makes this seller "unethical," but not the others?
You can call out PSA to post on these boards all you want, but what is their interest in doing so? They don't owe you, me, or anyone else an answer to a question of ethics. It's simple....either you do the right thing or you don't. It seems to me that PSA has done the right thing here. It doesn't matter how much you gussy up your point with "ambulance chaser attorney" logic. The seller knows that the grade was a mistake. If he chooses to get attorneys involved because PSA is attempting to correct the mistake, he'll have to sell more than just that card to pay the bill. That's his choice.
And no, I don't want to meet you in a dark alley to settle this. Watching the way you deal with people, I can only assume that's your next suggestion.
Funny how you say "PSA is attempting to correct the mistake." Why do you continue to say "the" mistake. It is not "the" mistake, it is "their" mistake. How about saying, "PSA is attempting to correct their mistake." Put the blame where it belongs - you are only fooling yourself.
<< <i>You can call out PSA to post on these boards all you want, but what is their interest in doing so? >>
What is the interest in doing so? Maybe to protect their reputation? Maybe to just simply say, "We made a mistake and have tried every effort to resolve the problem." If that is how they fix their mistake, it says a lot about their company. Again, I am not arguing the point that their mistake shouldn't have been fixed, but isn't they way they did it kind of like sweeping it under the rug like it never existed? If the seller was uncooperative about returning the card, why not just put some sort of disclaimer in the database or changing the grade in the database? No, they want to pretend like it never happened.
Let's shift the focus for a minute. Why did you totally avoid my last question. We can sit here and talk fault all day long, but what I really wanted to know is "Why is it okay for some dealers to sell 10's that never should have been graded a 10 and that is okay, but this dealer is "unethical" for doing so? What is the difference?
Of course the misgrade is PSA's mistake. I've never said it wasn't. Pardon me for not being 1000% clear about every bit of minutia involved in my responses to your drawn out, rehashed posts.
It seems like you live in a world all your own, with expectations that PSA answer your every question and comment on every situation. Don't you think they should spend their time grading cards? If you have a question, call Joe. If you want to be indignant and insist that they stop the world for you and make comments on a public message board, well then I guess you'll have to continue to live with disappointment. It seems as though you bring that upon yourself.
As for why I didn't answer your last question...I didn't want to. Deal with it. I (just like PSA and the rest of the world) owe you nothing.
I would bet PSA offered to buy the card back for what the seller (or the last person who purchased the card, who may not be the seller) paid for the card if PSA made an error in grading it, which I think they have tacitly agreed to by pulling the cert. That is the extent of their warranty when they grade a card. The seller can be unreasonable and claim that he paid more for the card or that it is worth more, but he would not have much of a case. The burden is on the seller to show how he was "damaged", i.e. overpaid for the card. I would almost guarantee the seller or consignor didn't pay anything close to $4K.
As for PSA discussing this publicly, that would not be prudent for them since it apparently is going to end up in some sort of litigation. PSA would have to be "silent" on the matter and certainly is not going to discuss the case with vintagetoppsguy or anyone on this forum.
Finally, your point about why the members don't jump all over some sellers for selling "10s" that may not appear to be 10s, I think in the case of the Carter, although the centering was not perfect, it still met the criteria for "MT" centering and I don't think the seller has the kind of ridiculous BIN or even a reserve on this item.
Mark B.
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
<< <i>As for why I didn't answer your last question...I didn't want to. Deal with it. I (just like PSA and the rest of the world) owe you nothing. >>
You are right - you owe me nothing. Funny though, when I posted the first message this morning it was clearly addressed to psafan, but you wanted to put in your two cents. Then when I ask a question that you can't answer, your response is "I owe you nothing." Brilliant!
<< <i>You are right - you owe me nothing. Funny though, when I posted the first message this morning it was clearly addressed to psafan, but you wanted to put in your two cents. Then when I ask a question that you can't answer, your response is "I owe you nothing." Brilliant! >>
Your first message this morning stated that an assumption was "exactly right" based on half of the story. I thought I would point out your absurdity and move on. Of course, deep down I knew better, because I knew you would reply with more idiocy and I would then reply again. I've let you goad me into replying a few times, but since you seem to like having the last word, here's your chance.
