Another Probstein123 black eye
 

Blowout Basketball Forum has a post about a card that is up for auction by Probstein123. It's a 2008 Jordan/James dual auto. He had the card originally graded a PSA 7. Sold the card and is now in a PSA 9. The original owner shows back pictures to show how much the card has been cut.

Rick got back to someone questioning the auction and his reply was.

eBay
New message from: probstein123 Top Rated Seller(461,986RedShooting Star)
“we hold by psa over the forums...if psa contacts us then we remove the listing...not because of the forums...
they should contact psa if they think psa made an error”

Profits before integrity. Sorry for lack of links but don't know how to do them properly.

Is the grade not for the AUTO that is on the card and not he card itself? Apparently the AUTO got the bump, not the card itself.

Made these so people can see what's being talked about. The top cards in each paring are the 'originals' and the bottoms are 'probstein-ized' and swimming in the holder from the trim job...

Attachment 300631
Attachment 300632

The most obvious difference is on the back left, where the '1' in the '15' on the banner is sliced dramatically.

Wow, that looks pretty bad IMO. Good think PSA is so trusted and we as collectors put so much blind faith into them printing money...

Thank you for posting the pictures. PSA should have done a better job grading the card. Mistakes are made and I hope they correct this one.

Okay, I read the thread on blowout. Am I missing something? In that whole thread all they do is bitch about Probstein and PSA. They bitch about how Probstein handled it. But in Probstein's response, isn't he pretty much saying is if it is graded incorrectly PSA needs to step in? So while Probstein should perhaps do a little investigating himself and contact PSA, it seems pretty obvious to me if the OP wants to do anything he should complain to and send pictures to PSA. Nowhere in that thread does it say PSA has been contacted.

I'm sure there are many more nuances to this, but I can see a consignor taking the PSA grade at face value and not seeing it as their responsibility to question it. Granted if it were me, I'd certainly ask a few questions.

I guess the thread bugged me because it went on to bash PSA about handing out 10's like candy and referenced a PSA 10 Aaron Rodgers that looks off-center. I looked at several of those cards, graded and raw and EVERY ONE of them was cut the same way, including a BGS 9.5 Gem Mint. I'm not a member there so I made no comments. But to me, the thread was a bunch of mostly misplaced criticism.

I'm not absolving Probstein of all responsibility, but it seems to me the way to get it fixed is to contact PSA and let them investigate and contact Probstein. Just my $.02

A spade should be called a spade
 

An auction house should ultimately be responsible for the authenticity, and I question auction houses that defer to outside services when a spade is obviously a spade. This is too common in this hobby.

But how do you explain that there is more of Lebron's hand and finger
on the back of the supposed trimmed one, almost the same amount
of difference as the 1 on the banner. The gold border and ornamental
design looks completely different on the fronts I thought that was the scans
but then it looks like two different backs with a slight shift difference on them. Something seems odd about the whole thing.

Re: Another Probstein123 black eye
 

An emphatic +1.

If you look at the first card, part of the side of the card is obscured by the PSA clear prong on the side with the finger. If you compare the autographs on the front, there is no question they are the exact same card. If they made slight variations of this set that were both #/25 (one silver and one gold or something), the guys at Blowout would know.

Yes, there's a lot of exaggerated anger there, but they are great at spotting and outing cases of fraud.

The earlier images of the card are photos, not scans. The Lebron finger/hand concerned me as well when you mentioned it, but if you go to the Blowout thread, the images are larger and it's easier to see.

It's the same card in my opinion...minus a portion of that edge that is.

Well, if I'm reading what you are saying correctly, it seems the angle of the picture plus the bright flash is adding to distorting his hand area. You can see the flash on the case right next to the area in question. Since the original bumped corner was the upper left on back, it appears they trimmed the top just a teeny bit and the left side more substantially. James shouldn't show any signs of trimming, as he is situated in the wrong place.

Yeah I considered that but it looks like on the upper right that isn't
obscured that there is more black showing from the white rail to the border
on the 9 too but it must be because of the scans vs photo's.

Attachment 300644

I would guess the card is rebacked.
 

