_Jut_

Hi Mike, Thanks for your comment, but I think you misunderstood what I said. I'm not complaining about there being no pop report...I'm saying that there is a person accused of directly manipulating the graded video game market while at WATA who is working for CGC. He (allegedly) did this by exploiting WATA's lack of pop report. The snake that bit someone in the grass over there is in this tall grass we're all standing in (so to speak). Maybe have a read through what I've written, if you disagree, great! Regardless I'd be interested in what you think. Be it for or against what I've raised, I think its important to be discussed. And just on the development time you raised, I only raise this because 1. They already have a database, thus a search query of this database is a few lines of code. Yes there is a user interface that needs to be developed, but this is not a 2 year job in my opinion. You also don't use graders to develop code, its completely independent of the number of submissions, doubly so because is a database (more entries in a database doesnt affect a competently written search query) 2. The person involved. (Previously mentioned) 3. Saying your going to release a pop report is not actually releasing a pop report. The same exploitation tactics can, and likely are being used. I hope that putting a little bit of pressure on cgc to release a pop report has the potential to minimise damage to people paying very high prices for things that they wouldn't have if they had known the actual rarity. CGC, to there credit have not removed my posts...so who knows, maybe I've got this all wrong.

Co-founder/executive team member of WATA (allegedly), Mark Haspel, was president and primary grader of CGC and has been working in a professional capacity with cgc since 2014. My understanding is that this is the person alleged to have been selling WATA graded games on his eBay account while in his position at WATA. I just want to be clear, this is just what I've read online at a quick glance, so if anyone (from cgc or otherwise) would like to provide any clarification it would be greatly appreciated. Details of the extent to which Mark was allegedly buying, grading, selling his own WATA graded games in the yt link below. Seems viable (to me at least), that Mark or anyone else within CGC would have the capacity to use the same tactics used for WATA graded games, no pop report being instrumental for this to occur in the first place. Edit: changes to wording for benefit of the doubt until/if clarification is provided

The same way WATA (may) have done it (in my opinion), or anyone with enough capital could do it (as there is no pop report). Refer investigation by Karl for details. There might be a policy that says something like 'CGC employees can't sell or buy CGC graded cards'...well WATA does too, and it appears that's what WATA was engaging in at its highest levels for graded video games (rules just being a front). The reason why this works is because there is a lack of information with regard to rarity (WATA has no pop report, just like CGC). Hiding the pop report is not effective for cards that are fleshed out (ie. All the cards that collectors were grading with PSA for years, which are a different thing). Like I said before, low pop (new or nobody graded because it wasn't rare). Those cards, believe it or not, are selling for very high amounts in 10s/perfect 10s. I would argue that they sell for more than PSA cards (specifically the cards without a fleshed out pop report in CGC 10s). I came back into the pokemon hobby about 2 years ago and since then I've heard about trimmed cards by PSA (allegedly), trimmed cards by psa being knowingly sold by PWCC (allegedly, as I believe the FBI is or was investigating this), PWCC being accused of shill bidding by eBay, and Karls investigation into WATA directly manipulating the graded video game market in conjunction with heritage auctions (no pop report being instrumental for this to occur). So when I see a company that is as well organised as CGC, primed right at the hype of the popkemon boom, not release pop report (but have no issues with AI, QR codes to online data bases) for no real reason...well...its concerning But at the end of the day, maybe im just an insufficiently_thoughtful_person who doesn't know the first thing about market manipulation.

I can't speculate on how CGC might be able to manipulate buyers of there perfect 10s while having no pop report, but I can say there is opportunity there. Particularly in cards not fleshed out by PSA (modern, unlimited). The prices of unfleshed out cards have seen massive upticks, take jungle eve for example (not rare in any way, low pop, massive spike in prices). I firmly believe that the majority of those cards have come through CGC, and people paying these prices wouldn't pay this much if they knew the population. People need pop reports to understand the rarity of unfleshedout cards and CGC is not providing this information...why. Thank you for your comment, I do appreciate it. I'm just passionate about this topic.

Hi, can you please tell me how many cgc 9.5 base set charizards have been graded? No, I don't think you can...because cgc is not going to tell you. Do you think this sort of thing is only happening in video games? Have you been watching what happened to PWCC? Furthermore, comics since 2009 you say? Well I guess they should know what they are doing by now, plenty of experience with the comic population reports. They have been happily grading cards for over a year now and still no pop report. Over a year, and that's assuming they hadn't even bothered looking into publishing a pop report when they started grading. And for transparency on my end, I actually stand to gain by people not knowing how rare my cgc cards actually are. It might be financial good for most people here, even funny for some (below), but I don't like it when people are getting taken advantage of. Its gross.

With the recent investigation by Karl Jobst into market manipulation (exposing fraud and deception by auction houses and grading companies) i think it is more important than ever for CGC to publish a pop report. There is no discernible reason for keeping population reports hidden. Cgc has been grading since 2009, so 'we're working on a population report' (for what? Two years?), raises serious concerns. Again, there is NO discernible reason that cgc can not provide any details as to the population of the cards they grade. Saying 'these things take time' is not a valid reason. These things do not take this much time...especially if you are actually working on it. The two biggest card grading companies for pokemon for the last year, during its largest ever influx of cards being graded, are PSA and CGC. PSA isn't taking cards, but CGC is happy to grade all those cards that would have gone to PSA...only they arnt saying how many there are. CGC 10s have moved to take a premium over PSA 10s, as manny people are under the impression the CGC is a harsher grader. But guess what...you have NO idea how manny 10s CGC gives out. The lack of transparency is not good enough. Its concerning, and anyone reading this should be concerned as well. Its time to produce CGC

Thank you so much Paul, geez I almost had a heart attack. Thanks for the quick response as well, much appreciated

Hi All, So my pokemon card submission moved from received to scheduled for grading recently, only found out when I logged in to check if anything progressed. Noticed the following: "Line Item: 012 Card Name: Typhlosion .... Variants: Incorrect Damage Holo" Naturaly I proceeded to freak out, just ever so slightly. Just wondering if anybody has come across this "varient" before in there submission? Any idea whats happened here? I've enquired as to why this might be the case, but I'm bracing for the worst