Ashamed - Topps T206 Buy Back Fraud

[drcy]

If you know something is bad, you can't reoffer it as authentic or unaltered no matter what its 'pedigree.' However, I don't doubt that when a card is in a holder it's harder to see all the qualities and details and many sellers aren't experts and reasonably defer to graders and TPAs.

Though, in the long run, it's good for your business if people know you're the type of seller who will point out when TPAs and graders have made mistakes on items you are selling.

My belief is, even if an item is in a holder or comes with a LOA (such as with an autograph or piece of memorabilia), the seller is responsible to the buyer for the authenticity and correct identification. Other than obviously blatant errors, the condition grade on a holdered card is a different thing, as that's a matter of opinion and the seller can't properly grade a card when it's in a holder. Some alteration no doubt will be hidden in a holder too, so that can also be a different situation.

I remember a number of years ago, an eBay seller was offering a rare and desirable "Leaf 'Hermansk'" error card (Hermanski missing a letter)." It was more than obviously simply a label error, as anyone with more than zero eyes saw that the card said "Hermanski" not "Hermansk." But the seller, who had to know the card was not the error, was selling it as the error card because that's what the label said. This is a blatant example of where the seller has to say what the item really is and point out that the grader or authenticator is in error.

[edhans]

Originally Posted by drcy

If you know something is bad, you can't reoffer it as authentic or unaltered no matter what its 'pedigree.' However, I don't doubt that when a card is in a holder it's harder to see all the qualities and details and many sellers aren't experts and reasonably defer to graders and TPAs.

Though, in the long run, it's good for your business if people know you're the type of seller who will point out when TPAs and graders have made mistakes on items you are selling.

My belief is, even if an item is in a holder or comes with a LOA (such as with an autograph or piece of memorabilia), the seller is responsible to the buyer for the item being authenticity and correct identification. Other than obviously blatant errors that anyone can see in a scan, the condition grade on a holdered card is a different thing, as that's a matter of opinion and the seller can't properly grade a card when it's in a holder. Some alteration no doubt will be hidden in a holder too, so that can also be a different situation.

I remember a number of years ago, an eBay seller was offering a rare and desirable "Leaf 'Hermansk'" error card (Hermanski missing a letter)." It was more than obviously simply a label error, as anyone with more than zero eyes saw that the card said "Hermanski" not "Hermansk." But the seller, who had to know the card was not the error, was selling it as the error card because that's what the label said. This is a blatant example of where the seller has to say what the item really is and point out that the grader or authenticator is in error.

+1 again. Well said, David.

[Peter_Spaeth]

In which of these situations, if any, do I need to dislose?

1. I buy a raw card I suspect is trimmed. I think if I bury it within a submission I can get it through. A TPG grades it.

2. I buy a PSA 8. I don't like the looks of it, suspect strongly it's trimmed. I put it back out for sale.

3. I buy an SGC 92. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross, PSA rejects it for evidence of trimming. I put it back out for sale.

4. I buy an SGC 88. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross. PSA declines on min. grade grounds. I put it back out for sale. Someone then asks me, did you try to cross it.

[DeanH3]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In which of these situations, if any, do I need to dislose?

1. I buy a raw card I suspect is trimmed. I think if I bury it within a submission I can get it through. A TPG grades it.

2. I buy a PSA 8. I don't like the looks of it, suspect strongly it's trimmed. I put it back out for sale.

3. I buy an SGC 92. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross, PSA rejects it for evidence of trimming. I put it back out for sale.

4. I buy an SGC 88. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross. PSA declines on min. grade grounds. I put it back out for sale. Someone then asks me, did you try to cross it.

These are some initial thoughts I have after reading these questions. I'm not set on them and could change after some discussion.

1. You are selling PSA's opinion. The buyer should determine if they agree or not. No need to disclose your suspicion.

2. Send it back to PSA for a review. If it comes back the same then again, you are selling PSA's opinion. No need to disclose. The buyer should determine if they are comfortable with the grade.

3. Again, your selling a TPG's opinion, SGC in this instance. Maybe the card is not trimmed and PSA was incorrect. No need to disclose.

4. PSA doesn't cross a lot of cards in other TPG holders so that doesn't mean the card isn't graded properly by SGC. However, if a potential buyer asks, then be upfront and tell the truth about your attempted results.

I would add though, I would disclose any of these if a potential buyer asked me.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In which of these situations, if any, do I need to dislose?

1. I buy a raw card I suspect is trimmed. I think if I bury it within a submission I can get it through. A TPG grades it.

2. I buy a PSA 8. I don't like the looks of it, suspect strongly it's trimmed. I put it back out for sale.

3. I buy an SGC 92. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross, PSA rejects it for evidence of trimming. I put it back out for sale.

4. I buy an SGC 88. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross. PSA declines on min. grade grounds. I put it back out for sale. Someone then asks me, did you try to cross it.

Pretty easy really, disclose everything no matter if the card is graded or not. This makes you a good person who cares about others.

Disclose nothing because it is the TPG's fault and hide behind their incompetence. This makes you a piece of garbage that only cares about yourself no matter how you rationalize it to yourself.

