Community crossfire with Chris McGill & Josh Adams. Joe signs off and we sprint through 70+ starred comments: Is PSA’s upcharge model fair capitalism or a predatory practice? Would a flat-fee grading tier solve the rage (and reduce cheap slabs)? Who actually benefits from the PSA guarantee—and why doesn’t the submitter get it? We dig into Nat Turner’s pre-ownership take vs today, authenticity vs condition guarantees, and the collector vs flipper divide. Jeremy also shares a real $6,000 guarantee payout story—and the designer-clothes analogy for why slabs drive value even though the card hasn’t changed.

Highlights

• Flat-fee grading idea: demand control, less plastic, fewer low-value slabs

• Free market lens vs “predatory” framing—who’s choosing to pay?

• Guarantee realities: per-card and lifetime caps, submitter exclusion

• “Buy the card, not the slab” vs registry/set-building culture

• Do changing standards make old grades obsolete? Expiring-grade thought experiment

• Collector feedback as a feature, not a bug—why companies should listen

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices