<< <i>If a car dealership rolls back odometers and no one can tell the difference, this is still considered unethical and illegal. >>
Not truly a valid comparison. Cars have wear and tear. A car with 75,000 miles on it has a lot more wear and tear (and is closer to the end of its useful life) than a car with 25,000 miles on it.
A card that has been soaked to remove scrapbook residue on the back simply is a card that had something added to it that was subsequently removed. A more valid comparison would be a car dealership that removed bumper stickers from trade-ins before selling them. That doesn't seem so bad, now does it? >>
That's not an equal comparision either because you are doing something to the integrity of the card. They aren't just scraping the residue off, they are submerging the entire card in liquid and then drying it out by pressing the card in between heavy books.
If you mess up scraping off a bumper sticker, oh well, no big deal. The car's value may be slightly lower.
If you mess up soaking a card, it's ruined. The value will plummet.
Unless I'm missing something....
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
You've just found an old '57 Chevy in a barn. It's in great condition, but there's a big piece of debris stuck to the back fender (2 feet long). It's not part of the car, it just got stuck from being in that barn for 50 years.
You can't just yank this piece of debris off. If you do, there will be this huge hole in the back fender and the value of the car will plummet.
You have to submerge this car under a special solution, and then the debris will loosen and float free.
But if you submerge it for too long, the back fender can become discolored (halo). If you took a before and after picture of the metal and the paint, it's different now. *Something* has been done to the integrity of the metal and the paint. It got rusted? It got damaged in some way? The metal got kind of wavy or warped?
Now you've got to "fix it". You've got to dry it out in the sun. The "damage" is gone. The paint scheme is back to normal. The metal isn't wavy anymore.
To me, that sounds like a different car than one thats been undisturbed for 50 years.
<< <i>If a car dealership rolls back odometers and no one can tell the difference, this is still considered unethical and illegal. >>
Not truly a valid comparison. Cars have wear and tear. A car with 75,000 miles on it has a lot more wear and tear (and is closer to the end of its useful life) than a car with 25,000 miles on it.
A card that has been soaked to remove scrapbook residue on the back simply is a card that had something added to it that was subsequently removed. A more valid comparison would be a car dealership that removed bumper stickers from trade-ins before selling them. That doesn't seem so bad, now does it? >>
That's not an equal comparision either because you are doing something to the integrity of the card. They aren't just scraping the residue off, they are submerging the entire card in liquid and then drying it out by pressing the card in between heavy books.
If you mess up scraping off a bumper sticker, oh well, no big deal. The car's value may be slightly lower.
If you mess up soaking a card, it's ruined. The value will plummet.
Unless I'm missing something.... >>
What you're missing is that if you soak the card too long and ruin it then you-- not another collector-- are on the hook for the financial loss.
Are your clothes 'different' -- or at least different in any meaningful way-- after they've been washed? If you put something in water, then let it dry, most people agree that the object in question hasn't been significantly compromised. If you soak a card, and after it dries it looks exactly the same as it did before the soaking, then what is the problem? And even if it looks different, who cares? If people think that the difference in appearance-- say, for example, that the color on the card has faded-- compromises the card's appeal then they'll pay less for it.
<< <i>What you're missing is that if you soak the card too long and ruin it then you-- not another collector-- are on the hook for the financial loss.
Are your clothes 'different' -- or at least different in any meaningful way-- after they've been washed? If you put something in water, then let it dry, most people agree that the object in question hasn't been significantly compromised. If you soak a card, and after it dries it looks exactly the same as it did before the soaking, then what is the problem? And even if it looks different, who cares? If people think that the difference in appearance-- say, for example, that the color on the card has faded-- compromises the card's appeal then they'll pay less for it. >>
Hmmm. Interesting point...
Guess it comes down to one's opinion of an item being restored or altered.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>What you're missing is that if you soak the card too long and ruin it then you-- not another collector-- are on the hook for the financial loss.
Are your clothes 'different' -- or at least different in any meaningful way-- after they've been washed? If you put something in water, then let it dry, most people agree that the object in question hasn't been significantly compromised. If you soak a card, and after it dries it looks exactly the same as it did before the soaking, then what is the problem? And even if it looks different, who cares? If people think that the difference in appearance-- say, for example, that the color on the card has faded-- compromises the card's appeal then they'll pay less for it. >>
Hmmm. Interesting point...
Guess it comes down to one's opinion of an item being restored or altered. >>
I think the central problem is that this hobby is guided what what most 'non collectors' would consider to be some very irrational precepts, and when those precepts clash with common sense-- and this happens a lot-- then there's bound to be a conflict. For instance, if a card has some glue on its back, and you soak the card and remove the glue, then you have, beyond any question, 'altered' the card.
But who cares? Or, more importantly, WHY does anyone care? Now I can see why this issue would matter very much to someone who has a truck load of money wrapped up in high grade cards, since this soaking process could increase the supply of high grade cards and drive down the value of their collection. But from an 'ethical' standpoint it doesn't make any sense to me. For instance, the one card I would really love to own one day in high grade condition is the T-205 Matthewson. To me it's the most beautiful card ever produced. But if I had a choice between two copies that were identical in every way except that one of them had been soaked to remove some gum on the back I would be totally indifferent when it came time to buy a copy. Why? Because I can't think of any reason why I would care. I like the card because it's a beautiful card. If both cards are equally pleasing then they provide me with identical levels of utility.
