PWCC planning to redefine the difference between altered and conserved in cards

[swarmee]

It's kind of buried in the Vault thread (and the '52 Mantle one in the post-war forum), but is a post from Blowout concerning PWCC changing the definition of conservation as compared to alteration of cards in the marketplace.

Later this month we will publish our Marketplace Tenets which, among other things, touches on the differences between alteration and conservation. Until then, I will summarize why this card is still live in our auction.

In our view, there's a difference between conservation and alteration. Conservation is any act which returns a card closer to its as-manufactured condition and does not render the card artificially different from the as-manufactured state. Removal of dirt, glue, pencil marks, wax, etc. are good examples of conservation, so long as it's done in a way that doesn't affect the natural properties of a card.

Alteration is very different from conservation in that it generally involves the addition of a foreign matter to a card (i.e. recoloring or corner rebuilding) or the removal of material (i.e. trimming, erasing print, etc).

The ‘52 Mantle in question shows no signs of alteration based on these definitions, so it is an acceptable asset to be sold on the marketplace.
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpost.php?p=14633641&postcount=264

You can see it in that thread and the one exposing tons of trimmed Bryce Harper autographed cards. Have any of you been consulted on this attempt to redefine the standards of card alteration? They basically agree that the PSA 4.5 Mantle has been pressed, but since that is considered "conservation" by them, they will not remove the listing NOR mention to the bidders that the card has been worked on.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Since nobody here wanted to talk about it I posted many times on the Blowout thread lol. I'm too burned out to repeat it all, but I strongly oppose what they are doing. It's utterly disingenuous IMO. Big surprise, I know.

For proof of the hypocrisy, look only to the fact that they won't disclose it.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Are they going to start grading cards next? Stupid, they claim they aren't professional graders yet they are walking the fine line.

[Leon]

I don't think pressing cards is a good thing. It is not the same as erasing a mark or soaking or pushing down a corner that flipped up. It seems the pressing would make the paper thinner which isn't the same as when it left the mfg....

[Peter_Spaeth]

Are they going to start grading cards next? Stupid, they claim they aren't professional graders yet they are walking the fine line.

Worse than that. They are claiming it's acceptable to soak and press a card. We aren't talking about soaking a card out of a scrapbook here. We are talking improving corners. And probably taking out creases as the same logic would seem to say that is OK.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I don't think pressing cards is a good thing. It is not the same as erasing a mark or soaking or pushing down a corner that flipped up. It seems the pressing would make the paper thinner which isn't the same as when it left the mfg....

That's because you have a hobby history and understand the collective wisdom on alteration. And so does PSA by the way, if in practice they fall short of being able to enforce their standards.

[jayshum]

How come they consider recoloration to be alteration instead of conservation? Wouldn't that just be an "act which returns a card closer to its as-manufactured condition and does not render the card artificially different from the as-manufactured state"? That's their definition of conservation.

Really corner rebuilding is also returning it to the as-manufactured state. Trimming would seem to be the only thing that would be classified as alteration based on the above definition of conservation.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The sh*t going on out there is just evil. At some point does it reach a critical mass and people start asking what the %^&* is going on, or do we just go about our business and keep on praising all the major players and talking about how wonderful they are? Just the latest example by the super sleuth on blowout. If you check his ID you can find all his recent threads.
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?p=14636793&posted=1#post14636793

[Peter_Spaeth]

How come they consider recoloration to be alteration instead of conservation? Wouldn't that just be an "act which returns a card closer to its as-manufactured condition and does not render the card artificially different from the as-manufactured state"? That's their definition of conservation.

Really corner rebuilding is also returning it to the as-manufactured state. Trimming would seem to be the only thing that would be classified as alteration based on the above definition of conservation.

Certainly taking out creases would pass muster. It's hard to even take this crap seriously. It's just stunning to me that we have reached this point. But the cash register just keeps on ringing.

[ullmandds]

It would be a major injustice if Pwcc is allowed to define what an altered card is and isn’t!

[Peter_Spaeth]

It would be a major injustice if Pwcc is allowed to define what an altered card is and isn’t!

ya think?

[Peter_Spaeth]

I was just reflecting back on how I started in this hobby -- riding my bike with my friend to the 7-11 to buy 65 Topps packs with our allowances. I've always loved cards, most fundamentally I guess because I've always loved baseball and later sports in general. I understand that it's become a business, and that they've become valuable collectibles. No issue with that. I understand the advantages of TPG in the internet age. No real issue with that. But on days like this, I am just so pissed off at the criminal and sleaze elements, and those who enable them and defend them, that I almost want to quit.

