Don Olmstead is a well known expert in paper money, a professional dealer, a member of CAND and a contributor to trends and paper money books.
Profit is not a dirty word, neither is being a dealer.
As paper is only a small part of numismatics, but an important part, slamming anyone who has contributed as much to numismatics is not called for.
Grading notes is subjective, sometimes things need to be improved. Perhaps the Sheldon method of using numbers for grading notes is something that is going to happen, sooner or later. Some call it an improvement, other don't like change.
The addition of various words to describe notes has been going on for years. Gem, choice, original, bright, perfect, perfectly centered etc. I sat with Don for a bit at the CAND show, and graded a whole pile of notes that he had graded, and agreed with all of them. As no one is perfect, if two or more people agree that a note is choice Uncirculated (thus Unc. 63), then we have more agreement on grading notes than we do on many coins.
Notes are just bits of paper, subject to the slightest mark. Not really any harder than grading hockey cards, except they are of better paper.
Trends in CCN sellects only a certain group of notes for value. Not enough room to put them all in along with mint products, coins, and tokens. The prices shown are more current than similar notes in the catalogues, which is many pages longer.
Notes being slabbed have some problems, as many people like to slide them out of the holder to look at them closely. Can't do that in a slab.
We need some propers definitions and descriptions of the numbering systems for note grading to make it viable. It may never be the cats meow, but surely some people will use it.
Rick