If people alter cards and PSA grades them, then altering them is O.K. to do. You can't have the best of both worlds, you can't say that altering cards is wrong when PSA sees them as unaltered. There's a fine line between altering cards and submitting them and simply resubmitting them trying to get a higher grade. I don't see much of a difference, both are based on financial gain. C123
It may be unethical but if they pass PSA than where is the harm? What is the difference between soaking cards and resubmitting the same card 5 times and finally getting that 9 into a 10 holder? When it is put up for sale, the seller is not saying that is was graded a 9 four times. C123
I have a soaked card from a flood. You can tell it has been soaked with water from my own basement. The integrity of the card has changed. The paper is not as "smooth" as it once was. Not that there is any "wrinkles", maybe it is the gloss that wore off. I dont think it would change the PSA grade, but I can tell exactly what has changed from what it looked liked before. Again, it was only ground water, not distilled.
2 more for cardkid Warning signs to pay attention to.... Worrying about messing up. -Worrying about the right kind of solution -Worying about doing it for too long -Doing something to card that results in it ending up in 2 pieces.
And the big one for me, doing something to card that you want removed or that's "bad"or asking "how do I fix this".
Passionately argueing that is is "right" justifying why it is"good for the hobby"
<< <i>What you're missing is that if you soak the card too long and ruin it then you-- not another collector-- are on the hook for the financial loss.
Are your clothes 'different' -- or at least different in any meaningful way-- after they've been washed? If you put something in water, then let it dry, most people agree that the object in question hasn't been significantly compromised. If you soak a card, and after it dries it looks exactly the same as it did before the soaking, then what is the problem? And even if it looks different, who cares? If people think that the difference in appearance-- say, for example, that the color on the card has faded-- compromises the card's appeal then they'll pay less for it. >>
Hmmm. Interesting point...
Guess it comes down to one's opinion of an item being restored or altered. >>
I think the central problem is that this hobby is guided what what most 'non collectors' would consider to be some very irrational precepts, and when those precepts clash with common sense-- and this happens a lot-- then there's bound to be a conflict. For instance, if a card has some glue on its back, and you soak the card and remove the glue, then you have, beyond any question, 'altered' the card.
But who cares? Or, more importantly, WHY does anyone care? Now I can see why this issue would matter very much to someone who has a truck load of money wrapped up in high grade cards, since this soaking process could increase the supply of high grade cards and drive down the value of their collection. But from an 'ethical' standpoint it doesn't make any sense to me. For instance, the one card I would really love to own one day in high grade condition is the T-205 Matthewson. To me it's the most beautiful card ever produced. But if I had a choice between two copies that were identical in every way except that one of them had been soaked to remove some gum on the back I would be totally indifferent when it came time to buy a copy. Why? Because I can't think of any reason why I would care. I like the card because it's a beautiful card. If both cards are equally pleasing then they provide me with identical levels of utility. >>
Oh don't get me wrong, I completely understand where you are coming from.
Personally, it's not a matter of having a higher grade, it's a matter of preference.
For example, if there were two 4 PSA Clementes, both absolutely identical except one has been "soaked". If they were offered at the same price, I would take the unsoaked one.
But hey, that's just me.
As for soaking as a whole, I don't like it one bit. Personally, I believe it is tweaking the card's integrity. However, I can see how others can see it as just restoring it.
But again, hey, that's just me.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>It may be unethical but if they pass PSA than where is the harm? What is the difference between soaking cards and resubmitting the same card 5 times and finally getting that 9 into a 10 holder? When it is put up for sale, the seller is not saying that is was graded a 9 four times. C123 >>
Very good point. Like I said before, this is all a bunch of bullchit. chaz
<< <i>What you're missing is that if you soak the card too long and ruin it then you-- not another collector-- are on the hook for the financial loss.
Are your clothes 'different' -- or at least different in any meaningful way-- after they've been washed? If you put something in water, then let it dry, most people agree that the object in question hasn't been significantly compromised. If you soak a card, and after it dries it looks exactly the same as it did before the soaking, then what is the problem? And even if it looks different, who cares? If people think that the difference in appearance-- say, for example, that the color on the card has faded-- compromises the card's appeal then they'll pay less for it. >>
Hmmm. Interesting point...
Guess it comes down to one's opinion of an item being restored or altered. >>
I think the central problem is that this hobby is guided what what most 'non collectors' would consider to be some very irrational precepts, and when those precepts clash with common sense-- and this happens a lot-- then there's bound to be a conflict. For instance, if a card has some glue on its back, and you soak the card and remove the glue, then you have, beyond any question, 'altered' the card.
But who cares? Or, more importantly, WHY does anyone care? Now I can see why this issue would matter very much to someone who has a truck load of money wrapped up in high grade cards, since this soaking process could increase the supply of high grade cards and drive down the value of their collection. But from an 'ethical' standpoint it doesn't make any sense to me. For instance, the one card I would really love to own one day in high grade condition is the T-205 Matthewson. To me it's the most beautiful card ever produced. But if I had a choice between two copies that were identical in every way except that one of them had been soaked to remove some gum on the back I would be totally indifferent when it came time to buy a copy. Why? Because I can't think of any reason why I would care. I like the card because it's a beautiful card. If both cards are equally pleasing then they provide me with identical levels of utility. >>
Oh don't get me wrong, I completely understand where you are coming from.
Personally, it's not a matter of having a higher grade, it's a matter of preference.
For example, if there were two 4 PSA Clementes, both absolutely identical except one has been "soaked". If they were offered at the same price, I would take the unsoaked one.
But hey, that's just me.