My grandfather always told me not to attempt to argue reason with the unreasonble.
<< <i>If you like to read 30+ posts about two idiots playing "internet tough guy," that is definitely your problem. >>
Just a point of clarification:
You will never, ever see me say that I'm better than anyone else here or anywhere else. Also, you will never, and I mean EVER, see me threaten/imply physical violence against anyone.
If I ever have, even though I know for a fact I haven't, I will sincerely and humbly apologize until my fingers fall off...
I'm just the common collector who tells it like I see it. If that's your definition of an "internet tough guy", more power to you
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
I can't bring myself to read through this whole thread but PSA most likely has not responded to this thread as it is in their best interest to keep their mouth shut until it is resolved. If they come on here and make public statements about an ongoing negotiation it is only going to impact them legally in the negative.
My guess is the seller is trying to hold them over the coals for the full value on an obvious clerical error instead of being fair about the whole situation. He knows it was an obvisous clerical mistake but is trying to capitalize on it. No dealer in their right mind would believe the card was a 10 , I think if he goes to court he is going to lose since this is one of those cases where "reasonability" will be used. and it can be proved that this was an error outside of their buyback policy. this is the silimar case that jsut happened where a dealer listed a card mistakenly for 9.99 buy it now instead of the opening bidder when it was worth 3-4k, I was told it would not stand up in court that the buy it now was a contract since it was such an obvious mistake.
I keep hearing a lot of you guys say that maybe PSA offered to buy the card but mayber the seller was unerasonable. I wouldnt give it to PSA cheap either. THey can win the auction and buy it back for fair market value if they were really offereing a fair deal to the seller.
<< <i>I keep hearing a lot of you guys say that maybe PSA offered to buy the card but mayber the seller was unerasonable. I wouldnt give it to PSA cheap either. THey can win the auction and buy it back for fair market value if they were really offereing a fair deal to the seller. >>
What is the fair market value of a PSA 8(OC)? That's what the card is...
<< <i>I keep hearing a lot of you guys say that maybe PSA offered to buy the card but mayber the seller was unerasonable. I wouldnt give it to PSA cheap either. THey can win the auction and buy it back for fair market value if they were really offereing a fair deal to the seller. >>
What is the fair market value of a PSA 8(OC)? That's what the card is... >>
If thats what the card is, then whatever the auction ended at wouold be fair market value, after all you buy the card not the holder right?
It's as simple as this...refund the grading charge on the card. That's all that is really necessary. As was stated above, the seller would have to prove that PSA harmed him in order to get anything more than that. The card was for sale for a $4k BIN only, no opening bid.
Are you saying that PSA should be forced to pay that? It'll never happen.
Okay, I can see the points made about PSA not commenting because of legal purposes.
This was my whole point in even bringing this thing back up:
PSAfan's EXACT statement was "I think PSA removed it without buying it back." I told him that he was "exactly right" because he was. That is not half the story - it is a fact. Is there another side of the story? Sure there is! I don't know the whole story, but I do know facts - they removed it without buying it back. That is just a fact.
I never said PSA didn't attempt to contact the seller and try to work it out, but the seller was unreasonable or anything like that. Again, I don't know the other side of the story. However, let's assume for a minute that PSA did try to contact the seller and he was unreasonable. My statement is still TRUE because whether he declined to sell it back or not, "PSA removed it without buying it back." That statement is just a fact. How difficult is that to understand?
Sorry I brought it back up by simply stating a fact!
One thing that needs to be cleared is the word FACT and using it so liberally in this case.
We are nothing more than a peanut gallery watching this unfold and getting second hand information.
Hypothetically speaking, say I spoke with the Seller and he said PSA did not offer to buy back the card. Does that make it a FACT that PSA did not offer a buy back? No, you are relying on someone's word. Sure, I can say it's a fact that he told me this, but that doesn't mean his statement was factual. Perhaps the Seller is pissed off that this mistake was uncovered and realizes his $4k pipe dream just went down the toilet. Maybe he's jaded and stretches the truth when telling his side of the story.
The point is, unless anyone here is directly involved in this, no one knows what the FACTS are.
