Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="imrich, post: 1445752, member: 22331"]The Truth Will Prevail Eventually!! I trust you'll pardon my worthless "two cents" interjection. I believe I've read the majority of the seemingly ad infinitum or ad nauseum unqualitative or unquantitative statements  concerning the subject of this thread. I've tried to digest the content objectively, and find myself agreeing with many of the positions advanced by opposing parties/posts. I personally believe that grading organizations all have their areas of expertise/deficiencies. I believe that anyone having reasonable objective knowledge pertaining to collecting knows the truth about suspected self-serving entities affiliated with the associated organizations seemingly guiding collecting/investing activities. I believe that reasonable evaluation will establish that these affiliated entities have disregarded their standards, and the published standards of the associated organizations. There has been involvement/action by Federal personnel, who I believe knew that without class support or plaintiffs in actions, unqualitative or unquantitative information would result in the  limited resulting agreement. The suspected offending entities who've touted unequaled standards for establishment of collectibles value, have "Price Guides" and limited guarantees that's believed to influence investors. A suspected offending entity representative stated it "would have fought the complaint in court ``had the FTC asked us to pay (customer-redress fines)." I believe both the government and the suspected offending entity knew that it is difficult to establish acceptable fines until real customer damages are established. I have presented offending "exceptions" to published "grading standards", and cited the appropriate standard, in several of the discussion threads. The intent was to establish the TPG grading truths, and the bias generated by insinuated grading promises, price guides, and guarantees. If the informed collecting public believe these statements to be a basis for action, and respond, a proof of incredibility is a potential basis for redress. It has been argued by "informed" individuals in many of the threads that grading exceptions are an anomaly, and that redress is guaranteed.  If a class, or individual action can show that the "informed" statements are untrue/believed, resulting in damages, and that appropriate damages (i.e. relative to published guides) are unavailable, class redress may result. I believe the facts are objectively self-evident, and unqualitative or unquantitative statements are a useless unproductive exercise. I trust that we can determine a basis for meaningful discussion, minimizing personal biases. Hopefully, we the potential customers, can eventually establish a basis for fairness and adherence to published standards, and appropriate damages remuneration, prior to formal adjudication. JMHO :thumb:[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches