PSA Parent Collectors Holdings Faces Antitrust Lawsuit Over SGC, Beckett Acquisitions
PSA parent company Collectors Holdings Inc faces proposed class action alleging acquisition of SGC and Beckett created an illegal monopoly, harming trading card hobby enthusiasts with higher prices and poor service standards.
The suit, brought by plaintiff Michael Rasmussen, was filed this week in California, naming Collectors, PSA, SGC, and Beckett as defendants and seeking damages and forced divestment as remedies for alleged antitrust violations.
The initial complaint gives background on the history of the trading card grading industry, detailing how it adds value for collectors and how PSA's dominance of the market has evolved over the years through mergers and acquisitions.
Prior to the Acquisitions, there were four major independent card grading companies:
- (i) Defendant PSA, which has been owned and operated by Defendant Collectors since 2021 and controlled roughly 72% of the Relevant Market;
- (ii) Defendant SGC, which controlled roughly 5% of the Relevant Market;
- (iii) Defendant BGS, which controlled roughly 3% of the Relevant Market; and
- (iv) non-party Certified Guaranty Company (“CGC”), which controlled roughly 18% of the Relevant Market.
Although PSA was the dominant player in the market, Defendants SGC and BGS served important roles as growing competitors that offered lower prices and higher quality services (usually through faster turnaround times for card grading) than PSA.
As a result, they provided significant downward competitive pressure on prices and upward competitive pressure on service quality for consumers.
Rather than compete with SGC and BGS on the merits by decreasing prices and/or increasing service quality, Defendant Collectors acquired both companies to cement its monopoly power in the Relevant Market.
Collectors acquired SGC in February 2024 and BGS in December 2025. As a result of the Acquisitions, Defendant Collectors controls roughly 80% of the Relevant Market.
Following each acquisition, Defendant Collectors increased prices and decreased the quality of services for both PSA and the acquired company.
For example, following its acquisition of SGC, Collectors increased prices for SGC services by 20%, increased turnaround times for graded cards by as much as 400%, and reallocated significant assets from SGC to PSA to shrink SGC and turn it into a specialized boutique grading company, i.e., not a competitor to PSA.
Through these actions, Defendants harmed competition and consumers. Not only did Defendants reduce the number of major independent competitors in the Relevant Market from four to two, but they also eliminated competitors that were putting downward pressure on prices and upward pressure on service quality.
The complaint goes on to describe how lower service quality and long delays can significantly impact the value of items submitted to PSA, SGC, or Beckett as the secondary trading card market is volatile and dynamic, particularly during the respective season for current players.
For example, the suit says that a PSA 10 2024 Silver Prizm rookie card for Drake Maye would have doubled in value between October 2025 and January 2026, but then from January 2026 to March 2026, the value of the card dropped nearly 40%, corresponding with poor performances by Maye and a loss by his team in the Super Bowl.
A collector who sent a Maye rookie card to a grading service provider in October and received it back by early January 2026 would have been able to sell the card for significantly more than a collector who also sent the card to a grading company in October but did not receive the card back until early February, according to the plaintiff.
The complaint then goes on to detail how both SGC and Beckett experienced price increases and longer service terms after acquisition, and that PSA also ratcheted up prices at the same time, leaving collectors with few alternatives.
Rasmussen is not alone in raising antitrust concerns - Congressman Pat Ryan wrote a letter strongly urging the FTC to investigate Collectors Holdings when they announced the Beckett acquisition in late 2025.
Liz Morton
The plaintiff is seeking to have this suit certified as a class action and is asking the court for several remedies including damages, forced divestment of SGC and Beckett, expenses and more:
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, for himself and on behalf of the Class of all others similarly situated, respectfully requests judgment against Defendants and the following relief...
- An award of damages to Plaintiff and Class Members, including statutory treble damages, compensatory damages, punitive damages, and pre- and post-judgment interest to the extent permitted by law;
- An order enjoining Defendants from continuing to implement either of the Acquisitions;
- An order undoing the Acquisitions and requiring Collectors to divest the assets of SGC and BGS, enabling each to function as independent companies;
- An Order awarding Plaintiff attorney’s fees, expenses, and taxable costs to the extent permitted by law; and
- Such other further relief as the Court deems just and proper to protect and compensate Plaintiff and the Class Members
The plaintiff is represented by Daniel J. Mogin and Timothy Z. LaComb of Mogin Law LLP.
Collectors Holdings Inc has not yet filed a response.
The case is Rasmussen v. Collectors Holdings, Inc. et al, case #8:26-cv-00897 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Stay tuned for updates in this developing story and download the full initial complaint:
