Recently, Mike Baker has started to include the certification number of every card crossing his desk in his database whether the card receives or does not receive a diamond along with notes why the card did not receive a diamond. Good question…
My success rate has been 34/60 or 56.666%…19 silver diamonds and 15 gold diamonds. My collection grade is 8 or above from 1956-1975…and don’t hit a card below an 8 until 1955 Topps and Bowman with a 1955 Koufax RC PSA-7 (MBA -Gold), 1955 Bowman Mantle PSA-7 (MBA-Gold) and a 1955 Clemente RC PSA-6.5 (top-to-bottom centering when viewed horizontally …the reason for no Diamond).
@1all said:
As someone with no horse in this race (never bought or sold a stickered card) I have a question. Have there been any cases yet where a card is MBA stickered and you look at it and say "That doesn't look great for it's assigned grade"? If not, I don't see what's wrong here.
Usually the MBA sticker fits the card, but here is an example where this card is certainly not in the top 5% of EX 5 graded T206 Wagners. I'm not sure this is even deserving of a 5 grade, regardless of the MBA sticker. I'm not sure how you even explain this.
@mintonlypls said:
..but investment is not why I buy cards. I collect cards for its beauty and nostalgia...
Really!!!! I have a champagne taste …on a beer budget! My collection would not be where it is today, if I had not started assembling it when it was only a hobby.
This is a fun thread to follow for sure. The point about caring or not caring about trimmed or colored cards is way off base IMO. All of my cards are already graded by PSA, so how does my getting a graded card reviewed for a label or any collector doing so have anything to do whatsoever with a trimmed or colored card?
So answer this - is it wrong for people who collect to make money off their cards by getting them graded by PSA? Think of the value increase from a raw card to a PSA card when they sell - the increase is exponential. That means anyone who gets cards graded, buys or sells graded cards, deals with an auction house who sells graded cards is a hypocrite?
Same goes for anyone that buys or sells a card with a PWCC sticker or MBA sticker. How dare Ebay and Heritage and Mile High... allow this to happen. I think you should personally write to all of them and tell them all of the dirty stuff going on, and because Craig said they should not allow these grades and labels to exist al of them should be pulled. You do hear what you are saying right? You and you alone get to determine what is right and wrong based on your number of threads started and claims you are making.
I started collecting way before PSA cards ever came about, and I did it because I enjoy cards and did it with my dad and brothers while we grew up playing baseball. I also happened to play against guys in college who went on to play in the MLB and some became HOF players so I enjoy collecting their cards and following them - Frank Thomas, Piazza, Jim Palmer.... I also got to meet Mantle during my playing days and got to take some neat photos on field with him and Whitey Ford, Enos Slaughter...and they also personally signed some stuff for me as well. I enjoy cards whether they have a PSA slab on them or not, a 3rd party sticker or not, and if someone does not approve that is their prerogative - funny thing is they think they can tell me what to do or how to act and with whom. Good luck with that!
You are more than welcome to prolong your obsession with this one, and keep worrying about who uses stickers or PSA cards. Can't wait to see your next thread when another card gets a sticker
Maybe someone can come up with one like this for the next thread!
@KendallCat said:
This is a fun thread to follow for sure. The point about caring or not caring about trimmed or colored cards is way off base IMO. All of my cards are already graded by PSA, so how does my getting a graded card reviewed for a label or any collector doing so have anything to do whatsoever with a trimmed or colored card?
So answer this - is it wrong for people who collect to make money off their cards by getting them graded by PSA? Think of the value increase from a raw card to a PSA card when they sell - the increase is exponential. That means anyone who gets cards graded, buys or sells graded cards, deals with an auction house who sells graded cards is a hypocrite?
Same goes for anyone that buys or sells a card with a PWCC sticker or MBA sticker. How dare Ebay and Heritage and Mile High... allow this to happen. I think you should personally write to all of them and tell them all of the dirty stuff going on, and because Craig said they should not allow these grades and labels to exist al of them should be pulled. You do hear what you are saying right? You and you alone get to determine what is right and wrong based on your number of threads started and claims you are making.
I started collecting way before PSA cards ever came about, and I did it because I enjoy cards and did it with my dad and brothers while we grew up playing baseball. I also happened to play against guys in college who went on to play in the MLB and some became HOF players so I enjoy collecting their cards and following them - Frank Thomas, Piazza, Jim Palmer.... I also got to meet Mantle during my playing days and got to take some neat photos on field with him and Whitey Ford, Enos Slaughter...and they also personally signed some stuff for me as well. I enjoy cards whether they have a PSA slab on them or not, a 3rd party sticker or not, and if someone does not approve that is their prerogative - funny thing is they think they can tell me what to do or how to act and with whom. Good luck with that!
You are more than welcome to prolong your obsession with this one, and keep worrying about who uses stickers or PSA cards. Can't wait to see your next thread when another card gets a sticker
Maybe someone can come up with one like this for the next thread!
you are either missing the point or purposefully obfuscating. You also continue to avoid addressing very simple questions.
while I think stickering graded cards is silly (you already paid for a second opinion. if you do not value that opinion have MBA grade it to begin with), I do not have a problem with others doing it. The problem I have is the company providing this "service." It is run by a guy with a questionable hobby history, who partnered with a person with a horrible hobby history, while offering a "service" he cannot possibly accurately provide.
why would you hitch your wagon to that train? with those people?
I will ask this question again. If you believe Mike is the grading guru and his reputation is above reproach, why dont you cross all of your PSA slabs over to MBA slabs? then you could skip the stickers altogether.
OMG, he doesn't quit. I actually think it's like calling the kettle black. The sig line has two arguably cheaters, aka bad actors, and one is considered the goat affectionately called Tommy like some best friend or man crush. Money, value, money, duh.
I think it’s because the responses are so tangential and anecdotal so I feel for Craig here. He has to deal with story time defenses of nothing which culminate in an insult as rebuttal.
why would you hitch your wagon to that train? with those people?
I will ask this question again. If you believe Mike is the grading guru and his reputation is above reproach, why dont you cross all of your PSA slabs over to MBA slabs? then you could skip the stickers altogether.
thus far your silence is speaking volumes.
>
>
I wouldn't bother to answer the question either, but I'll give it a try.
_Because it would be expensive AND stupid to do so. _
Having the card initially graded by PSA carries their reputation. Having someone else coming in later and saying "YES, but not only is this card an 8, but it's an OUTSTANDING 8, better than 99% of all the other 8's!". If this increases the value by more than you paid for the opinion, it makes perfect sense.
