PWCC & eBay - help us improve the hobby

[Brent Huigens]

Dear Fellow Collectors,

I need to get something off my chest. My general policy is to let the message boards run free, but occasionally I need to make a post where I defend accusations, otherwise some folks may consider our lack of response as sign of guilt.

Do some folks really believe that we manipulate our scans?
Do some believe we orchestrate and/or tolerate shill bidding in our auctions?

For those who know us, or know me personally, it’s clear that these acts of fraud are simply not in my DNA. For those who don’t know me or PWCC and who choose the conspiracy theory approach, I offer logic to refute these claims. The logic is this… we only clear a couple % on each sale, so we simply don’t have the time or resources to manipulate individual auctions. Not to mention that the risk associated with trying to manipulate an auction is immeasurable; it would destroy our brand and everything I’ve worked hard to accomplish.

Our Scans:
Regarding our scanning, all I can say is that we use the same settings for every card we scan in each auction. Never do we go in and adjust the settings for an individual card. If you don’t like our scans, I suppose you can accuse us of having bad scans, but please forgo the accusation that we are manipulating them artificially. We never receive returns from buyers who felt our scans were inaccurate. In fact, I just checked our return history over the last 12 months and there’s not a single instance where the bidder sights the scan as having been enhanced artificially. What does that tell you? I admit that the settings we used in prior years with old equipment was simply were not universally accurate (in my opinion); sometimes making some issues appear ‘hot’ or overly bright. In our defense, it’s hard to make one group of settings that optimize every card issue from 1888-2014. As technology has improved, so have our scanners and we feel that our current images are extremely accurate. If folks are upset with past images, I sincerely apologize and perhaps those folks prefer our current representations more.

Policing Bidders:
On the topic of bid behavior it’s particularly frustrating to be accused of auction manipulation when I actually feel we are working to improve bidder behavior more than anyone else. It's impossible to watch every auction, but we police the bid as much as we can and have blocked more bidder ids for bad behavior than anyone else I know. As our company has matured we have had various policies come and go, some of which have proven more intelligent than others. For example one program I regret most was from 2009/2010 when we allowed consignors to place a single ‘reserve bid’ on a consigned lot if they received approval from us. This sort of thing was more-or-less accepted back in 2009 and we didn't think anything of it at the time (hidden reserves are still part of the hobby with many auction houses). In hindsight this wasn’t a smart program to have engaged in because it opened the door to abuse. We made a mistake offering this as a service and ended it in 2010. We certainly didn’t want to hurt the hobby and we have not offered this option for over 5 years. This is just an example of where we admit to being imperfect and we sincerely hope folks don’t hold this against us. Every business goes through a maturation and we continue to mature alongside the hobby at large.

eBay & the Hobby
It’s important to remember that eBay is a public auction venue, so when dealing with the public, bidding isn’t always squeaky clean. There are a lot of eccentric behavior in the hobby and it’s not fair to accuse every instance of manipulation. In my experience, 8/10 times something that looks fishy is actually legitimate. Obviously bidder behavior on eBay isn’t perfect, but we are absolutely doing all we can to help improve the marketplace. We hope folks can view accusations that PWCC is somehow the source any bad bidder behavior as illogical; we have nothing to gain and everything to lose from such acts.

So what is PWCC doing to help?
Two weeks ago I was at the 2015 West Coast Seller Summit hosted by eBay where I spoke at length with the eBay’s Trust & Safety team regarding bidder behavior and buyer quality. I am also attending a panel discussion on 6/11 with eBay where I will again be pressing for more seller tools that help us filter and police bidding. This panel discussion will be among 200 eBay employees and I’m one of only 4 sellers who’ve been invited to offer their opinions. In particular I am working to get the following tools implemented:

a) Stricter penalties for bid retractors who don’t follow the prescribed rules
b) Much stricter penalties for users with unpaid items on their record
c) IP address monitoring to ensure two or more accounts are never placing bids on the same item
d) Contact information cross checks to ensure bad users are not able to create new accounts
e) Stricter policies on how bidders with prior bad behavior are allowed to return to bidding (.i.e. forced instant payment with vetted credit cards on file, etc)
f) Seller tools that allow us to specify which bidders are allowed to bid (relative to the number and type of infraction listed above).

*Does anyone have other ideas that I could forward on to eBay? How can we make eBay the most trusted sale environment on the internet? Please help us make it better and post your thoughts to this thread.

I again ask that folks be constructive in their comments and I will indeed follow up in a week to review all posts and issue replies where needed. We appreciate everyone’s feedback.

Brent Huigens
PWCC Auctions, LLC
brent@pwccauctions.com

[Sean1125]

Brent,

Do you use factory scanner settings?

Are you adjusting or using extra features on the technology that you have purchased?

-Contrast
-Brightness
-Dust Removal
-Threshhold
-Gamma Editor

Do you use 8, 24, or 256 bit color when scanning?

I am sure with such advanced scanners you could scan above 200-240 dpi. If not why are the scans resized?

Are you willing to scan cards at 300 dpi with factory defaults and allow zoom on your scans? If not, why not?

Invest In Baseball is committed to using factory settings on all of our scanners making very sure even a stray print mark or piece of dust is visible and uploading our original un-resized images. Does PWCC have this same level of commitment? I believe you would benefit from proper scans that allow users to zoom and view the card as if it were being louped in hand.

Edited for grammar.

Also:
In our defense, it’s hard to make one group of settings that optimize every card issue from 1888-2014
You are right. I have found after years of selling you need two settings. One for cards that have holo-foil of any sort and one that is for non-holofoil classic gloss cards. I recently checked your website and see that you break up your auctions by era. You can set up multiple profiles on any modern scanning technology and seamlessly switch back and forth with one click. You should never be using the same settings for vintage as you do with modern.

I would be happy to help if you have any questions with volume technology in an effort to keep your quality constant and maintain the current level of volume you have.

[iowadoc77]

Brent,
Thanks for your attempt to do everything you can to be above reproach. It is much appreciated. I have purchased through PWCC before and have been very pleased.
Eric

[Jacker_ Cracks]

Brent,
Thanks for your attempt to do everything you can to be above reproach. It is much appreciated. I have purchased through PWCC before and have been very pleased.
Eric

+1

[bbcemporium]

Sean, does it matter if the scanner settings are factory default? Shouldn't the settings be set to provide a scan that most accurately represents the card?

[Joshchisox08]

Wow didn't know the owner of PWCC was on this site haha. I've got a couple of things from PWCC. Always seem to go a little higher than market value but I've never even had the thought cross my mind of fals scanning or shid billing.

I personally think it's the branding that drives the higher prices. People see PWCC and they trust the name.

[LKeeler]

I've bought numerous items from Brent, and have consigned perhaps over a hundred cards. I've never had any problems and will continue to buy from him, and consign to his auctions.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Brent, when your scans were previously questioned here at a time when in my opinion and many others' opinions they were sometimes bordering on thermonuclear (they are OK now as I have said), why did you come on here and claim that that was the first you had ever heard of your scans being questioned, when in fact you yourself had responded at length to a CU thread about the same topic not too long before? Just wondering? Had you somehow forgotten?

76 and 78 in this thread.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=177348

As for whether you tolerate shill bidding by consignors, only you can know that for sure, but I and several people I know have on many occasions observed bidders with high percentages of bidding activity with you and high numbers of retractions bidding on a wide spectrum of high dollar items in your auctions. You can tell it's the same bidder by the abbreviation and feedback number. It sure looks suspicious even if it isn't.

[swarmee]

I never realized in 2009-10 that PWCC permitted consignors to have a secret reserve bid, presumably against eBay's Terms of Service. Interesting.

Well, an easy thing for the people who identify shilling in his/any other auctions, is for people to report the listings to eBay and PWCC via the "Report Item" link at the right side under the box and select "Listing Practices", then "Fraudulent Listing Activities," then "Seller is using other accounts to inflate price." If people who care and are being shilled in these auctions would report it every time, eBay will be flooded with Report Item notifications. I am not sure if this would hurt Brent and his business directly; maybe he can chime in again and tell us. If it does, then it may be a solid topic of discussion at the meeting coming up with eBay's employees.

But, once reported, eBay and PWCC can check the auction history since they're being given a pointer to specific instances of presumed shill bidding.

Questions I'm interested in:
1) How often are items for certain sellers not paid for? If that number is over 10% (or on large $$ items), that would be a sign to me that shill accounts are being used and then stiffed, so that the "buyer" doesn't have to fork over cash to buy back their own card. They know you'll relist the card during your next auction.
2) Does your staff actively cross-check buyer addresses with consignor addresses of the same cards? Are they kept in the same line on your spreadsheet/database where they could be easily queried to see if your consigners are winning back their items?
3) If the top bidder does not pay, do you offer to underbidders? If so, this would also spur shill bidding. You could make a policy that you will never make offers to underbidders. Most bidders are wary of receiving "2nd chance" offers, figuring they were bid up in the first place.
4) Can you block/suspend all user accounts with over 5 bid retractions in the course of 6 months and all related (same IP, address) accounts? This would help cut down on overbidding to identify someone's top bid, and then backing out.

So, these are a few of my constructive comments for your discussion with your own team and eBay.

[clydepepper]

Brent - I have always been very satisfied with my dealings with PWCC. I count you as a dealer I can trust and I certainly don't understand why anyone would say otherwise...unless they have unrealistic expectations...which is probably true.

Thanks again,
Raymond
EBAY user ID: clydepeppper

[wonkaticket]

So you used to allow bidders to bid on their lots, and you used to enhance your scans, but you don't do that anymore. Good to know. :rolleyes:

At least you haven't announced finding god to a courtroom, or been charged with any crimes. So as a dealer/AH addressing concerns go your way ahead of the curve...I guess. :)

[Peter_Spaeth]

I never realized in 2009-10 that PWCC permitted consignors to have a secret reserve bid, presumably against eBay's Terms of Service. Interesting.