End of speech.

[calvindog]

People laughed at Walt Disney too. He showed em, just like Brent will.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I was just reflecting back on how I started in this hobby -- riding my bike with my friend to the 7-11 to buy 65 Topps packs. I've always loved cards. I understand that it's become a business, and that they've become valuable collectibles. No issue with that. I understand the advantages of TPG in the internet age. No real issue with that. But on days like this, I am just so pissed off at the criminal and sleaze elements, and those who enable them and defend them, that I almost want to quit.



End of speech.

[emoji106] I share these sentiments. As someone who regularly reads and reflects on issues such as these, I just think the influence over our hobby so many have allowed elements like this to have is a load of crap. How so many people could just roll over and be so weak-minded is unreal to me. I don't regularly spend huge money on cards and I am not a blip on the radar, but I do make fairly regular purchases. When I do make purchases, I take these discussions to heart and avoid doing business with anyone who knowingly is doing this. This board has opened my eyes, and I am appreciative of that. Peter, it's like you have said before, "Stuff trumps all."

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[irv]

I quit dealing with PWCC a long time ago. Many issues in my short time here were a real eye opener to me when I thought this hobby was more on the up and up.
I was definitely naive/ignorant when I re-entered the hobby as I didn't think these types of things existed, or existed to the level they do.

I can relate to what Peter is saying fully. I have backed off considerably lately due to many things, but these types of PWCC shenanigans are a big part of that, sadly.

I'm not solely picking on PWCC. The B.S. I see from PSA, JSA, forgeries, trimmed cards, etc, etc, etc, just adds to that sentiment. I had no idea, re-entering this hobby, that things were so ugly.

[AGuinness]

The sh*t going on out there is just evil. At some point does it reach a critical mass and people start asking what the %^&* is going on, or do we just go about our business and keep on praising all the major players and talking about how wonderful they are? Just the latest example by the super sleuth on blowout. If you check his ID you can find all his recent threads.
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?p=14636793&posted=1#post14636793

The critical mass question is huge. But I'll pose a hypothesis: perhaps the collecting population is large enough that there is enough people out there who will tolerate this evil sh*t.
Of course, shenanigans with cards is not new. The recent trimming and forgery discoveries have been well-documented, but I don't think it's any new development in the hobby. I would presume that anybody bidding on "investment" cards, any cards that sell for five figures or more, etc. are well aware of the risks involved when it comes to alterations/restoration/etc. And yet the hobby still experiences record highs all over the place. People know, and they still bid.
Optimistic take: the hobby is in a strong place with a big population of collectors driving interest in all facets.
Pessimistic take: the buyers have the power to accept or veto this evil sh*t with their wallets. If people are accepting of obvious alterations, while also not expecting disclosure of them, then dang. From my time here, it seems that the general consensus of the board is that alterations suck and disclosure is necessary, which I'm in agreement with. If the future of the hobby is alterations everywhere and no disclosure, we're in a world of hurt.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I think we already have alterations everywhere and no disclosure. And have had for some time. What I find troubling about recent events is that people are actually defending it, as opposed to being upset about it. Just today we have heard high praise from multiple sources for the very company proposing a preposterous new definition of altered cards. It's Kafkaesque, or something.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Sometimes I'm glad to be a little guy. I don't even have to wonder what I would do in these situations. I just don't live in those rent districts. If I ever succumb to the temptation to cut ethical corners I officially invite the board to let me have it.

[irv]

I think we already have alterations everywhere and no disclosure. And have had for some time. What I find troubling about recent events is that people are actually defending it, as opposed to being upset about it. Just today we have heard high praise from multiple sources for the very company proposing a preposterous new definition of altered cards. It's Kafkaesque, or something.

What really struck me was those that continued purchasing/consigning to known/questionable businesses.

Lots of proof exists about some of the dealings these companies do but a blind eye is turned as long as money is involved. It's amazing what greed can do to a person.

I also have strong admiration for the likes of Jeffrey and others who try their best to convict these types only to find out, despite the evidence and convictions sometimes, that those doing some of the complaining are right back dealing with these types. I honestly don't know how they don't throw in the towel and just give up?

[Orioles1954]

I quit dealing with PWCC a long time ago. Many issues in my short time here were a real eye opener to me when I thought this hobby was more on the up and up.
I was definitely naive/ignorant when I re-entered the hobby as I didn't think these types of things existed, or existed to the level they do.