Just my honest opinion.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In which of these situations, if any, do I need to dislose?

1. I buy a raw card I suspect is trimmed. I think if I bury it within a submission I can get it through. A TPG grades it.

2. I buy a PSA 8. I don't like the looks of it, suspect strongly it's trimmed. I put it back out for sale.

3. I buy an SGC 92. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross, PSA rejects it for evidence of trimming. I put it back out for sale.

4. I buy an SGC 88. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross. PSA declines on min. grade grounds. I put it back out for sale. Someone then asks me, did you try to cross it.

I would disclose each of those scenarios. I wouldn't even wait to be asked if it had been the subject of a crossover attempt, although I cannot see myself trying to cross from SGC to PSA in the first instance.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I would disclose each of those scenarios. I wouldn't even wait to be asked if it had been the subject of a crossover attempt, although I cannot see myself trying to cross from SGC to PSA in the first instance.

Careful you are on a slippery slope. Are you also going to say every time you think a card should have graded lower? Every time a card has been bumped?

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Careful you are on a slippery slope. Are you also going to say every time you think a card should have graded lower? Every time a card has been bumped?

I don't resubmit cards, but if I did, yes I would state that it had been bumped. As for the other, I would give my opinion on the grade if asked and might anyway. Sorry, but these are really not tough decisions for me.

[Fred]

Grading is very subjective. If a TPG indicates a card is a 5, it doesn't mean it would grade a 5 two months later by the same company.

If a card cross graded to a higher grade, does that mean you have to disclose the card was bumped up? The way most people look at it, as long as the label from a "legitimate" TPG indicates a numeric grade then it doesn't matter what it was before.

What if a card was initially deemed "trimmed" or AUTH by PSA and three months later you crack it out, resubmit it and PSA assigns a "7" to the card. Does that have to be disclosed? I thought it was an accepted practice to just accept the "legitimate" TPGs assigned opinion.

Look at the "Hall" collection of T206 cards graded by PSA. I would have to believe that most people that have seen that collection of cards would have to believe many of the cards were obviously trimmed, yet it is just accepted by the general collecting public that the cards are legitimately graded because PSA assigned the cards numeric grades.

What about the McNall/Gretzky Wagner? How come that card gets a pass?

[drcy]

I don't think you have to disclose previous information/events that were wrong. If you resubmit a card because the first label misidentified the card (calling a 1957 Topps a 1958, for example), you don't have to disclose that resubmission. Similarly, if the original grading was clearly wrong and you get it regraded to get the correct grade, I don't think you have to disclose that. If you got an autograph in person at a Tri-Star show and have the in-person Tri-Star COA and photo of the guy signing it, but PSA rejects it, I don't think you have to disclose the letter. It may beg the question of why the person would choose to try to get the additional PSA letter, but, believe me, people do that. On the PSA forum, a collector had a game used jersey with team LOA and a photo match and was asking about getting an additional PSA/DNA authentication, and I foolishly asked what was the point paying to get a PSA/DNA letter. The wrong forum to ask that question

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I don't resubmit cards, but if I did, yes I would state that it had been bumped.

I have bought a card from a board member who (sometimes deservedly so) gets a lot of crap, and he 100% disclosed that the T206 Wajo pitching Tolstoi SGC 82 I was buying had once sat in an SGC 80 flip and he had it bumped. I think that was a stand up act, and frankly, I think the card is still undergraded in an 82 flip!!

[rats60]

I agree to disclose, but I see the first 2 as more grey than
black and white. I guess I am jaded when it comes to TPGs and trimmed cards. I have had too many cards kicked. Many that I bought in the 60s and early 70s, either pulled from packs or bought mail order. I don't buy that those guys were trimming .05 to .25 cards when most people weren't really condition conscience. My experience with TPGs is that if they err on an opinion in trimmed or not, that 99% of the time they are not grading a good card and 1% missing a trimmed card.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I don't see a reason to disclose 2. I am not a market player, my personal opinion is not material. Grading history on the other hand is an objective fact. On the other hand, I've never seen anyone disclose unfavorable grading history, as far as I recall.

[cardsnstuff]

Originally Posted by rats60

I agree to disclose, but I see the first 2 as more grey than
black and white. I guess I am jaded when it comes to TPGs and trimmed cards. I have had too many cards kicked. Many that I bought in the 60s and early 70s, either pulled from packs or bought mail order. I don't buy that those guys were trimming .05 to .25 cards when most people weren't really condition conscience. My experience with TPGs is that if they err on an opinion in trimmed or not, that 99% of the time they are not grading a good card and 1% missing a trimmed card.

I agree, and herein lies the problem; how many of us had a card minizero or evid trim and resubmitted it and presto, like magic it has a number

[rats60]

Originally Posted by cardsnstuff

I agree, and herein lies the problem; how many of us had a card minizero or evid trim and resubmitted it and presto, like magic it has a number

All the time. I measure and examine cards. If I feel there is a problem, I don't send it in. If it gets kicked and slabbed the second time, I feel that they got it right. They were just looking to get additional revenue from grading. Same with cards that look under graded.