Well, an easy thing for the people who identify shilling in his/any other auctions, is for people to report the listings to eBay and PWCC via the "Report Item" link at the right side under the box and select "Listing Practices", then "Fraudulent Listing Activities," then "Seller is using other accounts to inflate price." If people who care and are being shilled in these auctions would report it every time, eBay will be flooded with Report Item notifications. I am not sure if this would hurt Brent and his business directly; maybe he can chime in again and tell us. If it does, then it may be a solid topic of discussion at the meeting coming up with eBay's employees.

But, once reported, eBay and PWCC can check the auction history since they're being given a pointer to specific instances of presumed shill bidding.

Questions I'm interested in:
1) How often are items for certain sellers not paid for? If that number is over 10% (or on large $$ items), that would be a sign to me that shill accounts are being used and then stiffed, so that the "buyer" doesn't have to fork over cash to buy back their own card. They know you'll relist the card during your next auction.
2) Does your staff actively cross-check buyer addresses with consignor addresses of the same cards? Are they kept in the same line on your spreadsheet/database where they could be easily queried to see if your consigners are winning back their items?
3) If the top bidder does not pay, do you offer to underbidders? If so, this would also spur shill bidding. You could make a policy that you will never make offers to underbidders. Most bidders are wary of receiving "2nd chance" offers, figuring they were bid up in the first place.
4) Can you block/suspend all user accounts with over 5 bid retractions in the course of 6 months and all related (same IP, address) accounts? This would help cut down on overbidding to identify someone's top bid, and then backing out.

So, these are a few of my constructive comments for your discussion with your own team and eBay.

With due respect, ebay doesn't give a damn. I have reported completely obvious shills when there was no possible innocent explanation (to be clear, not on any PWCC auction), and they politely did nothing.

[nolemmings]

With due respect, ebay doesn't give a damn. I have reported completely obvious shills when there was no possible innocent explanation (to be clear, not on any PWCC auction), and they politely did nothing.

That's because you've never been very persuasive :)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Touche.

[calvindog]

"Doug, Your honesty is refreshing, but I'm concerned with the Mastro bidding policy."

2007

[swarmee]

Another recommendation: list a consignor's number/identifier on every card you list. That way bidding patterns from consignor's shill bidding accounts can be readily identified. If f****9 (258) is always bidding on consignor #456's cards but nobody elses, you have a very likely shill bidding account.

"Unlike proprietary auction software, eBay's platform is equally transparent to both the buyer and the seller."

This is copied from your listings. I disagree with your statement, since eBay is constantly finding ways to remove the ability to detect shill bidding accounts or problem bidders/sellers, first by removing full bidding identifiers, and secondly by replacing/improving negative feedback ratings for no reason.

[111gecko]

Bought multiple high end cards from Brent and he has sold a number of items for me over the years.

Class act as far as I am concerned....

[3-2-count]

Sean, does it matter if the scanner settings are factory default? Shouldn't the settings be set to provide a scan that most accurately represents the card?

Agreed. If anyone believes factory default settings on any scanner represents a cards true look I strongly disagree. Slight adjustment is usually if not always necessary.

[ejharrington]

I just won my first card from PWCC. It looks better live than on the scan...and I bought it for much less than it cost the seller.

[wonkaticket]

"Doug, Your honesty is refreshing, but I'm concerned with the Mastro bidding policy."

2007

Chuckle

[AddieJoss]

I've bought some items from PWCC and been happy with my experiences. I only win a small percentage of the items I bid on as his auctions generally get higher prices than other auctions. There are many bidders like myself that search their auctions and save them as a seller to view these items. I did have one issue on one high priced card which was incorrectly graded by PSA (graded VG with paper loss) and Brent took it back with no problem.
Cory

[Griffins]

Agreed. If anyone believes factory default settings on any scanner represents a cards true look I strongly disagree. Slight adjustment is usually if not always necessary.

No pre press house would even use factory settings, nor would anyone that understands how to properly use a scanner. Scans are supposed to be a little flat in order to get detail in shadow and highlights, and always need a little tweeking.
The key is to make that tweeking match the image or object being scanned, and to know when to stop pushing it past accuracy.

[slidekellyslide]

*Does anyone have other ideas that I could forward on to eBay? How can we make eBay the most trusted sale environment on the internet? Please help us make it better and post your thoughts to this thread.


Brent Huigens
PWCC Auctions, LLC
brent@pwccauctions.com

Yes, please get them to be more flexible in removing unwarranted negative feedback. I turned a guy over for non-payment after two weeks of trying to get him to pay for his item, he finally paid shortly after me turning him over and immediately left me a negative feedback...like within a minute of paying. I could not get anyone to listen to how unfair this was to me, they even promised me that a supervisor would call me. No call ever came.

[glchen]

Another recommendation: list a consignor's number/identifier on every card you list. That way bidding patterns from consignor's shill bidding accounts can be readily identified. If f****9 (258) is always bidding on consignor #456's cards but nobody elses, you have a very likely shill bidding account.

"Unlike proprietary auction software, eBay's platform is equally transparent to both the buyer and the seller."

This is copied from your listings. I disagree with your statement, since eBay is constantly finding ways to remove the ability to detect shill bidding accounts or problem bidders/sellers, first by removing full bidding identifiers, and secondly by replacing/improving negative feedback ratings for no reason.

I like the suggestion of providing the consigner number. About your second part, I think what Brent is saying is that ebay is still more transparent than major auction houses. At least you have a rough idea of the bidder id even if its mostly scrambled. You have no clue for major auction houses. It'd be nice if major auction houses also followed this, where they provide the consigner id with each lot, and then provide full bidder id for every one who bids on a lot with a % of how often the bidder bids with the same consigner. I doubt that will ever happen however.

For ideas to forward to ebay, I would ask them to unscramble the bidder and feedback id's so that it's easier to detect shilling. I'd also ask ebay to allow an option where you can ban bidders who have a over certain # of retractions. Then I would say PWCC should ban bidders who have over 5 retractions.

For detecting shilling, it's a lot of work, so I would say, don't look for it yourself. However, ask the community to look for shilling in your auctions, and then if someone thinks they see something then look into it. I think this would allow others to do a lot of the work for you. If a consigner is proven to have shilled, then ban the consigner.

[swarmee]

Another topic for your eBay meetings: inform them of battlefield selling sports cards that are creased/chipped/otherwise damaged and editing those out of the pictures they post to eBay. Tell them that it has been going on for years and yet battlefield continues to sell cards. Tell them that sellers that have a high number of returns for issues like this should be banned, and that their negative feedbacks/DSRs should not just disappear in the name of "Protecting their selling accounts."

battlefield's improved scans amounted to fraud. Check out the most recent thread concerning T206s and T205s, but notice that the thread also discussed actions from 3-4 years ago with the same seller.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=206192&highlight=battlefield

[glchen]

Another thing about shilling. What seems to occur sometime is that the seller has a friend (or another account) do the bidding for him, and then if the other account wins, he just cancels the transaction. Not sure if this already occurs, but cancelling the transaction if it's due to the buyer should count similarly to a bid retraction. Cancelling it due to the seller should be a strike, and as part of a seller's DSR, ebay should show how many cancelled transactions.

Other things for the ebay meeting may be to see how ebay can match auction houses in certain respects. For example, one reason that some sellers are afraid of using ebay where the auctions start at 99 cents is due to fear that the "right" eyes won't see the auction. Perhaps allow auctions of greater length to match what auction houses do such as 14 days or even 21 days or perhaps even auction previews where buyers can see listings ever before they can start bidding. Also perhaps allow sellers to have the option of ending lots using the 15 or even 30 minute rule that auction houses have where if there is a bid during the "extended" time of the auction, the auction is extended another 15 or 30 minutes. I know a lot of ebay buyers won't like this b/c they use snipe services, but that could be a decent option for some sellers.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Which auction houses still have hidden reserves?

[bnorth]

Another thing about shilling. What seems to occur sometime is that the seller has a friend (or another account) do the bidding for him, and then if the other account wins, he just cancels the transaction. Not sure if this already occurs, but cancelling the transaction if it's due to the buyer should count similarly to a bid retraction. Cancelling it due to the seller should be a strike, and as part of a seller's DSR, ebay should show how many cancelled transactions.

Other things for the ebay meeting may be to see how ebay can match auction houses in certain respects. For example, one reason that some sellers are afraid of using ebay where the auctions start at 99 cents is due to fear that the "right" eyes won't see the auction. Perhaps allow auctions of greater length to match what auction houses do such as 14 days or even 21 days or perhaps even auction previews where buyers can see listings ever before they can start bidding. Also perhaps allow sellers to have the option of ending lots using the 15 or even 30 minute rule that auction houses have where if there is a bid during the "extended" time of the auction, the auction is extended another 15 or 30 minutes. I know a lot of ebay buyers won't like this b/c they use snipe services, but that could be a decent option for some sellers.

eBay tried the extended bidding thing, it sucked and they canceled it for good reason.

[ls7plus]

Wow didn't know the owner of PWCC was on this site haha. I've got a couple of things from PWCC. Always seem to go a little higher than market value but I've never even had the thought cross my mind of fals scanning or shid billing.

I personally think it's the branding that drives the higher prices. People see PWCC and they trust the name.

+1.

Happy collecting, guys!