I can relate to what Peter is saying fully. I have backed off considerably lately due to many things, but these types of PWCC shenanigans are a big part of that, sadly.

I'm not solely picking on PWCC. The B.S. I see from PSA, JSA, forgeries, trimmed cards, etc, etc, etc, just adds to that sentiment. I had no idea, re-entering this hobby, that things were so ugly.


Holy cow that upper left corner!!

[calvindog]

What I find troubling about recent events is that people are actually defending it, as opposed to being upset about it. Just today we have heard high praise from multiple sources for the very company proposing a preposterous new definition of altered cards. It's Kafkaesque, or something.

And you really don’t know why? It’s not Kafkaesque at all and you know it.

This is the hobby. The more it changes, the more it stays the same.

Edited to add: does anyone care that Heritage gives themselves permission to bid on their own lots? To me that’s way more bothersome than Brent helping people evade taxes.

[Rascal1010]

I think everyone needs to relax a little bit, PWCC may very well be doing the collectors in this hobby a huge favor with this new definition. If PWCC feels comfortable selling by their definition "conserved" cards, then let them go about their business. As long as they are willing to sell "doctored" cards in their auctions, that is where consignors will consign them, and thankfully they will be off of the market and out of the general hobby, since a good portion of these will be purchased "tax-free" and stored in the vault in Oregon, hopefully to never see the light of day again. Maybe the new definition of what is "altered" or "conserved" just goes hand in hand with the vault business model. I say consign all the "doctored" cards to PWCC and let them store them.

[itslarry]

Conix books press and no one seems to mind.
The art world is full of restoration.
Iunno as long as its disclosed, and keeps something from becoming trash, go for it.

[chalupacollects]

It would be a major injustice if Pwcc is allowed to define what an altered card is and isn’t!

Personally I only think of them as an ebay seller greedy for cash. Nothing I have ever read about them makes me think of them as "the" card experts though they seem to try and portray themselves as such (see disclaimers on not being graders and then grading the grade and slapping a sticker on it) smh :(

[ullmandds]

Personally I only think of them as an ebay seller greedy for cash. Nothing I have ever read about them makes me think of them as "the" card experts though they seem to try and portray themselves as such (see disclaimers on not being graders and then grading the grade and slapping a sticker on it) smh :(

Yes...but venture away from this board and you will find hoards of zombies muttering PSA...PWWC...as if they were the Last Word in the hobby...and these are the masses...we are the minority.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Edited to add: does anyone care that Heritage gives themselves permission to bid on their own lots? To me that’s way more bothersome than Brent helping people evade taxes.

This blows my mind more than anything else I've ever encountered if that makes you feel better.

I'v always been amazed that there hasn't been more hue and cry about it, but then again as an auctioneer I know nobody actually reads terms and conditions besides auctioneers and lawyers.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Conix books press and no one seems to mind.
The art world is full of restoration.
Iunno as long as its disclosed, and keeps something from becoming trash, go for it.

But it's not disclosed, the information is ferreted out. Plus TPG failures actively hide disclosure and even give arm's length sellers plausible deniability.

[ullmandds]

This blows my mind more than anything else I've ever encountered if that makes you feel better.

I'v always been amazed that there hasn't been more hue and cry about it, but then again as an auctioneer I know nobody actually reads terms and conditions besides auctioneers and lawyers.

They are not the only ones who've done/do this. This "practice" is becoming more the standard.

[Peter_Spaeth]

And you really don’t know why? It’s not Kafkaesque at all and you know it.

This is the hobby. The more it changes, the more it stays the same.

Edited to add: does anyone care that Heritage gives themselves permission to bid on their own lots? To me that’s way more bothersome than Brent helping people evade taxes.

I always wanted to mention Kafka in a post, leave me alone.:D

[Peter_Spaeth]

Yes...but venture away from this board and you will find hoards of zombies muttering PSA...PWWC...as if they were the Last Word in the hobby...and these are the masses...we are the minority.

On this board too, my friend.

[rats60]

How come they consider recoloration to be alteration instead of conservation? Wouldn't that just be an "act which returns a card closer to its as-manufactured condition and does not render the card artificially different from the as-manufactured state"? That's their definition of conservation.

Really corner rebuilding is also returning it to the as-manufactured state. Trimming would seem to be the only thing that would be classified as alteration based on the above definition of conservation.