As for soaking as a whole, I don't like it one bit. Personally, I believe it is tweaking the card's integrity. However, I can see how others can see it as just restoring it.
But again, hey, that's just me.
>>
Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who the hell can tell the difference, I couldn't and I could care less. I'll say it again, leave it up to the experts at PSA and if it's in a PSA holder then they'll stand by the grade so what the hell are y'all worried about? It's as simple as that. chaz
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
You know, I think this answers the question of why some 57s feel so rough. It appears that they had been soaked and dried. Ever spilled liquid on a book and then let it dry? The feel of the book page(s) is how some of these cards feel. No way to know? I call BS since something had happened to those cards.
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical >>
Stown.... my point is how do you know???? You are just chasing a ghost or your tail.....either way it will drive you nuts. chaz >>
So you are saying we should just accept it? It's something you want to encourage?
If so, that's fine but personally, I don't like it and would hope others discourage the practice.
But that's just my opinion
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical >>
Oh, c'mon. No, that's NOT the same. When you're talking about friendships one of the implications of the relationship is, obviously, that you're not going to tap each other's wives. Or crank call each other's mothers, etc. etc. One of the reasons you became friends with that person in the first place was because they were comfortable with the assumption that neither of you would cuckold the other.
When you buy a sportscard from someone in a PSA holder the transaction does not take place in a moral context. You don't have a relationship with the seller; you are simply purchasing a commodity, and your decision on whether or not to purchase takes place outside of any ethical construct. An exception to this, obviously, is if someone sells you a PSA card and informs you that he knows the card has never been altered. At that point you've introduced an ethical dimension. But in the typical buyer-seller relationship this is not the case.
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical >>
Stown.... my point is how do you know???? You are just chasing a ghost or your tail.....either way it will drive you nuts. chaz >>
So you are saying we should just accept it? It's something you want to encourage?
If so, that's fine but personally, I don't like it and would hope others discourage the practice.
But that's just my opinion >>
There's nothing to accept or unaccept, because as chaz has illustrated there's a) nothing you can do about it, and b) once the card is holdered you can't tell if it's been soaked or not. Obsessing over card soaking is about as silly as obsessing over whether or not you're going to die in your sleep tonight. In neither case do you have any control over the possibility, and in both cases you'll never know if it happened or not.
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical >>
Stown.... my point is how do you know???? You are just chasing a ghost or your tail.....either way it will drive you nuts. chaz >>
So you are saying we should just accept it? It's something you want to encourage?
If so, that's fine but personally, I don't like it and would hope others discourage the practice.
But that's just my opinion >>
I, of course, am not saying encourage it. I am saying that we wouldn't know the difference. And again for the 50th freakin' time, that's why we rely on PSA. Let PSA determine if it's been messed with.... that's PSA's business and what we pay the grading fee for. chaz
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical >>
Oh, c'mon. No, that's NOT the same. When you're talking about friendships one of the implications of the relationship is, obviously, that you're not going to tap each other's wives. Or crank call each other's mothers, etc. etc. One of the reasons you became friends with that person in the first place was because they were comfortable with the assumption that neither of you would cuckold the other.
When you buy a sportscard from someone in a PSA holder the transaction does not take place in a moral context. You don't have a relationship with the seller; you are simply purchasing a commodity, and your decision on whether or not to purchase takes place outside of any ethical construct. An exception to this, obviously, is if someone sells you a PSA card and informs you that he knows the card has never been altered. At that point you've introduced an ethical dimension. But in the typical buyer-seller relationship this is not the case. >>
From a business perspective, you are absolutely correct. But that's when the line is crossed from a collector to an investor. There is no written "code of ethics" for collecting; so there's no set standard.
So who is to say who is right and who is wrong? That just comes down to preference.
Know what I mean?
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
The supply of some cards may actually turn out to be so low that collecting only "original" examples may not be possible for very much longer. Setting aside the economic factors that drive "market grading," a case can be made that restoration/doctoring is a means by which the "hobby" is preserved and expanded.
The parallel in currency collecting is well-stated on the PCGS Currency page entitled "Grading Standards." This is ONLY part of what PCGS says about originality. (As you read, substitute the word "cards" for the printed word "notes.):
"......In the 1970s and early 1980s many uncirculated notes were pressed out flat as a board to remove the original paper wave and embossing that, at the time, was considered a “defect.” Today, while the proponents of paper originality and embossing seem to be in the majority, this may not always be the case. How one approaches this problem is the basis for a reasonable and consistent grading standard. To ignore the problem would be a disservice to those in the marketplace who currently value originality. To place too much blame or detraction upon those notes that are truly beautiful and highly collectible, yet are not wholly original, would be a disservice. Many estimates of the numbers of large size type notes that have been restored in some fashion or another run so high that the supply of truly original notes might be so low as to preclude their collectability......."
///////////////////////////////////////////////
Once a card is TPGd and holdered, I tend not to worry too much about its past life.
storm
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
I think the issue is: Collectors have different levels of what is an acceptable level of alteration, from none to something significant. PSA has to set there standards somewhere, and they rely on their graders to detect the alterations. Altered cards will be missed, and if someone is good at altering cards, they could get a lot of altered stuff holdered, right or wrong.
The concern I think is that people altering cards may be able to do it "cleanly" enough to fool PSA or another grading company. Some people are satisfied with this, but it is a problem for other collectors.