Larry

[bbeck]

Brent-I spoke to you a few months back regarding the 1975 mini cello pack on ebay that was an impossible combination, Brett on top/ Ryan on bottom (Brett on top never could exist on mini cello packs), and you were very professional regarding your response and I hope the eventual buyer received a refund. I think you should take a hard look at discontinuing the sale of the fabricated Christmas racks that have surfaced for years now on ebay. Possibly, you should discuss with the executives at ebay, the idea of banning this item altogether. They continue to give the unopened market a black eye as they are duping collectors into thinking they have something that is truly vintage when they are nothing but basement after market garbage fantasy packs.

[Jantz]

Dear Fellow Collectors,

Policing Bidders:
On the topic of bid behavior it’s particularly frustrating to be accused of auction manipulation when I actually feel we are working to improve bidder behavior more than anyone else. It's impossible to watch every auction, but we police the bid as much as we can and have blocked more bidder ids for bad behavior than anyone else I know. As our company has matured we have had various policies come and go, some of which have proven more intelligent than others. For example one program I regret most was from 2009/2010 when we allowed consignors to place a single ‘reserve bid’ on a consigned lot if they received approval from us. This sort of thing was more-or-less accepted back in 2009 and we didn't think anything of it at the time (hidden reserves are still part of the hobby with many auction houses). In hindsight this wasn’t a smart program to have engaged in because it opened the door to abuse. We made a mistake offering this as a service and ended it in 2010. We certainly didn’t want to hurt the hobby and we have not offered this option for over 5 years. This is just an example of where we admit to being imperfect and we sincerely hope folks don’t hold this against us. Every business goes through a maturation and we continue to mature alongside the hobby at large.

Brent Huigens
PWCC Auctions, LLC
brent@pwccauctions.com

Brent,

I have a question for you.

Is Ebay aware of the fact that you allowed your consignors to "reserve bid" their own auctions for two years?

Jantz Morey

[swarmee]

Which auction houses still have hidden reserves?

http://www.network54.com/Forum/526604/thread/1431320184/last-1431956350/is+it+true+people+can+bid+on+their+own+lots+in+her itage-

http://www.legendaryauctions.com/rules.aspx
"20. Lots with hidden reserves will be marked as such in our catalog and on our website. Estimates will also be listed—and the reserves will never be higher than the low estimate."

And then there are the auctionhouses where people have posted that they thought they won an item as it closed, to wake up the next morning without it being on their invoice, and when they went to check the website, the listings *poofed.*

[irishdenny]

Mr. Huigens,

The only thought that has come to mind, is...

If PWCC is so concerned with cleaning up the Our Hobby, then why doesn't PWCC create it's own Auction House away from ebay's format?

Then PWCC wouldn't have to concern themselves with eBay's rules, just their own!

PWCC is certainly a Major player today, why do You stay with what some believe is where the problem exists?

[calvindog]

Brent,

I have a question for you.

Is Ebay aware of the fact that you allowed your consignors to "reserve bid" their own auctions for two years?

Jantz Morey

It's a "conspiracy theory" and "not in [his] DNA" to commit fraud. Except when he allowed consignors to bid on their own lots which was against ebay rules (and also fraudulent). Or when the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming that shill bidding occurs daily in his auctions. And by "overwhelming" I mean that it dwarfs the available circumstantial evidence which made it obvious to me 8 years ago that Mastro was shilling their auctions.

But as Brent told a client of mine the other day when asking him to convince me to lay off him, "what incentive do I have to shill my own auctions?" Gee, who can even think of a single such incentive?

[swarmee]

If PWCC is so concerned with cleaning up the Our Hobby, then why doesn't PWCC create it's own Auction House away from ebay's format?

What percentage of consignors AND customers would follow them to a different site, even if they stood up their own? 40%? Not worth the risk of pulling away from the LARGEST and MOST DIVERSE group of bidders in the world, right?

[wonkaticket]

Bottom line for me at least. You come out on a public forum admitting you played fast and loose with rules. You allowed consignors to bid on their items and tweaked scans. However that's all behind you now wink wink.

Now you want to survey the community who is raising eyebrows, to help "you" fix the problem. When in fact you admitted you were part of the very problem with past actions. Too many folks have come here over the years that were rule breakers who claimed to be converted hobby white knights or innocent.

History has shown that almost never is the case. I say best of luck with your business but please spare me the song and dance. I'm actually a little shocked at how many folks here have just glazed past your admissions. I've said it before and I'll say it again it's hard to feel sorry for this hobby and some of it's collectors because so many are so easy and willing to be duped and keep coming back for more.

Sorry if I don't rush to help or applaud your new found integrity. I would prefer to put that effort and attention with the honest players vs. the admitted coming clean players. Just my take....nothing personal in fact I don't think I've ever really done much with you in the way of business etc.

Cheers,

John

[begsu1013]

fedex.com

vs.

usps.com

especially on top tier items...

still waiting on the 59 mantle. been over a week and has been across the country twice and has been in everyone else's hands but mine.

[tombocombo]

If only three bids were allowed it would level the playing field quickly. I had a clown bid $2.00 increments til my bid showed, Brent (PWCC) cancelled the clown expeditiously. Who has time to bid 60 times in low increments? Three bid limit potentially could make people place more strategic bids. Sellers and consignors most likely lose money, as serious bidders back off on the 60 time bidder with the obligatory feedback rating of (1) The zero fating bidder just happens to be hitting a $1,000.00 multiple upon multiple times. Best to sit and laugh, however when it's a want-list item it is very testing to say the least. Call Brent when you see a problem, he will rectify quicker than you expect.

[DerekMichael]

If only three bids were allowed it would level the playing field quickly. I had a clown bid $2.00 increments til my bid showed, Brent (PWCC) cancelled the clown expeditiously. Who has time to bid 60 times in low increments? Three bid limit potentially could make people place more strategic bids. Sellers and consignors most likely lose money, as serious bidders back off on the 60 time bidder with the obligatory feedback rating of (1) The zero fating bidder just happens to be hitting a $1,000.00 multiple upon multiple times. Best to sit and laugh, however when it's a want-list item it is very testing to say the least. Call Brent when you see a problem, he will rectify quicker than you expect.

A three bid limit is actually a really intriguing idea to me. It eliminates people placing tiny consecutive bids over and over and over which to be honest is just a bit annoying (no offense intended to anyone, I guess I am just stating personal preference).

Nice light bulb Tom.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Bottom line for me at least. You come out on a public forum admitting you played fast and loose with rules. You allowed consignors to bid on their items and tweaked scans. However that's all behind you now wink wink.

Now you want to survey the community who is raising eyebrows, to help "you" fix the problem. When in fact you admitted you were part of the very problem with past actions. Too many folks have come here over the years that were rule breakers who claimed to be converted hobby white knights or innocent.

History has shown that almost never is the case. I say best of luck with your business but please spare me the song and dance. I'm actually a little shocked at how many folks here have just glazed past your admissions. I've said it before and I'll say it again it's hard to feel sorry for this hobby and some of it's collectors because so many are so easy and willing to be duped and keep coming back for more.

Sorry if I don't rush to help or applaud your new found integrity. I would prefer to put that effort and attention with the honest players vs. the admitted coming clean players. Just my take....nothing personal in fact I don't think I've ever really done much with you in the way of business etc.

Cheers,

John

The inevitable "I've never had a problem with him" posts are pretty familiar, aren't they? But they're really beside the point, because it has never been suggested that PWCC has less than stellar customer service. I received every card I ever won from Mastro or Legendary quickly and well-packaged. So?

I do hope Brent is being sincere and that all the anomalies one sees in his auctions have innocent explanations. I would also like to believe he doesn't accept consignments from people with reputations as card doctors, although I guess that would be naïve because who doesn't? But just to loudly proclaim one's innocence is not enough in some folks' book. And I still would like to understand why Brent came on here and claimed he had never heard complaints about his scans when he had only recently posted a long rebuttal to exactly such a claim on CU. If he lied about that, and it does seem he did, why should we believe him about other things?

[ullmandds]

I hate to say it...but I believe in the term..."once a cheater always a cheater!"

Any AH/seller who has proven to exhibit unfair/unethical business practices has lost me as a bidder/consigner...forever!

And to the unnamed AH who is constantly asking me why I continue to talk smack about them on here...this is why! You used to allow your employees/consigners to bid on auction items but no longer...but you only came clean after you were caught on numerous occasions...Bullshit I say!

Sad how some who made a career livelihood out of a hobby they must have loved at some point in their lives...have worked so hard to destroy it!

[calvindog]

Brent, have you ever offered to waive sales tax for Calfornia auction winners if they paid by check?

[HRBAKER]

Is it true that a good lawyer never asks a question he/she doesn't know the answer to?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Is it true that a good lawyer never asks a question he/she doesn't know the answer to?

Did a good lawyer just ask a question, I must have missed it. :D

[swarmee]

I am not a lawyer, but actively encouraging shill bidding in 2010 when the wire fraud statute of limitations is five years seems iffy to mention in multiple public settings (this board and Collector's Universe).

[Peter_Spaeth]

I am not a lawyer, but actively encouraging shill bidding in 2010 when the wire fraud statute of limitations is five years seems iffy to mention in multiple public settings (this board and Collector's Universe).

I am one, and I agree. Those paper trails can undo you sometimes.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Dear Fellow Collectors,

I need to get something off my chest. My general policy is to let the message boards run free, but occasionally I need to make a post where I defend accusations, otherwise some folks may consider our lack of response as sign of guilt.

Do some folks really believe that we manipulate our scans?
Do some believe we orchestrate and/or tolerate shill bidding in our auctions?

