Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

Alteration vs. Conservation? (Now defined by PWCC)

123457

Comments

  • brad31brad31 Posts: 2,530 ✭✭✭✭✭

    LOTSOS - yes I used I be a customer.

    Just looked on EBay - my purchase history still showing is 6 cards totaling $3,405.09.

    I used to bid often and win seldom - but there were dozens of auctions for which I came in second place. Not a large fish for them but they will never receive another bid from me.

    I also bought a PWCC-HE card for $1200 that was being re-sold. Will not look at cards with that sticker in the secondary market anymore.

    I can and will spend my card budget elsewhere. No card is worth me doing business with a dealer that had a real hand in ruining so many nice cards. I hope many in the hobby look at the evidence and reach the same conclusion I did and respond the same way.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,226 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @LarkinCollector said:
    Target card display. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.

    There’s a Target at Mos Eisley’s?

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • HighGradeLegendsHighGradeLegends Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭✭

    @LarkinCollector said:
    Target card display. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.

    Ha!

  • doubledragondoubledragon Posts: 22,529 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Happy 4th!

  • BLUEJAYWAYBLUEJAYWAY Posts: 7,940 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I will be looking forward to reports from the National,if there will be any, on the various forums regarding this issue.

    Successful transactions:Tookybandit. "Everyone is equal, some are more equal than others".
  • doubledragondoubledragon Posts: 22,529 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Don't mind me, just passing through.

  • 60sfan60sfan Posts: 311 ✭✭✭

    @LOTSOS said:
    Also, I'd add, ask those who say they would never buy from them if they ever did to begin with. A lot of those people were spectators from the start

    Kevin

    That's right ……… and maybe some of the collectors who said they would stop buying from PWCC are still buying from PWCC.

  • rexvosrexvos Posts: 3,274 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I have yet to weigh in much on this but I asked questions on a couple of the cards posted today.on another site. I was pretty much told do not question the authority of those bringing accusations ever again. That being said the whole thing upsets me. I hate it when people seek to defraud others especially in the hobby but it does seem like there is a little vendetta factor to some of the allegations.

    Looking for FB HOF Rookies
  • 70ToppsFanatic70ToppsFanatic Posts: 2,103 ✭✭✭✭

    @rexvos said:
    I have yet to weigh in much on this but I asked questions on a couple of the cards posted today.on another site. I was pretty much told do not question the authority of those bringing accusations ever again. That being said the whole thing upsets me. I hate it when people seek to defraud others especially in the hobby but it does seem like there is a little vendetta factor to some of the allegations.

    Well said. The fact that some altered cards apparently made it into slabs is upsetting and needs to be addressed. What is more upsetting is that there are a number of people out there who are on a "mission" claiming that they "...only want the truth exposed...", but who also seem to have an ax to grind against the TPGs and some well-known commercial stakeholders of the hobby. Honest mistakes are made in every business. Flaws and holes are constantly being found and exploited by bad actors in many commercial processes. Truth can be learned without the derogatory speculations and unsubstantiated accusations we are experiencing.

    One or more flaws in the grading system were exploited by some bad actors but it doesn't mean the grading system, or those who manage it, are complicit or corrupt. The sky is NOT falling, no matter what some of the more inflamed postings and speculations on the various blogs may want us to believe.

    It is reasonable to expect that those responsible for managing the grading system will take steps to correct any flaws that have been exploited, to meet their obligations (if any) with respect to any altered cards that made it into slabs and also to try to hold the bad actors accountable as best they can. It would be helpful and appreciated if they could do this as expeditiously as possible and keep the hobby stakeholders advised of their progress as it is possible and reasonable to do so. But I think its unreasonable to not give them a fair chance and the time to meet these expectations before simply lashing out with speculative condemnation and derogatory statements about them as has already started happening in some of the other forums. Getting instant-gratification is just not realistic.

    Lastly, all other stakeholders in the hobby have it within their power to hold the bad actors accountable by refusing to do business with them. That is a personal choice which each of us needs to make, but doing so can have powerful impact.



    Dave
  • slum22slum22 Posts: 2,593 ✭✭✭✭

    Well said Dave.

    Steve
  • graygatorgraygator Posts: 447 ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 5, 2019 9:33AM

    @70ToppsFanatic said:

    The fact that some altered cards apparently made it into slabs is upsetting and needs to be addressed. What is more upsetting is that there are a number of people out there who are on a "mission" claiming that they "...only want the truth exposed...", but who also seem to have an ax to grind against the TPGs and some well-known commercial stakeholders of the hobby. Honest mistakes are made in every business. Flaws and holes are constantly being found and exploited by bad actors in many commercial processes. Truth can be learned without the derogatory speculations and unsubstantiated accusations we are experiencing.>

    I cannot agree that possible overreactions by random people on message boards with bad motivations is more upsetting than potential fraud by major hobby players and the resulting altered cards in third-party graders' holders. I find the latter much more upsetting.