Carry on
Edited to add:
<< <i>It's as simple as this...refund the grading charge on the card. That's all that is really necessary. >>
Assuming he submitted the card, you are absolutely right.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
Comments
<< <i>As always, half the story is just that. >>
PSA has had ample opportunity to come on here and give their side of the story. They have failed to do so. Can't say they don't know about it because they obviously pulled the card. Inquiring minds want to know! Here's their chance!
<< <i>Whats to say PSA hasn't contacted the seller to negotiate the return and correction of grade and the seller was uncooperative? Any reasonable person would have to think that a publicly traded organization like PSA would at least try to do the right thing. >>
For you to assume that PSA tried to contact him to negotiate the return of the card is just as irresponsible for me to assume they haven't. I didn't say that because I don't know that and the seller didn't say. However, if they did and just because he chooses not to, that does not give PSA the right to pull the certification number. Whether you agree or disagree that the seller should return the card, it is still his card and he can LEGALLY decide what to do with it - keep it, sell it, trade it, destroy it or whatever. I see a big law suit there and I am sure the attorneys on this board will strongly agree.
<< <i>Based on the OBVIOUS overgrade and the ridiculous price asked by the seller, I take the seller's comments with a grain of salt. >>
This is my favorite line. So, if I am understanding you right, it is the seller's fault that it is an "OBVIOUS overgrade" and we should take what he says with a grain of salt? I think we all agree that it is definitely not a 10, but he didn't grade it and maybe we should take what PSA has to say (or won't say) with a grain of salt since he will at least give his side of the story, but PSA refuses to talk about it.
I am not sure what makes this seller any different from the sellers of the other PSA 10's that were recently talked about? I didn't see anybody bashing the 2 sellers of the PSA 10 Nolan Ryans when they were obviously not 10s. I didn't see anybody yesterday bashing the seller of the Chris Carter PSA 10 when it was obviously not a 10. Can somebody please explain the difference to me and what makes it okay in certain circumstances to sell a card that is "an OBVIOUS overgrade," but not okay for others? I really want to know the difference??? I am not trying to re-hash this arguement and I may even be wrong about this, but help me to understand the difference? What makes this seller "unethical," but not the others?
And no, I don't want to meet you in a dark alley to settle this. Watching the way you deal with people, I can only assume that's your next suggestion.
<< <i>You can call out PSA to post on these boards all you want, but what is their interest in doing so? >>
What is the interest in doing so? Maybe to protect their reputation? Maybe to just simply say, "We made a mistake and have tried every effort to resolve the problem." If that is how they fix their mistake, it says a lot about their company. Again, I am not arguing the point that their mistake shouldn't have been fixed, but isn't they way they did it kind of like sweeping it under the rug like it never existed? If the seller was uncooperative about returning the card, why not just put some sort of disclaimer in the database or changing the grade in the database? No, they want to pretend like it never happened.
Let's shift the focus for a minute. Why did you totally avoid my last question. We can sit here and talk fault all day long, but what I really wanted to know is "Why is it okay for some dealers to sell 10's that never should have been graded a 10 and that is okay, but this dealer is "unethical" for doing so? What is the difference?
It seems like you live in a world all your own, with expectations that PSA answer your every question and comment on every situation. Don't you think they should spend their time grading cards? If you have a question, call Joe. If you want to be indignant and insist that they stop the world for you and make comments on a public message board, well then I guess you'll have to continue to live with disappointment. It seems as though you bring that upon yourself.
As for why I didn't answer your last question...I didn't want to. Deal with it. I (just like PSA and the rest of the world) owe you nothing.
As for PSA discussing this publicly, that would not be prudent for them since it apparently is going to end up in some sort of litigation. PSA would have to be "silent" on the matter and certainly is not going to discuss the case with vintagetoppsguy or anyone on this forum.
Finally, your point about why the members don't jump all over some sellers for selling "10s" that may not appear to be 10s, I think in the case of the Carter, although the centering was not perfect, it still met the criteria for "MT" centering and I don't think the seller has the kind of ridiculous BIN or even a reserve on this item.
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
<< <i>As for why I didn't answer your last question...I didn't want to. Deal with it. I (just like PSA and the rest of the world) owe you nothing. >>
You are right - you owe me nothing. Funny though, when I posted the first message this morning it was clearly addressed to psafan, but you wanted to put in your two cents. Then when I ask a question that you can't answer, your response is "I owe you nothing." Brilliant!
