PDA

View Full Version : Mastro and Psa


Pages : [1] 2

Archive
08-07-2007, 09:05 AM
Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>'Babe' sellers see bad signs <br /><br />Give authenticators failing grade<br /><br />BY MICHAEL O'KEEFFE<br />DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER<br /><br />Monday, August 6th 2007, 4:00 AM <br /> <br /><br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />Print Email Suggest a Story <br /> <br />Babe Ruth<br /><br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />Longtime TV sports journalist Robert Bender left his family with a mountain of medical bills when he died last fall after suffering for years from Alzheimer's disease. But he did leave his survivors with several assets, including a home in Hilton Head, S.C., and his collection of sports memorabilia, most notably a baseball autographed by Babe Ruth.<br /><br />Bender's family hoped to sell those items to pay off its debts, but the declining real estate market has made it difficult to sell the home in South Carolina. The politics of the sports memorabilia industry, the family says, have set back its efforts to get a fair price for the Ruth ball.<br /><br />"We were punished," Bender's son Bob Bender says, "because we didn't choose to sell the ball through Mastro Auctions."<br /><br />In the world of sports memorabilia, authenticators are supposed to be knowledgeable third parties who grade autographed balls, trading cards, jerseys and other collectibles with a cold, objective eye.<br /><br />But collectors and dealers have complained for years that authentication companies award higher grades for big-volume customers, including Mastro Auctions, sports memorabilia's largest auction house. The story of Robert Bender's Babe Ruth baseball, they say, suggests the relationship between Mastro Auctions and PSA/DNA, the hobby's biggest autograph-authentication service, is too cozy.<br /><br />"There's no doubt Mastro gets preferential treatment from PSA/DNA," one hobby executive says.<br /><br />Robert Bender, the longtime sports director at WGY-TV in upstate Schenectady, met and interviewed some of the biggest names in sports history, including Joe DiMaggio and Ted Williams, according to his son, who now lives in Atlanta. Along the way, Robert Bender picked up some souvenirs, including the ball autographed by the great Ruth. "He probably got it during an interview," Bender says.<br /><br />His father, Bender adds, must have had a sense that the ball would be worth something some day, because he didn't leave it lying around the house, where his kids might grab it for use in a sandlot game. Instead, he put it in a safe-deposit box with its original carton, where it sat undisturbed for decades.<br /><br />Shortly after Bender's death, his family decided to consign the Ruth ball and other autographed baseballs to an auction house. After researching various houses, Bob Bender settled on two candidates - Mastro Auctions and Long Island-based Leland's. Both companies, after being provided scans of the ball, said the ball would be a star of any auction because it was in great shape and the autograph was crisp and sharp. According to Bender, both guaranteed at least $75,000 for the ball but said it would probably go for six figures.<br /><br />"They both led us to believe it was one of the best Ruth balls they had ever seen," said Jean Bender, Bob Bender's wife.<br /><br />Leland's ultimately got the nod, Bob Bender says, because it seemed more responsive and more personable. When Mastro president Doug Allen was informed about the decision, however, he told Bender his family had made a terrible mistake.<br /><br />"The reason for my concern is relationships," Allen wrote in a November e-mail to Bob Bender. "The other balls in the collection will take care of themselves. The Ruth ball on the other hand will depend on relationships; a relationship with PSA/DNA and relationship with high-end customers. I already shared the images with PSA/DNA and am convinced we could have maximized the grade on the ball."<br /><br />In another e-mail, Allen said, "I hate to see you go with a firm that cannot maximize the grade with PSA and ensure you get a world-class price for this ball."<br /><br />Allen says he was not suggesting Mastro Auctions could pull strings to get a higher grade than Leland's. Instead, he says, his company knows what items should be graded and how to prepare them. "I spend more money for our customers than any other auction house," he says. "We get record prices for our items."<br /><br />The Bender family, however, was not persuaded to change its mind. The ball was given to Leland's, which then submitted it to PSA/DNA.<br /><br />PSA/DNA, however, first claimed there was evidence that two other autographs had been removed from the Ruth ball, which would significantly reduce its value. Leland's submitted the ball a second time and was told an inscription had been removed, which would also erode its value.<br /><br />Leland's finally brought the ball to James Spence Authentication, a Pennsylvania autograph authentication service that ran the ball through its video spectral comparator, a sophisticated machine that uses magnification and different kinds of light to detect erasures and forgeries.<br /><br />"You can see things you can't with the naked eye," says Spence. "There was no evidence that anything had been removed. There are differences of opinion, but we had six people huddled around it through different cycles. We did our due diligence and we believe nothing had been removed."<br /><br />PSA/DNA president Joe Orlando did not return a call for comment. PSA/DNA eventually graded the Benders' Ruth ball an eight on a scale of 10, and although it's a high grade, it would not likely bring the six-figure payoff Bender says Leland's and Mastro Auctions had said the ball would fetch.<br /><br />The whole experience has left Bender with a bad taste, and he says his family will hang on to the ball for now and try to sell it at a later date.<br /><br />"I wish I knew more about this industry before I started messing with it," Bender says. "We're not sure what to do now."<br /><br />Related Articles

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:28 AM
Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>A quality story with just the facts.....who'd have thought?<br />Certainly, there now seems to be a series of such incidents that are building a less than stellar picture of Mastro Auctions.<br /><br /><br />Daniel

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:31 AM
Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>Not sure I really have anything else to say about it, because those comments would likely be irresponsible and inappropriate.

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:36 AM
Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>In another e-mail, Allen said, "I hate to see you go with a firm that cannot maximize the grade with PSA..."

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:37 AM
Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>Trial with Bill Daniels...Shill Bidding accusations...now this. <br /><br />Doesn't it seem like every month there's something? <br /><br />Autographalert.com noted that the entire autograph industry is in "shambles" and there's no question that this doesn't help it's cause. <br /><br />DJ

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:47 AM
Posted By: <b>Jim Dale</b><p>Someone suggested that cards were being reslabbed by PSA to hold different registration numbers when they were put up for auction (again) after not selling - was that Mastro auctions?

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:49 AM
Posted By: <b>PAS</b><p>that was Memory Lane

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:55 AM
Posted By: <b>Dave F</b><p>What paper is this from? "Daily News" hardly narrows it down.

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:56 AM
Posted By: <b>Dave</b><p> Don't care what anyone thinks of O'Keefe.....this paints a truly terrible picture of the people at Mastro, and PSA....YET AGAIN !!! Further evidence that both companies can manipulate the sports memorabilia market seemingly at will.

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:56 AM
Posted By: <b>Richard Simon</b><p>"I hate to see you go with a firm that cannot maximize the grade with PSA", Doug Allen.<br />There is only one way to interpret that statement as far as I know.<br />-- <br><br>I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.<br />Unknown author <br />--<br />We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.<br />No retreat baby, no surrender.<br />The Boss

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:57 AM
Posted By: <b>Richard Simon</b><p>For the person who asked - the story is from the NY Daily News.<br />--<br><br>I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.<br />Unknown author <br />--<br />We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.<br />No retreat baby, no surrender.<br />The Boss

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:02 AM
Posted By: <b>Bob Pomilla</b><p>Whatever O'Keefe's agenda may or may not be, those are quotes he is offering and if accurate, are pretty damning

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:11 AM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Damn that O'Keefe! Now he's inventing Doug Allen emails! I smell a conspiracy....

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:18 AM
Posted By: <b>Joseph</b><p>It always amazes me that a Doug Allen would memorialize his concerns IN WRITING. He really must believe there's nothing untoward about what he said about "relationships" in that email...<br /><br />And another thing: SO WHO GOT IT RIGHT? Were there sigs removed from the ball?

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:38 AM
Posted By: <b>PAS</b><p>Doug did not say Mastro would alter the ball in any way. Nor did he say Mastro could obtain an inappropriate grade. EDITED TO ADD I think what people are reacting to is the explicit statement that grading is not always entirely anonymous. But is that Doug Allen's fault? Or is it PSA's fault? Or is it just inherent in the system?

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:59 AM
Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>How exactly does Mastro 'prepare' signed pieces (as opposed to generic sportscards which we have been apprised of <img src="/images/sad.gif" height=14 width=14>) for grading, and by what method can they profess to 'maximize' grades with PSA, seemingly unavailable to another submitter..??<br /><br />Seems a pretty astonishing statement to make.<br /><br /><br />Daniel

Archive
08-07-2007, 12:02 PM
Posted By: <b>Chris</b><p>Allen says he was not suggesting Mastro Auctions could pull strings to get a higher grade than Leland's. Instead, he says, his company knows what items should be graded and how to prepare them.<br /><br />******************************************<br /><br />That's an especially strange reaction given that the consignor probably told Mastro that he chose Leland's. It's not like they're a bunch of hacks. What special 'prep' methods does Mastro use that Leland's wouldn't utilize on an item this valuable? <br /><br />edited to correct typo.

Archive
08-07-2007, 12:05 PM
Posted By: <b>PAS</b><p>Daniel I don't know what exactly is involved in grading a ball, but obviously there is some subjective element. Perhaps Doug meant only that a firm such as Mastro, with its own in-house experts etc., could more effectively present a case to PSA that a ball was deserving of a particular grade. In an ideal world I guess items would be graded without the grader knowing the identity of the submitter and without any interaction, but one would have to be naive to think that is always the case.

Archive
08-07-2007, 12:22 PM
Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>for grading submissions, and those instructions are available for all to see on the grader's website.<br /><br />But for my next submission, perhaps I will iron out creases, fold back bent paper layers, and then stamp my submission form with a Mastro label!<br /><br />Hmmmph.<br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 12:34 PM
Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>If this item was in a single household, kept in wonderful condition over all these years (and the ball was in nice shape), how did a couple of signatures simply desolve over the years? Do you think the recent discovery of a multi-signed ball by people uninvolved (and unknowing) decided to mess with the ball by exposing it to chemicals to remove the other signatures or doing research to manually fade the signatures? <br /><br />Thankfully they didn't come across the Mona Lisa or they would have drawn a smile on it?<br /><br />If PSA/DNA made mention of removed signatures or personalizations and JSA says "no way" and has the technology (does PSA/DNA not have this technology?), what does that say about PSA/DNA? It's not like an autograph which is subjective, like the signature comes into question. There has to be a true device to determine whether there was ink already on something...a machine...a man in a white coat with a forensic degree...something.<br /><br />Something stinks here folks.<br /><br />DJ

Archive
08-07-2007, 12:35 PM
Posted By: <b>PAS</b><p>Thankfully they didn't come across the Mona Lisa or they would have drawn a smile on it?<br /><br />That IS a smile. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
08-07-2007, 01:19 PM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>One thing to note is that Mastro uses both PSA/DNA and JSA for their auction autographs.

Archive
08-07-2007, 01:41 PM
Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>I have seen some items in Mastro that have only had one issued LOA (not sure if recently) and I have even seen that didn't have any LOA from either of the respected companies.<br /><br />David, curious, why all the editing after each post? <br /><br />DJ

Archive
08-07-2007, 01:51 PM
Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>DJ please read the artical. What does Mastro using both authenticators have to do with story.

Archive
08-07-2007, 01:57 PM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>I was just pointing out that this isn't a tale about the opinion of a company Mastro uses and supports versus the opinion of an outsider company. Mastro uses and supports both companies.

Archive
08-07-2007, 01:59 PM
Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>I did read the article Shelly. <br /><br />I was making a comment on David's post.<br /><br />DJ

Archive
08-07-2007, 02:04 PM
Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>Sorry I ment to write David not you.

Archive
08-07-2007, 02:06 PM
Posted By: <b>Neal Kane</b><p>if some facts are being left out.

Archive
08-07-2007, 02:08 PM
Posted By: <b>Jay</b><p>I'm sure that if Doug said these things he was simply indicating that Mastro would do a better job communicating the history of the item to PSA to facilitate their work. There is no preparation with a ball--pack it up securely, ship it off. If in fact PSA would give favorable treatment to a Mastro submission over a Lelands submission then that is an indictment of PSA not of Mastro.

Archive
08-07-2007, 02:14 PM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>Doug could have and probably should have said that he felt the ball would sell for more in a Mastro auction than in other auctions, and left it at that. Relationships with high end collectors is fine to mention, after all they are the bidders. Talking about maximizing grade doesn't sound good. I don't know how one maximizes the grade without something unwholesome not going on.<br /><br />As a nickel and dime collector, the only way I would know how to 'maximize' the grade for one of my baseball cards is either to 'prepare' it, get preferential treatment from a grader or resubmit it multiple times (and hope the grade doesn't go lower!). As I don't alter cards, don't know a grader and have never submitted a card for grading, I guess I've never maximized a card.

Archive
08-07-2007, 02:15 PM
Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>There are always facts left out in cases like this. <br /><br />We have all heard stories like this with authenticating companies. It's just yet another black eye for the autograph business. How many eyes does it have left? <br /><br />DJ

Archive
08-07-2007, 02:16 PM
Posted By: <b>Josh Adams</b><p>I would like to see the entire email, not just a couple sentences.

Archive
08-07-2007, 02:16 PM
Posted By: <b>Chad</b><p>It is an indictment of Mastro if they're using strongarm tactics to manipulate the authentication business. That said, we're only getting one side of the story here. <br /><br />--Chad

Archive
08-07-2007, 02:24 PM
Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>...that the Bender family never should have gone public with this story, since it will follow this baseball around like a cloud of suspicion.