How about this scenario? Someone finds a way to replicate cards from specific issues -- say T206, 1933 Goudey, and 1952 Topps. They get really good at manufacturing great replicas, then send PSA a handful of Wagners, Planks, Magies, Doyles, Ruths, Lajoies, Mantles, etc. If they get past PSA, would you be satisfied with them? You would never know, of course, so what's the problem? Well, one of the main reasons I collect cards is because I'm getting a piece of history, something that is relatively scarce, something that has wandered through the years and ended up in my hand today. I'd personally like to think that the card is authentic and unaltered.
This is a more extreme case, but it demonstrates my point that there is a continuum of what is acceptable in collectors' eyes, from no alterations to anything that gets into a PSA slab.
I would say it is wrong for a few reasons. One, alot of cards were put in bicycle spokes or have rubber band marks on them due to how collectors used or stored cards in the "old" days. According to the soaking logic, if there was a magic way to remove rubber band marks or fix creases due to storage wear then it would be ok because we are removing something that shouldn't have been there in the first place and we are also "preserving" the card in it's original condition. People also placed cards in albums with glue or flour paste in the "old" days as well. Just because there is a method of removing that type of damage does it make it right? I say this, it is just too bad that these cards were stored like this. If left in this condition the population of many prewar cards would be lower making the prices even higher. Second by soaking people are deliberately altering a cards condition to make it more valuable. If these people only cared about preserving the cards then why do they soak and grade them as well, pure greed is a large factor. Third if PSA could detect it or a method was devised would the same people who say it is ok to soak denounce PSA rejecting cards for being soaked? Alot of people are saying if PSA accepts soaked cards then it is fine with me but what if they could detect it would you support them rejecting these cards? That is what alot of collectors are saying, we would prefer people not alter cards by soaking. It messes with populations of cards and is done for the unethical reason of making more money on an unsuspecting customer (unethical because I am 100% sure dealers who do this purchase alot of these albums and cards for pennies on the dollar knowing full well that they can soak off the cards and make tons more money after grading). I understand it is not detectable at this time but if it does become detectable who would support PSA's decision to not grade these types of cards?
Currently completing the following registry sets: Cardinal HOF's, 1961 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1972 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1980 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, Bill Mazeroski Master & Basic Sets, Roberto Clemente Master & Basic Sets, Willie Stargell Master & Basic Sets and Terry Bradshaw Basic Set
As a supporter of the slabbing of cards as "authentic" if they have been trimmed, I would also support the same process for soaked cards. "Authentic" is alot more important to me than is "original."
If PSA adopted this scheme, the market would decide what value the authentic-but-altered cards had.
storm
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
<< <i>It may be unethical but if they pass PSA than where is the harm? What is the difference between soaking cards and resubmitting the same card 5 times and finally getting that 9 into a 10 holder? When it is put up for sale, the seller is not saying that is was graded a 9 four times. C123 >>
"If they pass PSA then where is the harm" Basically what you are saying here is that it is ok to make any alterations to the card as long as PSA doesn't catch it. What about the major auction houses pressing out wrinkles and erasing pencil makes? What about soaking the card to stretch it and then trimming the edges? All this can be done without PSA catching it. Does that make it ok? What about the guy that said he used Elmer's glue to put the 52 Mantle back together? It got past the graders. I guess that one is ok too. James
To those with their heads up there A$$ that dont think this is a huge problem may i suggest you set up at MAJOR shows for a few years then come back and tell me how prevelent you think card altering is. I can guarantee you your opinion on its frequency will change.
<< <i>To those with their heads up there A$$ that dont think this is a huge problem may i suggest you set up at MAJOR shows for a few years then come back and tell me how prevelent you think card altering is. I can guarantee you your opinion on its frequency will change. >>
A huge problem????? What does that mean???? If I showed you 2 cards and said pick out the one that has been soaked and you pick one (which you would) and then I tell you neither have been soaked (but I can't even be certain about that)....then what????? A huge problem ????? Or are you chasing a ghost or your tail ..... which will make you go nuts anyhow. My point is that you don't know for sure and I don't know and we leave it up to PSA to determine what cards have been altered....that's what we pay them for. chaz
Its not soaking so much that worries me,but some of the other stuff that openly goes on is disheartening. dont believe me fine but honestly set up at the major shows for a year or two. you'll be shocked at how many times you see someone buy nice 5-6-7s that only sells mainly 8s. It happens all the time and many of them are blatant and even up front about what they are doing. pressing,soaking, trimming, erasing print dots that are on the white borders of cards it happens at an alarming pace. things like power erasing and poorly trimmed cards are caught all the time but many other things are getting thru. One of the big ones has even graded some fake m101-5 ruths as authentic. these were fakes that were artifically aged and in low grade but could be spotted because the picture on the fakes is cropped slightly different then originals. i just dont feel we get what we pay for anymore from most of these grading companies.
<< <i>Its not soaking so much that worries me,but some of the other stuff that openly goes on is disheartening. dont believe me fine but honestly set up at the major shows for a year or two. you'll be shocked at how many times you see someone buy nice 5-6-7s that only sells mainly 8s. It happens all the time and many of them are blatant and even up front about what they are doing. pressing,soaking, trimming, erasing print dots that are on the white borders of cards it happens at an alarming pace. things like power erasing and poorly trimmed cards are caught all the time but many other things are getting thru. One of the big ones has even graded some fake m101-5 ruths as authentic. these were fakes that were artifically aged and in low grade but could be spotted because the picture on the fakes is cropped slightly different then originals. i just dont feel we get what we pay for anymore from most of these grading companies. >>
I still don't agree. If all this is going on (and you really can't be sure) then why doesn't the supply of all the vintage star cards and low pop commons just go through the roof? chaz
<< <i>I still don't agree. If all this is going on (and you really can't be sure) then why doesn't the supply of all the vintage star cards and low pop commons just go through the roof? chaz >>
I speculate that soaking is really tailor made for the pre-war era when pasting into scrapbooks was common. I'm guessing that would be from about 1880-1930 or so. In the 50's/60's -- kids stuck rubber bands on 'em and shoved them into cigar boxes. Soaking won't help those cards.
