The Response
 

I am writing this in response to the negative accusations and assumptions made over some upgrades that I received from PSA lately. As you can see by the diversification of cards that I have gotten upgrades on, that I am on ebay and other sites looking for cards that can possibly upgrade for hours every day. If I was just buying expensive Mantle cards and turning 5's and 6's into 8's and 9's, I would see why people would get upset over that. But I'm NOT doing that. I'm searching hundreds of cards a day, thousands of cards a week to find a handful of cards to buy and possibly crack out and resubmit. I submit hundreds of cards a month. I am bound to get a couple upgrades once in a while. I have been in the card business for over 30 years. I have been involved in grading cards for over 15 years. I work very hard and I have developed an eye to find undergraded cards.

To the surprise of many on this board, maintaining the original integrity of every card I buy and regrade is very important to me. I do not trim cards. I do not paint cards. I do not power erase cards. I do not do anything to a card that sacrifices the original integrity, edges, corners, surface, gloss, size, design or shape of a card to achieve a higher grade.

The Art Shell rookie PSA 8 upgrade to a PSA 10 seems to have caused the most commotion. I know it's hard for people to understand how that could happen without some sort of shenanigans going on but there were none. I literally cracked out the card, put it into a card saver and submitted it at the National last year. The card came back a PSA 10 and the owner of the card (my client) opted to sell it since he was putting a HOF Rookie PSA 9 set together. Top/bottom centering on 1973 Topps football is not black and white because of the funky design of the card. It is very possible that a first-year grader at PSA miscalculated the centering and graded the card a PSA 8 the first time. The more experienced graders that grade at the National put it in a PSA 10.

Rick Probstein deserves an apology from whoever accused Rick of being in cahoots with me for me to buy an undergraded card and resell it through him after regrading. This is so ridiculous. Rick is just like any other auction house. He makes a living from getting consignments. His job is to get the most money he can for the cards that are consigned to him. It's not his job to tell the consignor to tell him that his card may upgrade if resubmitted... there isn't an auction house on earth that would return the card to the consignor so he could resubmit it. To blame Rick for anything associated with upgrades is completely absurd.

Hopefully, this will help people understand that people who try to get upgrades on graded cards are not evil. Whoever enjoys following my every move, can put a scan as big as the moon of any one of my upgrades and I will stand behind that card and explain to any potential buyer why that card would be an excellent and legitimate addition to their collection. I don't feel that I have to explain any of my upgrades to anyone else.

I have a lot of good friends and colleagues in the industry that got a couple good laughs over these threads at my expense because the attacks were just so outrageous and ridiculous. But the attacks started to get personal and that's where I have to draw the line. My reputation as an honest, hard-working, innovative, knowledgeable and reputable sportscard dealer is very important to me. I can't stress enough that I stand behind every single card that I have ever graded and sold.

I also noticed that there is a lot of joking around. One guy wrote my name 10 times in a post after Leon said I requested my name be removed from a personal attack... It seems like a lot of you want to press people's buttons, and you feel like you can say anything you want while acting as judge and jury. This was evident when the guy agreed to change the title of his personal attack on me if I agreed to respond. Well guy, you accomplished what you wanted to accomplish by calling me a disgrace to the hobby. That was something that I didn't deserve and something that I don't deserve more of going forward. I have a long resume of accomplishments in the sportscard industry. I have hundreds of long-time customers that enjoy buying from me and selling to me. I have made a countless number of friends that are big names and small names in the industry that respect me as a reputable sportscard dealer.
I really don't feel that I need to further explain or defend anything that I've ever done in the sportscard industry.
I have not contacted a lawyer and I hope to not have to contact a lawyer, but my reputation is my most valuable asset. Going forward, I want to make it very clear that any personal attacks with my name in it will be forwarded to my lawyer. Hopefully, the fellow dealers and collectors of this board, will refrain from personal attacks going forward since I held up my end of the terms of the deal I made with Leon to respond. And Leon, you're welcome for all the extra hits to your site at my expense again. Respectfully, Joe Pankiewicz

That's a pretty solid response. I appreciate it.