    But I have a question: are you talking about the main players in exposing the altered cards, or are you saying that other posters, separate from the main players, are extrapolating too much from the known information and jumping to unwarranted conclusions? I think that makes a difference. I've yet to have seen this new refrain, which has been popping up lately, accompanied by any serious allegation that those exposing altered cards in holders are providing false or mistaken information. I personally don't care what their motivations are as long as their facts are correct, and so far they seem to be. Are you saying that they are not correct? Once I have correct information, I can then decide what I think based on that information, and the motivation of the people arguing what I should think aren't particularly relevant there either.

    One or more flaws in the grading system were exploited by some bad actors but it doesn't mean the grading system, or those who manage it, are complicit or corrupt. The sky is NOT falling, no matter what some of the more inflamed postings and speculations on the various blogs may want us to believe.

    We don't need to think third-party grading companies are complicit or corrupt. I seriously doubt that they are, but won't entirely rule it out until more is known. Frankly, I'd feel better if there was a complicit grader, as that person could be fired and there would be fewer questions about grading competence as a whole.

    I don't know if the sky is falling, but it sure seems to me that the foundation on which the high end of the hobby is built has many more cracks than were previously thought. Based only on the scans so far shown, I think a cautious consumer is perfectly reasonable to conclude that third-party graders lack sufficient competence at their core mission to justify continuing the blind assumption that a holdered card is not altered, or to justify the exponential price increases from one grade to the next that we have historically seen, particularly for high-grade cards. And it seems reasonable to me to maintain that conclusion until PSA explains what happened and how it intends to fix it going forward. That is, assuming such a consumer cares more about whether their cards are altered in fact, than they do about whether PSA says the cards are altered, an assumption that I'm not sure is warranted anymore.

    It is reasonable to expect that those responsible for managing the grading system will take steps to correct any flaws that have been exploited, to meet their obligations (if any) with respect to any altered cards that made it into slabs and also to try to hold the bad actors accountable as best they can. It would be helpful and appreciated if they could do this as expeditiously as possible and keep the hobby stakeholders advised of their progress as it is possible and reasonable to do so. But I think its unreasonable to not give them a fair chance and the time to meet these expectations before simply lashing out with speculative condemnation and derogatory statements about them as has already started happening in some of the other forums. Getting instant-gratification is just not realistic.

    What do you think a reasonable time frame is to expect action?

    Lastly, all other stakeholders in the hobby have it within their power to hold the bad actors accountable by refusing to do business with them. That is a personal choice which each of us needs to make, but doing so can have powerful impact.

    We also need to make a personal choice whether to apply this pressure not just to the "bad actors," but also to those who built their business as the first line of defense against those bad actors, until they address the situation to their customers' satisfaction.

  • brad31brad31 Posts: 2,530 ✭✭✭✭✭

    To me the title of this thread has PWCC right in it so unless specified comments are about them. Are those that are seeing a vendetta factor implying that PWCC’s reputation is unfairly being damaged?

  • 70ToppsFanatic70ToppsFanatic Posts: 2,103 ✭✭✭✭

    @drc said:
    A most excellent point was made elsewhere by well-known veteran vintage card expert Barry Sloate. He said that those who own high-grade cards and are hoping/trying to keep the status quo and have the controversy blow over are actually helping to devaluate their own cards.

    He pointed out that if nothing is done and grading of more and more trimmed cards continues (as it will if nothing is done and people forget), the populations of the high-grade cards will become larger and larger, and the values of these cards will thus go down.

    By putting their heads in the sand and trying to have hobby forget about it, they may not working to protect their investments but devaluating them.

    The only logical reason for an investor wanting to keep the status quo and hoping it blows over, of course, is when the collectors thinks or is worried that their investments are altered . . . Keep that in my with the next poster who tries to minimize the scandal.

    I am not advocating putting heads in the sand or waiting for things to blow over, nor am I trying to minimize the scandal.
    However, I find it completely irresponsible that more than a handful of posters in the various blogs make unsubstantiated and exaggerated claims on such topics as:

    • The number of slabbed cards affected
    • The percentage of lots in auction XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX that are "no good"
    • The market value of the affected items
    • The supposed actions various stakeholders involved are/are not/will/will not taking/take
    • The complicity and involvement of various stakeholders in the scandal
    • etc.