Archive
08-07-2007, 02:30 PM
Posted By: <b>Chad</b><p>I'm just saying... <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />--Chad

Archive
08-07-2007, 02:36 PM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>DJ, I edit my posts as Leon calls me and says, "You can't use that word!," "You can't say that-- they're one of our advertisers!" and "Just wait until SGC pays their banner bill, then you can what you want." We also disagree about which is correct translation of Lautreamont to quote from.

Archive
08-07-2007, 03:01 PM
Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>Here is what bothers me the most about the article. Psa turns down the ball twice and in the end they grade it and 8. If the ball had signatures removed in the beginning what happened to them in the end?

Archive
08-07-2007, 03:08 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Damn. I don't like this O'Keeffe dude, but Doug Allen has got some explaining to do...and not just for this baseball. He still has not addressed the football helmet that was being discussed over at GU.<br /><br /><br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 03:18 PM
Posted By: <b>PAS</b><p>I agree that the apparent inconsistency of the grading service is more troubling than anything Doug said. But one sees this all the time with cards, a card gets rejected for one reason, then for a different reason, then it gets slabbed. What this underscores to me is that we ultimately are talking about OPINIONS, not facts.

Archive
08-07-2007, 03:23 PM
Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>What i am talking about is that only after Jsa said the ball was good did PSA then authenticate it. It seems that there is something rotten in Denmark.

Archive
08-07-2007, 04:00 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p><I>Allen says he was not suggesting Mastro Auctions could pull strings to get a higher grade than Leland's. Instead, he says, his company knows what items should be graded and how to prepare them.</I><br /><br />To me, if this is true, it the most damning comment. I'd like to know what they were planning to do to "prepare" this ball for grading? I thought Doug came on this board and said Mastro wouldn't be doing things like that anymore? Maybe I misunderstood him. <br /><br />the more I learn and hear about what goes on behind the scenes at Mastro the more I really distrust them and wonder just how much, if anything in their auctions is unaltered.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-07-2007, 04:14 PM
Posted By: <b>bruce Dorskind</b><p><br /><br />In the fiercely competitive world of baseball card and autograph dealers,<br />competition for the very best items is cut throat at best.<br /><br />We study dozens of publications and a plethora of web sites.<br /><br />Regardless of whether an advert appears in a "hobby magazine."<br />price guide or antique publication nearly every dealer promises<br />"record prices."<br /><br />In fact, Mastro Auctions is far more conservative in its advertising<br />approach than a number of other dealers.<br /><br />Our experience with Doug Allen and Mastro has always been positive.<br />They don't over promise and they work hard to ensure that the items<br />they sell are properly presented and realize a price which meets or<br />exceeds the seller's expectations.<br /><br />Mastro's marketing efforts pale in comparison to those of the best<br />known international auction houses...several of whom have funded both<br />buyers and sellers in the same auction.<br /><br />We have the upmost respect for Mastro Auctions, and it has, in fact, been<br />our second best resource (REA has provided impecable service to us both<br />as a buyer and a seller).<br /><br />Whilst no auction house or invidivual is "perfect" the shameless attacks on<br />Mastro emanate more from jealousy and envy than from fact.<br /><br />What is particularly interesting to us is that many of the lead attackers don't<br />even have the resources to buy the catalog never mind the items that<br />are being sold.<br /><br />Mastro, while not perfect, has made an incredible contribution to this hobby.<br />Their efforts have brought amny long lost items to the public's attention.<br /><br />We ask that those who are all too anxious to be critical analyze the facts and<br />attempt to control their lack of emotional intelligence.<br /><br />Bruce Dorskind<br />America's Toughest Want List

Archive
08-07-2007, 04:21 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Thanks for the jab Bruce. I always appreciate it. As always, you prove you are lowest of low of the upper class that you try so hard to pass yourself off as. I know people that you would call trailer trash that have more class than you do.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-07-2007, 04:26 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Oh boy, here we go!<br /><br />I don't think envy or jealousy is the issue here. Even I have some concerns with the phrase "preparing things", but I am not envious of Mastro Auctions by showing curiosity.<br /><br />I think it's fair to ask them what that statement means.

Archive
08-07-2007, 04:27 PM
Posted By: <b>jeffdrum</b><p>How much money does one have to have in order to have an opinion or point of view that's relevant? Just wanting to know so I can save my breath if need be.

Archive
08-07-2007, 04:36 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Jeff, you have to at least be able to trace your roots back to the Mayflower and us "we" instead of "I" in order to have an opinion that counts.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-07-2007, 04:38 PM
Posted By: <b>David Davis</b><p>Whilst I can afford the catalog from Mastro, I cannot afford to continue reading diatribes from Bruce Dorskind without responding.<br /><br />The only times he posts anything is to copy a press release from another website, or to promote some item he loaned to a museum. There are far richer people who read this board, and who have collections that blow his away.<br /><br />He has never once that I have seen shown a scan of an item he presumably owns (although he has been asked many times to show them), and does nothing to contribute positively to this board.<br /><br />I prefer reading the antics of Scott Elkins, and the conservative posturings of Jim Crandell over anything Bruce has to write.<br /><br />I still want to know if he uses the royal "we" in his communications with whatever clients he might have. Pompous seems to kind a word, but I will leave it at that.

Archive
08-07-2007, 04:57 PM
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>.

Archive
08-07-2007, 05:06 PM
Posted By: <b>bruce Dorskind</b><p><br />We wonder who has supplied you with information with regard to income of Board Readers?<br />In fact, there are a cadre of people who read the Board, but never post. It is interesting that<br />you are able to compare and constrast their incomes. What other special talents do you have?<br /><br />And which Federal Laws have you violated in order to obtain the recent tax returns of Board Members?<br />.<br />Our postings reflect our opinion. The point of the Mastro Posting was simply to acknowledge that<br />Mastro Auctions has made an important contribution to the hobby. It is inappropriate to draw<br />conclusions about an issue from one newspaper story.<br /><br />As for posting items from our collection, we refer you to numerous books where said items have<br />appeared...that is, of course, if you are able to read English.<br /><br /><br />Bruce Dorskind<br />America's Toughest Want List<br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 05:15 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Why don't we all calm down a little before this gets out of control.<br /><br />Bruce, please try to address people with a little more respect. You can state any opinion you want but you can also do it without putting yourself on your own pedestal.<br /><br />Mastro has made contributions to the hobby, but the company has found themselves in the middle of a lot of controversy lately. And anybody is fair game. People have questions and would like answers. That seems reasonable, don't you think?

Archive
08-07-2007, 05:19 PM
Posted By: <b>David Davis</b><p>Brucie,<br />I'm pretty sure that Keith Olbermann, and several other people who read this board could not only buy and sell you, but make your collection look like a bunch of beaters. For someone who is a supposed expert in communications, your failing ability to do so with the general public is appalling. Your inability to come to the simplest of conclusions with few available facts is even more so.<br /><br />What is your purpose of occasionally chiming in on this board, other that to be obstreporous and condescending? Where do you even find the time to do so with the bank mergers, and other non-value added services you provide that must keep you busy?<br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 05:27 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Bruce, shouldn't the question be, where did you get the tax returns to determine who the board members are that cannot afford o buy a Mastro catalogue? You are the one the made socio-economic statements, no Mike.<br /><br />Without fail, any time you don't like someone's opinion, it becomes a class warfare issue, with you starting it.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-07-2007, 05:27 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>I am NOT envious nor jealous. In fact, here is a card I consigned to Mastro back in 2001. Anyone can see the "preparation" Mastro did to this card (1st scan is before and second scan is the after pic). Instead of being jealous, Jay Behrens, Jim Crandell, myself and MANY other true collectors would really simply LOVE TO SEE MASTRO BE HONEST AND CLEAN UP THEIR ACT, INSTEAD OF CLEANING UP CARDS!<br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1186442693.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1186442825.JPG">

Archive
08-07-2007, 05:29 PM
Posted By: <b>MikeU</b><p>"It is an indictment of Mastro if they're using strongarm tactics to manipulate the authentication business. That said, we're only getting one side of the story here."<br /><br />I do not think you can strong arm a nearly monopolist firm. <br /> <br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 05:32 PM
Posted By: <b>john</b><p>?????????

Archive
08-07-2007, 05:34 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Straight from Websters, with apologies to Bruce for not using Oxford's Unabridged<br /><br />Main Entry: ob·strep·er·ous<br />Pronunciation: &b-'stre-p(&-)r&s, äb-<br />Function: adjective<br />Etymology: Latin obstreperus, from obstrepere to clamor against, from ob- against + strepere to make a noise<br />1 : marked by unruly or aggressive noisiness : CLAMOROUS &lt;obstreperous merriment&gt;<br />2 : stubbornly resistant to control : UNRULY<br />synonym see VOCIFEROUS<br />- ob·strep·er·ous·ly adverb<br />- ob·strep·er·ous·ness noun<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-07-2007, 05:34 PM
Posted By: <b>David Davis</b><p>Correct spelling is "obstreperous". It means to be stubbornly defiant and aggressively boisterous.<br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 05:36 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>I believe Bruce types his posts with the same Thesaurus Mastro uses to concoct their auction descriptions with. <br /><br />BTW - Barry, it was a real pleasure to receive your last auction catalog. Short and to the point descriptions - great!<img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
08-07-2007, 06:03 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Thanks Scott. I'm a firm believer in being succinct. The cards and the pictures speak for themselves...and does anybody really read all that drivel?

Archive
08-07-2007, 06:06 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I do. With so few decent comics in the newspaper anymore, I need to find my laughs anywhere I can.<br /><br />Jay- loves Get Fuzzy and wishes The Boondocks would come back soon.<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-07-2007, 06:12 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>Oh Bruce...Bruce...Bruce..Bruce...ahhhhh<br /><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/junkforumimages/huge/Bruce.jpg">

Archive
08-07-2007, 06:17 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I hate to be the grammar/spelling cop tonight, but when one is as arrogant as Bruce and speaks (types) like he's the King of England shouldn't he at least be able to spell?<br /><br />What the hell is "upmost"? And you have at least one other misspelled word in there too Bruce, but I'll let you figure it out. Consider it an educational exercise.<br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 06:19 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Scott, what did you do when you noticed Mastro "prepared" your card? Did they mention the "preparations" they made in the description?

Archive
08-07-2007, 06:21 PM
Posted By: <b>Mark L</b><p>Scott-- whatever you think about preparation, you have to admit they did a pretty nice job on that card. What do you suppose they used?

Archive
08-07-2007, 06:53 PM
Posted By: <b>scott brockelman</b><p>I just realized that most of the known T207 Red Cross cards came from the same collector that adhered them with the same glue as all the T215 Red Cross cards which are normally found with the same yucky brown bugger at the top.<br /><br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 07:00 PM
Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>I will begin this piece by saying I can not spell. I will make mistakes. I am not perfect. Now that I said that I will vent. What is wrong with you people. This is not a joke, it is a problem that you look at and you laugh I went to prison because it was easy to cheat and lie to people. Its not funny. You trust people to do the right thing. You send items to be authenticated and graded and when your cheated it cost you money. If Masto fixed that card it as bad as forgery or any other crime. You made money cheating someone. If you doctored a card and sold it as authentic you cheated people.I talked to Leon today and I asked him what is the difference between a club house sig and a forgery. His answer was there is no difference. It is the same with cards. If you change what that card is it is no longer authentic. I find it insulting to see grown men make fools out of themselves. I put that article up to show you what is happening over and over again in this hobby. Your answers at the start where important and then as usual you make fun of yourself's. This is a forum for people who care what is happening to this hobby. I have spent the last seven years trying to make up for something I did. Now I look at the replies on this site and find out that most of you don't care so long its in your best interest. Well I will tell you that if it keeps going the way it is your cards and this hobby will be like Confederate Money. Stop this BS and care what the hell is happening out there. <br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 07:06 PM
Posted By: <b>Scot Reader</b><p>I used to view claims of preferential grading by PSA for large customers with some skepticism; however, I find it hard to understand Mr. Allen's email quotes as expressing anything other than a claim that Mastro could have obtained from PSA a preferential grade on the ball simply because it is Mastro.

Archive
08-07-2007, 07:34 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>I knew of the "alteration" "cleaning" "preparation" (whatever Doug Allen is calling it this week) before the auction catalog came out. I was getting out of collecting and consigned the card directly to Doug Allen in/around 2001. I was going to post the description, but it was too large and I had to cut out the pic of the card itself and omit the description Mastro provided in the catalog. I know Doug has said different since, but when he contacted me via phone, he said the "cleaning" of the card would only require a Q-Tip and bleach. I was against it, as I don't believe in alterations. PLUS, I thought the card would sell better without cleaning, since people would recongnize the back as the card being in Lipset's Encyclopedia. Without the "bugger" at the top, as Scott B. refers to, I thought people would not recognize the card from Lipset's Encyclopedia. To make a long story short, I agreed to the cleaning, as I was getting out of the Hobby (which lasted a couple of years), and Mastro cleaned the card, listed it WITHOUT stating anything about the cleaning and sold it - end of story.<br /><br />BTW - Barry, what I really hate as well in auction house (and some eBay) descriptions, is when the seller gives stats and tells how great a player is - Hell, if someone is bidding on a vintage Cobb with Cobb back, they probably know Cobb is the all time leader in batting average! Keep up the nice auctions, and I look forward to your next "NO NONSENSE" auction!<img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Dan B. - I was about to say something regarding Bruce's use of "upmost" instead of utmost. Glad you brought that to "their" attention!