Secondly, I do think you need to get off your "high horse" here. Your guy Brady knew IMMEDIATELY that football was underinflated and used it because he likes them a bit underinflated. Yet all is forgiven. I never thought it was that big a deal, but aren't you the guy who is always saying "cheating is cheating"? Taking a single "greenie" in a 20 year career is just as bad as gaining 30 pounds of muscle by injecting yourself literally hundreds of times with anabolic steroids, a MUCH stronger drug?
Probstein lost some of my collectibles I sent to him and when I politely inquired about some sort of compensation, he insulted me and told me to get a hold of a lawyer. I have warned people about this (more than one person has told me the same story) and if you want to use his service, you have been warned. Many thousands of people have done business with this guy and are happy with the results because they either MADE A PROFIT or didn't have to go through the hassle of selling the cards themselves.
"why would you hitch your wagon to that train? with those people?"
Your outrage over the "stickergate" issue is noted. It's time to move on.
Last I noticed Sean Payton was still coaching professional football and he pays his players to intentionally injure the opponents. Yet all is forgiven.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@bgr said:
I think it’s because the responses are so tangential and anecdotal so I feel for Craig here. He has to deal with story time defenses of nothing which culminate in an insult as rebuttal.
bgr, Would you say the responses from the Baker/Brent defenders amount to nothing more than japery?
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972) Not even a minute do I buy the whole buh buh buh I'm a man-child japery - Me (2025)
I think it should be noted that the stickers and the slabs are two totally different conversations and I think it's getting murky at points. For me, the important issue is that Brent has found a new avenue to unload all the trimmed cards he had to buy back under direction of the Feds in order to avoid jail time.
To answer the OP = it's just a generalization. Salesman talk. Unless and until I see hard data that shows me say ,5000 cards , and the card stands out amongst those , and hey = this proves it = then all it is becomes a standard hot air salesmans pitch
>
>
>
Could care less about an outside opinion like from MBA but = If a card owner needs to spice up their wardrobe with some gold, silver or platinum = let them. It is their money. When the bills being footed by ones own wallet think that's the deciding factor.
>
>
>
Chew on this tidbit = one of the hobbies foundational cards worth 30 million now has an MBA sticker on it. The collectors held it for 30 years. His stated goal, and it came out of his own mouth, was to build an investment level portfolio of intelligent purchases for future sale when he dies. He's no dummy. If his "investment" mind convinced him the sticker was worth it then so be it
>
>
>
>
Investors want the hobby to accept the stickers. The free market they are sold in determines if they add value. Real simple here. To each their own. I certainly will not begrudge anyone who invests time and money into building a portfolio of items with the stickers. Gotta pay to play, only way we ever find out if our own thoughts are worth a crap sometimes 🤣
>
>
>
I know plenty of collectors who buy auto cards that were just graded for the card grade. They then dual grade them and spend more $$. To me = same as an investor buying a card thats top tier , then spending $$ to slap some sticker on it
>
>
>
>
I own 15,000+ Psa slabs. I'll let someone else make the choice. My choice is " stickers not needed for my PC" ,,,,, because it's a PC not an investment in anything but my own personal enjoyment
@bgr said:
I think it’s because the responses are so tangential and anecdotal so I feel for Craig here. He has to deal with story time defenses of nothing which culminate in an insult as rebuttal.
bgr, Would you say the responses from the Baker/Brent defenders amount to nothing more than japery?
I think their perspective is completely valid. The MBA sticker service is the right thing at the right time with the influx of new money into the “hobby”. Good marketing and good results. But Craig has a valid perspective too in my opinion. It’s a good discussion.
To answer the OP = it's just a generalization. Salesman talk. Unless and until I see hard data that shows me say ,5000 cards , and the card stands out amongst those , and hey = this proves it = then all it is becomes a standard hot air salesmans pitch
>
>
>
Could care less about an outside opinion like from MBA but = If a card owner needs to spice up their wardrobe with some gold, silver or platinum = let them. It is their money. When the bills being footed by ones own wallet think that's the deciding factor.
>
>
>
Chew on this tidbit = one of the hobbies foundational cards worth 30 million now has an MBA sticker on it. The collectors held it for 30 years. His stated goal, and it came out of his own mouth, was to build an investment level portfolio of intelligent purchases for future sale when he dies. He's no dummy. If his "investment" mind convinced him the sticker was worth it then so be it
>
>
>
>
Investors want the hobby to accept the stickers. The free market they are sold in determines if they add value. Real simple here. To each their own. I certainly will not begrudge anyone who invests time and money into building a portfolio of items with the stickers. Gotta pay to play, only way we ever find out if our own thoughts are worth a crap sometimes 🤣
>
>
>
I know plenty of collectors who buy auto cards that were just graded for the card grade. They then dual grade them and spend more $$. To me = same as an investor buying a card thats top tier , then spending $$ to slap some sticker on it
>
>
I own 15,000+ Psa slabs. I'll let someone else make the choice. My choice is " stickers not needed for my PC" ,,,,, because it's a PC not an investment in anything but my own personal enjoyment
@SportsModerator2 said:
Let’s keep the discussion centered on the topic and move away from the repeated back-and-forth and personal commentary.
There are valid points on both sides—no need to keep circling the same ground.
I’d prefer not to have to step in further here.
100% agree with this. Some people like cards graded while some prefer raw cards. Others like the help of another set of eyes and potentially increased value of their cards with the MBA labels and some don’t. To each his own and will go back to enjoying my cards and hope others do the same. Circling the same ground is not going to change others minds either way, and others can continue this topic if they choose to do so. I am going to get in some golf and open some packs later with the family. Enjoy your weekend 👍
I do not have a pony in this race. However, I do have an interest in the optics in terms of how the discussion of grading and stickers effects the future of collecting. Specifically, there are issues of affordability which can easily influence the decision not to undertake collecting…period. The issues of grading and stickers, especially with vintage cards… and I mean real vintage cards as in pre 1965… adds a problematic layer to the affordability dilemma. Part of the dilemma are the grades assigned and the expectations for grades are simply not realistic. Vintage cards were made differently and mainly for kids. Many were simply not handled well and basically a significant percentage of the surviving population were abused. So we are in need of standards that adequately describe the condition spectrum of the surviving population. And the grading standards for vintage need to be reflective of the differences in how cards were produced and stored then in contrast to today. One cannot simply apply the same standards across the board to all cards- that simply fails the straight face test. Unless and until there is some recognition that all cards at the same grade level were simply not created equal, there will be issues with expectations with grades. Will stickers help re-set and manage grading expectations? I do not see this as a substitute for addressing what I see as the core issue. Instead, stickers seem to have the appearance of a bandaid in an effort to create some rough justice and satisfy some expectations. I am not writing that stickers are a bad idea… but the concept must have parameters and be transparent.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I think at this point it’s fair to say this topic comes down to two different ways of looking at the hobby.