How many cards did you submit at the National? How many received significant (more than a half grade) upgrades?

Do you know any of the graders personally? Would they recognize you or your name on a grading submission sheet?

I think those are the answers people are really looking for.

That Art Shell isn't a 10... it COULD be a 9. I think that's what is causing the commotion. If the first grader undergraded it, the second grader went nuts.

Wow, I have a lot to say, but for right now just two questions.

1) If you didn't erase the mark on the Gehrig, who did?

2) Why didn't you address the obvious shill bidding?

You may not get a response back on that. That would be incriminating himself I think.

Maybe you shoud lay out, with hard imperical evidence in a very logical fashion, why you believe he schilled his own auction.

Thanks,
Kevin

Coming right up, sir :D

Thanks for the reply.

Quoted for posterity.

€hû¢k Wölƒƒ

I have had some members contact me pertaining my dealings with Rick Probstein. As some of you know I have backed him on a couple of threads, and I have had numerous, successful transactions with him over the years. I must admit, however, the concerns I have over allegations made on this thread. Not comfortable at all. I don't even know this Joe P. guy, and quite frankly, I'm glad I don't. My father taught me years ago, if there's smoke, chances are there is a fire. This whole situation seems to be swarming into a wildfire, and maybe it's rightly so. I would like to think that Rick would come on the board and clear his name pertaining these comments and accusations. Some of the things presented on this thread do seem extremely puzzling, to say the least....Kevin M.

Cards of course do get bumped even two grades with nothing done to them. I have seen it happen. So the question is really are there identifiable changes between the two iterations of the card.

Response
 

Wow, there are just a lot of questions that beg to be answered....

Z Wheat

If Rick banned Joe from submitting to him, between the two of them we should have a great conversation about what was said and why.

Based on what was said on the board, there have to be opposing view points between the two of them or one of the two of them is down right lying about something.

Or am I missing something?

Kevin

I don't have the cahonas to crack most cards but I've had reviews go from

SGC 6---> PSA 6.5----> SGC 7
PSA 4---> SGC 5
SGC 5---> PSA 5.5

Really goes both ways... I am sure many members here know Johnny Adams, I believe his entire business model is based on cracking cards and I know for a FACT he does not alter them - I believe if Joe had the same model then it is in the realm of possibilities.

I think one of the biggest problems is the tremendous inconsistency with grading. If a card can get resubmitted and get a two and even three grade increase then I would no longer have much faith in third party grading. They need to do a better job.

Better some innocent inconsistency than doctoring. With all the threads and all the pics I can't recall now which cards are claimed to be Joe's.

The graders do not get it right every time. Seeing bumps, as well as reductions, in grades can happen without doing anything to a card however there were changes to the appearance of the two lower graded 1934 Goudey Gehrigs which would suggest these cards were simply not broken out and resubmitted.

I don't see it as so innocent Peter. Graders have a tremendous amount of power. A bump of even one grade, say from a 7 to an 8, on an expensive card may create thousands of dollars of added value. Therefore, they need to be really accurate and really consistent every time, something they clearly are not.

dont pollute this thread with opinions please.

put those comments on the other thread. lets discuss facts here, since this is the one with the response in it.

kevin

Pollute? We're having a discussion.

Agreed
 

I completely agree Barry. I'm an Engineer and the biggest problem I see is a flawed grading process. It's obviously big money to get those bumps so I can see why people resubmit and don't blame them. But 2 grade bumps should not happen in my opinion. Didn't they add half-grades to add even more differentiation between condition? Fix the process.

its the same discussion that the other thread is having. over and over and over again.

its all been said 10 times.

kevin

*

I think it would be extremely helpful if Joe would comment on the specific cards in question rather than just speaking in generalities about his practices. I feel like his response somewhat skirts the issue rather than directly addressing it.

I had many dealings with Probstein in the past, but mostly he was my customer he would contact me with a list of what he was looking for and
i would go out and get it, most deals were in the thousands and pleasant
i can't imagine why he would change for the worst now that he has become
that successful!

guys, back on topic? Again, I would like to see Rick come on and answer questions pertaining what really started this thread in the first place...