It is my understanding of what they posted that if you are adding (adding color to a corner or edge) or taking away (trimming), that is alteration. They are OK with anything else, pressing corners, creases, removing stains, whitening borders or anything else that removes something from the card that wasn't originally there. That is considered "conservation" by PWCC. The Joe DiMaggio rookie from last year and this 52 Topps Mantle are OK by their standards as I understand them.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It is my understanding of what they posted that if you are adding (adding color to a corner or edge) or taking away (trimming), that is alteration. They are OK with anything else, pressing corners, creases, removing stains, whitening borders or anything else that removes something from the card that wasn't originally there. That is considered "conservation" by PWCC. The Joe DiMaggio rookie from last year and this 52 Topps Mantle are OK by their standards as I understand them.

And if it's trimmed, they'll just hide behind PSA. All the bases are covered.

[Leon]

While I disagree with the pressing out of corners I still like most of what else PWCC is doing. I won't throw the whole business out with one disagreement. If that were the case the PSA 8 Wagner would make PSA go out of business and it hasn't.

Actually, pressing the corners does change the composition of the card so maybe they will backtrack on that one aspect. Pressing out a soaked corner can only lead to a thinner card and then trimming to make it the correct size again. Not a good idea.

[Peter_Spaeth]

While I disagree with the pressing out of corners I still like most of what else PWCC is doing. I won't throw the whole business out with one disagreement. If that were the case the PSA 8 Wagner would make PSA go out of business and it hasn't.

It's not just the pressing out of corners, it's a global contempt for the collective ethos of the hobby on altered cards, in order to justify the sale of obviously altered cards. Let's be honest about this. It goes well beyond this particular Mantle card.

[Leon]

It's not just the pressing out of corners, it's a global contempt for the collective ethos of the hobby on altered cards, in order to justify the sale of obviously altered cards. Let's be honest about this.

I disagree. They are trying to change the hobby for the better and, imo, misstepped on this one idea. There is no justification for pressing a cards corners out after soaking it. It all goes back to changing the card. Don't change it and I am ok with it. If it came from the factory with thinner corners than the rest of the card then it would be fine. But as far as I know that isn't how any cards have been made.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I disagree. They are trying to change the hobby for the better and, imo, misstepped on this one idea. There is no justification for pressing a cards corners out after soaking it. It all goes back to changing the card. Don't change it and I am ok with it. If it came from the factory with thinner corners than the rest of the card then it would be fine. But as far as I know that isn't how any cards have been made.

They are trying to make as much money as possible, by whatever means, in my opinion. I don't see any other motive here. Not that there is anything wrong with trying to make money as long as you act ethically, but let's not get starry-eyed. PS If they want to improve the hobby maybe they should stop accepting consignments from certain people. They won't.

[Leon]

They are probably accepting graded cards from the big TPG's. Whose fault is that? I agree that there is too much crap going on but, you know better than i do, stuff trumps all. OF course they want to make money but I also believe Brent is thinking outside of the box on a lot of stuff. His museum idea and vault ideas might take off. It is early on but there are some wealthy folks eyeing it. Personally, I would love to seem some museum quality cards that are hidden away in safes.



They are trying to make as much money as possible, by whatever means, in my opinion. I don't see any other motive here. Not that there is anything wrong with trying to make money as long as you act ethically, but let's not get starry-eyed. PS If they want to improve the hobby maybe they should stop accepting consignments from certain people. They won't.

[Peter_Spaeth]

You and I both know what I am talking about in terms of accepting consignments from certain people. I'll leave it at that. Sure, the TPG flip gives them cover, but it's always been an open secret in this hobby who (at least some of) the major card doctors are. There's a new generation of them working the high ticket modern serial numbered inserts -- see Blowout's detective work on this -- but I am sure the big sellers know exactly who they are.

[calvindog]

You and I both know what I am talking about in terms of accepting consignments from certain people. I'll leave it at that. Sure, the TPG flip gives them cover, but it's always been an open secret in this hobby who (at least some of) the major card doctors are. There's a new generation of them working the high ticket modern serial numbered inserts -- see Blowout's detective work on this -- but I am sure the big sellers know exactly who they are.

People laughed at Albert Einstein too.

[Peter_Spaeth]

People laughed at Albert Einstein too.

He would have run a relatively clean auction.

[steve B]

I think actual conservation is ok. Light surface cleaning if the card is really filthy, deacidifying for stuff like strip cards that won't make it another 90 years without it, that sort of thing.

Removing stains etc is to me where the slippery slope begins.