For those who know us, or know me personally, it’s clear that these acts of fraud are simply not in my DNA. For those who don’t know me or PWCC and who choose the conspiracy theory approach, I offer logic to refute these claims. The logic is this… we only clear a couple % on each sale, so we simply don’t have the time or resources to manipulate individual auctions. Not to mention that the risk associated with trying to manipulate an auction is immeasurable; it would destroy our brand and everything I’ve worked hard to accomplish.

Our Scans:
Regarding our scanning, all I can say is that we use the same settings for every card we scan in each auction. Never do we go in and adjust the settings for an individual card. If you don’t like our scans, I suppose you can accuse us of having bad scans, but please forgo the accusation that we are manipulating them artificially. We never receive returns from buyers who felt our scans were inaccurate. In fact, I just checked our return history over the last 12 months and there’s not a single instance where the bidder sights the scan as having been enhanced artificially. What does that tell you? I admit that the settings we used in prior years with old equipment was simply were not universally accurate (in my opinion); sometimes making some issues appear ‘hot’ or overly bright. In our defense, it’s hard to make one group of settings that optimize every card issue from 1888-2014. As technology has improved, so have our scanners and we feel that our current images are extremely accurate. If folks are upset with past images, I sincerely apologize and perhaps those folks prefer our current representations more.

Policing Bidders:
On the topic of bid behavior it’s particularly frustrating to be accused of auction manipulation when I actually feel we are working to improve bidder behavior more than anyone else. It's impossible to watch every auction, but we police the bid as much as we can and have blocked more bidder ids for bad behavior than anyone else I know. As our company has matured we have had various policies come and go, some of which have proven more intelligent than others. For example one program I regret most was from 2009/2010 when we allowed consignors to place a single ‘reserve bid’ on a consigned lot if they received approval from us. This sort of thing was more-or-less accepted back in 2009 and we didn't think anything of it at the time (hidden reserves are still part of the hobby with many auction houses). In hindsight this wasn’t a smart program to have engaged in because it opened the door to abuse. We made a mistake offering this as a service and ended it in 2010. We certainly didn’t want to hurt the hobby and we have not offered this option for over 5 years. This is just an example of where we admit to being imperfect and we sincerely hope folks don’t hold this against us. Every business goes through a maturation and we continue to mature alongside the hobby at large.

eBay & the Hobby
It’s important to remember that eBay is a public auction venue, so when dealing with the public, bidding isn’t always squeaky clean. There are a lot of eccentric behavior in the hobby and it’s not fair to accuse every instance of manipulation. In my experience, 8/10 times something that looks fishy is actually legitimate. Obviously bidder behavior on eBay isn’t perfect, but we are absolutely doing all we can to help improve the marketplace. We hope folks can view accusations that PWCC is somehow the source any bad bidder behavior as illogical; we have nothing to gain and everything to lose from such acts.

So what is PWCC doing to help?
Two weeks ago I was at the 2015 West Coast Seller Summit hosted by eBay where I spoke at length with the eBay’s Trust & Safety team regarding bidder behavior and buyer quality. I am also attending a panel discussion on 6/11 with eBay where I will again be pressing for more seller tools that help us filter and police bidding. This panel discussion will be among 200 eBay employees and I’m one of only 4 sellers who’ve been invited to offer their opinions. In particular I am working to get the following tools implemented:

a) Stricter penalties for bid retractors who don’t follow the prescribed rules
b) Much stricter penalties for users with unpaid items on their record
c) IP address monitoring to ensure two or more accounts are never placing bids on the same item
d) Contact information cross checks to ensure bad users are not able to create new accounts
e) Stricter policies on how bidders with prior bad behavior are allowed to return to bidding (.i.e. forced instant payment with vetted credit cards on file, etc)
f) Seller tools that allow us to specify which bidders are allowed to bid (relative to the number and type of infraction listed above).

*Does anyone have other ideas that I could forward on to eBay? How can we make eBay the most trusted sale environment on the internet? Please help us make it better and post your thoughts to this thread.

I again ask that folks be constructive in their comments and I will indeed follow up in a week to review all posts and issue replies where needed. We appreciate everyone’s feedback.

Brent Huigens
PWCC Auctions, LLC
brent@pwccauctions.com

Saving for posterity just so there can be no question as to what John was referring to.

[HerbK]

Imagine ... a thread where a plethora of lawyers all espousing to be the holiest of thou ... !

- Why does California have the most lawyers, and New Jersey, the most toxic waste dumps?

........ New Jersey got first pick!

:)

Hèrb K@nê

[xplainer]

I am not a lawyer, but actively encouraging shill bidding in 2010 when the wire fraud statute of limitations is five years seems iffy to mention in multiple public settings (this board and Collector's Universe).

Not sure if I can say this but, AMEN! :D

[swarmee]

Which auction houses still have hidden reserves?

17. A few lots are subject to a reserve; these will be clearly noted on our web site and the auctioneer may bid up to the bid below the reserve amount.
http://www.cleansweepauctions.com/html/faq.html

[swarmee]

Which auction houses still have hidden reserves?

"17. A few lots are subject to a reserve; these will be clearly noted on our web site and the auctioneer may bid up to the bid below the reserve amount."
http://www.cleansweepauctions.com/html/faq.html

I do like their treatment of bid retractors, though....

"11. Names of re-neggers will be published in all future auctions and correspondence. Please do not embarrass yourself."

[Gradedcardman]

This post does not need to go away yet. I am watching an auction with obvious shill bidding happening. I have notified Brent twice and asked him to have the bidder removed. The current high bidder, according to Brent, won this item 10 days ago and then decided to resell to free up funds. If that is the case then the winner should not now be the high bidder. I will post updates as this moves on and eventually with the winner/bidder information. Ebay will also be notified though I doubt he will face any issues due to his status with them.

[Peter_Spaeth]

This post does not need to go away yet. I am watching an auction with obvious shill bidding happening. I have notified Brent twice and asked him to have the bidder removed. The current high bidder, according to Brent, won this item 10 days ago and then decided to resell to free up funds. If that is the case then the winner should not now be the high bidder. I will post updates as this moves on and eventually with the winner/bidder information. Ebay will also be notified though I doubt he will face any issues due to his status with them.

So he told you this in order to reassure you there was NOT shill bidding going on? I don't follow.

[Peter_Spaeth]

By the way, how can a PSA 10 be high end for the grade?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1986-Fleer-Basketball-Karl-Malone-ROOKIE-RC-68-PSA-10-GEM-MINT-PWCC-/141687401031?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20fd3a2a47

[gregr2]

Reminds me of the line from the movie This is Spinal Tap "These go to eleven".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_to_eleven

[ullmandds]

By the way, how can a PSA 10 be high end for the grade?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1986-Fleer-Basketball-Karl-Malone-ROOKIE-RC-68-PSA-10-GEM-MINT-PWCC-/141687401031?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20fd3a2a47

the power of puffery!

[calvindog]

Nothing to see here, folks, keep it moving.

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBidderProfile&mode=1&item=400933778595&aid=o***o&eu=&bidtid=456479718027&view=NONE&ssPageName=PageBidderProfileViewBids_None_ViewLink

[scooter729]

By the way, how can a PSA 10 be high end for the grade?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1986-Fleer-Basketball-Karl-Malone-ROOKIE-RC-68-PSA-10-GEM-MINT-PWCC-/141687401031?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20fd3a2a47

Very simple: the description says it's worthy of an 11, so that's why it's high end. Duh.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Very simple: the description says it's worthy of an 11, so that's why it's high end. Duh.

LOL. Not that I thought much of the independent PWCC certification anyhow, but attaching it to a 10 burns all credibility. Stupid.

[Peter_Spaeth]

This post does not need to go away yet. I am watching an auction with obvious shill bidding happening. I have notified Brent twice and asked him to have the bidder removed. The current high bidder, according to Brent, won this item 10 days ago and then decided to resell to free up funds. If that is the case then the winner should not now be the high bidder. I will post updates as this moves on and eventually with the winner/bidder information. Ebay will also be notified though I doubt he will face any issues due to his status with them.

Can you post a link to the item in question, or the item number.

[Brian Van Horn]

I hate to pile on, but the Standard Biscuit fiasco in February is still a relevant topic. The cards were faked and still passed through SGC and were then auctioned through PWCC.

[conor912]

LOL. Not that I thought much of the independent PWCC certification anyhow, but attaching it to a 10 burns all credibility. Stupid.

+1

[conor912]

I hate to pile on, but the Standard Biscuit fiasco in February is still a relevant topic. The cards were faked and still passed through SGC and were then auctioned through PWCC.

...but SGC graded them, so they MUST be legit.

[wonkaticket]

Adam are you sure? I was told this isn't in his DNA?

[calvindog]

Adam are you sure? I was told this isn't in his DNA?

Tax fraud: in his DNA
Fraud rampant in his auctions: in his DNA
Sending out ebay messages openly suggesting to buyers how to beat the tax laws: in his DNA
Lying on Net 54: in his DNA

[wonkaticket]

So Jeff you're saying it should be viewed more like this? :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/net54shared/dna-163466_1280%20copy.jpg

[calvindog]

Lololololololol

[ullmandds]

So Jeff you're saying it should be viewed more like this? :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/net54shared/dna-163466_1280%20copy.jpg

close enough!!!!!

[wonkaticket]

Pete, I agree hard to argue with Lichtman Labs I've used them for years...they have never let me down. :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/net54shared/qKLXwyU.gif

[ullmandds]

Haha...lichtman labs...genetic testing thats close enough for govt work!

[pokerplyr80]

It sounds like PWCC doesn't have many fans on this forum. I'm sure people who consign to him to try to shill their own auctions, as they do through other sellers and auction houses. Only Brent can say what is really being done to prevent it. But with 1000s of cards up at any time I'm sure it's difficult to monitor.