I imagine that with every new "find" of pre-war material preserved via a scrapbook, soaking will continue to drive up the high grade numbers for that era. I'm not sure we'll be able to notice it over a short period of time .... but over the long run my theory is we'll see the numbers reflect it.
of course, i'm halfway talking about of my a$$ here.
-Tom
- Building these sets: ------- 1960 Topps Baseball PSA 8+ ------- 1985 Topps Hockey PSA 9+
"I still don't agree. If all this is going on (and you really can't be sure) then why doesn't the supply of all the vintage star cards and low pop commons just go through the roof? chaz "
Most low pops are low pops due to the fact that they usually suffer from problems that are unfixable like: print dots or snow on the face of the card, off center or miscut cards, as well as out of focus. As for star cards most of their pops have exploded as have some cards that used to be low pops but did not continuously suffer from an unfixable problem. And I can be sure as multiple doctors are open and honest about what they are doing if you've known them for a long time.
While I agree that there are problems in the hobby with alterations and the subject needs to be addressed, I see the quest for information at Net54 going overboard.
Leon it seems has brought the posts back into perspective and rightly so.
What was that thread we had here a while back about squirrels?
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>If a car dealership rolls back odometers and no one can tell the difference, this is still considered unethical and illegal. >>
Not truly a valid comparison. Cars have wear and tear. A car with 75,000 miles on it has a lot more wear and tear (and is closer to the end of its useful life) than a car with 25,000 miles on it.
A card that has been soaked to remove scrapbook residue on the back simply is a card that had something added to it that was subsequently removed. A more valid comparison would be a car dealership that removed bumper stickers from trade-ins before selling them. That doesn't seem so bad, now does it? >>
That's not an equal comparision either because you are doing something to the integrity of the card. They aren't just scraping the residue off, they are submerging the entire card in liquid and then drying it out by pressing the card in between heavy books.
If you mess up scraping off a bumper sticker, oh well, no big deal. The car's value may be slightly lower.
If you mess up soaking a card, it's ruined. The value will plummet.
Unless I'm missing something....
You've just found an old '57 Chevy in a barn. It's in great condition, but there's a big piece of debris stuck to the back fender (2 feet long). It's not part of the car, it just got stuck from being in that barn for 50 years.
You can't just yank this piece of debris off. If you do, there will be this huge hole in the back fender and the value of the car will plummet.
You have to submerge this car under a special solution, and then the debris will loosen and float free.
But if you submerge it for too long, the back fender can become discolored (halo). If you took a before and after picture of the metal and the paint, it's different now. *Something* has been done to the integrity of the metal and the paint. It got rusted? It got damaged in some way? The metal got kind of wavy or warped?
Now you've got to "fix it". You've got to dry it out in the sun. The "damage" is gone. The paint scheme is back to normal. The metal isn't wavy anymore.
To me, that sounds like a different car than one thats been undisturbed for 50 years.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If a car dealership rolls back odometers and no one can tell the difference, this is still considered unethical and illegal. >>
Not truly a valid comparison. Cars have wear and tear. A car with 75,000 miles on it has a lot more wear and tear (and is closer to the end of its useful life) than a car with 25,000 miles on it.
A card that has been soaked to remove scrapbook residue on the back simply is a card that had something added to it that was subsequently removed. A more valid comparison would be a car dealership that removed bumper stickers from trade-ins before selling them. That doesn't seem so bad, now does it? >>
That's not an equal comparision either because you are doing something to the integrity of the card. They aren't just scraping the residue off, they are submerging the entire card in liquid and then drying it out by pressing the card in between heavy books.
If you mess up scraping off a bumper sticker, oh well, no big deal. The car's value may be slightly lower.
If you mess up soaking a card, it's ruined. The value will plummet.
Unless I'm missing something.... >>
What you're missing is that if you soak the card too long and ruin it then you-- not another collector-- are on the hook for the financial loss.
Are your clothes 'different' -- or at least different in any meaningful way-- after they've been washed? If you put something in water, then let it dry, most people agree that the object in question hasn't been significantly compromised. If you soak a card, and after it dries it looks exactly the same as it did before the soaking, then what is the problem? And even if it looks different, who cares? If people think that the difference in appearance-- say, for example, that the color on the card has faded-- compromises the card's appeal then they'll pay less for it.
<< <i>What you're missing is that if you soak the card too long and ruin it then you-- not another collector-- are on the hook for the financial loss.
Are your clothes 'different' -- or at least different in any meaningful way-- after they've been washed? If you put something in water, then let it dry, most people agree that the object in question hasn't been significantly compromised. If you soak a card, and after it dries it looks exactly the same as it did before the soaking, then what is the problem? And even if it looks different, who cares? If people think that the difference in appearance-- say, for example, that the color on the card has faded-- compromises the card's appeal then they'll pay less for it. >>
Hmmm. Interesting point...
Guess it comes down to one's opinion of an item being restored or altered.