Archive
08-07-2007, 07:40 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>the four Red Cross T207's from the LA find all had the "bugger" at the top, as well as the T215's from the find.<br /><br />Shelly - I agree with EVERYTHING you stated. From my experiences, Mastro is doing nothing short of STEALING from people with these alterations and lack of explanations in their auction descriptions.<br /><br />Scott R. - I have heard from several honorable people (many of whom post on this board) that Doug and people from Mastro (including Bill Mastro) have told them to let Mastro do the submitting for their consignments. These people were told that Mastro WILL get them higher grades than if the cards were submitted by these individuals! Again, this is coming second hand from some people on this board, but I would believe these people, as I have known them for years and they ARE HONEST!<br /><br />Everyone - Just wondering what are people's thoughts as to the T207 Blackburne I posted? What are your views on this one? Is this form of altering OK????

Archive
08-07-2007, 07:44 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>from the Mastro auction.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1186451064.JPG">

Archive
08-07-2007, 08:03 PM
Posted By: <b>paul</b><p>Not THE Shelley Jaffe?<br /><br />Or should we better know you as "Eddie" of HBO fame?<br /><br /><br />Anyway, if you are the same Shelley Jaffe, why on earth after being nabbed in the Operation Bullpen Sting have you now decided to turn over a new leaf and become a crusader for all that's right and good with the world and to correct the ills of the industry? You didn't seem to have a problem stocking and presumably selling questionable material before you were arrested.<br /><br />According to the FBI, your seized inventory consisted of:<br /><br />Shelly's Cards<br />(Shelly Jaffe)<br />Tustin, CA<br /><br /><br />Baseballs 144 Hats/Helmets 22 <br />Photos/Posters 104 Other Balls, Pucks 1 <br />Bats 13 Albums, CDs, etc. 0 <br />Cuts 1 Misc. 0 <br />Jerseys 4 <br /><br /><br />Have you recompensed (made whole) any and all customers that purchased any questionable material? I realize that you've served your time, but as we've recently seen with other convicted felons in the industry, this aspect seems to be often overlooked.<br /><br /><br />Gotta be honest with you, if you are the same Shelley Jaffe, I sure as hell don't have any time for you or your agenda. Doing time at Club Fed does not exonerate you especially when the conviction is in an industry that you now purport an earnest desire to clean up when you were a part of the problem to begin with. <br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 08:08 PM
Posted By: <b>joebrennan</b><p>"What is particularly interesting to us is that many of the lead attackers don't<br />even have the resources to buy the catalog never mind the items that<br />are being sold."<br /><br />A direct quote by the Foreskin group to once again put down collectors in this hobby that have a life other than refering to ourself in two or more people with a partner almost assuredly named Sybil.<br /><br />Right on cue you prove again what a pompous ass you really are. Typical Forskin post. And you have the nerve to call me low class.I don't think low life windbag does justice to your disreguard for anyone but yourself and your imaginary we that is always mentioned that makes you look more and more like a classic case headed for Belview. When is enough, enough for you.<br /><br />The Brennan Group of one. <br><br>In Rememberance of James W. Brennan Sr. 1924-1982. Dad, thanks for everything you did for me.

Archive
08-07-2007, 08:16 PM
Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>I will quote Comte de Lautreamont: "Poetry must be made by all and not by one." <br /><br />Shelly, when Jim got on his soap box (and for correct reasons), basically everyone tugged as his shirt tails to get him off. The truth of the matter is that nobody cares about who gets harmed in the card or autograph business, whether a crease is removed and sold for thousands more, or whether an authenticator was shady in their ways. Is any of this a white collar crime? <br /><br />We prefer to look the other way before we admit there is an issue with something we love. I think we are so immune to this kind of stuff, that it's accepted. Will people still buy from Mastro? Of course. Head high in bad news...prices will still be through the roof. <br /><br />Here is the link to the above mention Game Used Forum thread involving a Michael Jordan jersey. <br /><br /><a href="http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=9946" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=9946</a><br /><br />Read the last thread...so I will now include that to what I <br /><br />Bill Daniels situation...Shill Bidding accusations...The PSA/DNA and Ruth item mentioned here...Michael Jordan College jersey. What else? <br /><br />As far as Bruce goes...seriously, exit this Forum for good. You can't open your mouth without saying something that will offend and "WE" all disagree with. <br /><br />DJ

Archive
08-07-2007, 08:51 PM
Posted By: <b>joebrennan</b><p>"I will quote Comte de Lautreamont: "Poetry must be made by all and not by one." <br /><br />There are more poets than people that read poetry. <br /><br />There are more personalities than 1 in the Dorkskin group. <br><br>In Rememberance of James W. Brennan Sr. 1924-1982. Dad, thanks for everything you did for me.

Archive
08-07-2007, 08:54 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>Believe it or not, there are those who are turned off by the "class warfare" that goes on here. I guess I know b/c I am one of them. I went from making nice money in the insurance business to being disabled in no time at all it seems. My monthly income now is just enough to cover the bills and pay for my double wide (which was recently made fun of by the forum owner here). I don't live in a 6000 square foot home, nor refer to myself in the plural. However, I love this Hobby just as much, if not more, than people who look down on the "armpit" collectors like myself.<br /><br />I don't think I will ever understand why some Hobbyists will turn the other way when it comes to Mastro and what goes on at their Empire, nor attack Jim Crandell when he wanted to take action and try to clean this Hobby up. I do know there is a small group of collectors, including myself, who really care about this Great Hobby and can put aside our differences to, at the very least, try and expose these auction houses and other individuals who do wrong. Happy Collecting!

Archive
08-07-2007, 09:16 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>If you say one more peep about me, or make a reference towards me, you will be banned forever from this forum.....Period....

Archive
08-07-2007, 09:26 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>And here I thought you were allowed to post anything as long as it was true and you put your name to it. <br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-07-2007, 09:28 PM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>"I am the son of a man and a woman, from I have been told. This astonishes me. I thought I was something more."<br /><br />For what it's worth, that's my favorite quote from from Comte de Lautreamont, a 19th century French speaking Uruguayan writer who and is considered the first surrealist due to his iconic book Les Chants de Maldoror. Maldoror is something of a monster, sort of a damned figure, and he is the narrator. The book is heavy, written as a collage and considered corrosive even by today's social standards. What's interesting is that it was written by a apparently normal, about 22 year old college student who died soon after. The book was not discovered and published until years after he had died.

Archive
08-07-2007, 09:32 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>David, lol. Great line. I've never heard of the guy. But then again, my reading is pretty much limited so sci-fi and fantasy and books by H P Lovecraft.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-07-2007, 09:41 PM
Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>Paul, i am the Shelly Jaffe who was Eddie and I am the same Shelly Jaffe that found UDA selling a $85000 card that was phony. I don't know who you are but I never hid who I am. What I said here is true. If you have problem with what I did that is fine but if you have a problem with what i said here I feel sorry for you. I am a bad guy I did every thing that was said about me but I have the balls to admit it. Where are yours when it come to what is taking place today not yesterday. You want to talk about me that is fine. Leon knows about me and trusts that what I say is fact not fiction. I know more about what went on this hobby than you ever will. If you doubt what I am saying ask the big boys. Heitman, Hughes, Mastro, Spence and the list goes on. I just want the bull s-it to stop. If you have problem with that then so be it. There is no one on this site that didn't know who I was. I also find it surprising that you didn't read that I said I went to jail for what I did. I am a person who made a mistake and people are now asking for my help to make sure it doesn't happen to other people. If you have a problem with that, I guess you don't really care who cheats, who lies or who steals. Oh and by the way every peron that bought from me was paid back and if you have the nerve call Tim Fitzsimmons at the San Diego FBI and ask him what he thinks about me.1-858-565-1255. Now if you have anymore questions please list them.

Archive
08-07-2007, 09:41 PM
Posted By: <b>Kenny Cole</b><p>Because Crandall, for all his pious purported discussion about cleaning up the hobby, was (and still seems to be) absolutely unwilling to donate even 1 of his precious 25,000 slabbed cards to be looked at, especially those that are probably altered. Since that graded/altered card thing is his thesis, he has zero credibility. Leading from behind generally doesn't work.<br /><br />So, Scott, that leaves you. I don't doubt that you love the hobby, as you see it. I do think that a lot of your "love" seems to be based on what you think you can get for your cards. In that regard, I have noticed that you have had not a problem one putting some stuff on the BST thread - the thread sponsored by the evil dictator Leon. Do you not see the contradiction? If not, you need to think more. Best,<br /><br />Kenny Cole<br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 09:55 PM
Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>David,<br /><br />You even edited your own post THREE times about Lautréamont!<br /><br />Did Leon call because he's not a fan of the avant-garde French Surrealist Imagery? <br /><br /><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />DJ<br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 09:58 PM
Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>Paul, I would advice anyone that has not read about me to google Shelly Jaffe and they will find the same in depth reporting that you did. You will also notice that its from 6 years ago. It also tells you that there is a lot more bad people out there. Are you one of them?

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:06 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>in order to fund a recent purchase. Sorry, I must sell cards in order to obtain others I want, as I don't have unlimited funds. <br /><br />As to your remark regarding me listing cards on the B/S/T thread here, I was doing that before yourself or Leon were even on these boards. I was selling cards on the old Full Count board before Leon was collecting Pre-War as a matter of fact. Just as Jay has stated before when asked why he still posts here while not agreeing with the way Leon runs things, I will give you the same answer - To me, this is home. I am an "old timer" on this board. Again, I was posting on the old Full Count board way before yourself or Leon.<br /><br />If Leon feels he needs to ban me, then so be it. I cannot see anything I have posted in this thread that is not true. If I am banned for posting the truth, that will be the ultimate form of censorship and really look more bad on Leon than myself. Besides, it will give me more time to post on the 13 posts per day Aimoo board.<img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:08 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>I hate to participate in this, but I can't let this one pass.<br /><br />Scott said,<br /><br />"I don't think I will ever understand why some Hobbyists will turn the other way when it comes to Mastro "<br /><br />It should not be that hard to understand since you did it when you stood to profit from it. See T207 Red Cross above.<br />JimB

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:08 PM
Posted By: <b>Kevin Sacuier</b><p>"Because Crandall, for all his pious purported discussion about cleaning up the hobby, was (and still seems to be) absolutely unwilling to donate even 1 of his precious 25,000 slabbed cards to be looked at, especially those that are probably altered."<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />That's not exactly true. Although I don't claim to be an expert, many trust my opinion when it comes to identifying altered cards...Jim included. We have talked and in the not so distant future I will be inspecting several of his graded cards at no cost.<br /><br /><br /><br />Kevin Saucier

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:11 PM
Posted By: <b>rand</b><p>this board offers incredible knowledge, opinions, and life experience in this ever so complicated hobby. the topic of this thread touches on the largest fear of the grading aspect of the hobby, PSA being biased, and not truly acting as an independant 3rd party.<br />instead of thoughtful insight, legality issues, and general concerns, we get everything from name calling to income differences. Why dont we start a separate and individual thread on each person that contributes to the board, then the personal attacks can be aired there, so we can stick to the topics that are offered. this board is free, the knowledge on the board was learned by mistakes or years of research, which are not free. so, can we get away from the petty BS, and stick to the topic at hand?

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:16 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>"Because Crandall, for all his pious purported discussion about cleaning up the hobby, was (and still seems to be) absolutely unwilling to donate even 1 of his precious 25,000 slabbed cards to be looked at, especially those that are probably altered."<br /><br /><br />"That's not exactly true. Although I don't claim to be an expert, many trust my opinion when it comes to identifying altered cards...Jim included. We have talked and in the not so distant future I will be inspecting several of his graded cards at no cost. "<br /><br /><br />If they turn out to be trimmed/altered will they be labeled and sold as such in the future? <br /><br />Jim if you’re out there are you that committed to the issue of cleaning up the hobby…that you would take a bath on your very expensive purchases?<br /><br />Just curious, that’s all.<br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:19 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>I gave in to Doug Allen on the T207 Red Cross, b/c he insisted and I was getting out of the Hobby at the time. I did NOT alter the card. I did NOT even bring up anything about it. Doug Allen contacted me about it and kept insisting. They had my card at the time. If I would have made Doug mad, what would he have done? I don't know. I thought it best to let them do what they wanted, me get the money for my card and leave the Hobby for a while. Hell, I didn't want to say no and have Mastro return my card to me in two halves!<br /><br />Jim, maybe if you spend more time researching cards than trying to place the blame on me for Mastro altering a card I sent them on consignment, you wouldn't be buying E93's that have been altered as ghost images!<img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:41 PM
Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>This thread gets better by the second. I love threads like this. I can't bear to look away.<br /><br />-Al

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:57 PM
Posted By: <b>Tony</b><p>I am an idiot and got banned....