    It's one thing to share and discuss substantiated information. It's quite another to spread wild exaggerations and/or make "bad actor" accusations against stakeholders that, so far, there is no evidence to support. All that such speculation does is add more distractions for those trying to get to the bottom of this, taking away from their focus on the realities that need to be uncovered.

    And of course, when answers are not forthcoming sufficiently fast enough for some then the discussion goes off into the tangent about some stakeholders are trying to make it go away or are ignoring/trying to pass off their responsibilities.

    There are reasons why, generally, discussions and disclosures about ongoing investigations are kept to a minimum. If nothing else it prevents potential evidence from being compromised or destroyed as bad actors can find out how close those looking into things are getting.

    I believe the hobby would be better served if people:

    • kept to the facts
    • curtailed commercial and/or trade activities with those who have, so far, been reasonably identified as knowingly being involved in the scandal
    • were diligent while considering purchases
    • continued to bring newly discovered examples of the problem to the attention of the stakeholders looking into the scandal
    • respectfully continued to inquire of the investigators when the next progress report will be provided
    • etc.

    None of that involves sweeping anything under a rug.



    Dave
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I have been trying to better educate myself on this topic and did a Google search today of Dick Towle gone with the stain. In my view I think it would be wise for others trying to formulate their opinions to read some of the old threads on this board and others and articles written about the topic. I personally don't think we are going to come to a total consensus on this issue but after watching the entire hour plus long Brent interview right after it was posted it is more clear to me why he suggests "conservation" is common.

  • 60sfan60sfan Posts: 311 ✭✭✭

    Will the grading companies publish a list of certification numbers for cards that were submitted by known card doctors?

  • doubledragondoubledragon Posts: 22,529 ✭✭✭✭✭

    For his crimes, Gary Moser should be turned into a half man, half turkey.

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,171 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @60sfan said:
    Will the grading companies publish a list of certification numbers for cards that were submitted by known card doctors?

    No and they should NOT.

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • prgsdwprgsdw Posts: 503 ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 6, 2019 11:34AM

    I don't see any scenario where they would publish lists of cert numbers regardless of who submitted them to be honest. They were all graded, they aren't going to publish those lists and undermine confidence in their grading product. Some of those items could be crack outs and re-submissions without alteration. As much as I want to nail the scammers to the wall - and I think they should be prosecuted by law enforcement vigorously - I don't know that everything ever submitted by these folks was doctored.

    Steve

  • LGCLGC Posts: 219 ✭✭✭

    @prgsdw said:
    I don't see any scenario where they would publish lists of cert numbers regardless of who submitted them to be honest. They were all graded, they aren't going to publish those lists and undermine confidence in their grading product. Some of those items could be crack outs and re-submissions without alteration. As much as I want to nail the scammers to the wall - and I think they should be prosecuted by law enforcement vigorously - I don't know that everything ever submitted by these folks was doctored.

    Steve

    PSA grading process:
    “A series of PSA graders review your cards for authenticity. If genuine, PSA looks for evidence of doctoring, such as re-coloring or trimming.”

    So is “evidence” static (point in time only) or dynamic (new evidence in the future is considered)?

    I always thought static.

  • KendallCatKendallCat Posts: 2,966 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Some interesting posts and topics on this one, and as far as I can surmise the bottom line seems to be as follows:

    *Card doctoring has been going on a long time and they are doing a very good job of it.

    • not many people outside of this board and Blowout are very aware of what is going on and it most likely won’t have a long term impact on the hobby

    *PWCC may skate on this one or If someone gets nailed and turns Brent and Betsy might squirm some on this one.

    *his video on conservation was a joke, and he did not win anyone over with it - came off as an elitist who talks down to everyone in the hobby. For a card dealer as large as they are they surely get into a lot of trouble - first the Back and forth publicly with Courtney back in 2016 over shilling and now the ties to the card doctor Moser. They are giving legit dealers a bad name, and if I was a dealer I would be ticked.

    KC

  • rcmb3220rcmb3220 Posts: 1,108 ✭✭✭✭

    @LGC said:

    @prgsdw said:
    I don't see any scenario where they would publish lists of cert numbers regardless of who submitted them to be honest. They were all graded, they aren't going to publish those lists and undermine confidence in their grading product. Some of those items could be crack outs and re-submissions without alteration. As much as I want to nail the scammers to the wall - and I think they should be prosecuted by law enforcement vigorously - I don't know that everything ever submitted by these folks was doctored.

    Steve

    PSA grading process:
    “A series of PSA graders review your cards for authenticity. If genuine, PSA looks for evidence of doctoring, such as re-coloring or trimming.”

    So is “evidence” static (point in time only) or dynamic (new evidence in the future is considered)?

    I always thought static.