One side places more weight on the people and process behind a service, and whether that foundation is something they’re comfortable with. The other side is more focused on how the market responds and whether the service provides added value in practice.
Both perspectives have been well represented here, and neither is likely to convince the other. That’s probably why the discussion keeps circling back on itself.
As with most things in this hobby, it often comes down to individual comfort level and how each collector chooses to approach it.
It feels like we may be at a bit of a stalemate on this one?
I do believe MBA stickered cards will often fetch higher prices, but the only cards receiving stickers should be high eye appeal to begin with. And high eye appeal cards already sell for more. So how much value does the sticker actually add?
I suppose, as has been said, the stickers’ true value comes from the information it provides the new collector, investor or otherwise uneducated buyer. Now the sticker allows for more people to know that a card looks really nice for a specific grade.
@bgr said:
I think it’s because the responses are so tangential and anecdotal so I feel for Craig here. He has to deal with story time defenses of nothing which culminate in an insult as rebuttal.
bgr, Would you say the responses from the Baker/Brent defenders amount to nothing more than japery?
I think their perspective is completely valid. The MBA sticker service is the right thing at the right time with the influx of new money into the “hobby”. Good marketing and good results. But Craig has a valid perspective too in my opinion. It’s a good discussion.
Craig's perspective is very valid. None of us could argue what he has presented as fact. Sometimes, even the cold, hard truth won't dissuade people from committing to an allegiance that may come into question. It happens everywhere, even at the highest level of our societal existence. The seemingly almost equal divide in this discussion comes as no surprise to me. Our entire country is divisive.
@Vaderb8 said:
I do believe MBA stickered cards will often fetch higher prices, but the only cards receiving stickers should be high eye appeal to begin with. And high eye appeal cards already sell for more. So how much value does the sticker actually add?
I pointed out the same sentiment in one of the previous discussions on the topic, when a poster listed record or near record prices from a large auction house, attributing those 2x-5x record prices BECAUSE it was stickered.
I said it was a false conclusion since other non-stickered cards ALSO reached record prices, some reaching 5x-10x.
Again, perception is everything. If enough people believe the sticker adds value, it then adds value.
However, in pretty much every area of collecting, documentation, provenance, adds value to an item. Added value doesn't necessarily mean more dollars though. If you had to pay the same price would you take the one with the sticker or the one without the sticker?
when i start a thread like this, it is not necessarily to try and convince folks like Mintonlypls or Kendallcat about bad actors like brent or silly companies like MBA. it is more to present convincing arguments to all those who silently read these threads and either havent heard about outfits like MBA or havent made up their minds about them.
very similar to all the debate YouTube channels. the main goal is not to "win" the debate. it is to present your side so that the people listening/reading will see. while there may only be 40 or so of us actively participating on this board, there are no doubt many multiples of that number who only read or would arrive at a thread like this from a google search.
those are the people to reach. not necessarily those who already have their minds made up.
@craig44 said:
when i start a thread like this, it is not necessarily to try and convince folks like Mintonlypls or Kendallcat about bad actors like brent or silly companies like MBA. it is more to present convincing arguments to all those who silently read these threads and either havent heard about outfits like MBA or havent made up their minds about them.
very similar to all the debate YouTube channels. the main goal is not to "win" the debate. it is to present your side so that the people listening/reading will see. while there may only be 40 or so of us actively participating on this board, there are no doubt many multiples of that number who only read or would arrive at a thread like this from a google search.
those are the people to reach. not necessarily those who already have their minds made up.
We agree on a lot of things, but this time I'm confused.
Your original post seemed to me to be an objection to stickers. You said;
"the SGC 9.5 Topps Mantle has a population of 1 in the SGC pop report. that being said, how can it be in the top 5% for the assigned grade when there is only one in the assigned grade? to extrapolate that further, how can any card technically receive a gold sticker unless there are a minimum of 100 in that assigned grade for that grading company? And to go even further, unless Mike has images of each of that minimum of 100 cards, how can he possibly rank each of them to arrive at an accurate "top 5%?"
I understand the math problem here, but every person who looks at a card has an opinion regardless if they have seen 1 baseball card or 10,000, No one has seen them all, so how can anyone have an opinion on a card based on math?
PSA's .5 addition to the grading scale (to me) is no different. I'm not a math whiz, but shouldn't there be a LOT more cards getting a .5 increase (or decrease)? I just looked up my last three larger submissions and out of 266 cards. I got .5 on 2 of them (both hand cut Post cereal cards) not one single .5 on any regular issue cards. That math don't math either.
Who cares? Anyone selling a card would rather have an 8.5 over an 8. Certainly would rather have an 8 over a 7.5!
Then, when nobody seemed to care about your math problem, you decided to bring in the "bad actor" argument and how MBA is a "silly company".
Brent Huegens is certainly an interesting fellow, and I don't care for some of his opinions on the hobby and grading. Does that mean he has been banned for the hobby? Does that mean every opinion he has on every card is wrong? I'm not sure he has ever been found guilty of altering cards, but I AM SURE that there are hundreds (probably thousands) of graded cards out there that have been cleaned, trimmed or pressed and reside in graded card holders, do the owners of these cards REALLY care? There's another thread going right now with a Mike Schmidt PSA 10 OPC rookie that looks trimmed. That card will probably sell for a record price.
You haven't educated anyone about these "bad actors" either. If you are actually trying to help novice collectors, present evidence of these guys' "bad actions" and let them decide for themselves.
Lastly, if MBA is a "silly company" then so is EVERY third party grading "service". These companies came into existence (in my opinion) because card sellers blatantly lied about the condition of their cards. Heck, the first graded card I bought (Accucard, Alan Hager) was overgraded by at least 3 grades!
PSA "came to the rescue" and did a very nice job.
The very bottom line here is;
If I can come up with an idea to make money and make money for my customers, we are all going to be happy.
For me, I don't need a sticker to evaluate a card, BUT if i saw a card with a sticker on it, I might take a closer look. As an ex sales person, that's half the battle. I also have no illusions that some of the graded cards in my collection have been altered. No company gets it right all the time.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
Been a minute since I seen Hager's name mentioned.
I really do not think there is one single honest seller,dealer or grading card entity, this hobby really attracts the greasiest of the sleazy. As longs as the rubes keep spending those like Brent, Baker, Mastro, Moser, Betsy, Probsteen, etc will always succeed.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972) Not even a minute do I buy the whole buh buh buh I'm a man-child japery - Me (2025)
@craig44 said:
when i start a thread like this, it is not necessarily to try and convince folks like Mintonlypls or Kendallcat about bad actors like brent or silly companies like MBA. it is more to present convincing arguments to all those who silently read these threads and either havent heard about outfits like MBA or havent made up their minds about them.
very similar to all the debate YouTube channels. the main goal is not to "win" the debate. it is to present your side so that the people listening/reading will see. while there may only be 40 or so of us actively participating on this board, there are no doubt many multiples of that number who only read or would arrive at a thread like this from a google search.
those are the people to reach. not necessarily those who already have their minds made up.