Archive
08-07-2007, 10:57 PM
Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>Nice seeing you at the national, even if it was only on the bus ride <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>.<br /><br />Throwing mud at Jim B. is just plain dumb Scott E. What he asked was a very reasonable and natural extention of your post, and the seeming inconsistency of blasting Mastro for altering cards - and you yourself participating in passing off just such a card on an unsuspecting buyer.<br />Your explanation of fearing damage to your cards sounds lame.<br />Hypocrisy, you bear thy name. (Or is that 'thine' name?)<br /><br /><br />Daniel

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:01 PM
Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>Hi Daniel!<br /><br />Since this thread has gotten so far off topic with everyone's personal agendas, I won't hesitate to say it was a pleasure (and total fluke) meeting you at the show as well...and I'm sad to say that the card I went racing into the show to buy was, indeed, gone.<br /><br />The buyer was just like me - he saw the card the night before, thought about it overnight, and went to the show first thing in the morning to buy it. I had the same idea, but decided to have breakfast first.<br /><br />So the way I look at it, I ate a $700 omelet and met Daniel Enright as a result. Not a bad deal for me.<br /><br />-Al

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:04 PM
Posted By: <b>Tony</b><p>I am an idiot and got banned

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:07 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>I NEVER passed off any card that was altered. Hell, I don't even know how to alter a card (NEVER HAVE, as I would be afraid of ruining it). Fact is, Jim B. was trying to blame me for what Doug Allen and Mastro did. Fact is Jim B. is probably still mad b/c I questioned a "Proof" Ty Cobb with Ty Cobb back he bought from Mastro and sold to someone who reads this board (I still have the e-mails from Jim asking that I NOT say anything negative about that card on this board, as the person he sold the card to reads this board). <br /><br />Also, you have shown ill feelings towards me E. Daniel ever since I would NOT sell you a Red Hindu common for a $200 loss on the B/S/T thread - it is still there if the thread was never deleted in fact. I put it on eBay and you were outbid. Don't blame me for you wanting to underpay for a card and me NOT being naive enough to sell it to you for a loss! Again, I did NOT sell the Red Cross nor alter it. In fact, I still have the Mastro catalog where MASTRO sold the card after THEY altered it. Don't show a low IQ by blaming me. Mastro had my card and I wasn't going to do anything at the time to piss them off and receive a card back in two halves or something! If you or Jim want to place the blame regarding the altered Red Cross PLEASE be intelligent enough to place the blame where it lies - with Mastro and Doug Allen!

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:11 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Scott,<br />I bought that card in a Lew Lipset auction. I corresponded with the consignor who bought the card for $15 or 20 (I forget now) from a guy who thought it was worthless printers scrap. Obviously it was not the product of a card doctor trying to cash in. Because a card doctor could approximate that does not make it the case with my card. If so, then every blank back T206, etc. is a fraud. The one person who thought it might have been doctored has never held the card or examined it and later admitted he could not be sure when questioned. I have examined it under a black light and 10x loupe and found no evidence of alteration.<br /><br />As for your your own dealings and opinions about Mastro, that is your **** and I am not interested in debating the topic any further. I think the truth is self-evident.<br />JimB

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:16 PM
Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>Scott:<br /><br />I understand your point here, but since you and I have been able to disagree in the past without it becoming personal, I'm going to take a risk and disagree with you again here.<br /><br />You were the owner of the card, and you were willing to accept whatever was done to the card, in the interest of ensuring the card sold for a maximum price. I agree with both Jim and Daniel here. You yourself said you "allowed" the alteration to happen partially because you were getting out of the hobby anyway.<br /><br />To blame the auction house when you, at any time, could have said no and let the card sell in its natural state - or even taken it back and given it to another auction house - seems awfully odd, particularly when I haven't seen anyplace where you state that you refused to take the money for the card that you claim to have been coerced into having fixed.<br /><br />In the end you were complicit in doing precisely what you are now trying to stop. You yourself didn't pull the trigger, but you authorized the hit, figuratively speaking.<br /><br />Which is fine - we all make mistakes and we all have lapses in judgement (I make mistakes every day). I think everybody understands your position on alterations, and most of us share your position. But trying to justify what was done to that card by claiming innocence and directing all the blame toward the auction house rings hollow. To continuously claim that Jim and Daniel are disagreeing with you because they have some agendas, when there are clearly issues with the statements you're making about the card, is also pretty hollow.<br /><br />-Al<br /><br />Edited to fix spelling before Barry got me.

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:22 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Is this the e-mail you are referring to? I am not at all ashamed of what I said. Your insinuations that the card was fake were reckless and unfair to the current owner. And FYI, I had completely forgotton about this when I pointed out the irony of your current musings.<br /><br />"Hi Scott,<br /> How's it going? I wanted to write to you about your comment on Net54 about the hand-cut Ty Cobb back that REA (while under the Mastro umbrella) sold about seven years ago. You seemed to insinuate that the card was not authentic since it looks "VERY DIFFERENT" from "REAL" copies. Do you have any grounds for making that kind of claim? Though I am no longer the owner of that card, I was for many years. I have also owned at different times two other Ty Cobb backs and have seen nine of the twelve known copies of the card. Other than not having the the shallack gloss that the others have and the hand-cut, it looks exactly like the others (and like all other T206 Cobb/reds for that matter). I spoke with Rob Lifson about the card extensively before I bought it in that auction many years ago. He believed that it must have been pulled before a complete production run or that it was some sort of proof. I see absolutely no evidence to presume otherwise. Do you think it is not authentic or not period in some way? If so, what is your evidence? If not, I think you are being a little reckless to throw out off-handed rumors on a public discussion board about that card that are not substantiated. I traded that card to a friend who is very proud to have it in his collection. It is also a very valuable card as you know. When a respected person in the hobby like yourself makes a comment like that on a public discussion board, it threatens to devalue a card like that, potentially undeservedly so. I don't think the current owner has any plans to sell it, but that is not really the point. If there is evidence, other than your hunch, I would be very curious to hear it. Otherwise, I think it would be good to be careful about throwing out unsubstantiated claims on a public board. I should mention that this is coming 100% from me. I have not spoken with the current owner and do not know if he even saw you post. He is a lurker on Net54.<br /><br />I just want to say that on a personal note I have generally appreciated your contributions over the years and have a lot of respect for your hobby knowledge. (2 sentences deleted here about an irrelavent matter) I hope you don't take this note to you the wrong way. I was just a bit concerned about the public perception of a card I know intimately, used to own, and have 100% confidence in its authenticity.<br /> Best,<br /> Jim Blumenthal"<br />

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:24 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>By the way, I have the e-mail response in which you say that you have NO proof.<br />JimB

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:27 PM
Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p> Ps. Tony. And who better than I to know all the bad people that are still out there. If HBO, SCD,New York Times, The New York Daily News, Richard Simon, Jsa, and the FBI trust what I am doing then you opinion is mute.<br />This is not about me. Its about the story . You can try and make me out to be the bad guy but not when this doesn't concern me.<br />Tony why are afraid of what I said?

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:28 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>seriously, as he has performed several alterations that look similar. He would be the one that could tell you either way for certain on that one. <br /><br />As for the truth being evident about Mastro altering my Red Cross, that is absolutely correct. Again, Doug Allen contacted me and kept insisting that I let them clean the card. I finally agreed b/c at the time I was getting out of the Hobby and didn't really care at the time and, again, they had my card. All I wanted was the money I had into the card back at the time. If you or E. Daniel either one truly think I am to blame for Doug Allen contacting me and altering my card when that was the last thing on my mind, you are BOTH IDIOTS! Talk about a spin zone - the owner of a card gets blamed for the actions of the auction house - come on, do you actually think anyone truly believes that!?!? If you are mad at me for questioning the Ty Cobb back or another card of yours, be a man, come on out and say it Jim, but don't try and blame me for Doug Allen's actions! Afterall, you are a very educated person - please act like one.

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:32 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I give this thread 150 posts before Elkins says something that gets him banned for life. I give this thread until the morning when Leon wakes up as to when "Tony" gets banned for life.

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:35 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>I'm done. Goodnight.<br />JimB

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:40 PM
Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>This is the second time you've mentioned a Red Hindu, and left me completely flummoxed????<br /><br />It's wierd. I've never that I can remember tried to buy one, don't own a single t206, don't even like the issue....but please, if you have any kind of reference please share. I'll willingly take the risk of looking the fool if you will <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>.<br /><br />Every thing I wrote was in response to your own post, nothing more. I am in complete harmony with your general cord/discord of wishing people wouldn't screw with cards. The other stuff you throw around so wilfully is just hard to ignore, especially when it seems so hypocritical.<br /><br /><br />Respectfully.<br /><br />Daniel

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:42 PM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>that make complete sense! After reading your post, I can see where I was at fault actually. At the time, I was getting out of the Hobby and didn't really care to be truthful, as long as I got my money back. However, when the President of an auction house contacts you and asks you to let them do something to your card that is in their auction, you must assume that they are serious and sent the "Big Gun" to "pursuade" you. If I had not agreed, they were in control - they could have "accidently" misidentified the card or anything. Again, I never even thought of any alterations, as I thought the card would sell better with the stain on the reverse. However, I do see Al's point here and appreciate his post. I guess I am somewhat to blame for agreeing to Doug (I have to admit Doug is a great salesperson however - he sold me on the idea and even went into detail how removing something from the card was not altering - I actually fell for his presentation!). I will take responsibility for agreeing to Doug's request - looking back, I should have said no. However, I do feel there is some blame to be placed on Mastro and Doug Allen in this situation as well. Afterall, they were the Masterminds who thought of altering the card and they were the ones who altered the card. <br /><br />I guess the best way to look at this would be from a legal standpoint - say, a murder. In this situation, Doug asks me if it is OK to kill my friend and talks me into saying yes. I eventually say Yes and Doug kills my friend. I am somewhat guilty in the situation, but it was not my idea nor me pulling the trigger. Again, I will be man enough to admit that I said Yes and I should NOT have agreed to let Mastro alter my card, but I didn't think of the crime, nor did I pull the trigger, so I still don't believe I am as guilty in the crime as Mastro nor Doug Allen. Al, you are correct, I should have said no, and am to be blamed as well!<img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Jim - you are correct. I did say I had no proof to my opinion on the Cobb with Cobb Back "Proof". I still don't have any proof - it was my opinion b/c it is SOOOOOOOOO much different from the other known examples (I didn't even know who owned the card when I made the statement, nor did it really matter). BTW - I thought posting e-mails was a no-no on this board!?!? If not, I guess I have quite a few I wouldn't mind posting sometime!<img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
08-07-2007, 11:50 PM
Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>"then you opinion is mute." <br /><br /><br />Now you've done it! You've kicked one of my pet peeves! Is his point really "mute"? Or is it "moot"? <br /><br /><br />If it is, "mute", can we do that to a couple of other posters as well? &lt;LOL&gt;<br />

Archive
08-08-2007, 12:01 AM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>I don't blame Leon for deleting that one however, as I remember telling him to do so the thread got so out of control. I do know Toby on here remembers it, b/c he e-mailed me when I auctioned the card on eBay (he was so mad about the B/S/T posts made that he even stated there was no way he would let you win that card for the price you wanted). If I have you confused with another E Daniel I apologize.<br /><br />Dan B. I have to agree with you - Leon HAS to be asleep or Tony's posts would have already been deleted. While I agree with some of what Tony said, he should have at least used his full name. I would have probably already have been banned as well for talking bad about Mastro were Leon at his post.<br /><br />Am I the only one who feels that this board is more of a police state than ever however? Sure, we have had a heated discussion here and disagreed to some rather extreme extents. However, I know people who do not voice their opinions on this board in fear of having their posts edited and/or deleted OR being banned (as I was threatened with earlier in this thread). Sure, there are several who disagree with what I say - this is America, you have that right. You should have a right to feel free to voice your opinions on this board about topics - whether it is Mastro altering cards, or me letting them alter one of mine. Things are too one sided here sometimes b/c of this fear however. Sure, you have a few that love to bash Elkins when he and Leon are in disagreement - they come out of the woodwork for that one! However, you don't really get to hear the side of the people who might disagree with Leon post b/c of fear. Sure Leon could come on here tomorrow and say "Everyone who disagrees with anything I have ever done please post". However, he knows that will never happen. The board needs time to get back to a more "free state of posting". I mean good things do come out of heated discussions - just look at this thread - Al posted his opinions in a way that I could understand his side of this situation. I now realize that it was wrong of me to allow Doug Allen and Mastro to alter the Red Cross. Hindsight is 20/20 however, and there is nothing I can do about it now but apologize - I am truly sorry for my part in saying yes to the alteration! At the time, I didn't even know if I would be back in the Hobby again and didn't really think clearly about what I agreed to. However, I am back in the Hobby now with a passion and say it is WRONG what Mastro keeps doing and I would never agree to anything they request again in terms of alterations!

Archive
08-08-2007, 12:05 AM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>While I hate what he did, he does seem sincere in trying to better the Hobby now and that is good. We have all made mistakes in our lives. Some people like Shelly learn from them and try to use their knowledge of wrongdoings in a positive way and I actually applaud that.

Archive
08-08-2007, 12:18 AM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>After some thought, it was NOT you who was mad at me for not selling the Red Hindu at a loss. Guess I thought it was you a while back, b/c your posts sounded like that person's (The guy was a Lee, NOT E. - sorry). Again, I apologize for the mistake!

Archive
08-08-2007, 04:39 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Would somebody please insult me...I want to get in on this too.<br /><br />And whoever that Tony guy is, what a cretin. Nothing like insulting Leon anonymously, who has pretty much kept a low profile on this thread.

Archive
08-08-2007, 05:12 AM
Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>Shelley writes: " You will also notice that its from 6 years ago. It also tells you that there is a lot more bad people out there. Are you one of them?"<br /><br />You're a funny guy Shelley and have a lot of balls to start questioning the integrity of others. Check out the front page of the DOJ complaint against WIWAG and see who the "victim" and complainant was. Ooops, looks like ol' Paul was on the good guys side in the FBI sting to nail the crooks for interstate transactions. Damn! Looks like you picked on the wrong guy to point a finger at. <br /><br />Save the holier than thou crap, it's just not going to fly. I compare it to a "reformed" whore lecturing on the subject of sexual abstinence.