Pressing/trimming/rebuilding etc shouldn't be acceptable. I can see some exceptions, but they'd need a lot of transparency and disclosure. Even then, it's just way too likely it gets cracked out and regraded without disclosure.


Here's an example of what I believe is ok. This card was in a small paper bag with a stack of other cards, It stuck out, and got partway coated with soot and grime. It must have been in there for decades. I removed some of the surface grime with just a q tip and water. That sort of grime would eventually cause long term problems.

It still has a bit of grime in the tiny cracks that sometimes happen in the surface coating over time. I probably could have gotten that out too, but I think that would be going too far, and I was way too lazy to spend a few hours doing that.

Before
http://www.net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=12668

After

http://www.net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=9887

[BengoughingForAwhile]

I think actual conservation is ok. Light surface cleaning if the card is really filthy, deacidifying for stuff like strip cards that won't make it another 90 years without it, that sort of thing.

Removing stains etc is to me where the slippery slope begins.

Pressing/trimming/rebuilding etc shouldn't be acceptable. I can see some exceptions, but they'd need a lot of transparency and disclosure. Even then, it's just way too likely it gets cracked out and regraded without disclosure.


Here's an example of what I believe is ok. This card was in a small paper bag with a stack of other cards, It stuck out, and got partway coated with soot and grime. It must have been in there for decades. I removed some of the surface grime with just a q tip and water. That sort of grime would eventually cause long term problems.

It still has a bit of grime in the tiny cracks that sometimes happen in the surface coating over time. I probably could have gotten that out too, but I think that would be going too far, and I was way too lazy to spend a few hours doing that.

Before
http://www.net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=12668[/IM

After

[IMG]http://www.net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=9887

Did you use tap water :eek: or distilled water :) ?

[Exhibitman]

I've always been in favor of proper conservation including cleaning, de-acidifying, etc. These are lithographs or photographs and need to be considered as such and treated responsibly. I've lost a few old cards to acid damage--they just fell apart across creases--and it is heartbreaking to a collector. If they conserved the Sistine Chapel frescoes I think it is OK for my Goudey card. Adding stuff to a card or rebacking it or similar restoration is where the line should be drawn. Soaking and pressing is right on that line, IMO. Probably something that I want disclosed but I am realistic enough to know it won't be. The micro-trimming and slabbing is a fraud, plain and simple.

I also have to observe with regard to the orthodox position on conservation that the 'no touch' mentality comes from the PSA advertising of two decades ago when they were trying to scare people into using TPG services. "Thou shalt not clean a card" is not a Commandment, but is the end product of successful advertising to the effect that only untouched cards will get past the PSA cops and only then will they be worthy of our interest. Other hobbies that do not have TPG overlords do not act this way, Take postcard collecting . Postcard dealers routinely pencil the prices onto the card backs and collectors routinely remove them using at artgum eraser and no one except us sports card collectors slumming it at postcard shows gives a damn because a faint pencil mark on a postcard isn't the difference between high value and low value unless some TPG slaps plastic on it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I agree with much of what Adam says but I don't see how soaking and pressing is a gray area. It seems to me it's done -- or the vast majority of the time anyhow -- not to conserve a card but to improve its appearance and value, in an effort to deceive. If someone wants to do it and disclose it, that's fine with me, but that will happen on the 13th of Never.

[conor912]

I got to a point a while back where I started just assuming that every card I buy, slabbed or not, has had something done to it over the years. The whole "hobby purist" thing felt good in the beginning but franky just became too exhausting. If I see a card I like the looks of at a price I like, I buy it. If an alteration is undisclosed and I can't see it, then chances are the next guy isn't going to either. And no, I don't consider this burying my head in the sand, it's just a place of peace I've had to come to if I was going to enjoy continuing to collect. All the hemming and hawing in the world isn't going to control what other people do.
Coming off of a recent health scare has put this more in focus than ever. Hug your kids. Kiss your wives. If collecting causes you stress, don't do it. There's plenty of other amazing things in the world to spend your time and money on.

[barrysloate]

Maybe it's time for the hobby to address what is acceptable and what isn't in terms of card restoration. This could be part of a panel discussion, perhaps at a future National. The panel could consist of representatives from the grading services, long time hobbyists, and experts in paper restoration. Removing some soot off the surface of a card is a far cry from rebacking, trimming, and other extreme alterations. Hobbyists could attend the conference and provide feedback. This is a critical hobby issue that is not getting the attention it merits.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Maybe it's time for the hobby to address what is acceptable and what isn't in terms of card restoration. This could be part of a panel discussion, perhaps at a future National. The panel could consist of representatives from the grading services, long time hobbyists, and experts in paper restoration. Removing some soot off the surface of a card is a far cry from rebacking, trimming, and other extreme alterations. Hobbyists could attend the conference and provide feedback. This is a critical hobby issue that is not getting the attention it merits.