We agree on a lot of things, but this time I'm confused.
Your original post seemed to me to be an objection to stickers. You said;
"the SGC 9.5 Topps Mantle has a population of 1 in the SGC pop report. that being said, how can it be in the top 5% for the assigned grade when there is only one in the assigned grade? to extrapolate that further, how can any card technically receive a gold sticker unless there are a minimum of 100 in that assigned grade for that grading company? And to go even further, unless Mike has images of each of that minimum of 100 cards, how can he possibly rank each of them to arrive at an accurate "top 5%?"
I understand the math problem here, but every person who looks at a card has an opinion regardless if they have seen 1 baseball card or 10,000, No one has seen them all, so how can anyone have an opinion on a card based on math?
PSA's .5 addition to the grading scale (to me) is no different. I'm not a math whiz, but shouldn't there be a LOT more cards getting a .5 increase (or decrease)? I just looked up my last three larger submissions and out of 266 cards. I got .5 on 2 of them (both hand cut Post cereal cards) not one single .5 on any regular issue cards. That math don't math either.
Who cares? Anyone selling a card would rather have an 8.5 over an 8. Certainly would rather have an 8 over a 7.5!
Then, when nobody seemed to care about your math problem, you decided to bring in the "bad actor" argument and how MBA is a "silly company".
Brent Huegens is certainly an interesting fellow, and I don't care for some of his opinions on the hobby and grading. Does that mean he has been banned for the hobby? Does that mean every opinion he has on every card is wrong? I'm not sure he has ever been found guilty of altering cards, but I AM SURE that there are hundreds (probably thousands) of graded cards out there that have been cleaned, trimmed or pressed and reside in graded card holders, do the owners of these cards REALLY care? There's another thread going right now with a Mike Schmidt PSA 10 OPC rookie that looks trimmed. That card will probably sell for a record price.
You haven't educated anyone about these "bad actors" either. If you are actually trying to help novice collectors, present evidence of these guys' "bad actions" and let them decide for themselves.
Lastly, if MBA is a "silly company" then so is EVERY third party grading "service". These companies came into existence (in my opinion) because card sellers blatantly lied about the condition of their cards. Heck, the first graded card I bought (Accucard, Alan Hager) was overgraded by at least 3 grades!
PSA "came to the rescue" and did a very nice job.
The very bottom line here is;
If I can come up with an idea to make money and make money for my customers, we are all going to be happy.
For me, I don't need a sticker to evaluate a card, BUT if i saw a card with a sticker on it, I might take a closer look. As an ex sales person, that's half the battle. I also have no illusions that some of the graded cards in my collection have been altered. No company gets it right all the time.
let me try to clarify.
the sticker thing is silly for a few reasons:
1. the math that Baker is claiming doesnt math. it is a standard that he cannot possibly hope to ever actually meet.
2. everyone who has ever submitted or purchased a graded card has already paid for a second opinion (the first opinion is, of course, your own) if you do not value that grading companies opinion to the point that you want mike baker to "review" it for you, why not just submit to MBA grading in the first place?
3. third party graders who use half grades already in effect have an eye appeal "marker" for each card. if a card earns a half grade, it is already deemed "high eye appeal" no need for an extra sticker.
the "bad actors" crib notes:
Mike Baker. one of or maybe the first grader at psa. remember, the very first card psa graded was the sheet cut wagner. amongst those with inner hobby knowledge, i have read that it was known that mastro had that card cut. after his psa career, baker founded GAI grading. they holdered known trimmed cards, had poor quality control and had an unopened pack division that holdered lots of bad packs. GAI ended up failing.
Brent Huigens. owner of PWCC. one of the worst hobby actors in recent years. pwcc consigned with many known card trimmers. burge, mosier, block, jaimet etc. submitting and selling MANY trimmed cards. a leaked text exchange between brent and a pwcc consigner showed brent instructing the consigner to schill his own card as brent knew the max bids of other bidders.
Brent/pwcc initiated pwcc's "marketplace tenets" which included accepting and encouraging altering cards under the auspice that said alteration was now to be referred to as "conservation" he went on multiple hobby podcasts at the time touting this "conservation"
I believe it was this last abomination combined with pwcc offering loans on consigned cards that took pwcc belly up.
as far as brent huigens goes, yes to both. i think he should both be banned from the hobby and his opinions should hold no authority at all. same for him as for bill mastro. huigens is as bad as it gets
that mike baker would not only associate with such a known bad actor, but to bring him into his company shows us the state of his hobby ethics.
i hope this helps. it is not just one thing, it is the combination of sticker silliness and bad actors in the hobby. there is tons further reading on the blowout forums. thousands of posts about pwcc over there.
@craig44 said:
when i start a thread like this, it is not necessarily to try and convince folks like Mintonlypls or Kendallcat about bad actors like brent or silly companies like MBA. it is more to present convincing arguments to all those who silently read these threads and either havent heard about outfits like MBA or havent made up their minds about them.
very similar to all the debate YouTube channels. the main goal is not to "win" the debate. it is to present your side so that the people listening/reading will see. while there may only be 40 or so of us actively participating on this board, there are no doubt many multiples of that number who only read or would arrive at a thread like this from a google search.
those are the people to reach. not necessarily those who already have their minds made up.
We agree on a lot of things, but this time I'm confused.
Your original post seemed to me to be an objection to stickers. You said;
"the SGC 9.5 Topps Mantle has a population of 1 in the SGC pop report. that being said, how can it be in the top 5% for the assigned grade when there is only one in the assigned grade? to extrapolate that further, how can any card technically receive a gold sticker unless there are a minimum of 100 in that assigned grade for that grading company? And to go even further, unless Mike has images of each of that minimum of 100 cards, how can he possibly rank each of them to arrive at an accurate "top 5%?"
I understand the math problem here, but every person who looks at a card has an opinion regardless if they have seen 1 baseball card or 10,000, No one has seen them all, so how can anyone have an opinion on a card based on math?
PSA's .5 addition to the grading scale (to me) is no different. I'm not a math whiz, but shouldn't there be a LOT more cards getting a .5 increase (or decrease)? I just looked up my last three larger submissions and out of 266 cards. I got .5 on 2 of them (both hand cut Post cereal cards) not one single .5 on any regular issue cards. That math don't math either.
Who cares? Anyone selling a card would rather have an 8.5 over an 8. Certainly would rather have an 8 over a 7.5!