On the original the top left corner on the back is dinged.but not in the newly graded card.
Also as pointed out ( pun intended) there is more of lebrons pointer finger showing.


I think this card has been rebacked.

So despite all the Blowout Sturm und Drang, the facts seem to be: a trimmed card got past the goalie and wound up in a slab, and then on eBay.

I think as some have rightly and calmly pointed out here, to rectify this situation PSA should be contacted, and if they feel the card is a mistake, they will contact the seller, who will pull it. They also have a policy in place which allows for the buyer of the trimmed card to be reimbursed.

Seems pretty straightforward to me, in terms of how to rationally handle the situation. I don't know about a "black eye" for a high volume internet seller for merely listing the item; I don't do that for a living, yet I don't expect someone in that position to scrutinize this particular card for trimming, or somehow decide to track down a scan of the card in a prior holder, and find the trim job. It seems like a flat out mistake by the grader, and human error happens. When it does, if there's a path and process to correct it, we simply should walk that path and then see if we achieve a solution. If I were the seller I would contact PSA and initiate the process.

I’m with Probstein on this one. If PSA screwed up PSA needs to fix it. Probstein is selling PSA’s opinion, not his own.

Well said and I completely agree...I think this just shows what CAN get by PSA, no TPG should be the end all-be all and common sense and knowledge still can go a long ways in the hobby.

Agree 100%. Think of it this way. If buyers place the responsibility on the seller to handle and correct the mishaps which PSA misses such as the likes we see in this case, it would be a full time job to police with as many that reside in their slabs.

yup

On one hand, I can see what you guys above are saying about the onus being on PSA to fix this. But on the other hand, if this item was in REA and it was brought to Brian's attention, you know damn well that he would be proactive and at least contact PSA (and more likely he would pull the item after investigating).

As David (drcy) said above, when it's this cut and dry, and the card is serial numbered and undeniably altered, the AH should take some action other than throwing their hands up and saying there's nothing they can do about it because it came from a forum.

This.

For such an in demand card featuring Lebron and Jordan's signature, I'm sure Rick and Joe Orlando have already spoke about it. My guess as to why the auction has not been taken down is Rick took the card on consignment assuming the PSA grade was legit. Also, you can't assume the consignee was the person who did the alleged trimming.

I would bet PSA or Joe Orlando himself will purchase the card under the "grade guarantee", never to be seen again.

I think Probstein should take the auction down.

Agree as well. This needs to sell first in order for a price to be established so then the buyer can get reimbursement from PSA from their warranty.

Probstein is a conduit between seller and buyer. My guess is that if you assume he knows nothing about cards you won't be far off. He relies on third party graders---fault PSA not Probstein. I also suggest the title of this post be amended; I think it misleads people into thinking Probstein did something wrong.

actually, go back and look at the REA fall auction, specifically the high grade 52Topps (PSA 7s and 8s) that were sold. I was surprised how many time REA description pointed out the possibility of a trim. when was the last time an eBay seller included that kind of info in a description. When people here talk about how buying on ebay is so much better than dealing with an AH (one that does things right, at least), I shake my head. If you buy all your high dollar cards on eBay instead of an auction house that knows what it is doing AND has integrity, then you are just treading water until you get ripped off.

That people don't think that an auction house should remove, or change the description so that it's accurate, an item that is a fake or misidentified-- in particular when the auction house knows it's a fake or misidentified--, says a lot about the current auction system. If hobby standard practices overrule what should be common sense and what would be considered clear ethical behavior to anyone and everyone outside the hobby, it says the standard practices are bad and the system has been corrupted.

And how does Probstein know this, because someone sent him an email? Should he take this opinion over the opinion of the largest grading service? REA is very knowledgeable; they can intelligently opine on condition. Probstein probably knows as much about cards as your grocery's butcher.

I wasn't singling out a seller or a particular auction (I haven't looked at the blowout thread or the images), and will leave it to situations of clear and convincing proof.

I think comparing Probstein to REA is both funny and sad. REA is not only the leading AH, they have also shown an immense amount of knowledge and integrity and if anyone knows Dwyer they know this is how he does things. He also has an immense knowledge as one of the leaders in the industry and his results show this.