    Well the 52 Bowman Musial is out of the pop report. I’ll go with dynamic.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,226 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @LGC said:

    @prgsdw said:
    I don't see any scenario where they would publish lists of cert numbers regardless of who submitted them to be honest. They were all graded, they aren't going to publish those lists and undermine confidence in their grading product. Some of those items could be crack outs and re-submissions without alteration. As much as I want to nail the scammers to the wall - and I think they should be prosecuted by law enforcement vigorously - I don't know that everything ever submitted by these folks was doctored.

    Steve

    PSA grading process:
    “A series of PSA graders review your cards for authenticity. If genuine, PSA looks for evidence of doctoring, such as re-coloring or trimming.”

    So is “evidence” static (point in time only) or dynamic (new evidence in the future is considered)?

    I always thought static.

    Evidence has no statute of limitations. Crimes and misdemeanors can and do. Evidence? Not a chance - whether to convict or exonerate, credible and compelling new evidence can always be considered and weighed.

    @Dpeck100

    I read these boards and others and have long admired your collection, individuality, openness and frankness.

    So I was hoping to ask because I just want to know:

    Why do you seem to endorse altering cards and then grading them as if they weren’t?

    Obviously, we’re strangers but please consider this a question asked in earnest and not an attempt to troll you.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium

    I am not supporting restoration of cards, I just have come to the conclusion that some form of alteration has been taking place for quite sometime and one can pretend it doesn't take place or they can realize it does. I have never understood how cards that came out of tobacco cans or Cracker Jack boxes had little to no staining. Perhaps some do but I tend to think many have taken a bath of some kind. I don't buy these cards but for those that do this topic has been bounced around for quite some time. The Google search I did found threads going back 15 years on this fellow Dick Towle so it is no secret and something market participants have been very aware of. In those threads there appears to be no consensus either on if what he is doing is acceptable.

    When I first got online and started interacting about cards I was shocked to find out that soaking was an accepted practice. I was under the impression that anything done to a card to improve its appearance was alteration. It is very clear that lots of collectors have different opinions on what constitutes alteration. Some have no issue with soaking and cleaning while others want cards to be in their virgin state. In my view once people started tinkering with trying to enhance their appearance and overall condition they moved the line and now you get into the area of interpretation.

    There are some collectors who love sheet cut cards because they showcase the card in their best overall state and others that feel this is cheating and not indicative of natural condition. I fall into the category of the latter but there are still differing opinions. Should I pretend that no sheet cut cards have ever made it into a slab? No.

    After watching Brent's interview it seemed very clear that many cards have been attempted to be enhanced and he appears to suggest that is okay. I only added the comment about this Dick Towle fellow because it appears to me that people are trying to simply act like this is shocking and you have folks like him that have been advertising these services for quite some time and dealers have been acting on it and collectors too. If he has solutions that clean cards that third party grading firms can't detect I just don't see what you do other than accept it is happening.

    I have always viewed older cards like art so if people are willing to pay 150 million dollars for works of art that aren't entirely original who am I to say what should and should not be done to cards. Perhaps some form of restoration is what some of these folks want and obviously there is a loud chorus of people who don't. I will let them decide.

    Most of us know nothing about card alteration and wouldn't dream of it but there really isn't an iron clad set of rules in all collectors minds so I am just of the mind set that many feel differently about the issue and I think it is wise to try and educate yourself on what is taking place and make your own decisions.

    I have read a lot of comments blaming the grading firms and obviously in some cases errors took place but in many others they are fighting a tough battle because they are championed with grading the card in front of them and if you can't tell something has been done to it there is really nothing you can do other than assign it the grade that you see.

    This is a very complicated issue in reality.

  • KendallCatKendallCat Posts: 2,966 ✭✭✭✭✭

    drc -extremely well stated post. That is the part that PWCC (Brent) does not seem to understand in his video which you explained very well.

    It is not the soaking or other methods of messing with cards that is ultimately the issue. It is the fact that his example about fine art is way off like you stated. It is one thing to restore a fine piece of art, and another thing to do so and hide the fact - a fact that will enable the seller to make far more money by not stating ALL of the info.

    KC

  • LOTSOSLOTSOS Posts: 1,303 ✭✭✭✭✭

    So have we come to the ultimate Qualifier? Guess a decision will need to be made if will it be PSA 9 (C)onserved or PSA 9 (R)estored. Of course this new qualifier will need to be applied to 10's as well.