Then, when nobody seemed to care about your math problem, you decided to bring in the "bad actor" argument and how MBA is a "silly company".
Brent Huegens is certainly an interesting fellow, and I don't care for some of his opinions on the hobby and grading. Does that mean he has been banned for the hobby? Does that mean every opinion he has on every card is wrong? I'm not sure he has ever been found guilty of altering cards, but I AM SURE that there are hundreds (probably thousands) of graded cards out there that have been cleaned, trimmed or pressed and reside in graded card holders, do the owners of these cards REALLY care? There's another thread going right now with a Mike Schmidt PSA 10 OPC rookie that looks trimmed. That card will probably sell for a record price.
You haven't educated anyone about these "bad actors" either. If you are actually trying to help novice collectors, present evidence of these guys' "bad actions" and let them decide for themselves.
Lastly, if MBA is a "silly company" then so is EVERY third party grading "service". These companies came into existence (in my opinion) because card sellers blatantly lied about the condition of their cards. Heck, the first graded card I bought (Accucard, Alan Hager) was overgraded by at least 3 grades!
PSA "came to the rescue" and did a very nice job.
The very bottom line here is;
If I can come up with an idea to make money and make money for my customers, we are all going to be happy.
For me, I don't need a sticker to evaluate a card, BUT if i saw a card with a sticker on it, I might take a closer look. As an ex sales person, that's half the battle. I also have no illusions that some of the graded cards in my collection have been altered. No company gets it right all the time.
let me try to clarify.
the sticker thing is silly for a few reasons:
1. the math that Baker is claiming doesnt math. it is a standard that he cannot possibly hope to ever actually meet.
2. everyone who has ever submitted or purchased a graded card has already paid for a second opinion (the first opinion is, of course, your own) if you do not value that grading companies opinion to the point that you want mike baker to "review" it for you, why not just submit to MBA grading in the first place?
3. third party graders who use half grades already in effect have an eye appeal "marker" for each card. if a card earns a half grade, it is already deemed "high eye appeal" no need for an extra sticker.
the "bad actors" crib notes:
Mike Baker. one of or maybe the first grader at psa. remember, the very first card psa graded was the sheet cut wagner. amongst those with inner hobby knowledge, i have read that it was known that mastro had that card cut. after his psa career, baker founded GAI grading. they holdered known trimmed cards, had poor quality control and had an unopened pack division that holdered lots of bad packs. GAI ended up failing.
Brent Huigens. owner of PWCC. one of the worst hobby actors in recent years. pwcc consigned with many known card trimmers. burge, mosier, block, jaimet etc. submitting and selling MANY trimmed cards. a leaked text exchange between brent and a pwcc consigner showed brent instructing the consigner to schill his own card as brent knew the max bids of other bidders.
Brent/pwcc initiated pwcc's "marketplace tenets" which included accepting and encouraging altering cards under the auspice that said alteration was now to be referred to as "conservation" he went on multiple hobby podcasts at the time touting this "conservation"
I believe it was this last abomination combined with pwcc offering loans on consigned cards that took pwcc belly up.
as far as brent huigens goes, yes to both. i think he should both be banned from the hobby and his opinions should hold no authority at all. same for him as for bill mastro. huigens is as bad as it gets
that mike baker would not only associate with such a known bad actor, but to bring him into his company shows us the state of his hobby ethics.
i hope this helps. it is not just one thing, it is the combination of sticker silliness and bad actors in the hobby. there is tons further reading on the blowout forums. thousands of posts about pwcc over there.
The only thing you clarified is you don't like stickers because your good at math (?), and there's a lot of altered cards out there.
PSA has slabbed a lot of altered cards too, so the "best" company is no better than the "worst".
I do not possess and cards with stickers on them, but I might if I find a good deal.
Have a great day. I'm moving on from this thread.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@craig44 said:
when i start a thread like this, it is not necessarily to try and convince folks like Mintonlypls or Kendallcat about bad actors like brent or silly companies like MBA. it is more to present convincing arguments to all those who silently read these threads and either havent heard about outfits like MBA or havent made up their minds about them.
very similar to all the debate YouTube channels. the main goal is not to "win" the debate. it is to present your side so that the people listening/reading will see. while there may only be 40 or so of us actively participating on this board, there are no doubt many multiples of that number who only read or would arrive at a thread like this from a google search.
those are the people to reach. not necessarily those who already have their minds made up.
We agree on a lot of things, but this time I'm confused.
Your original post seemed to me to be an objection to stickers. You said;
"the SGC 9.5 Topps Mantle has a population of 1 in the SGC pop report. that being said, how can it be in the top 5% for the assigned grade when there is only one in the assigned grade? to extrapolate that further, how can any card technically receive a gold sticker unless there are a minimum of 100 in that assigned grade for that grading company? And to go even further, unless Mike has images of each of that minimum of 100 cards, how can he possibly rank each of them to arrive at an accurate "top 5%?"
I understand the math problem here, but every person who looks at a card has an opinion regardless if they have seen 1 baseball card or 10,000, No one has seen them all, so how can anyone have an opinion on a card based on math?
PSA's .5 addition to the grading scale (to me) is no different. I'm not a math whiz, but shouldn't there be a LOT more cards getting a .5 increase (or decrease)? I just looked up my last three larger submissions and out of 266 cards. I got .5 on 2 of them (both hand cut Post cereal cards) not one single .5 on any regular issue cards. That math don't math either.
Who cares? Anyone selling a card would rather have an 8.5 over an 8. Certainly would rather have an 8 over a 7.5!
Then, when nobody seemed to care about your math problem, you decided to bring in the "bad actor" argument and how MBA is a "silly company".
Brent Huegens is certainly an interesting fellow, and I don't care for some of his opinions on the hobby and grading. Does that mean he has been banned for the hobby? Does that mean every opinion he has on every card is wrong? I'm not sure he has ever been found guilty of altering cards, but I AM SURE that there are hundreds (probably thousands) of graded cards out there that have been cleaned, trimmed or pressed and reside in graded card holders, do the owners of these cards REALLY care? There's another thread going right now with a Mike Schmidt PSA 10 OPC rookie that looks trimmed. That card will probably sell for a record price.
You haven't educated anyone about these "bad actors" either. If you are actually trying to help novice collectors, present evidence of these guys' "bad actions" and let them decide for themselves.
Lastly, if MBA is a "silly company" then so is EVERY third party grading "service". These companies came into existence (in my opinion) because card sellers blatantly lied about the condition of their cards. Heck, the first graded card I bought (Accucard, Alan Hager) was overgraded by at least 3 grades!
PSA "came to the rescue" and did a very nice job.
The very bottom line here is;
If I can come up with an idea to make money and make money for my customers, we are all going to be happy.
