Assumptions about TPG
 

The recent rise in fraud involving reholdered cards got me thinking (I know, I do a lot of it) whether PSA is risking its market share. Yes, they're the big player on the block with the most to lose. Fake Mantles, Cobbs, Ruths, etc..all put back together with little to no evidence of tampering. Most of these appear to be older-style holders. But, is PSA potentially leaving themselves wide open for a competitor to steal their lunch? If someone were able to introduce a technology that could make it nearly impossible to pull off this kind of fraud, could it be a Kodak moment for PSA?

Don't get me wrong, I still like their product and they haven't completely lost me with increased fees and slower turnaround times. I just wonder if they're leaving themselves wide open and creating the perfect storm. No holder will ever be completely fraud-proof, as the mouse always figures out the better mouse trap. It just seems to be getting a little out of hand lately.

I don't know why you think this is anything new. Bad cards in what appear to be PSA holders have been around for many years, there are plenty of threads about it stretching back for years, and PSA has continued to dominate the market. Just because you may be recently aware of it doesn't mean it's a new issue.

Peter, I didn't say it was new...just on the rise. We had a board member bid $6000 on a Mantle that a respected AH had for sale. It took PSA to review to sniff it out. That's a little different than my experience over the years. But, I could be less in tune than others to the trend.

IMO it's not on the rise, it's been a constant issue. There was a much higher profile bad Mantle in an auction a while back, Goodwin maybe. And people wanting a Mantle should educate themselves as to the basics of how to spot a fake. It isn't foolproof, but people don't seem to know even the basics about the two variations, the distinctive marks of a genuine one, missing pixels, alignment of the back text, etc.

Theoretically, in a respectable slab, they shouldn't need to.

In a world where people are putting fakes into real looking slabs, and people are getting burned constantly, they do need to. Or buy blindly and hope it works out.

This is just as much on the sellers as PSA. PSA has newer BGS style holders that are tougher to crack, and can no longer be peeled apart easily like SGC holders. (SGC is expected to roll out new holders next year?)

It's up to the sellers and auctionhouses to review their items before listing them, and using the PSA reholder service liberally if they think it's costing them any money. The card is obviously wrong and the image of the holder of the Mantle was obviously frosted at the top.

PSA is to blame for plenty, but scammers gonna scam. Maybe it's worthwhile to start a thread on commonly faked/resealed cards so there's at least a reference as to which cards should be double-checked for authenticity no matter which holder or flip it's in.

1952 Topps Mantle
1951 Bowman Mantle
1982 Topps Traded Ripken PSA 10
1933 Goudey Babe Ruths
1948 Leaf Babe Ruth
1959 Fleer Ted Williams "Ted Signs"
...

33 Gehrig. PSA 10 Montana I believe was a Mexican fave. Jordan of course.

Wasn't that part of the point of slabs to begin with? To bring buyers with limited knowledge into the hobby and give them piece of mind?

One idea is to put a high resolution image of the card (or auto) on the website to go with the cert # on the slab. That will stop 80% of the fraud, because the fraudster would have to reproduce the same exact creases, blemishes, stains, color, and corner wear, etc. A lot harder. Also more data storage cost for PSA.

Those slabbing machines are readily available. What's to stop an enterprising conman from buying a plane ticket to China or some other place and having an exact plastic mold made of the PSA slab? The Chinese don't care about America and will gladly steal as much IP as they can.

And therefore what? On certain cards it hasn't worked out that way so what's better, take some time to educate yourself or moan that things should be otherwise?

You sound like you need a hug.

Education of the cards with boots on the ground knowledge is the best scam prevention I can think of. People who blindly trust the TPG are not doing themselves a favor. TPG have done one this for us all good bad or indifferent that’s commoditization if said card in slab. Follow the money that’s what it’s about when it comes to grading. Registry and Pop Report are two of the most brilliant marketing platforms ever when it comes to TPG. They know rich folks or even regular guys like me are competitive, registry drills that home. Investors chase pop report. This is all theoretical and most may think BS sorry I’ve gotten way off on this thread. Please be careful of fakes. If it looks to good to be true it probably is.

Because I'm suggesting that people inform themselves? Sure, if you say so.

If these fakes are good enough to fool an auction house that can see the card in person I don't see how the average collector will be able to spot them from a scan. Unless the AH just completely missed something obvious.

Don't assume the AHs are experts as to every card that has been faked. Some are, some may not be.

Peter's comment to educate yourself is the best advice in the world. I know we have a ton of people in the business, cough hobby, that weren't doing this in the 80s when shows were everywhere and you could hold cards in your hand. With that said, we also didn't have the internet, email, texts and ll the crap we have now..

TPGs are suppose to bring peace of mind, but educating yourself will always be the better way to go. Reach out others, ask questions and do as much research as you need to put your mind to ease. When you educate yourself on a card you also tend to meet more people and add to your personal network as most people are extremely willing to share info when spotting fakes.

And on LOTG, if anyone thinks Al didn't take care of this then you need to go and piss in someone else's cheerios. Al did the right thing, apologized, credited the potential buyer, was transparent and in the end STOPPED a transaction that was no good. IMO Al simply did his job, but Ill give him credit for doing his job the right way. Al is the last person I would be concerned about getting screwed in a card deal from, plus the man absolutely loves doing what he does.

S Suckow

I'm sure they're not. But I would assume the average person running an auction house is more knowledgeable than the average collector. Plus they have the advantage of seeing the card in person. Spotting some of these, which may be authentic but altered cards in cracked or fake psa cases requires more than educating yourself a little on spotting common fakes.

It's too bad that buying a card from a major AH in an sgc or PSA holder is no longer a guareantee you're getting what you're paying for.

I don't disagree. My only point, and I really don't know why people take issue with it, is that a collector considering making a major purchase ought to take a little time to educate himself taking advantage of all the resources available to do so.

They don't, they're just trying to make their own points and you're crapping all over them.

Shame on you for suggesting that people should take some responsibility in knowing more about what they are buying! That is just so unreasonable. :D

I have no issue with that at all. Collectors should have as much knowledge as they can before spending a few hundred or thousand dollars on a baseball card. Something as simple as knowing when to avoid a specific Ebay seller or passing on a deal that seems too good to be true could have helped avoid situations I've read about on this board.

And I know at least one person who got burned on a 52T who would have avoided it had he taken an hour to learn the basics of how to spot a bad one. Not a one off situation either, a few years back when I was looking at buying one there were several questionable ones on ebay, in what appeared to be PSA holders.

My saying is "Only collect what you can authenticate yourself."

Though I thought the main point of third part graders was to identify trimming and give an independent judgment of condition grade, something that is hard for the buyer to do online or via mail order. Certainly, authentication can be a part of that.

I still stand behind my initial comment. I'm not out to chastise PSA or AH. The point was, if someone were to come along and introduce a new holder or service that would prevent most of these fraud cases, they could challenge the commonly-held understanding that PSA would always be the most-reputable and command the most $$$$.

It may never happen, but I think there's a potential opportunity if someone were to figure it out.