    Kevin

  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @drc said:

    @Dpeck100 said:
    @1951WheatiesPremium

    I am not supporting restoration of cards, I just have come to the conclusion that some form of alteration has been taking place for quite sometime and one can pretend it doesn't take place or they can realize it does. I have never understood how cards that came out of tobacco cans or Cracker Jack boxes had little to no staining. Perhaps some do but I tend to think many have taken a bath of some kind. I don't buy these cards but for those that do this topic has been bounced around for quite some time. The Google search I did found threads going back 15 years on this fellow Dick Towle so it is no secret and something market participants have been very aware of. In those threads there appears to be no consensus either on if what he is doing is acceptable.

    When I first got online and started interacting about cards I was shocked to find out that soaking was an accepted practice. I was under the impression that anything done to a card to improve its appearance was alteration. It is very clear that lots of collectors have different opinions on what constitutes alteration. Some have no issue with soaking and cleaning while others want cards to be in their virgin state. In my view once people started tinkering with trying to enhance their appearance and overall condition they moved the line and now you get into the area of interpretation.

    There are some collectors who love sheet cut cards because they showcase the card in their best overall state and others that feel this is cheating and not indicative of natural condition. I fall into the category of the latter but there are still differing opinions. Should I pretend that no sheet cut cards have ever made it into a slab? No.

    After watching Brent's interview it seemed very clear that many cards have been attempted to be enhanced and he appears to suggest that is okay. I only added the comment about this Dick Towle fellow because it appears to me that people are trying to simply act like this is shocking and you have folks like him that have been advertising these services for quite some time and dealers have been acting on it and collectors too. If he has solutions that clean cards that third party grading firms can't detect I just don't see what you do other than accept it is happening.

    I have always viewed older cards like art so if people are willing to pay 150 million dollars for works of art that aren't entirely original who am I to say what should and should not be done to cards. Perhaps some form of restoration is what some of these folks want and obviously there is a loud chorus of people who don't. I will let them decide.

    Most of us know nothing about card alteration and wouldn't dream of it but there really isn't an iron clad set of rules in all collectors minds so I am just of the mind set that many feel differently about the issue and I think it is wise to try and educate yourself on what is taking place and make your own decisions.

    I have read a lot of comments blaming the grading firms and obviously in some cases errors took place but in many others they are fighting a tough battle because they are championed with grading the card in front of them and if you can't tell something has been done to it there is really nothing you can do other than assign it the grade that you see.

    This is a very complicated issue in reality.

    One word you miss, and that is the legal requirement and the ethical standard in all collecting areas including Picasso and Rembrandt paintings: disclosure.

    It is perfectly legal to trim, restore and recolor a baseball card, painting or Indian arrowhead. It is the lack of disclosure that is illegal-- i.e. fraud.

    Even if restoration is more accepted and normal in the world of Picassos and Rembrandt paintings and vintage movie posters, not disclosing the work is considered by collectors to be just as unethical and fraudulent as it is with baseball cards.

    This Dick Towle fellow worked on over 7,000 cards in 2018 alone according to their Facebook page. I for some reason have never once read a description that states card was probably a 4 but because it was sent to Dick it is now a 7.

    There have been quite a few posts on various boards talking about removing wax stains and now with modern cards there are people who are doing Youtube videos showing how to clean surfaces and fix corners before grading. For some reason I have never read a description that stated card was going to be a 5 but I got the wax off and now it is a 9.

    Brent stated conservation was improving the cards appearance without leaving evidence of doing so. He sounded very matter of fact with this statement and my conclusion from reading about the topic is its going on whether anyone likes it or not.

    "I have done so many Mickey Mantle rookies it is ridiculous" Dick Towle quote from 2008 SCD interview

    It is hard for me to believe this has all been a total secret in the vintage card world.

  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 7, 2019 6:26AM

    There is another detailed one from 2009 that Ron Burgundy is the OP that I think folks should read.

    A total of 27 that show up in the Google search so lots of material from this site if people care to read it.

  • graygatorgraygator Posts: 447 ✭✭✭✭

    This is why I find all the hand-wringing about exaggerated reactions to this so laughable. It’s becoming more and more clear the more I look into this and the more dealers and collectors I talk to that all sorts of alterations have been going on for a long time by a lot of people. Recent events are showing that the third-party graders are not nearly as adept at catching it as I naively thought them to be on my re-entry to the hobby five years ago. There may not be much for individual collectors to do but accept that any card you might buy could be altered and price how you feel about that into what you are willing to pay and how you are comfortable collecting, if you are comfortable collecting at all.

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,171 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Dpeck100 said:

    It is hard for me to believe this has all been a total secret in the vintage card world.

    It has not been a secret at all. Some (most?) collectors hear what they want to hear and believe that TPGs are infallible.

    I am by no means a big time collector, but have witnessed sellers/dealers "fixing" cards for years, have bought cards through the mail that have been touched up, have had sellers accuse other sellers of pressing/rolling cards and then trimming, and bought and seen cards ridiculously over/under graded.