For me, I don't need a sticker to evaluate a card, BUT if i saw a card with a sticker on it, I might take a closer look. As an ex sales person, that's half the battle. I also have no illusions that some of the graded cards in my collection have been altered. No company gets it right all the time.
let me try to clarify.
the sticker thing is silly for a few reasons:
1. the math that Baker is claiming doesnt math. it is a standard that he cannot possibly hope to ever actually meet.
2. everyone who has ever submitted or purchased a graded card has already paid for a second opinion (the first opinion is, of course, your own) if you do not value that grading companies opinion to the point that you want mike baker to "review" it for you, why not just submit to MBA grading in the first place?
3. third party graders who use half grades already in effect have an eye appeal "marker" for each card. if a card earns a half grade, it is already deemed "high eye appeal" no need for an extra sticker.
the "bad actors" crib notes:
Mike Baker. one of or maybe the first grader at psa. remember, the very first card psa graded was the sheet cut wagner. amongst those with inner hobby knowledge, i have read that it was known that mastro had that card cut. after his psa career, baker founded GAI grading. they holdered known trimmed cards, had poor quality control and had an unopened pack division that holdered lots of bad packs. GAI ended up failing.
Brent Huigens. owner of PWCC. one of the worst hobby actors in recent years. pwcc consigned with many known card trimmers. burge, mosier, block, jaimet etc. submitting and selling MANY trimmed cards. a leaked text exchange between brent and a pwcc consigner showed brent instructing the consigner to schill his own card as brent knew the max bids of other bidders.
Brent/pwcc initiated pwcc's "marketplace tenets" which included accepting and encouraging altering cards under the auspice that said alteration was now to be referred to as "conservation" he went on multiple hobby podcasts at the time touting this "conservation"
I believe it was this last abomination combined with pwcc offering loans on consigned cards that took pwcc belly up.
as far as brent huigens goes, yes to both. i think he should both be banned from the hobby and his opinions should hold no authority at all. same for him as for bill mastro. huigens is as bad as it gets
that mike baker would not only associate with such a known bad actor, but to bring him into his company shows us the state of his hobby ethics.
i hope this helps. it is not just one thing, it is the combination of sticker silliness and bad actors in the hobby. there is tons further reading on the blowout forums. thousands of posts about pwcc over there.
The only thing you clarified is you don't like stickers because your good at math (?), and there's a lot of altered cards out there.
PSA has slabbed a lot of altered cards too, so the "best" company is no better than the "worst".
I do not possess and cards with stickers on them, but I might if I find a good deal.
Have a great day. I'm moving on from this thread.
did you actually read my response? I am confused. how did i not clarify huigens and baker?
Comments
Recently, Mike Baker has started to include the certification number of every card crossing his desk in his database whether the card receives or does not receive a diamond along with notes why the card did not receive a diamond. Good question…
My success rate has been 34/60 or 56.666%…19 silver diamonds and 15 gold diamonds. My collection grade is 8 or above from 1956-1975…and don’t hit a card below an 8 until 1955 Topps and Bowman with a 1955 Koufax RC PSA-7 (MBA -Gold), 1955 Bowman Mantle PSA-7 (MBA-Gold) and a 1955 Clemente RC PSA-6.5 (top-to-bottom centering when viewed horizontally …the reason for no Diamond).
The cards are prettier when the value exceeds $25k....Kind of like ta ta's the D's are prettier then the b's -- most of the time.
If that is a Pokemon card it looks outstanding.
Really!!!! I have a champagne taste …on a beer budget! My collection would not be where it is today, if I had not started assembling it when it was only a hobby.
Red Bull gives you wings. MBA gives you a seat in the cockpit.
This is a fun thread to follow for sure. The point about caring or not caring about trimmed or colored cards is way off base IMO. All of my cards are already graded by PSA, so how does my getting a graded card reviewed for a label or any collector doing so have anything to do whatsoever with a trimmed or colored card?
So answer this - is it wrong for people who collect to make money off their cards by getting them graded by PSA? Think of the value increase from a raw card to a PSA card when they sell - the increase is exponential. That means anyone who gets cards graded, buys or sells graded cards, deals with an auction house who sells graded cards is a hypocrite?
Same goes for anyone that buys or sells a card with a PWCC sticker or MBA sticker. How dare Ebay and Heritage and Mile High... allow this to happen. I think you should personally write to all of them and tell them all of the dirty stuff going on, and because Craig said they should not allow these grades and labels to exist al of them should be pulled. You do hear what you are saying right? You and you alone get to determine what is right and wrong based on your number of threads started and claims you are making.
I started collecting way before PSA cards ever came about, and I did it because I enjoy cards and did it with my dad and brothers while we grew up playing baseball. I also happened to play against guys in college who went on to play in the MLB and some became HOF players so I enjoy collecting their cards and following them - Frank Thomas, Piazza, Jim Palmer.... I also got to meet Mantle during my playing days and got to take some neat photos on field with him and Whitey Ford, Enos Slaughter...and they also personally signed some stuff for me as well. I enjoy cards whether they have a PSA slab on them or not, a 3rd party sticker or not, and if someone does not approve that is their prerogative - funny thing is they think they can tell me what to do or how to act and with whom. Good luck with that!
You are more than welcome to prolong your obsession with this one, and keep worrying about who uses stickers or PSA cards. Can't wait to see your next thread when another card gets a sticker
Maybe someone can come up with one like this for the next thread!
I think someone might want to use this sticker going forward…
you are either missing the point or purposefully obfuscating. You also continue to avoid addressing very simple questions.
while I think stickering graded cards is silly (you already paid for a second opinion. if you do not value that opinion have MBA grade it to begin with), I do not have a problem with others doing it. The problem I have is the company providing this "service." It is run by a guy with a questionable hobby history, who partnered with a person with a horrible hobby history, while offering a "service" he cannot possibly accurately provide.
why would you hitch your wagon to that train? with those people?
I will ask this question again. If you believe Mike is the grading guru and his reputation is above reproach, why dont you cross all of your PSA slabs over to MBA slabs? then you could skip the stickers altogether.
thus far your silence is speaking volumes.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
OMG, he doesn't quit. I actually think it's like calling the kettle black. The sig line has two arguably cheaters, aka bad actors, and one is considered the goat affectionately called Tommy like some best friend or man crush. Money, value, money, duh.
Yeah, but, his points are valid. He just restates them every five posts.
Arthur
I think it’s because the responses are so tangential and anecdotal so I feel for Craig here. He has to deal with story time defenses of nothing which culminate in an insult as rebuttal.
>
>
I wouldn't bother to answer the question either, but I'll give it a try.