I don't see how anyone could hold him or any auction house responsible for selling a counterfeit card that was good enough to fool SGC and was encased.

As for the PWCC certified PSA 10 it does sound unusual. However, if it weren't possible to have a PSA 10 that is nice for the grade, there would be no BGS 10 pristine. Perhaps this is one that could be crossed over.

[TanksAndSpartans]

Theoretically, I think a 10 could be “nice for the grade” or whatever you want to call it. Just to chose something quantifiable, take centering. PSA mentions: “55/45 to 60/40 percent on the front, and 75/25 percent on the reverse”. In theory a dead centered card would exceed the minimum requirement. In their definition they allow some room for a card to exceed minimum standards.

[calvindog]

It sounds like PWCC doesn't have many fans on this forum. I'm sure people who consign to him to try to shill their own auctions, as they do through other sellers and auction houses. Only Brent can say what is really being done to prevent it. But with 1000s of cards up at any time I'm sure it's difficult to monitor.

I don't see how anyone could hold him or any auction house responsible for selling a counterfeit card that was good enough to fool SGC and was encased.



How about letting consignors bid on their own lots? Or offer to help auction winners evade sales tax in California? Or lie about his manipulated scans? Can we hold him responsible for that?

[japhi]

Wow what a pile on. I don't have a horse in this race but I find amazing how clean some folks on here manage to run their business.

Brent's big mistake of course was his original post. Most of us have made mistakes in business, and I'm sure some folks here have done much worse.

I will say he's an idiot for posting and he underestimated how much free time some folks have, and how much enjoyment they get from trying to take others down and how some guys here are just downright angry.

[calvindog]

Wow what a pile on. I don't have a horse in this race but I find amazing how clean some folks on here manage to run their business.

Brent's big mistake of course was his original post. Most of us have made mistakes in business, and I'm sure some folks here have done much worse.

I will say he's an idiot for posting and he underestimated how much free time some folks have, and how much enjoyment they get from trying to take others down and how some guys here are just downright angry.

Actually, I think it's the massive fraud in his auctions, permitting consignors to bid on their own lots, the tax cheating and the bad scans that were his big mistakes. Posting on here was just idiotic. But Doug Allen and John Rogers did the same thing.

[japhi]

Actually, I think it's the massive fraud in his auctions, the tax cheating and the bad scans that were his big mistakes. Posting on here was just idiotic. But Doug Allen and John Rogers did the same thing.

I guess everyone has a different sense of proportion.

I just don't get as worked up as you guys about a scan that is too bright, a guy bidding on his own cards, or a seller offering to ship a card out of state. None of those things really have much of an impact on me. I can always return the card, not pay if I feel shilled and frankly I couldn't care less about California's tax situation. And of course, I could just not bid in his auctions.

[Pat R]

....

[pokerplyr80]

I was not actively collecting in 2010 and don't know if letting consignors place a bid was an announced policy or against Ebay rules. Since it seems everyone was unaware he had this policy I'm surprised he mentioned it. At least he's willing to admit they made a mistake.

I can't speak on helping buyers evade sales tax in California as I have no knowledge of this. Many purchase online to avoid sales tax and I would be surprised if more than a couple people on this entire forum self report their online purchases to pay the proper sales tax. Does that mean we're all guilty of tax fraud? By the letter of the law I'm sure it does. I know Brent has since moved his business to Oregon. Having to collect sales tax in the largest state in the country would put his business at a disadvantage. If he simply suggested to customers they can avoid paying sales tax by shipping to an out of state address or PO Box I don't see a problem.

[jhs5120]

I guess everyone has a different sense of proportion.

I just don't get as worked up as you guys about a scan that is too bright, a guy bidding on his own cards, or a seller offering to ship a card out of state. None of those things really have much of an impact on me. I can always return the card, not pay if I feel shilled and frankly I couldn't care less about California's tax situation. And of course, I could just not bid in his auctions.

This is the first intelligent thing posted here.

I'm surprised how worked up some people are getting

[Peter_Spaeth]

I was not actively collecting in 2010 and don't know if letting consignors place a bid was an announced policy or against Ebay rules. Since it seems everyone was unaware he had this policy I'm surprised he mentioned it. At least he's willing to admit they made a mistake.

I can't speak on helping buyers evade sales tax in California as I have no knowledge of this. Many purchase online to avoid sales tax and I would be surprised if more than a couple people on this entire forum self report their online purchases to pay the proper sales tax. Does that mean we're all guilty of tax fraud? By the letter of the law I'm sure it does. I know Brent has since moved his business to Oregon. Having to collect sales tax in the largest state in the country would put his business at a disadvantage. If he simply suggested to customers they can avoid paying sales tax by shipping to an out of state address or PO Box I don't see a problem.

So if complying with the law puts you at a disadvantage that makes it OK to break the law? Wow. I guess that's an interesting libertarian view. I have my doubts about its merit as a legal defense though.

By the way I think the issue may have been encouraging people to pay by check or money order, not shipping out of state.

[wonkaticket]

This is the first intelligent thing posted here.

I'm surprised how worked up some people are getting

Jason, I don't think folks who have posted here about his admissions are wrecked over this or pacing back and forth in their houses. If anything it's par for the course the hobby is full of not so above board folks. With that said you're ok with getting shilled or having a business owner turning a blind eye to things that could cost you extra money...that doesn't bother you at all? Interesting....

[ullmandds]

Jason, I don't think folks who have posted here about his admissions are wrecked over this or pacing back and forth in their houses. If anything it's par for the course the hobby is full of not so above board folks. With that said you're ok with getting shilled or having a business owner turning a blind eye to things that could cost you extra money...that doesn't bother you at all? Interesting....

exactly...because some of us "care" that the hobby is littered with corruption and crookery...and want a "safer" place to play in...that makes us losers with too much time on our hands?

you all who couldn't care less should be thanking us for trying to remedy the problem...not that any of us expect or even want that!

[calvindog]

Jason, I don't think folks who have posted here about his admissions are wrecked over this or pacing back and forth in their houses. If anything it's par for the course the hobby is full of not so above board folks. With that said you're ok with getting shilled or having a business owner turning a blind eye to things that could cost you extra money...that doesn't bother you at all? Interesting....

The level of intelligence of some of these responses just shows me how little some have learned since the Mastro debacle -- and how easy it is to rip off collectors. But I think anyone with an IQ north of 100 knew this already.

[chaddurbin]

hey you guys complaining...change from those sweatpants you're wearing, get out of your mom's basement and do something productive with your lives...or just get a life instead of ruining the great hobby experience the rest of us are having!

[ullmandds]

hey you guys complaining...change from those sweatpants you're wearing, get out of your mom's basement and do something productive with your lives...or just get a life instead of ruining the great hobby experience the rest of us are having!

i never leave the house in sweatpants!

[gnaz01]

hey you guys complaining...change from those sweatpants you're wearing, get out of your mom's basement and do something productive with your lives...or just get a life instead of ruining the great hobby experience the rest of us are having!

LOL, Quan.

[nolemmings]

i never leave the house in sweatpants!

Thank you--unless you're a spandex guy.

[ullmandds]

Thank you--unless you're a spandex guy.

ha ha...definitely not!!!!!!

[Peter_Spaeth]

As the Mastro/Allen discussions show, there are basically two types of people here, those that are really bothered and pissed off by fraud in the hobby, and those who don't care as long as they think it doesn't affect THEM personally. Not much point in either side bashing the other.

[calvindog]

As the Mastro/Allen discussions show, there are basically two types of people here, those that are really bothered and pissed off by fraud in the hobby, and those who don't care as long as they think it doesn't affect THEM personally. Not much point in either side bashing the other.

Tell me, how does fraud in the hobby not affect everyone? How do secret reserves, manipulated scans and shill bidding not affect everyone?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Tell me, how does fraud in the hobby not affect everyone? How do secret reserves, manipulated scans and shill bidding not affect everyone?

I never said it didn't, I said people THINK it doesn't affect them. Just like people think THEY won't be infected with the plague of altered cards. But you aren't going to convince those folks.

[Gradedcardman]

I want to update my last post to say that PWCC has retracted/removed the possible shill bids. I will follow this auction through to the end and give a final update on Sunday.

[ullmandds]

well I certainly understand that is is nearly impossible to "police" thousands of auctions...and if what it takes is someone pointing it out to brent in order for him to do something about it...that's better than nothing...and is certainly a start in the right direction.

[Rob D.]

This is a hobby in which loyalty is pledged -- much too often and by people who should know better -- to whomever bought them dinner at a National. If Brent does nothing else, he should just make sure he has reservations at Morton's the last week in July.

R0b D3wolf

[Peter_Spaeth]

well I certainly understand that is is nearly impossible to "police" thousands of auctions...and if what it takes is someone pointing it out to brent in order for him to do something about it...that's better than nothing...and is certainly a start in the right direction.

Is it impossible to police, say, the auctions of your 25 most expensive cards? That argument that it's harder to run an ebay auction house than a major corporation is bullshit. I can look at 25 auctions in about 10 minutes and identify repeat bidders bidding on all sorts of diverse cards with high percentages of bids in PWCC and lots of retractions.

[ullmandds]

Is it impossible to police, say, the auctions of your 25 most expensive cards? That argument that it's harder to run an ebay auction house than a major corporation is bullshit. I can look at 25 auctions and identify repeat bidders bidding on all sorts of diverse cards with high percentage of bids in PWCC and lots of retractions.

No...it is more than reasonable to police that #.

[calvindog]

well I certainly understand that is is nearly impossible to "police" thousands of auctions...and if what it takes is someone pointing it out to brent in order for him to do something about it...that's better than nothing...and is certainly a start in the right direction.