<< <i>
<< <i>What you're missing is that if you soak the card too long and ruin it then you-- not another collector-- are on the hook for the financial loss.
Are your clothes 'different' -- or at least different in any meaningful way-- after they've been washed? If you put something in water, then let it dry, most people agree that the object in question hasn't been significantly compromised. If you soak a card, and after it dries it looks exactly the same as it did before the soaking, then what is the problem? And even if it looks different, who cares? If people think that the difference in appearance-- say, for example, that the color on the card has faded-- compromises the card's appeal then they'll pay less for it. >>
Hmmm. Interesting point...
Guess it comes down to one's opinion of an item being restored or altered. >>
I think the central problem is that this hobby is guided what what most 'non collectors' would consider to be some very irrational precepts, and when those precepts clash with common sense-- and this happens a lot-- then there's bound to be a conflict. For instance, if a card has some glue on its back, and you soak the card and remove the glue, then you have, beyond any question, 'altered' the card.
But who cares? Or, more importantly, WHY does anyone care? Now I can see why this issue would matter very much to someone who has a truck load of money wrapped up in high grade cards, since this soaking process could increase the supply of high grade cards and drive down the value of their collection. But from an 'ethical' standpoint it doesn't make any sense to me. For instance, the one card I would really love to own one day in high grade condition is the T-205 Matthewson. To me it's the most beautiful card ever produced. But if I had a choice between two copies that were identical in every way except that one of them had been soaked to remove some gum on the back I would be totally indifferent when it came time to buy a copy. Why? Because I can't think of any reason why I would care. I like the card because it's a beautiful card. If both cards are equally pleasing then they provide me with identical levels of utility.
C123
C123
2 more for cardkid
Warning signs to pay attention to....
Worrying about messing up.
-Worrying about the right kind of solution
-Worying about doing it for too long
-Doing something to card that results in it ending up in 2 pieces.
And the big one for me, doing something to card that you want removed or that's "bad"or asking "how do I fix this".
Passionately argueing that is is "right"
justifying why it is"good for the hobby"
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>What you're missing is that if you soak the card too long and ruin it then you-- not another collector-- are on the hook for the financial loss.
Are your clothes 'different' -- or at least different in any meaningful way-- after they've been washed? If you put something in water, then let it dry, most people agree that the object in question hasn't been significantly compromised. If you soak a card, and after it dries it looks exactly the same as it did before the soaking, then what is the problem? And even if it looks different, who cares? If people think that the difference in appearance-- say, for example, that the color on the card has faded-- compromises the card's appeal then they'll pay less for it. >>
Hmmm. Interesting point...
Guess it comes down to one's opinion of an item being restored or altered. >>
I think the central problem is that this hobby is guided what what most 'non collectors' would consider to be some very irrational precepts, and when those precepts clash with common sense-- and this happens a lot-- then there's bound to be a conflict. For instance, if a card has some glue on its back, and you soak the card and remove the glue, then you have, beyond any question, 'altered' the card.
But who cares? Or, more importantly, WHY does anyone care? Now I can see why this issue would matter very much to someone who has a truck load of money wrapped up in high grade cards, since this soaking process could increase the supply of high grade cards and drive down the value of their collection. But from an 'ethical' standpoint it doesn't make any sense to me. For instance, the one card I would really love to own one day in high grade condition is the T-205 Matthewson. To me it's the most beautiful card ever produced. But if I had a choice between two copies that were identical in every way except that one of them had been soaked to remove some gum on the back I would be totally indifferent when it came time to buy a copy. Why? Because I can't think of any reason why I would care. I like the card because it's a beautiful card. If both cards are equally pleasing then they provide me with identical levels of utility. >>
Oh don't get me wrong, I completely understand where you are coming from.
Personally, it's not a matter of having a higher grade, it's a matter of preference.
For example, if there were two 4 PSA Clementes, both absolutely identical except one has been "soaked". If they were offered at the same price, I would take the unsoaked one.
But hey, that's just me.
As for soaking as a whole, I don't like it one bit. Personally, I believe it is tweaking the card's integrity. However, I can see how others can see it as just restoring it.
But again, hey, that's just me.
<< <i>It may be unethical but if they pass PSA than where is the harm? What is the difference between soaking cards and resubmitting the same card 5 times and finally getting that 9 into a 10 holder? When it is put up for sale, the seller is not saying that is was graded a 9 four times.
C123 >>
Very good point. Like I said before, this is all a bunch of bullchit. chaz
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>What you're missing is that if you soak the card too long and ruin it then you-- not another collector-- are on the hook for the financial loss.
Are your clothes 'different' -- or at least different in any meaningful way-- after they've been washed? If you put something in water, then let it dry, most people agree that the object in question hasn't been significantly compromised. If you soak a card, and after it dries it looks exactly the same as it did before the soaking, then what is the problem? And even if it looks different, who cares? If people think that the difference in appearance-- say, for example, that the color on the card has faded-- compromises the card's appeal then they'll pay less for it. >>
Hmmm. Interesting point...
Guess it comes down to one's opinion of an item being restored or altered. >>
I think the central problem is that this hobby is guided what what most 'non collectors' would consider to be some very irrational precepts, and when those precepts clash with common sense-- and this happens a lot-- then there's bound to be a conflict. For instance, if a card has some glue on its back, and you soak the card and remove the glue, then you have, beyond any question, 'altered' the card.