_Because it would be expensive AND stupid to do so. _
Having the card initially graded by PSA carries their reputation. Having someone else coming in later and saying "YES, but not only is this card an 8, but it's an OUTSTANDING 8, better than 99% of all the other 8's!". If this increases the value by more than you paid for the opinion, it makes perfect sense.
Secondly, I do think you need to get off your "high horse" here. Your guy Brady knew IMMEDIATELY that football was underinflated and used it because he likes them a bit underinflated. Yet all is forgiven. I never thought it was that big a deal, but aren't you the guy who is always saying "cheating is cheating"? Taking a single "greenie" in a 20 year career is just as bad as gaining 30 pounds of muscle by injecting yourself literally hundreds of times with anabolic steroids, a MUCH stronger drug?
Probstein lost some of my collectibles I sent to him and when I politely inquired about some sort of compensation, he insulted me and told me to get a hold of a lawyer. I have warned people about this (more than one person has told me the same story) and if you want to use his service, you have been warned. Many thousands of people have done business with this guy and are happy with the results because they either MADE A PROFIT or didn't have to go through the hassle of selling the cards themselves.
"why would you hitch your wagon to that train? with those people?"
Your outrage over the "stickergate" issue is noted. It's time to move on.
Last I noticed Sean Payton was still coaching professional football and he pays his players to intentionally injure the opponents. Yet all is forgiven.
bgr, Would you say the responses from the Baker/Brent defenders amount to nothing more than japery?
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
Not even a minute do I buy the whole buh buh buh I'm a man-child japery - Me (2025)
I think it should be noted that the stickers and the slabs are two totally different conversations and I think it's getting murky at points. For me, the important issue is that Brent has found a new avenue to unload all the trimmed cards he had to buy back under direction of the Feds in order to avoid jail time.
Arthur
Makes perfect sense. Nothing evokes nostalgia and presents more beautifully on a slabbed card than a sticker.
Did somebody say sticker? This post only gets an A sticker for lack of depth and words😉
" Buy the card, not the holder"
To answer the OP = it's just a generalization. Salesman talk. Unless and until I see hard data that shows me say ,5000 cards , and the card stands out amongst those , and hey = this proves it = then all it is becomes a standard hot air salesmans pitch
>
>
>
Could care less about an outside opinion like from MBA but = If a card owner needs to spice up their wardrobe with some gold, silver or platinum = let them. It is their money. When the bills being footed by ones own wallet think that's the deciding factor.
>
>
>
Chew on this tidbit = one of the hobbies foundational cards worth 30 million now has an MBA sticker on it. The collectors held it for 30 years. His stated goal, and it came out of his own mouth, was to build an investment level portfolio of intelligent purchases for future sale when he dies. He's no dummy. If his "investment" mind convinced him the sticker was worth it then so be it
>
>
>
>
Investors want the hobby to accept the stickers. The free market they are sold in determines if they add value. Real simple here. To each their own. I certainly will not begrudge anyone who invests time and money into building a portfolio of items with the stickers. Gotta pay to play, only way we ever find out if our own thoughts are worth a crap sometimes 🤣
>
>
>
I know plenty of collectors who buy auto cards that were just graded for the card grade. They then dual grade them and spend more $$. To me = same as an investor buying a card thats top tier , then spending $$ to slap some sticker on it
>
>
>
>
I own 15,000+ Psa slabs. I'll let someone else make the choice. My choice is " stickers not needed for my PC" ,,,,, because it's a PC not an investment in anything but my own personal enjoyment
I think their perspective is completely valid. The MBA sticker service is the right thing at the right time with the influx of new money into the “hobby”. Good marketing and good results. But Craig has a valid perspective too in my opinion. It’s a good discussion.
Let’s keep the discussion centered on the topic and move away from the repeated back-and-forth and personal commentary.
There are valid points on both sides—no need to keep circling the same ground.
I’d prefer not to have to step in further here.
As opposed to regaling us with word salad posts and stories nobody cares about? I'll take that A sticker every time.
Excellent points - very well said 👍
100% agree with this. Some people like cards graded while some prefer raw cards. Others like the help of another set of eyes and potentially increased value of their cards with the MBA labels and some don’t. To each his own and will go back to enjoying my cards and hope others do the same. Circling the same ground is not going to change others minds either way, and others can continue this topic if they choose to do so. I am going to get in some golf and open some packs later with the family. Enjoy your weekend 👍
I do not have a pony in this race. However, I do have an interest in the optics in terms of how the discussion of grading and stickers effects the future of collecting. Specifically, there are issues of affordability which can easily influence the decision not to undertake collecting…period. The issues of grading and stickers, especially with vintage cards… and I mean real vintage cards as in pre 1965… adds a problematic layer to the affordability dilemma. Part of the dilemma are the grades assigned and the expectations for grades are simply not realistic. Vintage cards were made differently and mainly for kids. Many were simply not handled well and basically a significant percentage of the surviving population were abused. So we are in need of standards that adequately describe the condition spectrum of the surviving population. And the grading standards for vintage need to be reflective of the differences in how cards were produced and stored then in contrast to today. One cannot simply apply the same standards across the board to all cards- that simply fails the straight face test. Unless and until there is some recognition that all cards at the same grade level were simply not created equal, there will be issues with expectations with grades. Will stickers help re-set and manage grading expectations? I do not see this as a substitute for addressing what I see as the core issue. Instead, stickers seem to have the appearance of a bandaid in an effort to create some rough justice and satisfy some expectations. I am not writing that stickers are a bad idea… but the concept must have parameters and be transparent.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I think at this point it’s fair to say this topic comes down to two different ways of looking at the hobby.
One side places more weight on the people and process behind a service, and whether that foundation is something they’re comfortable with. The other side is more focused on how the market responds and whether the service provides added value in practice.
Both perspectives have been well represented here, and neither is likely to convince the other. That’s probably why the discussion keeps circling back on itself.
As with most things in this hobby, it often comes down to individual comfort level and how each collector chooses to approach it.
It feels like we may be at a bit of a stalemate on this one?
I do believe MBA stickered cards will often fetch higher prices, but the only cards receiving stickers should be high eye appeal to begin with. And high eye appeal cards already sell for more. So how much value does the sticker actually add?
I suppose, as has been said, the stickers’ true value comes from the information it provides the new collector, investor or otherwise uneducated buyer. Now the sticker allows for more people to know that a card looks really nice for a specific grade.
Craig's perspective is very valid. None of us could argue what he has presented as fact. Sometimes, even the cold, hard truth won't dissuade people from committing to an allegiance that may come into question. It happens everywhere, even at the highest level of our societal existence. The seemingly almost equal divide in this discussion comes as no surprise to me. Our entire country is divisive.
It's like Captain America Civil War up in this hobby.
