Alteration vs. Conservation Defined

[oldjudge]

Who made this guy king?

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Who made this guy king?

With tenets, he would more rightly be identified as The Landlord, and with this proclamation the rent is now due for all asset-minded investors.

Brian (Words are so darn confusing)

[sayheykid54]

The question PWCC is why? Why would you want your business model to involve what many view as alterations?

You are promoting the fact of ENCOURAGING collectors to "conserve" cards. Seems ridiculous to me.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Who made this guy king?

The Lady Of The Lake when she held aloft Excalibur?

[calvindog]

If PWCC doesn’t acknowledge the altered cards they’re selling why would the card doctors acknowledge it? And what’s the point in expecting the card doctors to announce their work? After all, they slipped the cards past the TPG for a reason.

I think Brent and Betsy need better advisers.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

If PWCC doesn’t acknowledge the altered cards they’re selling why would the card doctors acknowledge it? And what’s the point in expecting the card doctors to announce their work? After all, they slipped the cards past the TPG for a reason.

I think Brent and Betsy need better advisers.

The consignment form will be modified to include, if you submitted any of these cards yourself, please state all work you did on the card, so PWCC can determine whether it is altered or conserved nd what to disclose.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Man there is some serious apathy going on around here. PWCC proposes to adopt a significantly different definition of altered cards than the TPGs and the hobby in general have embraced for decades, and there's less response than if someone complained about shipping costs on an ebay card.

[frankbmd]

Shipping costs less than the vault.

Sales tax avoidance is a straw man.

Alteration is monetary.

Restoration is monetary.

The soaker, the fixer, the TPG, the consignor and the vendor are all in the same boat, which is not yet sinking.

Will anything change as a result of a definition rewrite? Unlikely.

Money talks.

I really don’t know but I suspect that high grade tobacco cards are more prevalent today than 25 years ago.

I have neuropathy, not apathy.

[MattyC]

PWCC's "tenet" is just another opinion, in an infinite sea of opinions. I value my time and don't see why I should pay much of it to what some eBay seller says. I don't have to subscribe to what PWCC says anymore than I have to obey PSA's opinion, when they say one card is better than another. Life's way too short to let opinions cause aggravation— especially in one's hobby, which is a source of enjoyment, relaxation, and escape from big problems.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Man there is some serious apathy going on around here. PWCC proposes to adopt a significantly different definition of altered cards than the TPGs and the hobby in general have embraced for decades, and there's less response than if someone complained about shipping costs on an ebay card.

Peter,

I'm not sure that its apathy, per se, so much as resignation. I agree with you that the proposed "definition" of altered cards is substantially different from what has historically been the norm, obviously for overtly financial reasons, and that it is complete BS given what's going on. It is actually meaningless. But after years of shilling complaints, false bid complaints, failure to disqualify shill/retracting bidders according to the stated "policy," etc., why would people get too exorcised about this? What most collectors care about is the number, not what happened to get it there. I think I disagree with Leon that PWCC is doing anything good for the hobby, but that's an argument for another day. And, I will have to admit that I've bought cards from them before.

In any event, stuff trumps all. Always has, probably always will. They are perceived as having good stuff. Evidently that's what matters. Doesn't matter how or why. Too sad.

[glynparson]

Sorry Brent but conservation is anything done so the item exists for a longer period of time that’s it. Restoration is done to improve the items appearance and can be used to deceive buyers into thinking an item is in better natural condition than it truly is (if not disclosed)That is it end of definitions. All this other stuff is spin to try and justify what in my opinion is altering a card. Even some of the things I hear Leon and others saying are ok is altering. Erasing marks is altering a card in my opinion. Any chemicals that could degrade or change the paper in anyway is alteration in my opinion. Really not a fan of this statement at all and I think You, Brent, have done some positive things so this isn’t just an i hate PWCC opinion. I have used your consignment services and was generally impressed with how you guys handled my cards. The final things that worry me are the issues brought up on blowout that seem to indicate a preference for giving your own cards these stickers that seem to add significant value. That is an issue I’d love to see you adddress openly and honestly. Also the apparent partnering that was supposedly exposed on blowout with someone many consider a prolific card doctor. Those issues are important to many of us who have used your services as a buyer and a seller.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Man there is some serious apathy going on around here. PWCC proposes to adopt a significantly different definition of altered cards than the TPGs and the hobby in general have embraced for decades, and there's less response than if someone complained about shipping costs on an ebay card.

I think what is missing from this thread that is causing the Blowout Forums thread to blow up, so to speak, are some of the examples over there, illustrating, perhaps, what the new PWCC tenets are trying to support. Here are a few of the examples, which you can see in the links Calvindog provided:

[tschock]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

I think what is missing from this thread that is causing the Blowout Forums thread to blow up, so to speak, are some of the examples over there, illustrating, perhaps, what the new PWCC tenets are trying to support. Here are a few of the examples, which you can see in the links Calvindog provided:

Even if these aren't the same cards (and I do believe they are), it is obvious from the borders that they have been trimmed. So the conspiracy theorist in me wonders if the tenets are an attempt at one hand washing the other. I mean so what if the card was trimmed? All of what is left is original, right? And the creases, dings, rounded corners weren't part of the original card anyway, right? So we are simply conserving what is left, and why should that be a problem if the TPGs don't catch it (or care)? Maybe not giving total legitimacy to 'trimming as preservation', but at least 'trimming as not a big deal'. I mean really, trimming a painting doesn't change the fact that it is original, does it?

[frankbmd]

Rereading Brent’s definitions it seems that the ultimate conservation can make the card appear as manufactured, theoretical in PSA 10 pack fresh condition.

However the restored card has no such upper limit, suggesting that a restored card theoretically could receive a PSA 11, or even in rare cases a PSA 12.

If only PSA would award such grades, Brent’s definitions might make sense.



C’mon Man!!!

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

I think what is missing from this thread that is causing the Blowout Forums thread to blow up, so to speak, are some of the examples over there, illustrating, perhaps, what the new PWCC tenets are trying to support. Here are a few of the examples, which you can see in the links Calvindog provided:

A picture really does tell 1,000 words. I understand everyone's frustrations with PWCC. I really do. And some very good questions have been presented that I think they need to address. But what I truly don't understand is that no one is holding PSA accountable. Are they not to blame too? Why aren't they detecting the work being done on these cards? PWCC is being raked over the coals, but everyone turns a blind eye to PSA's involvement. Why? Why do people continue to submit cards to PSA when they can't do what you're paying them to do? That makes absolutely no sense to me. I'm sorry, everyone can complain all they want to but truly nothing will ever change until the people that you pay to do their job (the TPGs) actually does their job. If PSA did their job, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Things will never change until the TPGs are held accountable. Otherwise this thread is just useless whiney chatter.

One of the first things I educated myself on 35 years ago when I started this hobby was how to tell the difference between a factory cut and a non-factory cut. If I can do it, so can the TPGs.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Who made this guy king?

He who makes the money, makes the rules.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Who made this guy king?

I think PWCC is the King, The King of submitting doctored cards to PSA and then selling them. I'll bet 50% of everything he has been selling is doctored, IMHO