The idea that he's an innocent dupe being used by crooked consigners is belied by his admitted (and documented) fraud. Brent knows exactly what he's doing.

[Peter_Spaeth]

This is a hobby in which loyalty is pledged -- much too often and by people who should know better -- to whomever bought them dinner at a National. If Brent does nothing else, he should just make sure he has reservations at Morton's the last week in July.

R0b D3wolf

Seems all you have to do to win most people over is ship their card quickly and securely.

[jhs5120]

Jason, I don't think folks who have posted here about his admissions are wrecked over this or pacing back and forth in their houses. If anything it's par for the course the hobby is full of not so above board folks. With that said you're ok with getting shilled or having a business owner turning a blind eye to things that could cost you extra money...that doesn't bother you at all? Interesting....

John, while I agree with you that most posters are not "wrecked" over this, there is certainly a disproportionate level of anger by many considering the nature of the original post. As Matt said, everyone has a different sense of proportion.

If people want to get upset over this, that's their purgative.

[calvindog]

If people want to get upset over this, that's their purgative.

Totally my purgative, thanks.

[Peter_Spaeth]

John, while I agree with you that most posters are not "wrecked" over this, there is certainly a disproportionate level of anger by many considering the nature of the original post. As Matt said, everyone has a different sense of proportion.

If people want to get upset over this, that's their purgative.

Jason, the nature of the original post -- the righteous indignation over people raising questions, the "not in my DNA" choirboy shtick -- is precisely why people are reacting as they do.

[chaddurbin]

Seems all you have to do to win most people over is ship their card quickly and securely.

i'm happy with the free catalog that i didn't have to provide two hobby references for.

[Brent Huigens]

Fellow collectors,

Thank you for your responses to this thread and for providing suggestions for both improving eBay and for improving PWCC Auctions. I have separated our responses into two sections. The first provides my responses to your feedback about improving PWCC Auctions. The second provides my approach to incorporating your feedback in my conversations with eBay later this week.

I have said before that I try to limit my involvement in message boards in order to ensure an open, uninfluenced discussion. As such, I don’t plan to revisit this thread. If you have follow up questions or feedback, please send to me by email (brent@pwccauctions.com).

Thank you,

Brent Huigens
PWCC Auctions
brent@pwccauctions.com


Section 1: Feedback to improve PWCC Auctions:

Concerns over consignor-issued reserves in 2009-10

Raised by swarmee, wonkaticket, calvindog, Jantz, ullmandds

This was first discussed several years ago on this and the Net54 message boards. The reserve option was a highly restrictive service we offered over a narrow period of time, ending in 2010. It was used by very few consignors because our requirements were strict:


Consignors had to get PWCC approval to place reserve bids in advance
The reserve amount had to be conservative relative to the market value (also required approval)
The consignor still had to pay our fees, as well as eBay, in the event that the reserve was not met.

I estimate that no more than 100 (perhaps has few as 50) reserves were ever placed in 2009-10 and the vast majority were eclipsed by the bidding. Not making excuses for this program because we regret having it, but it was never used to wrong bidders, eBay, or the hobby.

Concerns over the cost of shipping, our approach to packaging, and recommendations to use FedEx rather than USPS

Raised by begsu1013

In order to keep shipping costs low, we use a packaging approach which includes multiple layers of envelopes. This includes a bubble mailer and a rigid outer envelope. This approach was developed over a decade of optimizing our shipping. We feel this approach results in not only an appropriate cost but also is very effective in protecting cards. Complaints of damage in shipping are extraordinarily rare.

We ship USPS because they offer the lowest rates. Generally speaking, most buyers prefer low cost over speed. We offer shipping through FedEx if buyers request it. Items over $3k are shipped USPS registered due to its unmatched safety and security.

Suggestions that we stop selling Christmas Rack Packs in our Auctions due to concerns over their legitimacy

Raised by Bbeck

We have discussed this internally and ultimately agree with the feedback from this and other boards. As such, we will no longer broker Christmas Rack Packs in our auctions, starting with Auction #6. Out of respect for our consignors who have already submitted these items to our current auction, we will sell the items we have already in house.

Concerns about bid manipulation (shilling)

Raised by Peter_Spaeth, Swarmee, Calvindog

9 times out of 10, bidding behavior that appears suspicious is actually legitimate, and just the result of eccentric bid behavior by trusted and proven users. However, we acknowledge there is still room for improvement which was the reason I started this thread; please refer to the next section of this post which summarizes the recommendations I intend to make to eBay to increase transparency in bidding and seller’s ability to limit bids from eBay users with prior bad behavior.

I encourage folks to contact me regarding any auction which they feel shows signs of suspicious behavior at brent@pwccauctions.com. I will always investigate and respond to these inquires. We very much appreciate everyone’s time in helping us police the market place.

Questions about the settings we use in our scanning process

Raised by Sean1125, Bbcemporium, Peter_Spaeth

Our goal with scanning is to make the card appear as close to its actual appearance as possible. We are not trying to enhance the appearance of the cards – this would not be in our best interest because we would end up with unhappy buyers, returned items, and a damaged brand.

We use an image size of 150 dpi because we feel this size is most representative of how the card looks when you are actually holding it in your hand. In special circumstances (high value, unique issues, etc.) we can and do provide higher resolution scans upon request.

Suggestion to list who consigned each item

Raised by glchen, Swarmee

This would deviate from the basic principles of a consignment-based business, though we understand the logic behind the suggestion.

Suggestion to ask the collecting community to police our auctions for bid manipulation and inauthentic items

Raised by Glchen

Yes! I often ask the hobby community to help us police our auctions, and welcome anyone who identifies perceived impropriety to bring it to our attention by email (brent@pwccauctions.com). In fact, a recent post on the Blowout Cards message board alerted us to an inauthentic item we had listed in Auction #5 yesterday. Based in part from the feedback from this message board, we ended the auction.

Suggestion to develop our own auction platform for PWCC and detach from eBay

Raised by irishdenny, swarmee

eBay is the largest market in the world. It is not broken, but we agree with many of the contributors to this post that there is room for improvement. We want to focus on improving an already highly functional venue rather than starting from scratch on our own platform. That said, should eBay make policy changes that we all feel undermine the needs of the hobby, we will absolutely make the move towards independence.

Question about whether we ever offered to waive sales tax for California auction winners if they paid by check?

Raised by calvindog

Yes, we offered this option to CA buyers in 2013/2014 until our move to Oregon at the start of this year. The State of CA was always paid the sales tax they were owed for all items shipped to CA buyers. This program was very expensive at times for us, but in 2013 our plans to relocate to Oregon were already in place, so we knew the program would be temporary. Bottom line, CA is a large market and we wanted CA based bidders involved in our auctions.

Because of our volume, we were audited by the CA Board of Equalization who reviewed all our transactions to CA buyers since 2009. It was concluded that we were in full compliance.


Section 2: Feedback to improve the service provided by eBay:

Suggestions to restore bidder usernames in bid history and enabling sellers to restrict bidding for things like unpaid items, bid retractions, and low feedback

Raised by swarmee, glchen

We agree about restoring bid history and usernames. It makes it difficult to ask the community to police bidding when usernames are truncated. In our opinion, more important than providing bidder IDs is providing a Bidder Defect Report, summarizing things like number of bid retractions, number of unpaid items, etc.

If such a report is created, eBay should also put in place the ability for sellers to enable or disable bidders based on certain metrics in the Bidder Defect Report. For example, sellers could then prohibit bidders who have a certain number of bid retractions, prohibit bidders who have a certain number of unpaid items, restrict buyers who have low feedback from bidding on all items or on selected items.

Right now, eBay does not have the functionality to allow sellers to do these things. This is one of my main suggestions to eBay.

Comments about seller’s ability to address negative feedback

Raised by Slidekellyslide

We agree that the feedback system needs revision, and the good news is that eBay agrees wholeheartedly. We will all soon see improvements to how feedback is treated. Generally speaking it is the belief of eBay that feedback should play a smaller role in marketplace.

Suggestion that eBay consider offering extended auction durations to enable more potential bidders to see items

Raised by glchen

We agree that the short durations can be a limitation. To address these concerns, eBay recently enabled 10-day duration auctions for free. It’s possible that they would consider longer auction durations in the future, but ultimately the need for long durations is a Catalog Auction invention, needed because auctions on those platforms are infrequent and bidders need time to find the items. Ebay has items closing 24 hours a day so the need for long auctions is less pronounced in our opinion.

Suggestion that eBay consider limiting the number of bids placed on an item by an individual bidder

Raised by tombocombo, DerekMichael

This is an interesting suggestion and worth discussing. In our experience, 9 times out of 10, mass bidding is not a sign of manipulation, but rather a symptom of competitive and often eccentric good bidders. So while mass bidding on a single item is certainly annoying, it’s rarely a sign of fraud.

Regardless, we agree this is a good suggestion and there may be some limits eBay could consider. We will bring it up.

Answers to specific questions raised by Swarmee

Raised by swarmee

1. How often are items for certain sellers not paid for? If that number is over 10% (or on large $$ items), that would be a sign to me that shill accounts are being used and then stiffed, so that the “buyer” doesn’t have to fork over cash to buy back their own card. They know you’ll relist the card during your next auction.

Great question, and a great metric to track. We do track this particularly for new consignors. In our opinion, a threshold of 10% is actually far too high. Returns and unpaid items are very rare. From an entire monthly auction, we only have about 1% of items go unpaid. For us, if a single consignor has more than 2 unpaid items, we research the buyers and bid history in search of suspicious behavior.

2. Does your staff actively cross-check buyer addresses with consignor addresses of the same cards? Are they kept in the same line on your spreadsheet/database where they could be easily queried to see if your consigners are winning back their items?