Brent is like (a) Hydra after all.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
Not even a minute do I buy the whole buh buh buh I'm a man-child japery - Me (2025)
I pointed out the same sentiment in one of the previous discussions on the topic, when a poster listed record or near record prices from a large auction house, attributing those 2x-5x record prices BECAUSE it was stickered.
I said it was a false conclusion since other non-stickered cards ALSO reached record prices, some reaching 5x-10x.
Again, perception is everything. If enough people believe the sticker adds value, it then adds value.
It only takes 2 people to believe it.
However, in pretty much every area of collecting, documentation, provenance, adds value to an item. Added value doesn't necessarily mean more dollars though. If you had to pay the same price would you take the one with the sticker or the one without the sticker?
when i start a thread like this, it is not necessarily to try and convince folks like Mintonlypls or Kendallcat about bad actors like brent or silly companies like MBA. it is more to present convincing arguments to all those who silently read these threads and either havent heard about outfits like MBA or havent made up their minds about them.
very similar to all the debate YouTube channels. the main goal is not to "win" the debate. it is to present your side so that the people listening/reading will see. while there may only be 40 or so of us actively participating on this board, there are no doubt many multiples of that number who only read or would arrive at a thread like this from a google search.
those are the people to reach. not necessarily those who already have their minds made up.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
We agree on a lot of things, but this time I'm confused.
Your original post seemed to me to be an objection to stickers. You said;
"the SGC 9.5 Topps Mantle has a population of 1 in the SGC pop report. that being said, how can it be in the top 5% for the assigned grade when there is only one in the assigned grade? to extrapolate that further, how can any card technically receive a gold sticker unless there are a minimum of 100 in that assigned grade for that grading company? And to go even further, unless Mike has images of each of that minimum of 100 cards, how can he possibly rank each of them to arrive at an accurate "top 5%?"
I understand the math problem here, but every person who looks at a card has an opinion regardless if they have seen 1 baseball card or 10,000, No one has seen them all, so how can anyone have an opinion on a card based on math?
PSA's .5 addition to the grading scale (to me) is no different. I'm not a math whiz, but shouldn't there be a LOT more cards getting a .5 increase (or decrease)? I just looked up my last three larger submissions and out of 266 cards. I got .5 on 2 of them (both hand cut Post cereal cards) not one single .5 on any regular issue cards. That math don't math either.
Who cares? Anyone selling a card would rather have an 8.5 over an 8. Certainly would rather have an 8 over a 7.5!
Then, when nobody seemed to care about your math problem, you decided to bring in the "bad actor" argument and how MBA is a "silly company".
Brent Huegens is certainly an interesting fellow, and I don't care for some of his opinions on the hobby and grading. Does that mean he has been banned for the hobby? Does that mean every opinion he has on every card is wrong? I'm not sure he has ever been found guilty of altering cards, but I AM SURE that there are hundreds (probably thousands) of graded cards out there that have been cleaned, trimmed or pressed and reside in graded card holders, do the owners of these cards REALLY care? There's another thread going right now with a Mike Schmidt PSA 10 OPC rookie that looks trimmed. That card will probably sell for a record price.
You haven't educated anyone about these "bad actors" either. If you are actually trying to help novice collectors, present evidence of these guys' "bad actions" and let them decide for themselves.
Lastly, if MBA is a "silly company" then so is EVERY third party grading "service". These companies came into existence (in my opinion) because card sellers blatantly lied about the condition of their cards. Heck, the first graded card I bought (Accucard, Alan Hager) was overgraded by at least 3 grades!
PSA "came to the rescue" and did a very nice job.
The very bottom line here is;
If I can come up with an idea to make money and make money for my customers, we are all going to be happy.
For me, I don't need a sticker to evaluate a card, BUT if i saw a card with a sticker on it, I might take a closer look. As an ex sales person, that's half the battle. I also have no illusions that some of the graded cards in my collection have been altered. No company gets it right all the time.
Been a minute since I seen Hager's name mentioned.
I really do not think there is one single honest seller,dealer or grading card entity, this hobby really attracts the greasiest of the sleazy. As longs as the rubes keep spending those like Brent, Baker, Mastro, Moser, Betsy, Probsteen, etc will always succeed.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
Not even a minute do I buy the whole buh buh buh I'm a man-child japery - Me (2025)
let me try to clarify.
the sticker thing is silly for a few reasons:
1. the math that Baker is claiming doesnt math. it is a standard that he cannot possibly hope to ever actually meet.
2. everyone who has ever submitted or purchased a graded card has already paid for a second opinion (the first opinion is, of course, your own) if you do not value that grading companies opinion to the point that you want mike baker to "review" it for you, why not just submit to MBA grading in the first place?
3. third party graders who use half grades already in effect have an eye appeal "marker" for each card. if a card earns a half grade, it is already deemed "high eye appeal" no need for an extra sticker.
the "bad actors" crib notes:
Mike Baker. one of or maybe the first grader at psa. remember, the very first card psa graded was the sheet cut wagner. amongst those with inner hobby knowledge, i have read that it was known that mastro had that card cut. after his psa career, baker founded GAI grading. they holdered known trimmed cards, had poor quality control and had an unopened pack division that holdered lots of bad packs. GAI ended up failing.
Brent Huigens. owner of PWCC. one of the worst hobby actors in recent years. pwcc consigned with many known card trimmers. burge, mosier, block, jaimet etc. submitting and selling MANY trimmed cards. a leaked text exchange between brent and a pwcc consigner showed brent instructing the consigner to schill his own card as brent knew the max bids of other bidders.
Brent/pwcc initiated pwcc's "marketplace tenets" which included accepting and encouraging altering cards under the auspice that said alteration was now to be referred to as "conservation" he went on multiple hobby podcasts at the time touting this "conservation"
I believe it was this last abomination combined with pwcc offering loans on consigned cards that took pwcc belly up.
as far as brent huigens goes, yes to both. i think he should both be banned from the hobby and his opinions should hold no authority at all. same for him as for bill mastro. huigens is as bad as it gets
that mike baker would not only associate with such a known bad actor, but to bring him into his company shows us the state of his hobby ethics.
i hope this helps. it is not just one thing, it is the combination of sticker silliness and bad actors in the hobby. there is tons further reading on the blowout forums. thousands of posts about pwcc over there.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
The only thing you clarified is you don't like stickers because your good at math (?), and there's a lot of altered cards out there.
PSA has slabbed a lot of altered cards too, so the "best" company is no better than the "worst".
I do not possess and cards with stickers on them, but I might if I find a good deal.
Have a great day. I'm moving on from this thread.
He came. He saw. He moved on.
did you actually read my response? I am confused. how did i not clarify huigens and baker?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.