Archive
08-08-2007, 05:54 AM
Posted By: <b>Dave F</b><p>It will be interesting Barry to see how many get the boot from this debacle. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
08-08-2007, 05:58 AM
Posted By: <b>Chad</b><p>So, what's up?<br /><br />--Chad

Archive
08-08-2007, 05:59 AM
Posted By: <b>PAS</b><p>Scott, Doug Allen did not make you consent, you consented. As a serious collector, surely you understood the issues. Your protestations that you were somehow dragged along for the ride are not very persuasive particularly where the bulk of any increase in the price the card realized went to you, not to Mastro. EDITED TO ADD How is getting out of the hobby a justification for consenting to something unethical, by the way, I don't get that one either?

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:14 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I know Dave, this one could get ugly.<br /><br />I have jury duty today so I will miss most of the fun.

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:21 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Tony is gone.......we'll see how the day goes...

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:23 AM
Posted By: <b>Dave F</b><p>Thats too bad Barry. And my boss is halfway across the country on a bike at Sturgis <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:30 AM
Posted By: <b>Tom Boblitt</b><p>a good old fashioned cockfight........Rhode Island Red versus Henny Game. Roy Jones Jr. officiating........

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:45 AM
Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>train ride into the city this morning was a lot more fun than usual!

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:45 AM
Posted By: <b>Tony Andrea</b><p>Hey everybody -<br />Just waking up this morning and I'm just now running across this post.<br />For the record, this Tony character isn't me who is poking a stick at Leon.<br />Just didn't want any confusion here.<br />Thanks , Tony Andrea

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:14 AM
Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>Apology accepted and I like the fact you have strong passion for the hobby. Lots of other really good people here do as well (Jim B. is a 'swell' guy if I can use a 50's vignette descriptor), so lets save the mud for the really deserving <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>.<br /><br />Daniel

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:12 AM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>Sorry to confuse you. I was NOT using the fact I was getting out of the Hobby at the time as an excuse for me saying yes to Doug Allen. I was using "me getting out of the Hobby at the time" to show that I really didn't care as much about what Mastro was altering or the fact they altered my card as I do now.<br /><br />Also, for the record, I made something like a $1k profit on the card after Mastro stuck their hands in the cookie jar. So, for those of you acting like I made more money than Mastro, you are WRONG. Their 30% was MUCH MORE than $1000, after buyer's and seller's fees! So, those of you willing to attack me by saying I had MORE to gain than Mastro are only fooling yourselves!<br /><br />For those of you slinging mud my way for saying yes to Doug Allen on this one, I would love for you to answer one question - If I am so bad for saying yes to Doug, then what do you think about Doug Allen for asking me to let Mastro alter the card and for altering the card? I think, again, we need to point the finger of blame where it rightfully needs to be pointed, not at someone who was getting out of the Hobby at the time and could care less what Mastro and Doug did as long as he got his original investment in the card back. If all you people picking through my posts to find something to point the blame at me would put half that energy into trying to clean this Hobby up NOW, Doug Allen and Mastro wouldn't be altering all these cards before grading and doing the things that are going on!<img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:23 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>The fact you are still allowed to post on this board is a stronger statemement than anything you can say about it otherwise...

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:28 AM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>For the record, this was the first and DEFINITELY the last time I would ever say yes to Doug Allen, or any auction house, when asked if they could alter a card I sent in. I wonder if Doug Allen can say that was the first time he/Mastro altered a card or if it was the last time? <br /><br />I see where I was wrong by saying yes to Doug Allen. Again, it really didn't matter to me as much then where I was getting out of the Hobby. I am back in the Hobby now however, and things like this DO matter to me now.<br /><br />It would be hard to start a Hobby Clean-Up project here however. I can tell that much from this thread alone (forgetting what I know about what has went on here before - especially all the attacks against Jim Crandell that were uncalled for). As soon as someone here tries to bring to light what these auction houses (especially Mastro) have done or are doing, there seems to be ones here who would much rather find a flaw with the person's statement, flog the person for something they did years ago, or try and show how that person's part in something was worse than the auction house's role. It seems that there is a "clique" of people here that really don't give a rat's ass what Matro has done or is doing to make money. All you want to do is attack anyone who throws a stone at Mastro. Again, out of all the people who have attacked me in this thread for saying yes to Doug's alteration request, NONE of you have said one negative word about Doug for asking me to let him alter a card in the first place, then for altering the card! Now, how hypocritical is that?

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:31 AM
Posted By: <b>PS</b><p>"could care less what Mastro and Doug did as long as he got his original investment in the card back"<br /><br />Scott don't you see the inconsistency? You did exactly what you are accusing Doug of doing -- letting money trump ethics. I agree with you that of course does not justify what Mastro did IF in fact they altered a card and did not disclose the alteration [I seem to recall an extensive discussion of this back during the time of the cleaned Keeler cabinet card], but the accusation rings a bit hollow in this instance.

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:34 AM
Posted By: <b>Scott Elkins</b><p>Go ahead and ban me - Hell, you are dying to b/c I have been showing what your buddy Doug Allen and Mastro did to that Red Cross in this thread! We all know you are in charge here - you don't have to keep reminding us with threats!<br /><br />Hey, I am so tired of Leon and his threats, you don't have to ban me Leon - I quit posting out of disgust of you! So, now you, Mastro and Doug Allen are safe on here. Now, all you need to do is find a way to shut up Shelly, Jay and Jim and this board will be even more Mastro friendly!<br /><br />Bye Fuhrer!

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:34 AM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>"I didn't rob the bank officer...I was only driving the car!"

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:36 AM
Posted By: <b>PS</b><p>Scott you would be a more persuasive advocate if your expressions of concerns about hobby ethics weren't always conflated with personal attacks on Leon.

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:39 AM
Posted By: <b>Bob Pomilla</b><p>"I don't kill the cocks, they kill each other."

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:43 AM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Peter, you forgot to mention that hobby ethics are only a concern during those periods he is active in the hobby.

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:49 AM
Posted By: <b>PS</b><p>Dan, I think Scott pretty much said that himself already:<br /><br />"Again, it really didn't matter to me as much then where I was getting out of the Hobby. I am back in the Hobby now however, and things like this DO matter to me now."<br />

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:49 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I am so happy to be able to help Scott out....Please don't post anything else with a response needed from him as he is now banned. Again, so happy to be able to honor his request..........and the board will be a much safer, better place now.....happy collecting.....your dictator....

Archive
08-08-2007, 11:13 AM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I am prescient!

Archive
08-08-2007, 11:14 AM
Posted By: <b>Chad</b><p>That was a fish in a barrell! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />--Chad

Archive
08-08-2007, 11:20 AM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Scott is a true lowlife; lowlife personified. Beyond torturing animals (and blaming it on the animals) he ends every rant with a Nazi reference. Any surprise that a guy who enjoys torturing animals also loves to invoke the Nazis to make his point?

Archive
08-08-2007, 11:22 AM
Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>Dan, <br /><br />I believe you had the expulsion at "150 posts". It happened at #131. <br /><br />Who had the under?<br /><br />You were precisely correct on Tony, however.

Archive
08-08-2007, 11:24 AM
Posted By: <b>Bob Pomilla</b><p>Answer to Jeff:<br /><br />No.

Archive
08-08-2007, 11:26 AM
Posted By: <b>Chad</b><p>"Scott is a true lowlife; lowlife personified. Beyond torturing animals (and blaming it on the animals) he ends every rant with a Nazi reference. Any surprise that a guy who enjoys torturing animals also loves to invoke the Nazis to make his point?"<br /><br />He'll be against the torture of animals as soon as he gets bored with it and gives it up as a hobby.<br /><br />--Chad

Archive
08-08-2007, 11:26 AM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>I lost over 30 family memembers to the Nazi's. It is deplorable to invoke the Nazi reference ever.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 11:26 AM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I think it's pretty odd that someone can harass the moderator of a board for nearly two years before finally getting the boot all the while crying censorship.....meanwhile over on his aimoo board I don't think Brian Daniels ever made a post before he was banned. I've been on a ton of internet message boards and this one is far more relaxed in what you can say than any other I've been on (excepting the wild wild west known as Usenet).

Archive
08-08-2007, 11:36 AM
Posted By: <b>Bob Pomilla</b><p>Scott is oblivious. The sad truth is, he'll never understand that it's wrong to torture animals, it's wrong to invoke nazi references and he'll never see his own hypocrisy.

Archive
08-08-2007, 12:16 PM
Posted By: <b>ScottIngold</b><p>Somehow i don't believe this was truly a pro nazi statement.

Archive
08-08-2007, 12:23 PM
Posted By: <b>Tom Boblitt</b><p>He still has Roy Jones Jr.............<br /><br />Whilst he continually baited the moderator, we feel that the moderator showed due consideration for the freedom of speech until such point that he had to make the decision he did.<br /><br />We commend the moderator........<br />

Archive
08-08-2007, 01:07 PM
Posted By: <b>Joseph</b><p>From the Mastro description of the Red Cross Blackburne:<br /><br />"The reverse...REFLECTS MINOR SURFACE PAPER LOSS AT SMALL POINTS IN THE TEXT AND TOP BORDER."<br /><br /><br />That sounds fairly honest to me. I mean, they <i>could</i> have mentioned that their ministrations were responsible for some of that paper loss, but they didn't.<br /><br /><br />Let's get real: Mastro is RESTORING baseball cards. In the real world of art and auctioneering, restoration of works is acceptable but the disclosure of such is expected as the hammer price is greatly influenced by whether or not a work is restored. That is why consumers of art use major auction houses: they TRUST that the auctioneer's expertise will get them an honest deal. If Sotheby's or Christie's<br />were to knowingly not disclose that a work was restored they would be run out of town on a rail. If Sotheby's or Christie's actually PERFORMED the restoration and didn't disclose, they'd be tarred and feathered before the rail thing.<br /><br />A number of years ago Mastro entered the real world of art and auctioneering. They should be subject to the same scrutiny as the big boys even though they're only selling old cardboard. They might try being totally honest and letting the market decide the hammer price.

Archive
08-08-2007, 01:16 PM
Posted By: <b>Randy Trierweiler</b><p>I feel that the moderator merely granted the wish of said baiter. <br />People don't get banned for no reason, they ban themselves. <br />That guy just got what he asked for. <br />It's always someone elses fault with him. <br /><br />Lets get back to cards. The National was GREAT. <br />

Archive
08-08-2007, 03:09 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Dan, BcD did post on the other board. He was given a chance to act civil and told he was on a short leash. He was unable to act civil and for those that have ever read some of his nastier emails, it was right on par with that. <br /><br />I hope all you people that are belittling Scott for his various actions (while unable to defend himself, no less) also hold the same contempt for fellow board members that are convicted felons and enjoy things that are legal or illegal that you find distasteful. Otherwise, you are all a bunch of hypocrites.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 03:28 PM
Posted By: <b>rand</b><p>Jay, you have nothing to offer this board, other than your stupid little quotes on the bottom of your posts. There are some former convicted felons that turn and work for the FBI or other offices to help catch other criminals. Your constant negative posts are pathetic. i liked the one where you called Barokas a slimy dealer and he offered to see you at the national, but of course like all cowards you hid behind your computer. i am 100% positive if these guys (and myself if you choose to say something about me) were standing in front of you your choice of words would be much different. Do us all a huge favor, and give Leon an early Xmas present and get lost.!!!

Archive
08-08-2007, 03:42 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>rand, or whatever your name is, you are laughable. If I could have made it to the National, I would have been more than happy to meet with Charlie and chat with him. <br /><br />You don't know me and you know nothing about me outside this board. I've met many of the people on this board and if I can ever get to another National, I will meet many more. Here's how little you know me, otherwise you wouldn't have said what you did. When I went to National in Chicago a few years, to say that MW (not sure if you've been around long enough to know who Mike Wentz is) and I didn't care for each other would be an understatement. After meeting and chatting a bit and then checking out the rest of the show, I ended up spending more time talking with him than anyone else at the show and feeling like I left the show with a new friend.<br /><br />I am big enough to move beyond differences and not make unbendable assumptions about people based on just this site.<br /><br />I'm not here to win a popularity contest. I want to do what I can to make things in the hobby better. Sadly, most people would rather not rock the boat and just keep their head buried in the sand because it's easier to keep quiet and not piss off people than it is to point out things that are wrong.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 03:45 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Jay, I don't see anyone condoning anything done by any convicted felons in this thread.<br /><br />Rand, I have met Jay in person and while he may be gruff on the internet he is one heckuva nice guy and so is his brother Lee. I would hope that we can agree to disagree without ever having to resort to the "wait'll we meet in person" line.<br /><br />edited to add: Jay, I didn't know that BCD had posted to your site before he was banned...I went there to try and see if I could read the thread about him, but it tells me I have to login to see the board and I don't have an account.

Archive
08-08-2007, 03:52 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Dan, there people that belittling Scott for enjoying cockfighting, which is legal where he is. If these people are upset about something legal, how do they feel about people who have committed felonies. That's far worse than anything they dislike Scott for.<br /><br />You should be able to read the board without an account. You only need to register to post. I'll look into it.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 03:54 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Jay, how can you say that Scott is unable to defend himself? He's done a great job digging holes for himself each time he posts out here -- and always ends with a Nazi allusion. The fact is, he's bashed Leon repeatedly, discusses the wonders of cock fighting and, otherwise, makes people nauseous out here. So what if there may be felons that post out here? I know plenty of felons I'd rather hang out with than those with no criminal record. Does being a non-felon give one the right to act like an ass? Of course not. And don't you think that we're all hypocrites on certain issues to some extent? Who cares? Regardless, now that Scott has been banned he's in a better place -- his own board, right?