Yes, we absolutely cross-check buyer addresses with consignor addresses for all items. This is an easy check for us with the tools we use.

3. If the top bidder does not pay, do you offer to underbidders? If so, this would also spur shill bidding. You could make a policy that you will never make offers to underbidders. Most bidders are wary of receiving “2nd chance” offers, figuring they were bid up in the first place.

No, we don’t offer items to underbidders because the second-chance offer process is highly inefficient and rarely honored by underbidders (partly for reasons you highlight). Important to note that these items are then relisted in the next auction. All bidders who fail to pay for an item in our auctions are blocked from bidding on our account.

4. Can you block/suspend all user accounts with over 5 bid retractions in the course of 6 months and all related (same IP, address) accounts? This would help cut down on overbidding to identify someone’s top bid, and then backing out.

We will be asking eBay to formulate a Bidder Defect Report (see description above) and ask them to start policing IP addresses to identify suspicious bid behavior. Bid retractions can be both legal and illegal, and it’s the illegal type which don’t follow eBay guidelines that we’d like to see treated more harshly.

[Peter_Spaeth]

"Yes, we offered this option to CA buyers in 2013/2014 until our move to Oregon at the start of this year. The State of CA was always paid the sales tax they were owed for all items shipped to CA buyers. This program was very expensive at times for us, but in 2013 our plans to relocate to Oregon were already in place, so we knew the program would be temporary. Bottom line, CA is a large market and we wanted CA based bidders involved in our auctions."

I am glad to hear you paid 8.25 percent sales tax even if you didn't collect it, meaning you must have lost money on each of those transactions ("we only clear a couple % on each sale"), but curiously the invoice I have seen instructing the winner how to avoid sales tax is dated 2011.

[calvindog]

PWCC tells us that it was so concerned about losing California bidders because of the law which requires the CA auction winners to pay 8.25% sales tax -- that because PWCC was planning on moving to Oregon at the beginning of 2015 anyway, PWCC would offer to pay the 8.25% sales tax on any auction wins by CA residents in 2013-14, thus losing money on sales to any CA resident for this relatively short period of time (1-2 years).

Except PWCC never advertised this in its listings, never telling CA bidders it wanted to keep their business by paying the sales tax for the auction winners -- thus the very bidders PWCC wanted to keep were never told of this wonderful program in place courtesy of PWCC's generosity;

Except PWCC was sending out invoices in 2011, not 2013-14, telling CA winners it could avoid CA sales tax -- which means Brent would have us believe that he took a loss on every single win by a CA resident from 2011 through 2014 (and putting the lie to what Brent wrote last night, that he offered to pay the sales tax starting in 2013);

Except PWCC never told CA winners that PWCC would be paying the CA sales tax for them -- instead it included in its invoices the language that CA winners could avoid sales tax if they would "1) Provide a valid CA resale license, or 2) Pay by check or money order." If I'm a CA auction winner who is paying by check or money order how am I not still liable for the sales tax? Nowhere did Brent say in his listings or invoices that HE would be paying the sales tax, thus removing the liability to the auction winners.

This story is ludicrous.

[Peter_Spaeth]

From a 2011 auction listing.

"Sales Tax 8.25% charged to some California buyers. We encourage CA buyers to contact us before bidding.

brent@pwccauctions.com 805-440-8903"

I guess you can draw whatever inference you want.

[calvindog]

Why would it be charged at all if PWCC was paying it?

[Peter_Spaeth]

I assume, if PWCC is to be believed, it would only pick up the tab where the buyer paid by check. If the buyer paid by paypal, sales tax was added automatically.

Still, assuming 10 percent or more of PWCC's business was California (based on population that seems certain), and assuming a reasonable percentage of people took advantage of the offer (who would want to pay an extra 8.25 percent?), that's a lot of money for a business with razor-thin margins to be paying out of pocket.

[pokerplyr80]

I had just noticed the conversation was pretty one sided and thought I'd say something positive. I thought it was harsh to call him a tax fraud when most of us buy online or pay cash at shows to avoid paying sales tax. If he's saying he paid the sales tax for CA customers who paid with checks, I'm sure he would have taken a loss on those transactions as the rate out here is 8-9% depending on the county.

Brent certainly doesn't need me to speak for him and seems to have provided a reasonable explanation for most negative comments. Whether or not everything he said is true is up for debate, but I have no reason to doubt him from my limited personal experience dealing with him.

[swarmee]

I thought his shrugging off of revealing even a seller ID number was disappointing, and it took about 20 guys on the CU/PSA board for him to decide it was a bad idea to continue selling aftermarket (by about 50 years) Christmas rack packs.
Some also set off my BS alarms, but he did actively respond to most of the feedback (not so much the overly bright scans pictured here).

[Leon]

I had just noticed the conversation was pretty one sided and thought I'd say something positive. I thought it was harsh to call him a tax fraud when most of us buy online or pay cash at shows to avoid paying sales tax. If he's saying he paid the sales tax for CA customers who paid with checks, I'm sure he would have taken a loss on those transactions as the rate out here is 8-9% depending on the county.

Brent certainly doesn't need me to speak for him and seems to have provided a reasonable explanation for most negative comments. Whether or not everything he said is true is up for debate, but I have no reason to doubt him from my limited personal experience dealing with him.

We have rules about giving opinions. At the top of every page it says if you give an opinion your full name needs to be in your post... so your name is Je.sse Arn.ot (nothing personal, it's the rule) thanks

[Peter_Spaeth]

I had just noticed the conversation was pretty one sided and thought I'd say something positive. I thought it was harsh to call him a tax fraud when most of us buy online or pay cash at shows to avoid paying sales tax. If he's saying he paid the sales tax for CA customers who paid with checks, I'm sure he would have taken a loss on those transactions as the rate out here is 8-9% depending on the county.

Brent certainly doesn't need me to speak for him and seems to have provided a reasonable explanation for most negative comments. Whether or not everything he said is true is up for debate, but I have no reason to doubt him from my limited personal experience dealing with him.

We all have our opinions but I do have reason to doubt him given that he said he started the sales tax avoidance program in 2013 in contemplation of moving to Oregon but I am looking at an ebay invoice from 2011 instructing the California winner how to avoid sales tax. And an auction from 2011 asking California bidders to contact him regarding sales tax. I also find it hard to believe, although it's just an opinion, that he took a loss on that many transactions rather than just collect the sales tax. My two cents, on which I will pay sales tax.

And he never responded to the fact that he had claimed that a post on Net 54 was the first time anyone had ever raised a question about his scans, when just a couple of months before he had posted at length on CU about the same topic. To me, once you burn credibility, I have a hard time believing anything else you might say. Just my opinion.

[pokerplyr80]

Sorry Leon I thought my full name was on my profile. I have no problem with anyone knowing my real name in here. I just made the change. Is that sufficient or do I need to include it into every post that includes an opinion?

[Leon]

Sorry Leon I thought my full name was on my profile. I have no problem with anyone knowing my real name in here. I just made the change. Is that sufficient or do I need to include it into every post that includes an opinion?

That is very good. Thank you.

[pokerplyr80]

And he never responded to the fact that he had claimed that a post on Net 54 was the first time anyone had ever raised a question about his scans, when just a couple of months before he had posted at length on CU about the same topic. To me, once you burn credibility, I have a hard time believing anything else you might say. Just my opinion.[/QUOTE]

I probably shouldn't have gotten involved in this one since it's obvious others on the forum have some strong opinions and I'm not even aware of all the facts in dispute. I was just trying to say there could be a reasonable explanation and not an attempt to defraud. As for the scans I took his response as that he hadn't had customers complain about them or return cards because they were misleading. Not that he hadn't answered someone in a forum about it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

And he never responded to the fact that he had claimed that a post on Net 54 was the first time anyone had ever raised a question about his scans, when just a couple of months before he had posted at length on CU about the same topic. To me, once you burn credibility, I have a hard time believing anything else you might say. Just my opinion.

I probably shouldn't have gotten involved in this one since it's obvious others on the forum have some strong opinions and I'm not even aware of all the facts in dispute. I was just trying to say there could be a reasonable explanation and not an attempt to defraud. As for the scans I took his response as that he hadn't had customers complain about them or return cards because they were misleading. Not that he hadn't answered someone in a forum about it.[/QUOTE]

No, you're wrong, you need to go back and read the thread I referenced in a prior post, if you are interested.

[pokerplyr80]

I will check it out.

[Tabe]

I was not actively collecting in 2010 and don't know if letting consignors place a bid was an announced policy or against Ebay rules. Since it seems everyone was unaware he had this policy I'm surprised he mentioned it. At least he's willing to admit they made a mistake.

It has ALWAYS been against the rules on eBay.

[pokerplyr80]

It has ALWAYS been against the rules on eBay.

It's strange that he would mention that on this forum then. With everything people were already unhappy about here no one was mentioning that. I see what you guys are saying about him claiming to not have heard anyone complaining about his scans. It seems he may have done himself a disservice posting in this forum. It certainly doesn't seem to be hurting his auction results though.

[calvindog]

It's strange that he would mention that on this forum then. With everything people were already unhappy about here no one was mentioning that. I see what you guys are saying about him claiming to not have heard anyone complaining about his scans. It seems he may have done himself a disservice posting in this forum. It certainly doesn't seem to be hurting his auction results though.

He did himself a disservice when he admitted committing fraud -- and now you're wondering why the admitted fraudster's auction results are not hurt as a result of his fraud? Is this the slow learners class?

[Joshchisox08]

I just won a pretty good card for a very good price. I've yet to receive it but I will say that all the other PWCC auctions I bid on soared well over where I tried to bid for them.

I didn't know about the extent of shill bidding and letting co-signers bid on their own items is total BS.