Yeah like card doctors are going to show up and weigh in. I would think this out again, Barry, as the song from Oliver goes. Anyhow, the issue isn't what the standard is, it's that people are good at getting altered cards past the grading services and sellers accept cards from them willingly and don't disclose even when they know there's a problem.

This hobby is never going to police itself, IMO. Too much sleaze and too much money. It will take law enforcement.

[Exhibitman]

Maybe it is time we stopped worrying about the TPGs. Candidly, a quality removal or restoration is rarely caught by a TPG. I find it ironic that people live and die by TPG determinations: that's too much power to cede to them.

Peter, one soaks a card for a number of reasons not involving the alleged stretching and micro-cutting of edges: dirt removal, acid neutralization, etc. Creases can be soaked out, especially if they are wrinkles that did not actually flake off parts of the image. I am not sure it is possible to police motives in this regard, just the outcome.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Maybe it is time we stopped worrying about the TPGs. Candidly, a quality removal or restoration is rarely caught by a TPG. I find it ironic that people live and die by TPG determinations: that's too much power to cede to them.

Peter, one soaks a card for a number of reasons not involving the alleged stretching and micro-cutting of edges: dirt removal, acid neutralization, etc. Creases can be soaked out, especially if they are wrinkles that did not actually flake off parts of the image. I am not sure it is possible to police motives in this regard, just the outcome.

Adam yes, but you said "soaking and pressing" which I took to mean both, not just soaking. You wouldn't press a card to neutralize acid would you?

[Exhibitman]

Maybe I don't understand pressing as it is being used. If you soak a card you have to press it to make sure it dries flat. I put it in a folded sheet of typing paper and press it under several REA catalogs (they are really dense and make great presses). If you are talking about running it through an actual press, no, you don't have to do that.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Maybe I don't understand pressing as it is being used. If you soak a card you have to press it to make sure it dries flat. I put it in a folded sheet of typing paper and press it under several REA catalogs (they are really dense and make great presses). If you are talking about running it through an actual press, no, you don't have to do that.

I guess I don't think of that as pressing, to me pressing is pressing OUT something by running something across the card like a spoon. May be misusing the term.

[barrysloate]

Yeah like card doctors are going to show up and weigh in. I would think this out again, Barry, as the song from Oliver goes. Anyhow, the issue isn't what the standard is, it's that people are good at getting altered cards past the grading services and sellers accept cards from them willingly and don't disclose even when they know there's a problem.

This hobby is never going to police itself, IMO. Too much sleaze and too much money. It will take law enforcement.

Let me clarify: I wasn't referring to the known card doctors, but third oarty paper restorers who are not actively involved in the hobby. I realize that nobody cares enough to do anything, and would prefer the status quo. But I just wanted to make a suggestion.

[ullmandds]

Maybe it's time for the hobby to address what is acceptable and what isn't in terms of card restoration. This could be part of a panel discussion, perhaps at a future National. The panel could consist of representatives from the grading services, long time hobbyists, and experts in paper restoration. Removing some soot off the surface of a card is a far cry from rebacking, trimming, and other extreme alterations. Hobbyists could attend the conference and provide feedback. This is a critical hobby issue that is not getting the attention it merits.

This idea makes the most sense to me.

[bobbyw8469]

Nice "Reviewing The Situation" reference. This has been an interested read for me.

[SAllen2556]

This hobby is never going to police itself, IMO. Too much sleaze and too much money. It will take law enforcement.

It is what it has always been - a hobby that requires no education or licensing, has no regulations, no professional associations, and little risk of ever getting prosecuted for misdeeds.

It certainly can be frustrating, but maybe a little perspective is required.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It is what it has always been - a hobby that requires no education or licensing, has no regulations, no professional associations, and little risk of ever getting prosecuted for misdeeds.

It certainly can be frustrating, but maybe a little perspective is required.

Messrs. Mastro and Allen might disagree with you about the prosecuted part.

[steve B]

Did you use tap water :eek: or distilled water :) ?


Tap water, but very little. Basically used a damp q-tip doing one small section at a time, and absorbing any excess with the dry end. Very similar to how conservators work on old paintings to remove years of airborne crud and "protective" varnish that's yellowed.


