PSA has a new president

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Thanks for the link Peter. I can already tell this will be a shitshow - the poor judgement it took to go on blowout and take on BODA is likely a harbinger of things to come. That dude was dead meat the minute he posted.

I disagree. His going on Blowout would be considered "poor judgement" only from the perspective of an executive putting himself on the spot and having challenging questions thrown at him. Since he's been a member at Blowout since 2015, he's seen all the evidence of card doctoring they have amassed. He knew that by posting there, he'd get the really tough questions.

But he chose to, anyway. I would call that sincere, as opposed to calculated.

I wouldn't write him off instantly - give him some time and see what he does or doesn't do to address issues raised. Overall I was impressed he was willing to walk into that hornets' nest in the first place, and I think it unreasonable to expect instantaneous action from a guy who just took over his new role at PSA.

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by Mark17

I disagree. His going on Blowout would be considered "poor judgement" only from the perspective of an executive putting himself on the spot and having challenging questions thrown at him. Since he's been a member at Blowout since 2015, he's seen all the evidence of card doctoring they have amassed. He knew that by posting there, he'd get the really tough questions.

But he chose to, anyway. I would call that sincere, as opposed to calculated.

I wouldn't write him off instantly - give him some time and see what he does or doesn't do to address issues raised. Overall I was impressed he was willing to walk into that hornets' nest in the first place, and I think it unreasonable to expect instantaneous action from a guy who just took over his new role at PSA.

I generally agree with your post, except that I feel like he is in a no-win situation posting and can only make things worse. The intent is no doubt good, but it’s a lynch mob over there (deservingly so), and nothing he says, and most things he does not say (see Peter’s post), will be construed negatively. Trying to appease a lynch mob gets you hung. I value my neck.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

I generally agree with your post, except that I feel like he is in a no-win situation posting and can only make things worse. The intent is no doubt good, but it’s a lynch mob over there (deservingly so), and nothing he says, and most things he does not see (see Peter’s post), will be construed negatively. Trying to appease a lynch mob gets you hung. I value my neck.

Agree.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

I generally agree with your post, except that I feel like he is in a no-win situation posting and can only make things worse. The intent is no doubt good, but it’s a lynch mob over there (deservingly so), and nothing he says, and most things he does not see (see Peter’s post), will be construed negatively. Trying to appease a lynch mob gets you hung. I value my neck.

I think my questions were fair, if pointed. HE chose to come on as the company spokesman, and if you do that people have a right to ask questions.

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I think my questions were fair, if pointed. HE chose to come on as the company spokesman, and if you do that people have a right to ask questions.

I think all of the questions were fair, and once he opened the discourse, were all very natural questions - especially AJ’s Jax (and the Gretzky Wagner). My only point is that no executive with sense would put themselves out there in that situation. It’s a no win. In fact, it’s a guaranteed loss.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

I think all of the questions were fair, and once he opened the discourse, were all very natural questions - especially AJ’s Jax (and the Gretzky Wagner). My only point is that no executive with sense would put themselves out there in that situation. It’s a no win. In fact, it’s a guaranteed loss.

Again, if he is just another obfuscating executive then yes, I agree, bad PR move. No-win situation.

But suppose, just suppose, he is actually sincere about making substantive changes at PSA. Yes, I know, the cynics will pile on, but with new ownership and new leadership, all I'm saying is, just maybe these new guys really will improve things in a meaningful way.

Jumping on a guy immediately after he is put in a new role, dumping years of historical mistakes in his lap and expecting immediate resolution, just isn't realistic. Revisit this in 6 months and then criticize him, if it's warranted.

[Rhotchkiss]

Dude, I am only criticizing the fact that he engaged in a public discourse on blowout. No win. Bad move. Instead, I would have spent the next 6 months improving things and then come out when I had some successes to promote. Do good acts, then speak. Talk is so cheap at this point. I promise you nobody at PSA applauded his going on blowout.

I hope he does good and psa gets straight. All I am saying is that going on blowout was a bad move and not something, I think, a sensible executive would have done. And if that’s where his judgement lies, then I am taking the “under” on this guy

I don’t think you and I are far off - I just don’t think good intentions, as sincere as they may be = good business judgement. In this case, I think it was the opposite. Dead horse beaten!! Peace

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Dude, I am only criticizing the fact that he engaged in a public discourse on blowout. No win. Bad move. Instead, I would have spent the next 6 months improving things and then come out when I had some successes to promote. Do good acts, then speak. Talk is so cheap at this point. I promise you nobody at PSA applauded his going on blowout.

I hope he does good and psa gets straight. All I am saying is that going on blowout was a bad move and not something, I think, a sensible executive would have done. And if that’s where his judgement lies, then I am taking the “under” on this guy

I don’t think you and I are far off - I just don’t think good intentions, as sincere as they may be = good business judgement. In this case, I think it was the opposite. Dead horse beaten!! Peace

He probably expected a warmer reception.
And I assume his major edits reflect that PSA indeed was not happy with him.

[Snowman]

I haven't read the Blowhard thread yet, but I do think his initial hiring and the acquisition of Genamint in the first place was mostly about PSA wanting to respond to all of the card doctoring issues that had surfaced. I believe it was their recognition of the fact that they simply weren't capable of fighting this beast head on without the aid of software. I believe they probably saw Genamint primarily as a tool for preventing future fraud and less of a tool for grading cards. It might be almost the entire reason they brought him on board.