Outed cards, now including a 130K gain on an Aaron rookie

[swarmee]

If they can be proven altered, yes. That is their grade guarantee with no expiration date, and it's priced into their grading services that cost up to $5,000 a card.
Add: As of a month ago's conference call, they only have about $800,000 in their grade guarantee reserve fund. So once it eclipses that, they'll be taking it out of hide.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by swarmee

If they can be proven altered, yes. That is their grade guarantee with no expiration date, and it's priced into their grading services that cost up to $5,000 a card.
Add: As of a month ago's conference call, they only have about $800,000 in their grade guarantee reserve fund. So once it eclipses that, they'll be taking it out of hide.

We'll see how many people actually ask. PSA may also have claims over against fraudulent submitters, which would be interesting.

[swarmee]

Well, if PSA decertifies the numbers like I've asked them to, I'm sure all of those affected will send them back to have them re-evaluated or refunded.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Well, if PSA decertifies the numbers like I've asked them to, I'm sure all of those affected will send them back to have them re-evaluated or refunded.

If. If.

[GeoPoto]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If. If.

Focusing on trimming and setting aside (I know it is hard) conspiracy/collusion theories, is it fair to summarize the apparent situation as follows:
(1) PSA has published (or at least alluded to) the practices and procedures it uses to grade every card;
(2) Those practices and procedures include height and width allowances for each type of card -- that is, some amount of deviation bellow an expected height/width is NOT viewed as evidence of trimming;
(3) Blowout/Etc. has established that it is possible to make material improvement in the value of many cards by trimming little enough that the majority (85%) of the cards are still tall/wide enough to avoid being viewed as "trimmed";
(4) Apparently, PSA's existing practices and procedures cannot (or at least do not) detect other evidence of trimming, either because the cutting doesn't leave a trace or PSA's practices and procedures are not comprehensive enough to detect whatever evidence of trimming is available;
(5) The foregoing leads to the conclusion that PSA has to either champion the idea that trimming within its height/width allowances is an acceptable (or at least undetectable) improvement that does not require qualification OR PSA has to explain how it is going to modify its practices and procedures so that trimmed cards can't go undetected.

(Hopefully the "card doctor(s) du jour" will be ostracized/prosecuted and likewise if PSA and/or PWCC (or their employees) were knowingly involved in efforts to conceal/ignore evidence of trimming and sell altered cards without qualification. At the same time,) the next "big picture" event has to happen soon -- PSA has to take a position regarding whether it can detect trimming going forward.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Part of the size issue is that sometimes, apparently, the card doctors use a press to stretch cards before trimming them, so detection depends more on examining the edges than on size per se. Probably some card stocks are more susceptible to this technique than others.

[GeoPoto]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Part of the size issue is that sometimes, apparently, the card doctors use a press to stretch cards before trimming them, so detection depends more on examining the edges than on size per se. Probably some card stocks are more susceptible to this technique than others.

So, the test needs to be 3-dimensional instead of the 2-dimensional test now used. Flattened-then-trimmed cards meet the 2-dimensional test, but with diminished thickness. They will have to measure the thickness of the card, particularly at the edges. This may require new/additional equipment, but should be technologically feasible and, just as important to PSA's business model, economical.

[Ben Yourg]

I called PSA,2 days ago.Asking about increased fees,and length
of return time.
They said they just hired a bunch of new people,to
speed up things??

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Ben Yourg

They said they just hired a bunch of new people,to speed up things??

They did, but MANY of these cards being exposed were graded 3-5 years ago based on their cert numbers. They can't just slough it off on some newbies.

[swarmee]

You are correct. PSA has to openly state they are WOEFULLY INCOMPETENT of detecting alterations including trimming, recoloring, rebuilding corners, and pressing out creases or they are lying. Or they have to reveal the scammers internal to their organization and prosecute them for fraud. They also need to openly state ALL OF THE SCAMMERS THAT ARE BANNED FROM SUBMITTING so the rest of the collecting community is aware and the information can be given to the other grading companies, auctionhouses, etc.

After that, they have to buy back all of these cards revealed to be altered, and remove them from their pop reports.

Then they need to actually develop the tactics, techniques, and procedures to detect alterations.

Otherwise, their business model crumbles. Maybe it does anyways. As a publicly traded company with millions of dollars of fraud uncovered in weeks by volunteer detectives, they are exposed both literally and financially.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by swarmee

You are correct. PSA has to openly state they are WOEFULLY INCOMPETENT of detecting alterations including trimming, recoloring, rebuilding corners, and pressing out creases or they are lying. Or they have to reveal the scammers internal to their organization and prosecute them for fraud. They also need to openly state ALL OF THE SCAMMERS THAT ARE BANNED FROM SUBMITTING so the rest of the collecting community is aware and the information can be given to the other grading companies, auctionhouses, etc.

After that, they have to buy back all of these cards revealed to be altered, and remove them from their pop reports.

Then they need to actually develop the tactics, techniques, and procedures to detect alterations.

Otherwise, their business model crumbles. Maybe it does anyways. As a publicly traded company with millions of dollars of fraud uncovered in weeks by volunteer detectives, they are exposed both literally and financially.

PSA is circling the wagons and will fight to the death any notion that they are financially responsible for this debacle. They will pay some squeaky wheels back but will surely not make any public pronouncement that anyone who has one of these obviously trimmed cards will get their money back. That would require them to accept responsibility and that's not happening. When has PSA ever fell on its sword for their incompetence and negligence?

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by swarmee

You are correct. PSA has to openly state they are WOEFULLY INCOMPETENT of detecting alterations including trimming, recoloring, rebuilding corners, and pressing out creases or they are lying. Or they have to reveal the scammers internal to their organization and prosecute them for fraud. They also need to openly state ALL OF THE SCAMMERS THAT ARE BANNED FROM SUBMITTING so the rest of the collecting community is aware and the information can be given to the other grading companies, auctionhouses, etc.

After that, they have to buy back all of these cards revealed to be altered, and remove them from their pop reports.

Then they need to actually develop the tactics, techniques, and procedures to detect alterations.

Otherwise, their business model crumbles. Maybe it does anyways. As a publicly traded company with millions of dollars of fraud uncovered in weeks by volunteer detectives, they are exposed both literally and financially.

You may be correct in what you say PSA should do. But I see very little chance of it happening. Based on what this Board has revealed about the number of altered cards, I would think the cost to buy them all back could put PSA out of business. And if in fact what has been revealed is only the tip of the iceberg, the point is only reinforced.

It seems to me that if ever there was a ripe opportunity for another grading company to come into being, or for SGC to make a major marketing move to recoup market share and reduce/eliminate the price gap between comparably graded PSA and SGC cards, this is it.