Not something I'd do often, It made me really nervous. There's two areas on the neck that came out cleaner than the rest. I figured I'd botched it, and was pretty much expecting an A when I sent it in. It's a 350-460 /25, and at least when I sent it in, was the highest SC 350-460 on the pop report. I'm a bit fussy about gunk, and was really surprised at the grade.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Any thoughts on how this one posted on Blowout was done and if it's legit?

[Leon]

Any thoughts on how this one posted on Blowout was done and if it's legit?

Looking at the front borders of the 5 they look a little less white. My guess is a soaking did it. Regardless, as long as a solvent wasn't used then I am not sure I have a problem with it. Just taking gunk off of a card doesn't bother me.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Looking at the front borders of the 5 they look a little less white. My guess is a soaking did it. Regardless, as long as a solvent wasn't used then I am not sure I have a problem with it. Just taking gunk off of a card doesn't bother me.

If that's all it required, and I have no issue with soaking off gunk with water either, I am surprised nobody encouraged the original consignor to HA to do that. Lot of $$$ left on the table.

[calvindog]

Whoa, here's some interesting reading on PWCC. Pretty good read from start to finish. It seems that easily proven trimmed cards are getting PWCC stickers and there's some question if in fact PWCC owns these cards.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1290614

[ullmandds]

Whoa, here's some interesting reading on PWCC. Pretty good read from start to finish. It seems that easily proven trimmed cards are getting PWCC stickers and there's some question if in fact PWCC owns these cards.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1290614

Lots of seriously incriminating info in that thread!

[calvindog]

Lots of seriously incriminating info in that thread!

Yeah, it's pretty ugly. Brent might not be able to trot out Betsy for this one. This one is going to eventually require an attorney.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Yeah, it's pretty ugly. Brent might not be able to trot out Betsy for this one. This one is going to eventually require an attorney.

Warren Zevon time, eh? He MUST have lawyers already though.

[calvindog]

Warren Zevon time, eh? He MUST have lawyers already though.

No doubt. I wonder who the best criminal lawyer in Oregon is?

[conor912]

Lots of seriously incriminating info in that thread!

Good thing they have a vault to hide in.

[calvindog]

Good thing they have a vault to hide in.

Speaking of the vault, maybe Brady can come back on and let us know his thoughts on that Blowout thread. If Brent makes the hobby any better he's going to end up in jail.

[ullmandds]

Good thing they have a vault to hide in.

Haha...i was thinking the same thing!

[Peter_Spaeth]

I wonder if PSA will wait until the auction closes then take action to zap the card as it apparently did with the WWG DiMaggio. That would be more their style than stopping an ongoing auction.

[steve B]

I wonder if PSA will wait until the auction closes then take action to zap the card as it apparently did with the WWG DiMaggio. That would be more their style than stopping an ongoing auction.

What does PSA do with the cards like that? Reslab as Altered with the difference paid to the owner?

It seems silly to do anything else, hopefully they don't destroy them.

[Peter_Spaeth]

What does PSA do with the cards like that? Reslab as Altered with the difference paid to the owner?

It seems silly to do anything else, hopefully they don't destroy them.

I have no idea.

[Vintageclout]

Simply stated, PWCC’s stance on altered vs. conserved card’s is virtually meaningless. They are an eBay based auction house that effectively sells cards. They are NOT graders and authenticators. They are now walking a fine line because they should not be selling cards AND authenticating them. Seems like a possible “conflict of interest”. Leave the grading issues to PSA, SGC & Beckett. You cannot have it both ways.

Joe T.

[topcat61]

I don't think pressing cards is a good thing. It is not the same as erasing a mark or soaking or pushing down a corner that flipped up. It seems the pressing would make the paper thinner which isn't the same as when it left the mfg....

Hey Leon, I'm curious cause I really don't know, but what is card "pressing"? Can you give me an example so I'll know what to look for? Thanks.

[Leon]

Hey Leon, I'm curious cause I really don't know, but what is card "pressing"? Can you give me an example so I'll know what to look for? Thanks.

My estimation of pressing as a nefarious act would be to soak a card then apply a lot of pressure to a corner (pressing) to make it thinner and longer. I have never done it or seen it done, but read what is said just like everyone else does.
Other pressing would be merely drying a card after it was soaked to prevent a curl to it. I don't have an issue with someone doing that (drying the card). But I do with the heavy pressing of corners because it can easily lead to trimming. As far as detection I would guess a loupe and holding it up to light would be useful. I don't study this crap like some others so maybe I am mistaking. If any card doctors want to come forward and let us know it would be most appreciated.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I found this online.

