Nothing has been proven. Your unsupported, conlusory statements are not "proof" of anything, nor are the generic statements of a couple of people on these boards who you think agree with you.
The fact is and has always been that no "premium" exists, and cannot be quantified or proven, and even if it could, it would be so wildly inconsistent (much like how CGC assesses "PQ" itself) as to be rendered utterly meaningless.
Funny (ironic) on how whenever I cite multiple data points disproving your bogus statements it is called "cherry picking". But when you try (poorly) to do the same thing, it is "evidence". Lol So what does it all mean ? It means nothing. Fact is, even if you ever bothered to produce a specific data set I could easily produce an equal amount of data to prove the opposite, causing the alleged "averages" you purport to exist to be reduced to a standard deviation within an expected price range of sales prices that can just as easily be explained by venue, auction end time, seller feedback, etc, as the so-called "PQ" on the label. That means your conclusory statements fail to satisfy even the most rudimentary requirements of the scientific method. Which means your conclusory statements are, have always been, and will likely continue to be, categorically wrong.
-J.