Probstein is an ebay seller, like others said he is peddling PSAs opinion, not his own. It would be nice if he pulled it, but on what information? A bunch of guys are complaining but PSA graded it? My bet is will side with PSA 100 out of a 100 times as his business is built on this. This isn't war_eagle we are talking about, Probstein doesn't trim his cards and has never been accused of that. PSA let this get by, their warranty will be carried out at this point.

Probstein could pull it but PSA could also do a better job and never had this happen in the first place...you know, their job the premier TPG. Maybe Joe O. should focus more on training at this point than expanding his business part its current means. TPGs are far from perfect but that's not the standard we hold them to.

I think it’s pretty hilarious that a card with autographs of two of the greatest basketball players of all time on it is suddenly garbage because it’s now one millimeter shorter than it was yesterday. Not to say that trimming the card was an okay thing to do, I just hadn’t realized that those cards were actually given a grade beyond authenticating the autographs.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/Baseball-/2...942%2529&rt=nc here is a link to a previous sold card numbered to 25 same card. The back to this card looks like the original PSA7. Top left corner ding and less Lebron hand then the psa 9.


We all have seen very gifted custom card made and advertised. I think someone with those skill and make a new back for this card.

For an interesting twist on this, go to the blowoutcards thread and take a look at post #27. It shows the same card (#08/25), that has the same look on the top left back corner/top right front corner. It's graded a BCG 9.5. Again, the referenced corner is exactly the same as the corner on card #01/25!

This would indicate that PSA's original 7 grade on the #01/25 was probably wrong also, as they apparently used that corner as reason for the downgrade. But it apparently is not damage to the corner.....it is simply the card's design.

So, it appears that PSA originally mis-graded #01/25 as a "7". It was later trimmed by someone who also believed the corner was damaged. PSA later ignored the trimming and graded it a "9". Double-screw up by PSA. Also, extremely hilarious that someone trimmed the card, believing as PSA did that the card was damaged, when it actually was not!

Steve

I agree, maybe both sides were trimmed on the "9?"
Finger does look off...

Yea I agree with the sentiment here. I knew they could be graded, but wouldn't have thought the difference in value from 7 to 9 would justify trimming and resubmitting the card. The value of this card would seem to be the on card autos of Jordan and LeBron, plus the limited number at 25.

This is a subject that I said, and have said for years, was futile. Folks, it is, face it....Until Ebay gets off their asses and does something legally these threads against Mr. Big (Probstein) and PWCC are an absolute waste of time. Some people have posted responses about, "well, we can at least bring this to the attention of novice collectors and the hobby..." Really? Who gives a damn? These threads about these two were first posted when King Kong was a monkey.

Ray, I know that Mr. Big (Rick P.) hates to hear that...:rolleyes: I hear your grief big time!! Meanwhile, he's laughing his ass off....

+1....Totally agree. To compare this guy with REA is an absolute joke.....

Strongly disagree, Tony. We sell cards, not some third party's opinion of them. The product is the card inside, not the plastic slab with a little slip of paper inside it. Anyone selling cards (dealer or auction house) should have sufficient knowledge about the products that he sells and back it up with a guarantee, third party opinion notwithstanding. TPGs make mistakes regularly. In an extreme case, if a dealer sells a graded card that proves to be counterfeit, I believe the courts would hold the seller, not the grader, responsible for damages.

You've been around the hobby for some Ed, like myself and plenty of others here. We started by holding, feeling and even smelling cards and learning how to detect alterations and fakes as a right of passage into the hobby. But Ill will disagree that the product isn't the flip now, I love raw cards, but the reality is TPGs lowered that barrier of entry significantly. That flip is the commodity, people pay huge premiums for higher graded cards even if the grade isn't warranted...some people just don't care what the card looks like, its all about that flip. It allowed for people who have NEVER held a raw card in hand to spend 10s of thousands on a collection or "investment" as they are called more often now. This has not only brought more people into the hobby but lots more money as well. How much is the "hobby" valued at? Billions? What percentage of the value is in a TPG?
I also disagree that the courts would hold the seller accountable unless it was proved beyond a doubt that they purposely misrepresented an item they sold. PSA is considered the expert, not Probstein. And why would a 100 hobby guys hold weight over PSA? If one engineer says a bridge isn't safe but 100 towns folk say "its fine" who will the courts listen to?
Probstein has a responsibility to his consignor and buyer and really no one else. No one hear is accusing him of altering cards to my knowledge...he is peddling his wares like he always has. Has PSA been notified? How about PSA step in and try to correct the problem? Like someone else said, the auction will run its course and then the buyer and PSA will work it out. It would be nice to see Probstein do something, I just do not think its his responsibility at this point and I think the courts would agree.