    Going to card shows and card shops and talking to people taught me a lot. Ebay is great for getting cards you would have never otherwise found and getting great deals, but the downside is it's not a way to learn much about the hobby.

    @graygator said:
    This is why I find all the hand-wringing about exaggerated reactions to this so laughable. It’s becoming more and more clear the more I look into this and the more dealers and collectors I talk to that all sorts of alterations have been going on for a long time by a lot of people. Recent events are showing that the third-party graders are not nearly as adept at catching it as I naively thought them to be on my re-entry to the hobby five years ago. There may not be much for individual collectors to do but accept that any card you might buy could be altered and price how you feel about that into what you are willing to pay and how you are comfortable collecting, if you are comfortable collecting at all.

    You got it graygator!

    Apparently cards can be "fixed" and since the grader is limited to observation as a way of inspection. TPGs are in many cases unable to detect if a card has been soaked/cleaned. A clever trimmer can prolly figure out how to produce the rough cut that some think proves that a card has not been trimmed.

    With the huge sums of money that can be made when an 8 (or 4 or 6) becomes a 9 or 10, I doubt that most of the money grubbers are going to disclose what they have done.

    If you decide to stay in the hobby, I would suggest being realistic about your expectations.

    As I have said in the past, SOME of the detective work that has been done is fantastic, some has been reactionary and done by those with little or no understanding of the printing process and some I would think with their own agenda.

    Still, have fun collecting!

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • 60sfan60sfan Posts: 311 ✭✭✭

    @KendallCat said:
    drc -extremely well stated post. That is the part that PWCC (Brent) does not seem to understand in his video which you explained very well.

    It is not the soaking or other methods of messing with cards that is ultimately the issue. It is the fact that his example about fine art is way off like you stated. It is one thing to restore a fine piece of art, and another thing to do so and hide the fact - a fact that will enable the seller to make far more money by not stating ALL of the info.

    KC

    @KendallCat said:
    drc -extremely well stated post. That is the part that PWCC (Brent) does not seem to understand in his video which you explained very well.

    It is not the soaking or other methods of messing with cards that is ultimately the issue. It is the fact that his example about fine art is way off like you stated. It is one thing to restore a fine piece of art, and another thing to do so and hide the fact - a fact that will enable the seller to make far more money by not stating ALL of the info.

    KC

    Buyers rely on the TPG to verify the cards authenticity and evaluate the card's condition.

    How would the restoration information for a card get passed on to buyer #2, buyer#3, etc. over a period of 15, 20 or more years?

  • detroitfan2detroitfan2 Posts: 3,311 ✭✭✭✭

    Detecting alteration of a baseball card is no different than authenticating an autograph or determining if unopened product has been re-sealed. It's based on the knowledge available, and we trust the people who are the best at their craft to make these decisions. Anyone who thinks these decisions will be 100% accurate, or shall I say "can be" 100% accurate, is fooling themselves.

    If we want to debate whether a "decision maker" is on the take, or that they should have "more knowledge", we can do that. If one thinks they should have "more knowledge", however, don't expect any $5 grading specials in the future.

  • KendallCatKendallCat Posts: 2,966 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @KendallCat said:
    drc -extremely well stated post. That is the part that PWCC (Brent) does not seem to understand in his video which you explained very well.

    It is not the soaking or other methods of messing with cards that is ultimately the issue. It is the fact that his example about fine art is way off like you stated. It is one thing to restore a fine piece of art, and another thing to do so and hide the fact - a fact that will enable the seller to make far more money by not stating ALL of the info.

    KC

    Buyers rely on the TPG to verify the cards authenticity and evaluate the card's condition.

    How would the restoration information for a card get passed on to buyer #2, buyer#3, etc. over a period of 15, 20 or more years?

    Not sure I understand your post -please clarify and I will try to respond.

    KC

  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 4,680 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @60sfan said:

    @KendallCat said:
    drc -extremely well stated post. That is the part that PWCC (Brent) does not seem to understand in his video which you explained very well.

    It is not the soaking or other methods of messing with cards that is ultimately the issue. It is the fact that his example about fine art is way off like you stated. It is one thing to restore a fine piece of art, and another thing to do so and hide the fact - a fact that will enable the seller to make far more money by not stating ALL of the info.

    KC

    @KendallCat said:
    drc -extremely well stated post. That is the part that PWCC (Brent) does not seem to understand in his video which you explained very well.

    It is not the soaking or other methods of messing with cards that is ultimately the issue. It is the fact that his example about fine art is way off like you stated. It is one thing to restore a fine piece of art, and another thing to do so and hide the fact - a fact that will enable the seller to make far more money by not stating ALL of the info.

