I've said this before, but I think it bears some repeating.
The entire process for authentication and grading is backwards.
Sure, there are a lot of cards that can be done by pretty much anyone. Stuff that's not particularly prone to recoloring, and is in pretty worn condition. I'd say that cards with colored borders are more likely to be recolored even in lower grades - we've seen a great example right here.
But to take the cards, and push them through faster based on value is not what makes any sense. I suspect that actually only means the cards that are expensive get their limited inspection sooner, probably to make the insurance company happy.
Even if you can't accept a system that handles higher value cards more slowly, maybe a system that triaged where effort was spent?
Send in a box of VG anything, and it goes to the new guy. Send in a bunch of cards that might be in higher grades, send them to more experienced people. Possible high grade cards with fairly high value if they are high grade should get much more scrutiny. And I mean actually taking time to be sure everything is "right" with the card.
And if something isn't "right" put the opinion of that in writing so it's clear. No "questionable" authenticity, No "we won't slab it because it's been tampered with" none of that nonsense.
It wouldn't work for less expensive cards, but ultimately all card graded should have the flaws explained, and in writing.
Steve B
|