SGC's own little WIWAG problem??

Thread from SGC boards.

Rather interesting - it sounds as if it's confirmed that the label is bogus, and with a higher feedback seller, you'd have to assume this isn't a photoshop edit job. Is this a case of people switching cards in SGC holders?

Comments

  • Did you get a look at the card before the auction was pulled to see what the problem was?
  • Card looked fine to me, though I'm not that familiar with SGC cards (in an intricate sense anyhow) - apparently the two red flags that people picked up on, as mentioned in the thread, was an extra digit on the SGC number and that it started with a "2" instead of a 1 or 8. SGC submissions are different from PSA or Beckett - the first number on the label is the submission #, and the second is the card number in the submission. Thus "1234567-001" would be submission invoice #1234567, and card #1 of that submission.
  • shagrotn77shagrotn77 Posts: 4,839 ✭✭✭
    So what is the deal with PSA and WIWAG? I heard there was some type of scandal, but I don't know what happened? Can anyone fill me in?
    "My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
  • The font on the label looks different, but there are no signs that the SGC holder was compromised.
  • It was mentioned on the SGC boards that the seller said the card appeared to have been re-holdered by someone other than SGC.

    Get ready for the double talk about how this "scandal" is not exactly the same as wiwag; how in some way this SGC SCANDAL again verifies they are the far superior company. Funny.

  • Did anyone save a copy of the image? The SGC holder certainly did not look like it was tampered with.


  • << <i>Get ready for the double talk about how this "scandal" is not exactly the same as wiwag; how in some way this SGC SCANDAL again verifies they are the far superior company. Funny. >>



    LOL - and the prattle now is that I'm Solomon Kramer, and the Defenders of the Faith have to do anything possible to prove this is irrelivant, resorting to personal attacks against someone I'm not!

    MW has to learn that there are more than three people in the world that don't have a hi opinion of his constant PSA bashing. Talk about defensive.
  • Not sure how one can compare the When It Was A Game scandal to this one example. How does one example stack up against the quantity of cards that were involved with When It Was A Game? Regardless of whose story you want to believe of the actual quantities involved.

    If you want to take the position that where there is smoke there is fire, fine. But find hundreds more examples of holders that have been compromised before you start drawing wild conclusions.

    As a new comer here and to the PSA grading game I have not found any comfort in the manner in which their scandal was handled.

    Ron
  • aconteaconte Posts: 1,930 ✭✭✭


    << <i>double talk about how this "scandal" is not exactly the same as wiwag >>



    READ the thread CAREFULLY. It is not the same.

    I figure you got to really hate Sgc to think the WIWAG scandal compares to this auction.

    But I do agree that there are a lot of unanswered questions from that debacle.

    aconte
  • On the thread from the link mentioned above, the VP of SGC, Sean Skeffington wrote:

    I am aware of the bogus Bonds card that is currently on eBay. I have been in contact with eBay's fraud department today and the auction should be removed within 24 hours. To answer Scott's question, I have not seen this version of a bogus SGC label before, but I have seen other crude reproductions of an SGC label on one or two other occasions. This is a rare and unfortunate situation, but thanks to all of the board members for bringing these potential frauds to light.

    This fact that this is a new type of phony label and not of the phony labeled cards from one of the several prior incidents is disturbing and is sad news for all collectors and we need to show solidarity on this problem. I hope that SGC will take a proactive position this time and aggressively get to the bottom of this incident and file charges on the low life that is responsible for this.
  • Bottom line...some people just suck regardless of whose flip is fraudulent. I never thought the WIWAG scandal was a PSA problem and I don't think this an SGC problem. It is a people problem. No matter what you do to make the holder more secure there will always be someone who spends all of their time trying to be a tool. I think at the root of both these issues is such a person(s). The best thing to do is bring it to the grading companies attention and if applicable notify local authorities. Looks like SGC handled this as well as could be expected.