<< <i>You are right - you owe me nothing. Funny though, when I posted the first message this morning it was clearly addressed to psafan, but you wanted to put in your two cents. Then when I ask a question that you can't answer, your response is "I owe you nothing." Brilliant! >>
Your first message this morning stated that an assumption was "exactly right" based on half of the story. I thought I would point out your absurdity and move on. Of course, deep down I knew better, because I knew you would reply with more idiocy and I would then reply again. I've let you goad me into replying a few times, but since you seem to like having the last word, here's your chance.
My grandfather always told me not to attempt to argue reason with the unreasonble.
<< <i>If you like to read 30+ posts about two idiots playing "internet tough guy," that is definitely your problem. >>
Just a point of clarification:
You will never, ever see me say that I'm better than anyone else here or anywhere else. Also, you will never, and I mean EVER, see me threaten/imply physical violence against anyone.
If I ever have, even though I know for a fact I haven't, I will sincerely and humbly apologize until my fingers fall off...
I'm just the common collector who tells it like I see it. If that's your definition of an "internet tough guy", more power to you
My guess is the seller is trying to hold them over the coals for the full value on an obvious clerical error instead of being fair about the whole situation. He knows it was an obvisous clerical mistake but is trying to capitalize on it. No dealer in their right mind would believe the card was a 10 , I think if he goes to court he is going to lose since this is one of those cases where "reasonability" will be used. and it can be proved that this was an error outside of their buyback policy. this is the silimar case that jsut happened where a dealer listed a card mistakenly for 9.99 buy it now instead of the opening bidder when it was worth 3-4k, I was told it would not stand up in court that the buy it now was a contract since it was such an obvious mistake.
http://sportsfansnews.com/author/andy-fischer/
<< <i>I keep hearing a lot of you guys say that maybe PSA offered to buy the card but mayber the seller was unerasonable. I wouldnt give it to PSA cheap either. THey can win the auction and buy it back for fair market value if they were really offereing a fair deal to the seller. >>
What is the fair market value of a PSA 8(OC)? That's what the card is...
<< <i>
<< <i>I keep hearing a lot of you guys say that maybe PSA offered to buy the card but mayber the seller was unerasonable. I wouldnt give it to PSA cheap either. THey can win the auction and buy it back for fair market value if they were really offereing a fair deal to the seller. >>
What is the fair market value of a PSA 8(OC)? That's what the card is... >>
If thats what the card is, then whatever the auction ended at wouold be fair market value, after all you buy the card not the holder right?
http://sportsfansnews.com/author/andy-fischer/
Are you saying that PSA should be forced to pay that? It'll never happen.
This was my whole point in even bringing this thing back up:
PSAfan's EXACT statement was "I think PSA removed it without buying it back." I told him that he was "exactly right" because he was. That is not half the story - it is a fact. Is there another side of the story? Sure there is! I don't know the whole story, but I do know facts - they removed it without buying it back. That is just a fact.
I never said PSA didn't attempt to contact the seller and try to work it out, but the seller was unreasonable or anything like that. Again, I don't know the other side of the story. However, let's assume for a minute that PSA did try to contact the seller and he was unreasonable. My statement is still TRUE because whether he declined to sell it back or not, "PSA removed it without buying it back." That statement is just a fact. How difficult is that to understand?
Sorry I brought it back up by simply stating a fact!
We are nothing more than a peanut gallery watching this unfold and getting second hand information.
Hypothetically speaking, say I spoke with the Seller and he said PSA did not offer to buy back the card. Does that make it a FACT that PSA did not offer a buy back? No, you are relying on someone's word. Sure, I can say it's a fact that he told me this, but that doesn't mean his statement was factual. Perhaps the Seller is pissed off that this mistake was uncovered and realizes his $4k pipe dream just went down the toilet. Maybe he's jaded and stretches the truth when telling his side of the story.
The point is, unless anyone here is directly involved in this, no one knows what the FACTS are.
Carry on
Edited to add:
<< <i>It's as simple as this...refund the grading charge on the card. That's all that is really necessary. >>
Assuming he submitted the card, you are absolutely right.