Archive
08-08-2007, 03:57 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Dan,<br /><br />I agree with you. However, Rand makes an interesting point...Jay does not speak to people the way he would in person. Jay, might be a great guy in person but I think he is quick to be vituperative over the internet. I think people should only type in a way that they would speak in a person to person conversation. Jay will claim, as he as many times in the past...that he speaks this way because he is being brutally honest. But, I think you can be brutally honest and show respect at the same time. <br /><br />CB<br /><br /><br />

Archive
08-08-2007, 04:01 PM
Posted By: <b>Randy Trierweiler</b><p>Jay, I don't agree with much of what you say, but I respect your card knowledge. I wish your input on this board would lean more to sharing what you know about vintage cards. One thing we do agree on is that if you are not civil on the boards, you deserve to get banned.

Archive
08-08-2007, 04:09 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Charlie, I agree and I have never been the target of one of Jay's attacks so I can't know what it feels like to be in your shoes...I can only relay what I know and that Jay in person is a very nice fellow. Internet chatboards can be dehumanizing and it only takes a few statements by someone to paint a picture that is not pretty.

Archive
08-08-2007, 04:11 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Jeff, I don't like or agree with a lot of things regarding Scott and he has done a good job of digging holes for himself, but it really is bad form for people to be piling on him after he gets banned.<br /><br />Charlie, I can be this way in person too. I've never lived my life to win popularity contests or spare people their tender feelings. If you get to know me, there is no pretense. I am who I am with no hidden agenda. If you get to know me well enough and become a true friend, I'll defend you to the death, but piss me off and you'll wish that you never crossed me. For good or bad, very few people can claim to be a really close friend and ever fewer fall into the other spectrum.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 04:19 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>When you get banned you don't get to have the last word. I doubt any piling on will occur after this thread dies out.

Archive
08-08-2007, 04:26 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />I hear ya but I think you are throwing around alot of unoriginal cliche's. "piss me off and you'll wish that you never crossed me." "I've never lived my life to win popularity contests" etc<br /><br />Are you suggesting that there are board members that you can cross and they won't get pissed? Or are the rest of us just about winning a popularity contest without any regard for substance or truth? Or do we all have hidden agenda's? <br /><br />I just don't by the argument that... you are the only person on this board with an impregnable set of core values that are so much deeper in principle to us.. the shallow sheep.<br /><br />Lose the attitude and keep the good info coming from your 25 years of experience.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 04:36 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>What good are values and ethics if you won't stand up for them? <br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 04:41 PM
Posted By: <b>Ryan Christoff</b><p>Now that the San Diego Human is gone, who will be the board's new mascot?<br /><br />-Ryan<br /><br /><br />

Archive
08-08-2007, 04:42 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>What good are values and ethics if you won't stand up for them? <br /><br />Jay,<br /><br />Values and ethics are very important and extremely worth standing up for. But, it is self-righteous to suggest that you are the arbitor of the correct way to profess them.<br /><br />For example, some would say values and ethics are...the way you treat human beings and animals (not taking a shot at anyone in particular).<br /><br />Some would also say that the correct message or value can get lost in the delivery if the message is delivered in a bitter and self-aggrandizing way.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 04:44 PM
Posted By: <b>rand</b><p>see Jay, others agree with me, you write your posts without any reguard for how they "read" to other members. you are quick for an opinion on other members, but rarely offer insight on the actual thread or cards. You think your words are doing us a favor, when in fact make you look like a Jerk. if you talk to people in person like you write then people are being polite and not truly appreciating your company. You have made personal remarks about members that have no relevance to the thread. it just makes you feel better or gives you a rush. You may be a nice guy, who cares, act like an adult and write with manners. people can get their points across without insults or personal attacks. Add something to this baseball card forum, that actually is about cards, not what smart ass remark you have with other people. you add posts to "hear" yourself, and to ignite attacks. sounds to me you have some personal issues to work out, you are definetly insecure, or you wouldnt continually irritate people and not care.

Archive
08-08-2007, 04:59 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Thanks for the insight. Do you have a degree in psychology? This just continues to prove that you know nothing about me.<br /><br />I have no delusions that everyone likes what I have to say. I also know that contrary to what you believe, everyone does not dislike me and the way I post. <br /><br />It would be a pretty boring world if all acted and talked the same way. If you really dislike what I post, then treat it like a thread you don't like, skip it and ignore it.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 05:00 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Jay, anything said about Scott after his ban was said before the ban. <br /><br />And who is to say that your values and ethics are even remotely close to the average values and ethics of board members here? As an example, if Scott came out here and claimed that he was a member of NAMBLA -- not a crime in itself -- would that make him better in your eyes than a felon who was convicted of selling a pound of hash 20 years ago?

Archive
08-08-2007, 05:10 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I know my values and ethics aren't close to the average person on here. I think the American Dream is a fraud and have a general disdain for the whole consumerism thing. That pretty much makes me unAmerican in Republican eyes.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 05:14 PM
Posted By: <b>Joe Pelaez</b><p>When anyone gets banned on this board, the wimps crawl out of their holes, and pile on.<br /><br />OmiGod ... did I say that?<br />Not to worry, I'll say 105 Hail Mary's, and beg for forgiveness........<br /><br />Father Joe

Archive
08-08-2007, 05:21 PM
Posted By: <b>Parpasi</b><p>Does Mastro alter cards today? Can Mastro influence PSA to downgrade an item it doesn't consign? These are the questions. I'm bummed that a card can be altered by an auction company and passed by a grading company. As an outsider I could care less if the owner approved or not. I feel worse for the Bender family than any individual on this board. Every time I read these inflammatory threads I laugh at the self proclaimed leadership represented here. Lately I have seen more inflammation than useful discussion. I'm sure I'm not the only lurker who thinks so.

Archive
08-08-2007, 05:42 PM
Posted By: <b>Joseph</b><p>Sure, Scott may hang himself time after time on this board and many of you, no doubt, believe him an asshat.<br />But the example he provided in this thread (unless HE doctored the before picture, which he no doubt did not) is irrefutable evidence of card doctoring/cleaning/restoring or whatever you want to call it. <br /><br />Why is it that almost every time a thread unravels against the Mastro machine, Net54 filibustering essentially kills the thread? I'm glad I'm not a conspiracy theorist...

Archive
08-08-2007, 05:56 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>There is no consensus on what constitutes "alteration"...some may call what Mastro did as simply cleaning the card and lots of people have no problem with that...Mastro has done much more nefarious things (see the GU Helmet issue). What are people expecting? For everyone to boycott Mastro? It isn't going to happen because if Mastro has that one item that you "need" you aren't going to care if Mastro cleaned up a card.

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:01 PM
Posted By: <b>Joseph</b><p>There is NOTHING WRONG with altering/cleaning/restoring works of art (or baseball cards).<br /><br />BUT it is ESSENTIAL that an auctioneer disclose ANY ALTERATIONS of which he is aware.

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:07 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Joe,<br /><br />When and if you have sold car's in your life, would you disclose that at one time a bird **** on your car and that you removed it with some water and a rag?<br /><br />CB<br /><br />edited for spelling/grammar

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:08 PM
Posted By: <b>rand</b><p>i pose this question or comparison...if a person can restore and old car and sells it fully refurbished does he need to disclose how many dents were in it, and if a person sells a renovated home, does he have to show pictures of the old kitchen? meaning, if a card can be made better and it does not involve adding paper stock is this a bad thing? if the grading companies cannot detect a light alteration, in this case glue removal, is this really underhanded? or offering a better product without actually disturbing the cardboard?

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:20 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I am not going to bash someone that can't defend themselves. Scott got what he deserved much later than he should have. Nuff said. If anyone else wants to continue to attack anyone on this board personally, including me, then they will be banned too. As for cleaning the little bit of dirt off of the Red Cross card we have done polls on this board and the overwhelming majority of true card collectors (not plastic collectors) have no issue with it. If it wasn't there to begin with then there is no harm taking it off. If it leaves any kind of mark/indention behind then it should be disclosed, imo.......regards

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:24 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Guys, there will never be a consensus about Mastro's practices. Period. Like many auctioneers, in my mind, Mastro alters cards to some degree. Period. I'm not sure we as the buying public will ever be able to change that when you consider Mastro's position in the industry.

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:25 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>bad examples. When you sell a restored/refurbished car, it is noted as such. I don't think houses have become collectibles, so what's the point there? Ignoring that, when you buy an older house, it's pretty much a given that there has been some sort of work done on the house. This contrary to the way cards are viewed. Cards are viewed as being unaltered, no matter how old. <br /><br />The point Joe is trying to make is that most people wouldn't have a problem (myself included) with restoration, cleaning, etc if sellers were up front about it. There obviously something ethically and morally wrong with it if sellers aren't willing to disclose this basic information.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:32 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>There is more than just cleaning that happened to that card. Look closely at the stain. There is back damage there that disappeared after the cleaning. That's a little more than just removing a stain.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:34 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I agree that any alteration or restoration of a card should be noted by the seller. And I also believe that restoration would become more acceptable if the auction houses would disclose what is being done on a consistent basis.

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:35 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Dan,<br /><br />When and if you have sold car's in your life, would you disclose that at one time a bird **** on your car and that you removed it with some water and a rag?<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:36 PM
Posted By: <b>scott brockelman</b><p>2 people got banned, several more are arguing amongst themselves and the rest are either questioning or defending the parties involved.<br /><br />The alteration consisted of removing the unsightly brown glue(bugger) at the top of the card. The auction description reads that there is slight paper loss at the top. I really don't think this is an earth shattering event. They cleaned some crap off the card and made it look presentable. It's not like they trimmed it, painted it, rebuilt it, etc. For those that don't know or believe there are about 10 more levels they COULD have gone but did not, if in fact they were trying to repair of alter the card.<br /><br />

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:43 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Charlie, it's a bad example the same someone else asking about whether you disclose you clean your house, or whatever it was. No one expects to buy a car that has never been cleaned. The vast majority of people in the hobby expect their cards to have never been cleaned or tampered with. <br /><br />I'll say it again, if it really wasn't a big deal, then there is no reason not to disclose that glue or whatever had been removed. It doesn't get disclosed because sellers know that it will adversely affect the selling price.<br /><br />Charlie, a question for you. You seem to think that cleaning a card is OK. If so, in your next auction, if you have any cards that you know have been cleaned, will you be disclosing this fact? According to you, it's no big deal, so if you aren't going to disclose it, why not?<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 06:52 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I think it is assumed by most people that a car has been cleaned at one point or another. It is not assumed that a card was glued into a scrapbook. With cards it is: Where is the line drawn? The fact that a large percentage of collectors are not okay with card alterations or cleaning of any kind in my opinion dictates that sellers should always disclose alterations and cleaning. With automobiles I would guess the percentage of people who have a problem with cleaning the car is close to zero percent. So the comparison is invalid.

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:01 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />Nice dodge. Unlike you I will not dodge your question. Once again you are trying to lump "cleaning" in to all forms therein. My opinion, is the same as many others on the topic and unlike you I will not put words in anybody's mouth. But, I think it is not unethical to clean my car before I sell it without disclosing the cleaing. I also don't it is required to disclose that a piece of dirt was removed from a baseball card.<br /><br />Having said that, there are many ways to clean and alter a baseball card that I do think are unethical. Kevin Saucier has done a good job explaining those. In my opinion, soaking a card in a chemical is unacceptable and unethical.<br /><br />Soaking a card out of an album with distilled water was being done well before any of us were born. Which I believe is not unethcial. That is the main reason many of these cards are around in such high-grade. <br /><br />Once again, it is a case by case basis. The case you cited regarding removing dirt with water is not unethical and unacceptable, in my opinion. I have spoken with many people in the hobby regarding this and I think there is a viable consensus to support it.<br /><br />Lastly, to complete not dodging you as you did me, I would not disclose removing dirt with water, if I was selling a card, car, rug, pair of old underwear etc etc<br /><br />Dan,<br /><br />Fair point. However, I think it is naive to think that baseball cards survived this long without being cleaned, perserved etc at some point. I think a reasonable person would assume a 100 year card that looks like it came out of the pack yesterday, might have some sort of restoration done to it. <br /><br />CB<br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:04 PM
Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>Charlie, you sell old underwear?<br /><br />Is that a new business unit for you?<br /><br />-Al

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:10 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Al,<br /><br />It was great to finally meet you at the National. I forgot that you hammered me for removing pencil from that Herpolshiemer? We will have to cross that bridge next time. I don't know why I am taking on Jay, probably because his side-kick got banned. As Joe Said, the wimps are out in full force today. Smiley face.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:10 PM
Posted By: <b>John J. Grillo</b><p>IMO the analogy below is weak. Washing a car is an "accepted" practice. Just because someone washes a car (before they sell to me) I wouldn't expect to pay more for it. Vintage cards that have been altered/cleaned are done so for one purpose in mind...to "significantly" increase the value, to trick or deceive a buyer that a card has been kept in meticulous condition all these years when it has not.<br /><br />A better analogy is buying a car that has been in an accident but has a new paint job/body work to cover up the damage. This is information I would want to know about before I buy.<br /><br />"Nice dodge. Unlike you I will not dodge your question. Once again you are trying to lump "cleaning" in to all forms therein. My opinion, is the same as many others on the topic and unlike you I will not put words in anybody's mouth. But, I think it is not unethical to clean my car before I sell it without disclosing the cleaing. I also don't it is required to disclose that a piece of dirt was removed from a baseball card."<br />