For cards, I think that there are three variations of this, and pressing in general is not accepted.

(1) Soaking - this is usually fairly common especially in prewar cards where you usually soak the card in water to remove it from a scrapbook, etc. It is also sometimes used to remove excess dirt or other residue that has accumulated on the card. After the water soak, the card is usually dried and then placed under some heavy objects such as books to ensure that it dries flat. This process may also remove some warping in the card. I believe this is usually acceptable in the card community as long as NO CHEMICALS ARE USED. Only water or distilled water is acceptable. Anything else is considered altering the card.

(2) Pressing - this is the process to remove wrinkles or creases in the card. This is not acceptable as sometimes over time, the wrinkles or creases may come back. A card may look to be crease-free when it is originally submitted to a TPG. However, at a later time, the creases re-appear, and observers wonder how such a card with creases got such as high grade and got past the graders.

(3) Pressing to trim - one of the reasons that there is a minimum size requirements to cards is to prevent unscrupulous sellers from trimming a card with soft corners so that the end product is a card with sharp corners. They then submit this card for a grade, but it will often fail due to minimum size requirement. However, one way to get around this is to press the card so strongly that the size of the card increases (but it becomes thinner). Then the card is trimmed, so that the corners are now sharp and it is still within the minimum size requirements. Obviously, this is not acceptable to the collecting community. >>

The pressing(#2 above) aspect reminds me of what many did in the 80's/90's with a process called "spooning". Where one rolled a spoon,the bottom/curved part of the part of the spoon that holds the liquid, back/forth over a crease/bubble to flatten it. Also the pressing to trim(#3 above) was accomplished via pressing a card under a certain tonage (PSI) in a mechanical press of sorts to "stretch" the cardboard thereby allowing more material to be trimmed from the edges. This does in fact result in a thinner stock card.

[drcy]

An issue is you don't know what pressing will do to a card later, and don't know that what the pressing does is permanent. There have been instances of wrinkles re-appearing after being holdered.

Clearly, a collector or dealer removing wax stain or pencil mark isn't like trimming and recoloring, and many would argue those are okay and reasonable things to do. However, I wouldn't catalog that as 'conservation,' with conservation be done by a trained professional, or expert amateur, who is considering and is educated in the longterm health and preservation of the item.

I don't want eBay sellers to be able to get away with saying "No, no, I wasn't altering it. I was conserving it."

Unless it's been professionally, or otherwise expertly, conserved, do not use the term conserve.

I do know a collector and board member who is a self-trained expert in conservation (does more than paper items), and I would consider what he does as conservation (deacification of documents, etc). He's also very ethical and transparent about what he does, and, for items such as antique prints and paintings, real conservation is considered a selling point.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Didn't read the whole thread, but there's a difference in card pressing and card stretching. Card pressing is usually used to remove a crease. Card stretching is used to make it slightly larger than it's normal size so that it can be trimmed back down to size. Both are wrong IMO.

[Peter_Spaeth]

An issue is you don't know what pressing will do to a card later, and don't know that what the pressing does is permanent. There have been instances of wrinkles re-appearing after being holdered.

Clearly, a collector or dealer removing wax stain or pencil mark isn't like trimming and recoloring, and many would argue those are okay and reasonable things to do. However, I wouldn't catalog that as 'conservation,' with conservation be done by a trained professional, or expert amateur, who is considering and is educated in the longterm health and preservation of the item.

I don't want eBay sellers to be able to get away with saying "No, no, I wasn't altering it. I was conserving it."

Unless it's been professionally, or otherwise expertly, conserved, do not use the term conserve.

I do know a collector and board member who is a self-trained expert in conservation (does more than paper items), and I would consider what he does as conservation (deacification of documents, etc). He's also very ethical and transparent about what he does, and, for items such as antique prints and paintings, real conservation is considered a selling point.

Conservation is a complete misnomer here. That, to me, implies as David says something necessary to protect the item from further decay. PWCC, if anything, is talking about restoration, that is, returning the item closer to its original state. It just further betrays the ignorance.

[Stampsfan]

What does PSA do with the cards like that? Reslab as Altered with the difference paid to the owner?

It comes back in an SGC 7 holder.

[conor912]

It comes back in an SGC 7 holder.

Hahaha.

[ClementeFanOh]

I got the "relatively" in the Einstein remark, Peter!