    KC

    Buyers rely on the TPG to verify the cards authenticity and evaluate the card's condition.

    How would the restoration information for a card get passed on to buyer #2, buyer#3, etc. over a period of 15, 20 or more years?

    If PSA wished to slab restored cards, one option would be to do what CGC has done: use a different color label and describe the detected resto.

  • 60sfan60sfan Posts: 311 ✭✭✭

    @KendallCat said:

    @KendallCat said:
    drc -extremely well stated post. That is the part that PWCC (Brent) does not seem to understand in his video which you explained very well.

    It is not the soaking or other methods of messing with cards that is ultimately the issue. It is the fact that his example about fine art is way off like you stated. It is one thing to restore a fine piece of art, and another thing to do so and hide the fact - a fact that will enable the seller to make far more money by not stating ALL of the info.

    KC

    Buyers rely on the TPG to verify the cards authenticity and evaluate the card's condition.

    How would the restoration information for a card get passed on to buyer #2, buyer#3, etc. over a period of 15, 20 or more years?

    Not sure I understand your post -please clarify and I will try to respond.

    KC

    If PWCC sells a card that has gone through "conservation" and PWCC discloses this on their listing, the buyer will know the card went through "conservation".

    But what happens when that buyer sells the "conservation" card at a card show, and then that buyer sells it on ebay, and then the card is sold through an auction house, etc.?

    There's a good possibility that at some point "ALL of the info" that PWCC disclosed is not passed on to subsequent buyers of that card over the next 5, 10, 15, 20 years.

  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 4,680 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 7, 2019 1:43PM

    @60sfan said:

    @KendallCat said:

    @KendallCat said:
    drc -extremely well stated post. That is the part that PWCC (Brent) does not seem to understand in his video which you explained very well.

    It is not the soaking or other methods of messing with cards that is ultimately the issue. It is the fact that his example about fine art is way off like you stated. It is one thing to restore a fine piece of art, and another thing to do so and hide the fact - a fact that will enable the seller to make far more money by not stating ALL of the info.

    KC

    Buyers rely on the TPG to verify the cards authenticity and evaluate the card's condition.

    How would the restoration information for a card get passed on to buyer #2, buyer#3, etc. over a period of 15, 20 or more years?

    Not sure I understand your post -please clarify and I will try to respond.

    KC

    If PWCC sells a card that has gone through "conservation" and PWCC discloses this on their listing, the buyer will know the card went through "conservation".

    But what happens when that buyer sells the "conservation" card at a card show, and then that buyer sells it on ebay, and then the card is sold through an auction house, etc.?

    There's a good possibility that at some point "ALL of the info" that PWCC disclosed is not passed on to subsequent buyers of that card over the next 5, 10, 15, 20 years.

    As I’ve said before, if PSA can’t detect something, then nothing else matters. What PWCC says really means nothing, at the end of the day their official role is nothing more than consignment seller. It is not their role to disclose anything about conservation/resto on a card unless they are selling it raw. And yes, if they disclosed something about a raw card, we should assume it is meaningful only for the current sale.

  • LOTSOSLOTSOS Posts: 1,303 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @drc said:

    @PaulMaul said:

    As I’ve said before, if PSA can’t detect something, then nothing else matters. What PWCC says really means nothing, at the end of the day their official role is nothing more than consignment seller. It is not their role to disclose anything about conservation/resto on a card unless they are selling it raw. And yes, if they disclosed something about a raw card, we should assume it is meaningful only for the current sale.

    Entirely wrong.

    CORECT ANSWER!

    Kevin

  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 4,680 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @LOTSOS said:

    @drc said:

    @PaulMaul said:

    As I’ve said before, if PSA can’t detect something, then nothing else matters. What PWCC says really means nothing, at the end of the day their official role is nothing more than consignment seller. It is not their role to disclose anything about conservation/resto on a card unless they are selling it raw. And yes, if they disclosed something about a raw card, we should assume it is meaningful only for the current sale.

    Entirely wrong.

    CORECT ANSWER!

    Please explain.

  • KendallCatKendallCat Posts: 2,966 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Obviously PSA or SGC or any other TPG needs to catch the alterations. Do some get by the goalie that should not - absolutely. From my side I disagree with Brent trying to rationalize in his video that alterations(he calls it conservation) are normal in arts and antiquities and that the card world is in the Stone Age in regards to it.

    IMO his stance is arrogant and ignorant and very self serving. We obviously now know this has been going in the industry for a while, but what he fails to realize is that as a major seller of graded cards and associating with a known trimmer who he is working with to buy/crack/trim and resell it is a bad idea. Just like having examples of texts posted from 2016 telling a guy to shill and drive up auction prices on your auction and that he does not have to worry about being on the hook for the cards.. Really a sad thing to see from PWCC.