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:14 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>John,<br /><br />I respectfully disagree. I think your analysis of my opinion is weak. <br /><br />Edited to add:<br /><br />The analogy of a car accident not being disclosed doesn't fit (I know, so you must acquit) because structural work will be done to fix the car. Using water to wipe dirt off a card involves nothing structural. Trimming, now that would be considered structually changing the card.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:20 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>How did I dodge the question? Dan used the same example I did as to why washing your car is a completely invalid comparison to cleaning a card, so obviously I'm not the only person that find your argument flawed. <br /><br />Yes, soaking cards out of albums has been done for a long time. I don't have a problem with that. By the same token, you cannot remove what was on that Red Cross t207 simply by soaking it in distilled water, so I do have a problem with that. So, I'll ask again, if you had this t207 to auction, would you disclose the fact that the card had a stain removed?<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:22 PM
Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>Hey Charlie:<br /><br />It was nice to meet you, too. It's always good to put a face with a name, and I enjoyed our conversation.<br /><br />I wouldn't use the word "hammered", though - I brought it to your attention, you rectified it immediately, life goes on. I've bid in your auctions since, and I'll bid in them again.<br /><br />-Al

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:23 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>The car accident analogy is bad too.<br /><br />As someone else pointed out, paintings are cleaned all the time, but when they are sold, the cleaning is noted in the auction. Cards should be no different.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:25 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />In the case of Scott's card, I would describe it just as Mastro did. The one caveat would be and I never saw the card in person but if there was any evidence that the card had a stain removed. I would describe that it appears that a stain was attempted to be removed but some remant was still visible. If dirt is on a card and after you wipe it off with distilled water and shows no evidence of the stain or distilled water, there is nothing to disclose.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:28 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Mastronet--card alterations--no disclosure--why is anyone surprised. And whoever said that people will still buy from Mastromet if they need a card is wrong--I won't--I won't buy from a number of other auction houses either that I suspect of altering cards--and I know a lot of other collectors who feel that way.<br /><br />As far as Jay is concerned, I had my run-ins with him early on but he is one of a very few people on this board who actually adds value.<br /><br />And Leon, thanks once again for saying that "anyone who attacks anyone on the board personally" will be kicked off--please make sure that applies to those that attack others and not just those that attack you. I would expect that guys like Bretta or the BoxingCard guy or Asphaltguy who continually attack me on these board and the guys that personally attack Bruce Dorskind or Jay will be kicked off as you say should they continue to do this. We will be watching.<br /><br />Jim

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:28 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />You are an idealogue as opposed to a free thinker. You will never see things any other way. My post are not for your benefit. I think the rest of those who lurk are interested in hearing an alternative view.<br /><br />This is about the time that you remark about all the personal emails you are receiving telling you to forge ahead. Smiley face.<br /><br /><br /><br />Al,<br /><br />"hammered" was a term of endearment. I have lot of respect for you and I think you are doing an amazing job for SGC.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:34 PM
Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>IMO any analogy that compares a work of fine art to a baseball card doesn't apply.<br /><br />A work of fine art is, in the examples in which they're usually used, one of a kind. A baseball card is one of many of the same card, out of many of the same set. Usually.<br /><br />Paintings undergo professional restoration that is disclosed and fully acceptable in the art world. It is done with the goal of preserving the only example of that painting that exists. <br /><br />Baseball cards undergo all sorts of restoration, legitimate and otherwise, that is usually done with intent to deceive. It is done with the goal of duping someone into thinking that the card is in better condition than it really is.<br /><br />Two different animals.<br /><br />In this case, I think that Charlie's analogy of washing bird crap off a car is the most accurate. All sorts of things can happen to a car during its life - minor things that can be repaired with no harm, no foul, serious things that should be disclosed out of fairness to the buyer, and all points inbetween. Just as a vintage car with all its original parts and paint in pristine condition is valuable, so is a vintage card in pristine condition. Just as a vintage car can be manipulated and buyers deceived into thinking they're getting something they're not, so can a vintage card.<br /><br />I agree with just about everything Charlie is saying in his analogy. However, you can take it a step further and say that it's possible to use a chemical to get that particularly stubborn clump of crap off your rag top, but I don't think that's acceptable to do with a card.<br /><br />-Al<br /><br />

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:37 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Charlie, you are right, I am an idealogue. But I am not rigid in my stance. If you can provide a persuasive argument, you can change my mind. But it better be a damn good argument.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:39 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />I am biased but I think my opinion is correct. I think you have a wealth of knowledge and I respect it. Just change the delivery alittle and you will be one of the more popular guys on the board. See there I said it, Jay "popular". Smiley Face Also, I will let you have the last word because I got to start putting the kids to bed. <br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:47 PM
Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>but I'm with Jay on this one. Comparing the wiping of bird crap off a car windshield before selling it to cleaning a collectible baseball card is one of the lamest things I've ever heard. In fact the bird crap on the windshield smells better than your analogy.

Archive
08-08-2007, 07:55 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Todd,<br /><br />I appreciate your disagreement but did you have any reason to back it up. Or was it just the rewording with the smelling of **** comment. For the record you are disagreeing with at least Al and Leon as well.<br /><br />Edited to add to the list: Mastro, all of the grading services <br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:05 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Just because Leon and Al agree with you doesn't mean you are right. It's still a bad analogy. As has been pointed out repeatedly, no one is under the illusion that a car has never been cleaned. Exactly the opposite is true in card collecting world. People in this hobby still have the belief that what they are buying is unaltered. This includes cleaning up cards.<br /><br />I can repeat this again if necessary if you still don't under the reasoning of those of us that find your analogy flawed.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:07 PM
Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>For the record, Al and I have been known to disagree from time to time, and still manage to swill beer together at the National. And for the record, Leon and I have not always agreed either, yet I doubt there's much wrong with that.<br /><br />And so again for the record, it seems of little consequence that you and I should disagree. Since you like to refer to the record, I will invite anyone here to look at your stance on "handling" cards that you acquire, resubmit and then sell, and draw their own conclusions, not mine. I stand by my comment however, that equating the wiping of a windshield before selling a car to cleaning a collectible card before sale is lame at best.

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:11 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />The post was directed at me and I want to make it clear it is not my unilateral opinion. Just like their are others who agree with you. I said earlier and I will say it again, I am not trying to persuade you of anything, that would be impossible. I am simply representing the other side of the argument so that people lurking can make up their own minds. Clearly there will be people that have a contrary opinion inspite of the facts or truth, read: OJ Jury.<br /><br />I promise you we won't go around in circles anymore we shall agree to disgree.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:17 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Todd,<br /><br />Once agian, no reasoning, just repition. Sounds like playground reasoning to me. As far as the "handling" cards remark you made, you obviously felt behind in the arugment and were forced to try and throw mud in attempt to deflect attetion away from your vacous analysis.<br /> <br />One week after the "handling" remark a major grading service came on this board and described "handling" as tier 1. Tier 1 in their opinion, being acceptable forms of restoration. I have never "handled" a card beyond tier 1, nor will I. I certainly don't have to lie about it. <br /><br />CB<br />

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:21 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Who came up this Tier 1, etc none sense? It seems a lot people missed the memo on this one because there are a lot of people, including me, who have no clue what it means and what all the tiers are and what they involve.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:22 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />As you have tersely stated many times, "do a search on it".<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:23 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>You must have missed my post that stated I no longer do that because I finally realized that the search function here is pathetic and inadequate.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:24 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />Actually, don't bother seaching for it, it won't fit your thesis therefore you will just disregard it.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:26 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Charlie, I've been very civil towards you, why the change in your tune? You were the one calling for civility earlier.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:30 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Just typed "tier 1" into the search engine. What I got were a bunch of posts about tier 1 HOFers, your mention of tier 1 and someone else posting and wondering where tier 1 alterations came from.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:31 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />How is that not being civil? Is it not true that you give much weight to things that make your case and try to dismiss things that don't make your case?<br /><br />Let me be clear, I don't like the way you have acted on the board in the past but we got passed that. I want to learn from you but just as you are inspired to give your unbridled opinion I must represent my side. And part of representing my side is pointing out part of your style of discrediting those that disagree with your brutally honest opinion.<br /><br />Again, I mean no disrespect. I am just engaging in a spirted debate of both sides of this issue.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:38 PM
Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>Let's go. You want reasoning. A person buying a car, regular or even collectible, expects it to have routine maintenance and cleaning. Such does not need to be disclosed because it is open and obvious, and impacts nothing upon value. That is not open to debate, there is no majority or minority view. Now let's look at a card. There are a great many who want full disclosure of what has been done to it, at least within the seller's knowledge. No we don't want to hear about nose drippings that have been flicked off, but we do want to know if there has been any "work" on the card, period. Mastro be damned, and any other names you care to drop be damned as well. Did you not comprehend the gist of this thread? The very company upon whose name you hang your hat is having their practices called into question. The matter is clearly open to debate, yet you try to trivialize it with your birdcrap analogy. <br /><br />As for you, why don't you disclose what has been done, knowing that there are many who want to know? You can't in good faith say that it is such a common practice that it would be of no interest to people--that's a copout and only leads people to view your auctions with suspicion. My reference to the record is because you seem intent on calling things to people's attention--well, I am doing the same as to your views on these subjects. You smugly tell Jay to use the search function. I merely invite others to do the same when it comes to your activities.

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:39 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>It took me 3 minutes to find this recently posted SGC thread. You think it's a pathetic search function but maybe it's the person doing it not knowing how....I am willing to teach you how to do a search if you need to be taught...It's really very easy...best regards

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:39 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />The tiered system was posted by SGC. It gave unique clarity into the different levels of alteration from the most innoccuous to the most detestable and everything in between.<br /><br />And believe me I get it, your argument is that its all alteration is all bad and or unacceptable. This is where we respectfully disgree. I am representing the side that claims there are acceptable and unacceptable forms of restoration.<br /><br />Let the circling around begin.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 08:48 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Todd,<br /><br />Are you asserting that every person that owns a car that is selling said car maintains the car at the same level? And that no monotary value can be assigned to a poorly maintained car vs. an emaculately kept one? Your argument is specious.<br /><br />"Work" please define? The converstaion I was having with Jay was with regard to dirt removal whether is is flicked off or cleaned off with distilled water.<br /><br />I never hung my hat with Mastro. I simply stated that I was not the only person defending the position. With Mastro its a case by case basis, Doug Allen stated at the N54 dinner that he and they make mistake and they work to rectify them as best as they can. If they are found guilty of a crime, I will not defend them. But up until this point we have heard accusations. Some of the accusations are troublesome but let the process play out before making a final judgement.<br /><br />I encourage people to search my name on this board, google or anywhere else. I have nothing to hide and I think if you ask around you might find the my repuation is an honest one.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:01 PM
Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>Just keep posting on this subject, and your position and people's willingness to deal with you will become more and more defined. I don't need to ask around about your reputation--believe it or not I can formulate my own opinions and have been in this hobby long enough--some 40 years. My argument is not specious, although I'm pleased you at least spelled the word correctly. You can continue to equate wiping birdsh!!t off a car with cleaning a collectible card--that's your right. I'll let others decide if one of us is being specious.<br /><br />So answer the question--why don't you disclose whatever you have done to a card in your auction descriptions? Because it's trivial? Nobody would want to know? Or maybe, just maybe, you think it might cost you potential bidders?

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:01 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Leon, How are you supposed to find that post if you are told to do a search for "tier 1 alterations", yet that post never uses the word tier?<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:09 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Todd,<br /><br />My name is not Pal. Second, you are condescending me man. Third, thank you for helping me define my stance, which I might add is a good one. There will be those that will never buy or sell a card from or with me and that is ok. But, it won't be because I am being dishonest.<br /><br />SGC says removing dirt from cards is an acceptable form of resotoration so why would I take your personal luddite opinion over theirs? Tier 1 alterations are not disclosed for the same reason the bird **** is not disclosed. Which brings us back to the start.<br /><br />You spend alot of time attacking and very little time responding to posts. I guess I will let that speak for itself.<br /><br />Once again, I respect your opinion but your are making this personal. Can we just debate hobby issues without insulting hobby participants for having differing views.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:10 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Charlie, please be sure to read everything I write. If you had, you would have read that I don't have a problem with restoration, cleaning or anything else that you want to do to a card as long as you disclose what you did. People do these things and and DON'T disclose them because they know that full disclosure will hurt the final price.<br /><br />If there are practices that you feel are OK and acceptable in general as is claimed by you and Leon, then why won't you disclose them in your auctions? It shouldn't impact the price if they truly are acceptable.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:13 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Charlie, your argument that SGC says it's OK, so you don't need to disclose it is lame at best, especially when you keep falling back in your car analogy. If I tell someone I cleaned bird crap off my car, no one cares and it won't affect the final sale price of the car. You tell someone that you cleaned up a card, even if it was only with distilled water, and it WILL affect the final price. This is why your car analogy fails.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:13 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />For the same reason, I would not disclose the bird **** removed from the vintage car that I am selling. If removed correctly without changing the structure of the car it is as if the bird never **** on the car.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:15 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>This is real easy.....If I remove a piece of dirt from a card and it can't be seen then I don't feel the need to disclose it. I already stated, a few posts up, that if anything can be detected it should be noted. My stance parallels SGC's stance word for word.....I had the same opinion before Dave wrote what he did.....You can disagree and that is fine....I don't worry about things I can't see....

