Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;imrich, post: 3419054, member: 22331&quot;]Not having read the complete transcripts from that trial, I can&#039;t speak properly to your STATEMENTS, only assuming (you know what&#039;s said) that the evidence was properly established/proved. But from what I have read, I believe that a different informed judge could have discarded some of the accusations. If it can be proven that the same PCI litigation charges and more can be proven/levied against the current industry &quot;leaders&quot;, would you support change? I suspect not, as stated in my post!</p><p><br /></p><p>Virtually every &quot;industry&quot; of the same size is regulated and has standards to a greater degree. If the advocates for continued subjective biased acceptance expect passivity by buyers, it&#039;s believed they need to show change to a uniform industry standard from within.</p><p><br /></p><p>It&#039;s just a matter of time before the Numismatic industry sees the litigation believed inevitable, and you may be correct that current processes are adequate.</p><p><br /></p><p>Many of the premium coins seen in sales are stated to being acquired from OUS, maybe your proposed changes are a method for change.</p><p><br /></p><p>Regardless, &quot;time will tell&quot;! We&#039;re in this believed sinking ship together, I&#039;ll support your objective proposals, if you&#039;ll just listen to mine without getting upset. Actions are believed better than words. At a miniscule rate I&#039;m attempting constructive change, I&#039;d enjoy your assistance! I&#039;m a frustrated Libertarian Independent, so I&#039;ll be waiting!</p><p><br /></p><p>P.S. Thank you for the article link. I&#039;ll send you one from the past&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; regarding&nbsp; PCGS or &quot;industry&quot; leaders, if you&#039;d like.</p><p><br /></p><p>JMHO[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in