But who cares? Or, more importantly, WHY does anyone care? Now I can see why this issue would matter very much to someone who has a truck load of money wrapped up in high grade cards, since this soaking process could increase the supply of high grade cards and drive down the value of their collection. But from an 'ethical' standpoint it doesn't make any sense to me. For instance, the one card I would really love to own one day in high grade condition is the T-205 Matthewson. To me it's the most beautiful card ever produced. But if I had a choice between two copies that were identical in every way except that one of them had been soaked to remove some gum on the back I would be totally indifferent when it came time to buy a copy. Why? Because I can't think of any reason why I would care. I like the card because it's a beautiful card. If both cards are equally pleasing then they provide me with identical levels of utility. >>
Oh don't get me wrong, I completely understand where you are coming from.
Personally, it's not a matter of having a higher grade, it's a matter of preference.
For example, if there were two 4 PSA Clementes, both absolutely identical except one has been "soaked". If they were offered at the same price, I would take the unsoaked one.
But hey, that's just me.
As for soaking as a whole, I don't like it one bit. Personally, I believe it is tweaking the card's integrity. However, I can see how others can see it as just restoring it.
But again, hey, that's just me.
Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who the hell can tell the difference, I couldn't and I could care less. I'll say it again, leave it up to the experts at PSA and if it's in a PSA holder then they'll stand by the grade so what the hell are y'all worried about? It's as simple as that. chaz
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical
<< <i>
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical
Stown.... my point is how do you know???? You are just chasing a ghost or your tail.....either way it will drive you nuts. chaz
<< <i>Soaking is unethical card doctoring. >>
Thanks for clearing that up. We'll all move on to the next discussion now.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical
Stown.... my point is how do you know???? You are just chasing a ghost or your tail.....either way it will drive you nuts. chaz >>
So you are saying we should just accept it? It's something you want to encourage?
If so, that's fine but personally, I don't like it and would hope others discourage the practice.
But that's just my opinion
<< <i>
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical
Oh, c'mon. No, that's NOT the same. When you're talking about friendships one of the implications of the relationship is, obviously, that you're not going to tap each other's wives. Or crank call each other's mothers, etc. etc. One of the reasons you became friends with that person in the first place was because they were comfortable with the assumption that neither of you would cuckold the other.
When you buy a sportscard from someone in a PSA holder the transaction does not take place in a moral context. You don't have a relationship with the seller; you are simply purchasing a commodity, and your decision on whether or not to purchase takes place outside of any ethical construct. An exception to this, obviously, is if someone sells you a PSA card and informs you that he knows the card has never been altered. At that point you've introduced an ethical dimension. But in the typical buyer-seller relationship this is not the case.
<< <i>
<< <i>Soaking is unethical card doctoring. >>
Thanks for clearing that up. We'll all move on to the next discussion now. >>
By the way Boopotts, the Mathewson T 205 is a tremendous card. A PSA 7 sold for around $8700 and I feel it is very undervalued. chaz
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical
Stown.... my point is how do you know???? You are just chasing a ghost or your tail.....either way it will drive you nuts. chaz >>
So you are saying we should just accept it? It's something you want to encourage?
If so, that's fine but personally, I don't like it and would hope others discourage the practice.
But that's just my opinion
There's nothing to accept or unaccept, because as chaz has illustrated there's a) nothing you can do about it, and b) once the card is holdered you can't tell if it's been soaked or not. Obsessing over card soaking is about as silly as obsessing over whether or not you're going to die in your sleep tonight. In neither case do you have any control over the possibility, and in both cases you'll never know if it happened or not.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical
Stown.... my point is how do you know???? You are just chasing a ghost or your tail.....either way it will drive you nuts. chaz >>
So you are saying we should just accept it? It's something you want to encourage?
If so, that's fine but personally, I don't like it and would hope others discourage the practice.
But that's just my opinion
I, of course, am not saying encourage it. I am saying that we wouldn't know the difference. And again for the 50th freakin' time, that's why we rely on PSA. Let PSA determine if it's been messed with.... that's PSA's business and what we pay the grading fee for. chaz
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Don't you get it???????? Pick out the soaked one.......YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chaz >>
Is it okay to tap your best friend's wife? He wouldn't know... Nothing different, physically, than before...
Well that comes down to what one considers ethical
Oh, c'mon. No, that's NOT the same. When you're talking about friendships one of the implications of the relationship is, obviously, that you're not going to tap each other's wives. Or crank call each other's mothers, etc. etc. One of the reasons you became friends with that person in the first place was because they were comfortable with the assumption that neither of you would cuckold the other.
When you buy a sportscard from someone in a PSA holder the transaction does not take place in a moral context. You don't have a relationship with the seller; you are simply purchasing a commodity, and your decision on whether or not to purchase takes place outside of any ethical construct. An exception to this, obviously, is if someone sells you a PSA card and informs you that he knows the card has never been altered. At that point you've introduced an ethical dimension. But in the typical buyer-seller relationship this is not the case. >>
From a business perspective, you are absolutely correct. But that's when the line is crossed from a collector to an investor. There is no written "code of ethics" for collecting; so there's no set standard.
So who is to say who is right and who is wrong? That just comes down to preference.
Know what I mean?
low that collecting only "original" examples may not be
possible for very much longer. Setting aside the
economic factors that drive "market grading," a case
can be made that restoration/doctoring is a means by
which the "hobby" is preserved and expanded.