As if that was ever an obstacle on this forum.

Agree completely. Something stinks.

And how many times has THAT been said on this forum. :D

Maybe he's waiting for that apology first.

*

That would not put it back on topic. This is not a thread for Rick to respond to. This is all about Joe and his explanation. There needs to be another thread for Rick to explain why he supposedly banned Joe from doing business but Joe is doing business with him.

eye
 

I wish I had the eye to see the undergraded cards & the guts to bust them out and submit them. I have never done so, but I don't think it is altering if you erase a mark from a card with an eraser. I think this guy is just using his experience in being a professional grader to purchase cards. If I had his experience I would do the same. As far as bidding on his own items, I don't know if he has done so & haven't seen any proof of it.

Just my two cents.

Joe, I don't know you and I'm still holding out judgement until I see hard proof one way or the other, but that was some fantastic spin. You dodge specifics with the best of them and should consider running for office.

Greg...Probably right, I was just hoping to get some kind of clarification from Rick.

I think there's some pretty solid evidence he shilled Probstein's auctions of his own items...it's all in the bid history.

Dan Hicks

Whenever I'm feeling iffy about trusting someone and I bring up the 'touchy' topic to them, I always feel better when I get a short confident response. If I get a long drawn-out one with loads of detail, I remain nervous and doubting.

That saying still holds true: "Me thinks the lady doth protest too much."

I know very honest dealers/sellers in this hobby and in others who have been questioned publicly. They simply never respond - nothing at all. I've spoken with some of them on the phone and they say that they have no respect for all the b.s. that goes on in internet forums, that they don't enjoy participating, and that their reputation can stand on what others say about them publicly, both good and bad. For the honest ones, such a strategy works perfectly.

The commotion with the Shell card was a direct issue regarding just the grading of the card. I think the bigger issue and the issue that more people are concerned about is the apparent trim, doctoring and resubmission of cards like the 34 Goudey Gehrig.


Mark Fox

I mailed Greg on ebay and the card was pulled in a matter of minutes.

I'm sure there will be more information coming from that direction.

Kevin

? Kevin, what are you referring too?

Lets see cracks cards and does nothing to them but gets a higher grade sure i am going to believe this spin. Anybody in this type of business would sell his grandmother for a higher grade. As my father always said when their is money to be made their is hankypanky. No I do not believe in Santa Clause.

He's shilled many of his auctions. Here is just one example. On June 10, 2013, eBay member gpark73, which is Joe Pankiewicz, purchased the 1954 Topps Hockey #32 Camille Henry PSA 7 card shown below in the first pic. It was eBay item #370827911540 and here is a link to the original auction…

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1954-Topps-H...p2047675.l2557

The second screen shot is of the bid history, showing him as the winning bidder.

The card was re-submitted to PSA and this time came back as a PSA 8.5 as shown in the third pic below. Then, it was consigned to Probstein123, eBay item #370876222931 and here is a link to that auction…

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1954-Topps-3...p2047675.l2557

During the auction, Joe placed three shill bids as can be seen in the bidding history, last screen shot below.

Since then, Joe has changed his eBay username from gpark73 to cgseller89, but the bid history, feedback, etc also changes with it making it easy to track. He can run, but he can’t hide. Therefore, I just proved him a shill bidder and in my opinion he is a disgrace to the hobby.

Joe, attorneys can be expensive. If your attorney has anything to say to me, just PM me and I’ll give you my contact information saving your attorney some time and you some money.

WOW, Just WOW!!!! Nice work David!!

The gherig card on ebay greg bissineau had listed.

Kevin

Gotcha....bad, bad situation. Looks extremely funny to me....

Wow, someone is going to get a call from a lawyer who has not yet been contacted.

Does he have your number? :D:D:D

I have a question for the OP--do you know Ryan Braun?

I respectfully plead the 5th.....

That's outrageous and ridiculous. And you should apologize to Rick Probstein too.

...we'll go for 20

How about Bill Clinton? Oops, no politics rule, right.

This whole thread is a vast right wing conspiracy.

Seriously, where does everyone stand on this? Still a little concerning....