Ed:

I respectfully disagree with you. Because I pretty much guarantee you that the verbiage on EBay auctions featuring the reputable 3rd party graders absolve the seller in these cases. You know, the no returns on graded cards, we're just an outlet to sell these cards, etc. types of notes on auctions.

I would wager Rick and his team already has situations such as this and they have language in their auctions to protect them.

And, IMHO, if PSA or Beckett or SGC gets something wrong, unless it's something easily catchable, guess what, I'm going with that they say the grade is as a seller.

While perhaps with this pub about this card, Rick and his team should pull this auction until further notice as a protection, it's not their job to examine every single card in a slab sent to them. REA has the luxury of months of research and even with that, they had to pull a bunch of auto items in the past year or two IIRC. That does not mean they did anything wrong but they missed as well. We all miss things. Period end of sentence.

Valid points by both Rich and Steven. I still think the seller is liable for the products he sells, regardless of any third party opinion or any exculpatory clauses on their website, contract, etc. If it's a fake, the seller would be responsible for damages. Period. The seller would, no doubt, have a claim on the TPG that made the error.

To be clear, my posts in this thread are not a commentary on Probstein, the auction in question, or any other dealer or auction house. They were directed at those who like to hide behind the mistakes of a grading company.

It seems like these big spenders with psa can basically buy the grade they want with little issue.

Agreed...

Another Probstein123 black eye

I think I found him.;):D

Attachment 300775

I believe that in a court case, if the defendant has clear proof that the card he was sold was a fake or altered, the judge will only care that the card is fake or altered and not give weight to an independent opinion that is clearly wrong. Doesn't matter what certificate it comes with or what is the standard hobby etiquette, if the sold as gold and diamond ring is proven to be brass and quartz, the judge is going to rule seller gets his money back.

I believe that some people here are mistaking "hobby norms" for what would hold up in a court of law.

Not necessarily. A buyer and seller can agree as to who bears the risk and a court will generally enforce it absent proof of fraud, which is very hard to prove. If I sell a card as a PSA 8 Joe Shlabotnik and it is, you are not going to win a case against me with some other opinion as to authenticity or condition, especially if the auction rules state all sales are as is buyer beware.

Now the card in question here is a close call because it looks to be trimmed but we don’t know the behind the scenes with PSA. If PSA is aware and has re-examined the card I would sell it but disclose the history even if PSA said it is ok. Or offer to allow the consignor to take it back and pursue PSA. I am abundantly cautious.

To anyone surprised or amused by the REA/Probstein comparison:

Both companies are movers of high volumes of cards which are consigned to them by collectors. They may not react the same way, but they provide an identical service, albeit through different venues. They are counterparts. Comparisons will be made. Expectations will be set.

If one of those companies (REA) sets a standard of basic ethical practice in the business, it is not out of the ordinary to think that other auction houses should follow suit when an altered card is brought to their attention (ie. investigating and at least pulling the auction and returning the card to the consignor if the alteration is blatant).

Of course, other auction houses may not follow suit (Probstein, in this instance), but it is neither funny, sad, or an "absolute joke" to make the comparison and expect similar ethical business practices.

I am also not naive enough to think the above will happen, but as a consumer you can expect it. When it doesn't happen, then you complain or criticize which is why this thread was started.

And I just happened to use REA as an example. As another, when Goodwin was alerted about a possibly bad PSA graded '52 Mantle in one of their auctions, they sent it to PSA for review, found it to be a compromised slab, and they pulled the auction.