Really, PWCC?

[Bliggity]

Shady.

I'm not a PWCC hater and I bid in their auctions, but I have to call shenanigans on this. I expect this from bottom-feeder eBay sellers, but was very surprised to see PWCC describe a "? AUTHTCT" card as "PSA AUTH" in both the listing title and item description.

Now, I understand their point that the card looks legit, and I agree that the card looks good, especially assuming that it came from the same collection as the dozens of other E cards of similar condition in the current auction. But don't tell us it's a "PSA AUTH" card when that's the opposite of what PSA determined. Yeesh.

[bnorth]

But they are confident it is real.


EDIT: Also kind of weird that the zoom option was disabled for that listing.

[yanksfan09]

I don't consider myself an expert on that particular set, but from what I can see the card looks real to me, FWIW. Grading companies are not infallible.

[Bliggity]

Originally Posted by yanksfan09

I don't consider myself an expert on that particular set, but from what I can see the card looks real to me, FWIW. Grading companies are not infallible.

I agree, which gave me pause about the language in the listing. But then either send it back in or just list it raw and guarantee its authenticity.

[yanksfan09]

Yes, I agree the title of the auction should be changed to better reflect the grade (non grade) status. From the auction title, you'd think it was graded Authentic.

[Beastmode]

I"m guessing it was an error on their part. Why not send them an e-mail and let us know what transpires?

[Bliggity]

Originally Posted by Beastmode

I"m guessing it was an error on their part. Why not send them an e-mail and let us know what transpires?

Done. Will update when I get a response.

[bobbyw8469]

Card looks real to me also. PSA blew it. I guess PWCC just wanted to be as transparent as possible.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

Card looks real to me also. PSA blew it. I guess PWCC just wanted to be as transparent as possible.

If they are being so transparent why is the zoom option disabled on this auction but is not on their other listings. That has to be done on purpose.

[Bliggity]

They're not being transparent. Yes, they showed the flip, but they're clearly saying that PSA deemed it authentic, when that's not true. I agree that maybe it was a mistake. They haven't answered my inquiry yet.

[PhillipAbbott79]

Hi,

I was interested in this card, but definitely not any more. I think the wording on this card is 'intentionally clever'.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-11-T206...cAAOSwMtxXwixY

What the hell is a "small paper pull"? What does that even mean? If you have a big card like this, would you want to give a better explanation of the problem. You can't zoom in far enough to really see what is going on.

Is this one with a large paper pull?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/T206-Miller-...gAAOSw3xJVcOcY

Phillip Abbott

[clydepepper]

I sent a message to the seller, explaining the difference between 'PSA AUTH' that they have in the item title (which is PSA stating that they recognize the authenticity of the card) and '? AUTHTCT' which is on the label (and means PSA states the card is of questionable authenticity), and asked that they either correct the title or, failing that (since there have already been bids placed), withdraw the listing.

We will see if they respond.

[Beastmode]

Originally Posted by hieroglyphics

I sent a message to the seller, explaining the difference between 'PSA AUTH' that they have in the item title (which is PSA stating that they recognize the authenticity of the card) and '? AUTHTCT' which is on the label (and means PSA states the card is of questionable authenticity), and asked that they either correct the title or, failing that (since there have already been bids placed), withdraw the listing.

We will see if they respond.

I don't buy questionable "?" authentic cards, but holy crap, can't PSA be more clear in the flip. the have the word "authentic" in the flip for frick sake. Really? That's just plain dumb. And the the question mark "?" before the word "authentic" is suppose to be a prefix?

Note to PSA, just say "unknown origination" and lose the word "authentic" in the flip. Stop with the hieroglyphics.

[Leon]

I wish all grading companies would just call them what they are, a reprint. Whether it's authorized or not, if it is made much, much later, not from the original mfg, and isn't real it is a reprint. That would look good on the labels..

Originally Posted by Beastmode

I don't buy questionable "?" authentic cards, but holy crap, can't PSA be more clear in the flip. the have the word "authentic" in the flip for frick sake. Really? That's just plain dumb. And the the question mark "?" before the word "authentic" is suppose to be a prefix?

Note to PSA, just say "unknown origination" and lose the word "authentic" in the flip. Stop with the hieroglyphics.

[martyp]

Originally Posted by Beastmode

I don't buy questionable "?" authentic cards, but holy crap, can't PSA be more clear in the flip. the have the word "authentic" in the flip for frick sake. Really? That's just plain dumb. And the the question mark "?" before the word "authentic" is suppose to be a prefix?

Note to PSA, just say "unknown origination" and lose the word "authentic" in the flip. Stop with the hieroglyphics.

I do not have any problem with what PSA put on the flip. Authentic cards are slabbed and have a flip that states such. This sleeve is not intended to be sold with whatever card someone chooses to put with it. The card was not sealed in so there is no proof that this reprint was even the reprint that was sent in. PSA is not stating that it is a reprint, just that it is their opinion that the card is not original. They could be mistaken. I have had SGC return cards to me because they did not think that they were real and then slab them later when I pointed out what why the card was what I said that it was on the sub.

[Leon]

I politely disagree.
If any TPG knows something isn't real they should state it. They shouldn't leave something like "? AUT" on the flip. It can be interpreted different ways. They should know this by now. And the "reprint" designation should be reserved for ones they are sure of. If they aren't sure then they should say "Not sure" ..... I would respect them more for that then what they do now. BTW, Beastmode and I feel the same way....

Originally Posted by martyp

I do not have any problem with what PSA put on the flip. Authentic cards are slabbed and have a flip that states such. This sleeve is not intended to be sold with whatever card someone chooses to put with it. The card was not sealed in so there is no proof that this reprint was even the reprint that was sent in. PSA is not stating that it is a reprint, just that it is their opinion that the card is not original. They could be mistaken. I have had SGC return cards to me because they did not think that they were real and then slab them later when I pointed out what why the card was what I said that it was on the sub.

[Stonepony]

Originally Posted by PhillipAbbott79

Hi,

I was interested in this card, but definitely not any more. I think the wording on this card is 'intentionally clever'.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-11-T206...cAAOSwMtxXwixY

What the hell is a "small paper pull"? What does that even mean? If you have a big card like this, would you want to give a better explanation of the problem. You can't zoom in far enough to really see what is going on.

Is this one with a large paper pull?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/T206-Miller-...gAAOSw3xJVcOcY

Phillip Abbott

I had some interest in this card until examination revealed those " lines" adjacent to his chin and the " paper pull" on the back. That's paper loss. Its a nice card but WAY over graded.