    KC

  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 4,680 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Maybe you guys are misunderstanding me. If a card has been altered/conserved/restored, PSA needs to be able to detect that. It is silly to expect submitters or sellers to police themselves. PSA’s job is to be the gatekeeper, that’s what their service is for. Everyone else in the submitting/selling process is simply relying on PSA’s opinion. Whatever else the submitter has done to the card (if anything) will usually be difficult to establish, and will certainly not be voluntarily disclosed.

  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 4,680 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @drc said:
    What matters is if the card is altered or unaltered.

    If PWCC knows a card is altered, they have to disclose it.

    Morally, PWCC should obviously not sell a card as unrestored if they know it is restored.

    Practically speaking, one of the main reasons to have cards graded is for the TPG to catch alterations. The submitter can not be relied upon to disclose alterations. The submitter may be ignorant or dishonest. The TPG is supposed to police those possibilities.

    So again, if TPG can’t fulfill that responsibility, bad cards will reach the marketplace one way or another.

  • LOTSOSLOTSOS Posts: 1,303 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 7, 2019 10:17PM

    @PaulMaul said:

    @LOTSOS said:

    @drc said:

    @PaulMaul said:

    As I’ve said before, if PSA can’t detect something, then nothing else matters. What PWCC says really means nothing, at the end of the day their official role is nothing more than consignment seller. It is not their role to disclose anything about conservation/resto on a card unless they are selling it raw. And yes, if they disclosed something about a raw card, we should assume it is meaningful only for the current sale.

    Entirely wrong.

    CORECT ANSWER!

    Please explain.

    I say that because if you read through all the posts on BO it is very clear (at least to me) that PWCC / Brent bought cards had them altered / conserved / restored and sold them. That’s not “nothing more than a consignment seller”. It’s that simple for me. So in MY OPINION if your are doing what I believe they did you are completely responsible and should disclose what you did. And yes, I see how that muddies the waters down the road for the sale of that item in the future but don’t you think that the hobby, and TPGs would reassess there relationship with such a consignor if they stated that upfront?

    And to be clear @PaulMaul you are a great member here who has contributed to my knowledge in the hobby. I’m not trolling you or trying to provoke. Simply stating my opinion.

    Kevin

  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 4,680 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 7, 2019 10:24PM

    @LOTSOS said:
    So in MY OPINION if you are doing what I believe they did you are completely responsible and should disclose what you did.

    Again, I wholeheartedly agree in the moral sense. But from a practical standpoint, those who are guilty of wrongdoing cannot be relied upon to disclose it. A competent gatekeeper is needed. Absent that, bad cards will reach the marketplace one way or another.

  • doubledragondoubledragon Posts: 22,529 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 9, 2019 12:23PM

    I wish Dirty Harry was on this case. Did you alter this card? Well, did ya? Punk.

  • demondeacsdemondeacs Posts: 113 ✭✭✭
    edited July 9, 2019 9:51AM

    Interesting article but it sidesteps one complicated decision prosecutors would have to make--where to draw the line. Even on blowout, there are threads abound about cleaning. buffing out scratches with meguiar products, and soaking cards as well as other alterations. Do I consider that the same as trimming or recoloring? No, but there's no telling how a non-hobbyist would view it and even hobbyists disagree. All of it can increase value significantly depending on the card and I've never seen any of it disclosed.

    https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=982715

    https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=198828

    https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1231846

    Those are just a few I found quickly by googling scratches and soaking.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,226 ✭✭✭✭✭

    After watching Brent's interview it seemed very clear that many cards have been attempted to be enhanced and he appears to suggest that is okay.

    I would say that MOST people who ALTER CARDS view it as no big deal.
    And most that don’t, do.

    I know I don’t and I do.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 9, 2019 2:38PM

    @drc said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I would say that MOST people who ALTER CARDS view it as no big deal.
    And most that don’t, do.

    Well said.

    Scammers also often justify their actions by saying "Everyone does it," which is not true. Most people, including in this hobby, are honest and ethical. Criminals often wrongly assume people think and view the world as they do.

    I just read an article yesterday on another forum from 1996 shortly after PSA began grading cards. I take it more as he is just pointing out the obvious and what has been going on for decades.

    Brent may turn out to be a criminal but I don't jump to conclusions based on internet sleuthing. The same sleuths had that board convinced that the Honus Wagner PSA 8 was recalled if you will and as witnessed by the moderators comment in the thread here that couldn't be further from the truth.

Sign In or Register to comment.