The parallel in currency collecting is well-stated on the
PCGS Currency page entitled "Grading Standards." This
is ONLY part of what PCGS says about originality. (As you
read, substitute the word "cards" for the printed word "notes.):
"......In the 1970s and early 1980s many uncirculated notes were pressed out flat as a board to remove the original paper wave and embossing that, at the time, was considered a “defect.” Today, while the proponents of paper originality and embossing seem to be in the majority, this may not always be the case. How one approaches this problem is the basis for a reasonable and consistent grading standard. To ignore the problem would be a disservice to those in the marketplace who currently value originality. To place too much blame or detraction upon those notes that are truly beautiful and highly collectible, yet are not wholly original, would be a disservice. Many estimates of the numbers of large size type notes that have been restored in some fashion or another run so high that the supply of truly original notes might be so low as to preclude their collectability......."
///////////////////////////////////////////////
Once a card is TPGd and holdered, I tend not to worry too much
about its past life.
storm
The concern I think is that people altering cards may be able to do it "cleanly" enough to fool PSA or another grading company. Some people are satisfied with this, but it is a problem for other collectors.
How about this scenario? Someone finds a way to replicate cards from specific issues -- say T206, 1933 Goudey, and 1952 Topps. They get really good at manufacturing great replicas, then send PSA a handful of Wagners, Planks, Magies, Doyles, Ruths, Lajoies, Mantles, etc. If they get past PSA, would you be satisfied with them? You would never know, of course, so what's the problem? Well, one of the main reasons I collect cards is because I'm getting a piece of history, something that is relatively scarce, something that has wandered through the years and ended up in my hand today. I'd personally like to think that the card is authentic and unaltered.
This is a more extreme case, but it demonstrates my point that there is a continuum of what is acceptable in collectors' eyes, from no alterations to anything that gets into a PSA slab.
Doug
detectable who would support PSA's decision to not grade these
types of cards? "
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
As a supporter of the slabbing of cards as "authentic" if they
have been trimmed, I would also support the same process
for soaked cards. "Authentic" is alot more important to me than
is "original."
If PSA adopted this scheme, the market would decide what
value the authentic-but-altered cards had.
storm
<< <i>It may be unethical but if they pass PSA than where is the harm? What is the difference between soaking cards and resubmitting the same card 5 times and finally getting that 9 into a 10 holder? When it is put up for sale, the seller is not saying that is was graded a 9 four times.
C123 >>
"If they pass PSA then where is the harm" Basically what you are saying here is that it is ok to make any alterations to the card as long as PSA doesn't catch it. What about the major auction houses pressing out wrinkles and erasing pencil makes? What about soaking the card to stretch it and then trimming the edges? All this can be done without PSA catching it. Does that make it ok? What about the guy that said he used Elmer's glue to put the 52 Mantle back together? It got past the graders. I guess that one is ok too.
James
<< <i>To those with their heads up there A$$ that dont think this is a huge problem may i suggest you set up at MAJOR shows for a few years then come back and tell me how prevelent you think card altering is. I can guarantee you your opinion on its frequency will change. >>
A huge problem????? What does that mean???? If I showed you 2 cards and said pick out the one that has been soaked and you pick one (which you would) and then I tell you neither have been soaked (but I can't even be certain about that)....then what????? A huge problem ????? Or are you chasing a ghost or your tail ..... which will make you go nuts anyhow. My point is that you don't know for sure and I don't know and we leave it up to PSA to determine what cards have been altered....that's what we pay them for. chaz
<< <i>Its not soaking so much that worries me,but some of the other stuff that openly goes on is disheartening. dont believe me fine but honestly set up at the major shows for a year or two. you'll be shocked at how many times you see someone buy nice 5-6-7s that only sells mainly 8s. It happens all the time and many of them are blatant and even up front about what they are doing. pressing,soaking, trimming, erasing print dots that are on the white borders of cards it happens at an alarming pace. things like power erasing and poorly trimmed cards are caught all the time but many other things are getting thru. One of the big ones has even graded some fake m101-5 ruths as authentic. these were fakes that were artifically aged and in low grade but could be spotted because the picture on the fakes is cropped slightly different then originals. i just dont feel we get what we pay for anymore from most of these grading companies. >>
I still don't agree. If all this is going on (and you really can't be sure) then why doesn't the supply of all the vintage star cards and low pop commons just go through the roof? chaz
<< <i>I still don't agree. If all this is going on (and you really can't be sure) then why doesn't the supply of all the vintage star cards and low pop commons just go through the roof? chaz >>
I speculate that soaking is really tailor made for the pre-war era when pasting into scrapbooks was common. I'm guessing that would be from about 1880-1930 or so. In the 50's/60's -- kids stuck rubber bands on 'em and shoved them into cigar boxes. Soaking won't help those cards.
I imagine that with every new "find" of pre-war material preserved via a scrapbook, soaking will continue to drive up the high grade numbers for that era. I'm not sure we'll be able to notice it over a short period of time .... but over the long run my theory is we'll see the numbers reflect it.
of course, i'm halfway talking about of my a$$ here.
-Tom
------- 1960 Topps Baseball PSA 8+
------- 1985 Topps Hockey PSA 9+
Most low pops are low pops due to the fact that they usually suffer from problems that are unfixable like: print dots or snow on the face of the card, off center or miscut cards, as well as out of focus. As for star cards most of their pops have exploded as have some cards that used to be low pops but did not continuously suffer from an unfixable problem.
And I can be sure as multiple doctors are open and honest about what they are doing if you've known them for a long time.
Leon it seems has brought the posts back into perspective and rightly so.
What was that thread we had here a while back about squirrels?