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:16 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>This would be a good poll. That way people could chime in without having to publicly expose what side they support. I'd be interested to know what the silent majority thinks of your analogy.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:17 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />You cannot be serious, are you really going on the record stating that everybody maintains their car in the same fashion? Is it not pertinent to the resale value as to whether someone cleaned the car meticulous or the converse? You are the one with the flawed argument. Those that maintain their belonging the best will receive the most money at resale. <br /><br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:17 PM
Posted By: <b>Zach S.</b><p>You're talking cardboard and painted metal... it's not the same. Let's say that the car you're selling needs a new paint job and you get it done. People advertise older cars as having a new paint job because it may help get a few more dollars but if you added color to a card you wouldn't get the same result. Cars and vintage baseball cards are not the same and the analogy is ridiculous... much like this thread has become.<br /><br />Zach S.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:19 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Zach,<br /><br />Ridiculous or not, repainting is comseruate with re-coloring, which is clearly unacceptable. I respect your opinion but saying my argument makes no sense with out a valid reason, makes no sense?<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:19 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Zach, thanks for saying what I was about to say. And you prolly said it in fewer words.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:22 PM
Posted By: <b>Zach S.</b><p>Alright Charlie,<br /><br />If a bird shat on my car I'd wipe it off. That doesn't mean that I want to buy a vintage baseball card that a bird shat on. Does that make it a little bit clearer?<br /><br />E.T.A - I don't want to buy any used underwear either.<br /><br />Zach S.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:23 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />Since when is "prolly" a word? Smiley Face.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:25 PM
Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>Dear Mr. Barokas,<br /><br />Please allow a couple of questions from a luddite, a term I'm sure you employed in its most complimentary form, as you wouldn't want to get personal. If a buyer specifically asks you in one of your auctions whether you have done anything to the card and if so what; i.e., if it is clear from the question that the potential buyer wants to know this information, do you believe you have an obligation to answer? You wouldn't want to be dishonest, right? You wouldn't consider his question immaterial and not deserving of full and truthful response, just because a grading company gives it a "tier 1" label, would you? You would tell him, hypotheticaly, that since you've owned the card, you;ve done x,y, or z to the card, wouldn't you?

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:25 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Zach,<br /><br />Now we are getting somewhere, lets take your favorite card and your are in route to a show, suddenly a bird swoops down and ****s on it. I believe you have the right based upon the ethics of this hobby to wipe of the bird **** with distilled water and cloth. And if you do it correctly and the bird **** is gone, it never happened.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:28 PM
Posted By: <b>Zach S.</b><p>Charlie,<br /><br />First of all I wouldn't know where to begin getting bird poop off of a card. I'd have to start a thread here and ask the best way to get it off. I would want it off for my own benifit but if I ever decided to sell this poo card I would make it known to any potential buyer that something had been done to it. I'm sure the smell would probably tip them off though.<br /><br />Zach S.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:29 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Todd,<br /><br />Luddite is a term of endearment for your longevity in the hobby. The answer to the question is an emphatic Yes. When asked, I will always disclose everything I know about the history of a card. <br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:29 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>The reason your analogy and argument have become ridiculous is that you gone from the simple removal of bird crap from your car to the overall maintenance and care of the car to defend your analogy. You have moved beyond the simple removal of bird crap from the car in your analogy. This implies that you also need to bleach your cards to make then whiter, the same way you would want to make your white walls whiter (no need to disclose that is there?), your want to touch up any missing color on a card the same way you want to touch up any nicks in your paint job (no need to disclose that either, is there?). How far do you want to carry the maintenance analogy, or would you prefer to just stick to cleaning bird crap off the car?<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:30 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Zach,<br /><br />Fair enough. But I think you are under no obligation to tell anyone that it had been pooed on in the past.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:32 PM
Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>I have read almost every excuse to allow a card to be sold as authentic. I can't belive that the same people who accused me of being a thief are the same people saying that cheating the public is ok. I have to tell you that I paid every person that I sold an item to that was not authentic. I belive that you should do the same. If you changed or altered a card and did not tell the public, then your as bad if not worse that I am. Paul you can say what ever you want about me.you took great pride in saying you turned in the guys from ca. It is about time you do the same for those that did exact <br />same thing. If this is how business is done in this hobbie I will stand by my statement that it will not be long before what you have in your hand is as good as dirt. I can also tell you that I have done more to protect this hobby in last six years than all of you put together. I stand by that statement and if you want to argue ask Leon.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:34 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />First of all, please do not put words in my mouth, bleaching baseball cards is definately unacceptable all the time. An analogy is just that, not every nuancial simiarlity has to match up. This is not my analogy, I heard it from someone I have a lot of repect for in the hobby and it mades sense to me. Obvioulsy if you carry out any analogy you will find inconsistences. Again, it is a tiered system, bleach...bad...distilled water acceptable.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:34 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>"Prolly" is a lazy way of spelling "probably" back in the 80s when when bandwidth was at a serious premium and you typed all your USENET messages in some form of shorthand. I try not to use it anymore, but it slips by once in awhile.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:35 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Shelly,<br /><br />Wow! You are a convicted fellon. Explain to me how anybody who erases pencil or removes dirt from a baseball card is worse than you?<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:37 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />You got a beautiful baby on the way. You might want to tighten up "prolly" for his/her benefit.<br /><br />Congrats again, I have three and they supercede all this ****.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:37 PM
Posted By: <b>Zach S.</b><p>Well, it's time for me to get to bed. I hate knowing that tomorrow I'll have to read all the posts that are made while I'm away... but, I'll HAVE to do it. <br /><br />Good night... and I hope no birds poop on your cards<br /><br />Zach S.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:42 PM
Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>Dear Mr. Barokas,<br /><br />Thank you for your prompt response. I may take you up on your offer and question your cards at auction--perhaps others will as well. And unlike what you have just accused Jay of doing, I will try not to put your words in your mouth, although frankly, I believe that sometimes your words as posted in threads have disappeared, into whose mouth, I don't know <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Good evening.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:42 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Charlie, not putting words in your mouth, just trying thinking out loud trying to figure out how overall maintenance of car is comparable to cleaning bird crap off your card. On the surface, the car/bird crap analogy seems to make sense, but when you think it through, it doesn't hold up. The main reason being that people prefer that you wash and clean your car. People prefer that their baseball cards NOT be washed, cleaned or altered. <br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:43 PM
Posted By: <b>Joe Pelaez</b><p>"As the Cardboard Stomach Turns"<br /><br />Brought to you by the makers of Mr Clean.......

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:45 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Come on Zach, you can't go to bed yet. Bonds is still in the game. The guy is killing my sleep. I've been lucky to get 4 hours of sleep a night during the chase for the 755 and 756.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:46 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Charlie, you may not want to go down the convicted felon route. Others on the board resemble that remark.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:46 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />Ok. I give up. I tried to represent the other side of your assertion to the best of my ability. Please come to the next national as we can can have a fun conversation over some beers that Leon might pay for. Smiley face.<br /><br />CB

Archive
08-08-2007, 09:47 PM
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>If it's Chicago I say we make Leon buy us a case of PBR.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:06 PM
Posted By: <b>Joe Pelaez</b><p>BEAUTIFULLY!

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:07 PM
Posted By: <b>JK</b><p>Didnt Scott state that he was told by Mastro that the card could be cleaned with a q-tip and bleach? Why are we assuming it was merely cleaned with distilled water? As I have stated many times (I think) I generally would have no problem if I found out that a card I owned had a pencil mark erased or was cleaned with water. However, I think I'd be a tad more irritated to learn it was cleaned with bleach.

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:15 PM
Posted By: <b>Charlie Barokas</b><p>Joe,<br /><br />Thank God for the good folks at pfizer!<br /><br />Wimp

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:16 PM
Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>Why are people surprised that (alleged) unsavory activity is being done at an auction house?? Christies and Sothebys got into trouble for collusion, among other things, a few years back. Reputations were dmaged and people were fined and jailed for their actions. Why is Mastro (for example) no different??<br /><br />The executives of Enron and Adelphia were rich yet human nature took over and they wanted more and did illegal things to attain "more". Why couldn't this happen at Mastro??<br /><br />Ten years ago, when eBay first started and sports auction companies were coming into existence, an old-time collector (my Mentor) advised me to be careful and watch out for auctions. His advice was to be careful when really rare or high grade items started popping up. Because these were the items that would sell for the most yet also were the ones that were most likely to be reproduced or tampered with.<br /><br />An example he gave was the following. He knew that one of the things I wanted to add to my collection was an L1 baseball leather. He said for enough money, he knew a person who could MAKE me one. He said he knew a leathersmith who had been in business a long time and that all I needed to do was give him a color picture of the L1 I wanted and it's dimensions. The leathersmith could make it look like new or age and damage it to look old. Whatever I wanted. <br /><br />Of course, he advised me that if I ever did this, I would have to disclose <br />that the leather was a reproduction (I would). The problem, though, is the people who owned this fake piece after me. Would THEY disclose the leather was not as old as it was supposed to be?? I never went farther with this idea because 1) I didn't have the money and 2) I worried about what would happen afterwards if I ever sold a fake piece. However, I did remember his advice to be careful. <br /><br />The problem, as I see it, is how high at Mastro (or any auction company) does the problem go?? Is it a rogue lower level employee doing these things without their superior's knowledge or is the problem systemic?? If a lower level employee is cleaning/repairing a few cards for a friend or customer and only he/she knows about it, then the whole company shouldn't be tarred and feathered. But, if altering cards is a known practice from top to bottom (or even just at the top) and these alterations are not disclosed at the time of sale, then there is a MAJOR problem because WHO is benefiting the most?? The Owners and high level employees, that is who.<br /><br /><br />The people I worry about most in this (or any) hobby are the ones who know the most and who have a lot of money. These people know what an item is supposed to look like and have the money to reproduce it, if they wanted. An example might be the Pirate Cigarette cards which were just sold.<br /><br />When these cards first came to this board's attention, how many were curious about them?? I know I was. Now, how many thought there was something fishy going on?? If I remember correctly, there were a few. I mean, these cards rarely show up individually but here was an almost complete set with a few uncatalogued cards to boot. The strange thing was there were no doubles (at least not known at this time).<br /><br />If these were run of the mill cards that sold for $800 or even $8,000 dollars, then most people wouldn't take notice. But ultra-rare cards, in quantity, coming out of nowhere and selling for $8000,000 dollars is something else. <br /><br />If I were wealthy, unscrupulous and KNEW what Pirate Cigarette baseball cards were supposed to look and feel like, what is to keep me from going overseas and having someone make them?? I mean, going to China and paying someone there $100,000 to make these cards wouldn't be out of the question. A person there wouldn't know or care about baseball cards and they are so far away that if a stink was ever raised, they are out of the loop and even if they DID hear about a controversy, why would they come forward?? They were paid a lot of money, so why get involved?? If I were the rich person who had them made why would I care or say anything to raise eyebrows?? If I were unethical enough to have them created in the first place and then pocketed a $700,000 profit, I would keep my mouth shut and move on to other things. <br /><br />As an aside, this was just an example. I have NO knowledge of these cards and are just using these as an example of what COULD happen, so DO NOT SUE ME BECAUSE I KNOW NOTHING, AM IMPLYING NOTHING and don't have any money anyway.<br /><br />As far as automobiles (and collectibles ) go, I use as a guide the old saying, "a car is only original once". For the most part, an original, unrestored car is going to sell for more than a restored car, if both are in the same condition. If you don't believe me, just watch the Barrett-Jackson auctions in January on the SPEED Channel. The cars that sell for the most are rare cars that are original or restored back to original. Those cars are fully documented and, if restored, have full documentation of that, too. Altered or undocumented cars sell for WAY less than their documented brethren.<br /><br />Having said all of that, it does not mean that you just let an original car sit out in the open and let it get rusty and allow birds to crap all over it. You keep it stored in a climate controlled building and drive it every once in a while to let the fluids circulate.<br /><br />The same goes for cards. A card is only original once and those cards will sell for more than a restored card. And just as with cars, cards also have to be taken care of and stored properly. <br /><br />With collectibles, any alteration or restoration MUST be disclosed when selling. Otherwise, the buyer will think they are getting an original, unrestored example. If an altration has occured and is not noted at the time of sale, then I consider that fraud. Also, just because an alteration is not detectable now doesn't mean it wont be in the future.<br /><br />That is my two cents about this issue,<br /><br />David

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:21 PM
Posted By: <b>Joe Pelaez</b><p>That Charlie might have been squeezing the Liquid Truth?<br /><br />Say it isn't so Charlie.<br /><br />It's time for Charlie to come clean.<br /><br />Was it Water, or Bleach?

Archive
08-08-2007, 10:22 PM
Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>Gee Charlie you are correct I am a convicted felon. I have said that over and over again. I am also a father and I have been married for 36 years. I also have been in the Steel business for over forty years. I am what I am. The only difference between us is that you think what you do is ok. I think that if you cheat someone for selling something bad (autographs) without telling them is the same as changing a card to get a higher price without telling them. If you have problem with that lets go to the FBI and you tell them that your selling something that you say is fact but you know its not. Im tired of you guys trying to make what I am the reason that its ok for you. If you cheat and you dont get caught your not a felon. Just remember it only took one person to change my life. If any of you belive that changeing a card in anyway is ok then you are what is wrong with this hobby.