    If you're like me, this stuff makes you sick and feel like slapping someone. It's nice to reflect on all of the reputable folks I've dealt with for a minute. That helps flush away this human refuse...sort of a hobby cleansing, if you will...doing away with the toxic under-belly of our collecting society...
    someday I'll tell you how I really feel.

    dgf

    oldschool.images@yahoo.com
  • I have opened Sgc holders, and they are not as easy as PSA holders to open, so I don't if. If someone can pull that off, they are pretty good.


  • << <i>So what is the deal with PSA and WIWAG? I heard there was some type of scandal, but I don't know what happened? Can anyone fill me in? >>




    Shag What they did was open part of a psa holder and put a lesser card condition in, then resealed it and sold it as the real mccoy. Pretty sneaky and pretty smart. Had they not been so greedy doing it on so many thousands of cards, they probably would have gotten away with it.
  • 1). If by sneaky, you mean criminal, then yes.
    2). It has never been determined how many cards were doctored by WIWAG. To say that thousands were affected is pure conjecture, or you know more than the rest of us. Care to spill your info?



    << <i>Shag What they did was open part of a psa holder and put a lesser card condition in, then resealed it and sold it as the real mccoy. Pretty sneaky and pretty smart. Had they not been so greedy doing it on so many thousands of cards, they probably would have gotten away with it. >>

    Who is Rober Maris?
  • I am sure that if it were not several thousands of cards that were involved that Real Legends would not be involved in litigation over this matter. WIWAG was the main consignor to Real Legends' Grade & Trade for a long period of time and had unknowingly sold most of the cards that would qualify as those that were switched and resealed.

    Ron
  • so wiwag was done on a larger scale SUPPOSEDLY (how do we know the numbers of either?) - can someone please tell me the difference in the problem?

    seems to me in both instances the cards were inserted into new holders with higher false grades.

    Where is the outrage on the SGC boards? When wiwag hit that very outrage was EVERYWHERE - I believe the sky was falling if I remember correctly. Now when the shoe is on the other foot? Virtual silence. How telling.
  • The same thing can happen to SGC.

    SGC holders are very easy to open without traces of tampering. Whether this has been done on a large scale, nobody know yet.




  • << <i>1). If by sneaky, you mean criminal, then yes.
    2). It has never been determined how many cards were doctored by WIWAG. To say that thousands were affected is pure conjecture, or you know more than the rest of us. Care to spill your info?
    >>



    MW posted that there were tens of thousands of WIWAG cards still out there. What more proof do you need??????????

    He also said that SGC gets rid of all fake SGC cards to take them off the market. But the seller didn't say anything about being contacted by SGC to take the card back. They merely contacted Ebay to end the auction.

    I think that it is awful that anyone conterfiets a card, and I would lke all companies to make it more difficult. I used to buy SGC cards,ut the reason I own PSA cards and not SGC cards now is not becuuse of security reasons, but because MW is so obnoxious that I want nothing to do with SGC.
    Ole Doctor Buck of the Popes of Hell

  • Nobody is getting rid of these cards. The owner/seller has not agreed to disgarded the card.

    This is not the first time I have seen cards with such fonts in SGC holders. The seals look perfect. Hopefully SGC can get to the source of this problem before more collectors are fooled.
  • Did anyone save a pic of the card before the auction was taken down? If so, please PM it to me.
    Who is Rober Maris?
  • Sean, I wish that I did, but I didn't.

    As usual, Koby is pretty far off base on an issue involving SGC. I spent a good bit of time examining the images. They were horrible digital pics and the one that showed the entire card was so poor you couldn't even read the (bogus) certification number. Contrary to Koby's contention, you couldn't see details of tha slab at all. There was a second image that showed the (blurry) flip and you could tell it was curious to say the least -- wrong font, very strange cert #, a bar code that was just a bunch of parallel lines, etc.

    In short, based on the auction images, you couldn't say anything about what the holder actually looked like and I'm inclined to believe the seller who stated the alteration was pretty obvious. His words follow.

    i can't believe people sold me a bogus card.
    i find that card out and take a closer look at it.
    i find out that the card holder has beened opened and glue it back together.
    i don't know what's to do with this card. i am so sorry that i lsit stuff
    like this

    Dr S. of the Dead Donkeys MC
Sign In or Register to comment.