I think he knows Curt Schilling
http://www.homeruncards.com/imagesrc/schillingdon.jpg

Kevin,

I think David clearly showed the shill bidding by the OP, unless I am reading it incorrectly :)

What a great debut single
 

The OP made. Gonig to be a top 5 smash

That stock photo looks trimmed.

+1.
The guy is brilliant.

Yep, good job so far, David. I have a feeling there's more to reveal.

Of course, it would be tough to accept the fact that someone so honest, hard-working, innovative, knowledgeable and reputable as Mr. Pankiewicz could stoop to such a level as to actually shill bid one of his own auctions.

Let it be known that this should not be construed as an attack ( :eek: ) , but rather a statement of fact and my incredulous disbelief that someone who happens to have a long resume of accomplishments in the sportscard industry, has hundreds of long-time customers that enjoy buying from him and selling to him, and has made a countless number of friends that are big names and small names in the industry that respect him as a reputable sportscard dealer, would actually artificially inflate the bidding on one of his auctions. WOW!

*

Add me to the list. Nice work

David, how do you know...
 

serious question from a naïve person:
how do you know that gpark73 = that 9***8 or whatever shows up in the bidding history?
Thanks,
JasonL

Jason,

Because he was the winning bidder and the user ID of the winning bidder is 9***8

Greg

I can't agree more, TPG can be inconsistent regarding grade, but the apparent changes to the Gehrig should be addressed.

There is some e-bay link where you can check the actual bids people have placed I don't know what it is anymore though.

I said it in the other thread, but I want to say it again here too just to be clear. Some of this information I was able to come up with on my own, however a lot was sent to me via PM and email from many other sources (some of which really surprised me). I certainly don't want to take credit when others helped me out a lot. I think they wish to remain anonymous, but they're more than welcome to chime in and take credit where credit is due.

Exactly, and that doesn't change. It remains the same, no matter what he bid on and/or wins. Once you know the eBay username, it's very easy to track and confirm from there.

Explain no more. Must be just a misunderstanding. You know, sort of like that guy... oh, what's his name. Um... I just had it. Mustard... Mustang... Master... Mastro! Yeah Bill Mastro! Now he was a well accomplished and well respected man who had countless long-time customers. How's he doing these days?

This guy is as arrogant as they come. Not only does he demand that the other thread's title be changed (as if he should have a say one way or the other), but then he comes here and makes his own thread proclaiming himself to be holier than thou.

He didn't address any of the issues specifically, but gave some generic reasoning that he really seems to believe makes everything okay.

Something stinks in here

-
S.haun F.yffe

I've highlighted the section I have a question about in red.

My question is this. What caused the reduction in the severity of the ink drag mark on the back of the Camille Henry card? And similarly what caused the reduction in blue ink spatters on the front of the O'Rourke?

Both cards are shown before and after in this thread
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=174534

Are you saying the cards are unaltered?

Steve B

You're putting it all together and making it very easy to understand. That's not easy to do. I truly appreciate the work you're putting into this and also would like to thank those that have assisted you. Kudos!

Joe:

Plain and simple
 

If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck....

and if she weighs the same as a duck then....

She's a witch!

The differences in the O'Rourke along the right border are pretty dramatic, I doubt a scanner could account for them especially as the scans seems to be at the same settings otherwise.

You're getting sued too.

I know one lawyer not to call.

lol!!

full names in this thread
 

Everyone will need their first and last name by their post(s) in this thread or in their sig line etc..., if it isn't there already etc. If their full name isn't in there, they can edit their comments out, put their name in the post or I will put their name in it. :). Nothing personal. Thanks everyone.

Exactly. Here are the two side by side for comparison. What happened to all the blue print marks? If they were scanned by 2 different scanners, that might account for some of it, but they were both scanned by Probstein and I doubt he changed the scanner settings.

Note: I reduced the size of the images. If you go back to the thread and look at the supersized images, it's even more obvious.

Curiously, the flip is whiter/brighter in the 8 scan. Is it safe to assume PSA used the same paper stock for both of those flips?

Pffffffffft lose my number. You'll probably try to give me that Cobb for payment.