[Peter_Spaeth]

He did himself a disservice when he admitted committing fraud -- and now you're wondering why the admitted fraudster's auction results are not hurt as a result of his fraud? Is this the slow learners class?

I think what Jesse means is that no matter what gets revealed about an auction house, people continue to do business with them. We see that time and again. Stuff trumps all.

And yes, Brent should have left well enough alone, if it ain't broke don't try to fix it.

[swarmee]

He did himself a disservice when he admitted committing fraud -- and now you're wondering why the admitted fraudster's auction results are not hurt as a result of his fraud? Is this the slow learners class?

He also claims that his consignor's shill bidding did not cause any negative to a bidder or eBay. Seems unlikely.

[calvindog]

He also claims that his consignor's shill bidding did not cause any negative to a bidder or eBay. Seems unlikely.

Of course not. He broke eBay's rules by allowing consignors to bid on their own lots -- but naturally eBay wasn't affected, bidders weren't affected and the hobby wasn't affected. Brent's pockets, I'm guessing, were affected.

He lies, he cheats, he gets caught lying and cheating, the shill bidding in his auctions is extraordinary -- yet he comes on here with his righteous indignation about how dishonesty is not "in his DNA" and then admits fraud almost immediately. What bothers me more about the fraudsters is their ability to delude themselves into thinking they can fool everyone. Doug, Bill, Rogers all did the same thing, usually on this board. I suspect Mastro would have as well if he knew how to use the computer for purposes other than to run up Mastro Auction lots.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Yet another example of Hamlet's "the lady doth protest too much, methinks."

[pokerplyr80]

He did himself a disservice when he admitted committing fraud -- and now you're wondering why the admitted fraudster's auction results are not hurt as a result of his fraud? Is this the slow learners class?

What I meant is that it since that there are a relatively small number of people buying very high end sports cards, I'm surprised they are still willing to pay such a premium for his cards if this stuff is common knowledge. I was unaware of most of it myself.

My other point was it seemed most on this forum, myself included, had no idea he used to allow people to bid on their own auctions against Ebay rules. I don't know why he would have brought that up, although he did say he only mentioned it to point out that they have learned from their mistakes and no longer engage in those practices.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I hate to pile on, but the Standard Biscuit fiasco in February is still a relevant topic. The cards were faked and still passed through SGC and were then auctioned through PWCC.

I don't think we can blame PWCC for accepting SGC graded cards on consignment, unless the consignor was inherently suspicious, but you do raise the very important question of who was able to get these through SGC and how.

For reference:
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=201147

[Exhibitman]

I agree with Peter re the counterfeit cards in SGC holders; no one should expect an auctioneer or consignment seller to second-guess the TPGs.

As for the shilling and fraud admission, first thought I had about the OP was "how stupid was that?" Had a client of mine wanted to make a similar post I'd have told him to STFU because he will win over no one who wasn't already OK with his business and he might step in the doo-doo by accident, as happened here. What leads someone to think they can BS around stuff like that I will never understand. Nixonian hubris? brain lesions? Alien mind control beams?

An interesting thing that got short shrift here is the 2nd PWCC post discussing the inside game with eBay reps. I thought that was fascinating, esp. how eBay might actually change the feedback system to something more transparent, as it used to be. 90% of the shilling crap would end if the system still allowed for the outing and tracking of shill bidders. A return to that standard would be nice and I hope it happens. Or should I just go ahead and cancel that ice skating lesson in Hell?

Frankly, I love the idea of tracked consignor ID's right in the listing. Easily done, and easily checked.

Despite all of the negatives, personally, I have no issue with anyone who chooses to bid with PWCC or Probstein. We're all card sluts to one extent or another. I've danced with those devils more than once, but always eyes wide open and aware of the pitfalls of wading into the cesspool. Anyone who doesn't know what these middlemen are about and act accordingly at this point is akin to someone taking up smoking: it says right on the damned box the stuff is bad for you, so ignore the warnings at your own peril.

Time to move on to other dead horses to beat?

[calvindog]

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=351417585383&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2565

Here is an interesting underbidder on PWCC's auctions: 104 total bids in the past 30 days on 102 items -- and 97 percent of the bids are with PWCC. Gee. If you spend 10 mins perusing PWCC auctions you will find 10 more underbidders just like this one.

[Peter_Spaeth]

And then, there are people who make fake Magie errors and put fake stamps on blank backed cards. What a world, eh?

[Peter_Spaeth]

And in the meantime, these results are pretty hard to believe on 59 Mantles. Then again, the winner of the one that went 50 percent over the prior record price is the underbidder on the PSA 10 Jordan rookie, so he must have money to burn.

Latest Auction Prices for: PSA 8 - Average Price: $2,700.63



6/11/15 eBay Auction | Image pwcc_auctions -***o 44 $4,100.00
5/31/15 eBay Auction | Image pwcc_auctions 6***6 35 $3,105.00
5/29/15 eBay Listing | Image vintagescards s***o BIN $2,695.00 8
5/29/15 eBay Listing | Image vintagescards s***o BIN $2,695.00 8
5/26/15 eBay Auction | Image probstein123 s***i 39 $2,350.00
5/14/15 eBay Auction | Image pwcc_auctions n***a 26 $2,300.71
4/10/15 Greg Bussineau Auction | Image 7 $2,820.00
3/29/15 eBay Auction | Image higradecards10 a***g 18 $2,550.00
1/24/15 eBay Listing | Image buddysbaseball h***7 Best Offer $2,695.00 8
1/24/15 eBay Listing | Image buddysbaseball h***7 Best Offer $2,695.00 8
1/11/15 Memory Lane Auction | Image 9 $1,922.76
1/11/15 Memory Lane Auction | Image 7 $2,815.42
1/9/15 eBay Listing | Image vintagescards 9***n BIN $2,595.00 8
12/16/14 eBay Auction | Image prewarcardcollector 5***f 24 $2,225.00
12/5/14 Greg Bussineau Image 7 $2,100.00

[pokerplyr80]

I'm surprised it went that high since it wasn't even PWCC certified high end

[bnorth]

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=351417585383&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2565

Here is an interesting underbidder on PWCC's auctions: 104 total bids in the past 30 days on 102 items -- and 97 percent of the bids are with PWCC. Gee. If you spend 10 mins perusing PWCC auctions you will find 10 more underbidders just like this one.

That looks more like one of those strange bidders to me. Bidder has feedback of 1649 with only 104 bids last month.

Now this looks more like a shill bidder to me. Only 201 feedback with 547 bids in 30 days on 173 items. Not a PWCC auction jus an example.

Bidder: t***7( 201Feedback score is 100 to 499)
Feedback: 100%Positive
Item description:
Item Title:
Bids on this item: 12

30-Day Summary
Total bids: 547
Items bid on: 173
Bid activity (%) with this seller: 98% Help
Bid retractions: 0
Bid retractions (6 months): 0

[calvindog]

A bidder who bids on 102 items with 104 bids, with 97% of the auctions belonging to PWCC is a shill bidder.

[Gobucsmagic74]

I'm surprised it went that high since it wasn't even PWCC certified high end

POTY candidate

[calvindog]

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBidderProfile&mode=1&item=141693131969&aid=o***o&eu=&bidtid=1139757758004&view=NONE&ssPageName=PageBidderProfileViewBids_None_ViewLink

It's definitely in this PWCC underbidder's DNA to be a shill.

[Jantz]

This thread is definitely a good read and seems to be a hot topic lately. :)

[kmac32]

I sent a group of cards (T207) to SGC and one card I bought from PWCC which was in a PSA slab graded vg ex 4 came back from SGC as authentic. It was not a high dollar card but I need to call SGC and find out why the card did not cross over into a SGC slab from PSA. My guess is that it was trimming as the card looked good in my opinion but then I am not a grader. I have heard rumors and talk of PWCC having influence on how PSA grades cards submitted by them. I may have been a victim in this case.

[MattyC]

Two graders can have very different opinions on the same card. Often a card can be graded EOT then the next time get a grade.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Two graders can have very different opinions on the same card. Often a card can be graded EOT then the next time get a grade.

I would guess most slabbed cards in PWCC were consigned in the slabs and not submitted by PWCC. Plus what Matt said, multiple opinions on the same card is very common.

[kmac32]

Two graders can have very different opinions on the same card. Often a card can be graded EOT then the next time get a grade.

I am not upset about the grade as I could care less what a card comes back as. My function in getting cards slabbed is more for display than value and the card was only a $60 card so in the big scheme of things, the grade really did not hurt the value of the card in my opinion but it is hard to see why something would go from being a PSA 4 to only authentic in a SGC slab. I do not plan on resubmitting it as it would not be worth the time and effort. Fortunately on the submission I also submittted my E121-80 Frank Baker and it came back a SGC 40 which I was happy with. I would have been really pissed if that one had not crossed over as this version is very rare and it is a high dollar card. I did have to call SGC and tell them that this is the Frank Baker version of the card and not the J Franklin Baker version as they had originally had listed in my submission. I would not have been happy if the card came back mislabled.

[turtleguy64]

Jeff,you've made my night on the forum.I've added purgative to my new vocabulary list in the DuckHunter Dynasty folder.Thanks !

[conor912]

I agree with Peter re the counterfeit cards in SGC holders; no one should expect an auctioneer or consignment seller to second-guess the TPGs.


I hear what you're saying, but why not? It burns may ass when an AH takes no responsibility for what they're selling. It's a total cop out. They're just slinging these things into auctions without even looking at the card. It's amazing how many people don't even look at the effing card anymore. The flip is all that matters to the AH, period.

Sorry. This is my "two drinks on an empty stomach" rant. Carry on.