Conservation vs restoration defined by other genres of collectibles

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Whether they could or not, why should they? You haven't made that case at all IMO. Nor have you responded to the point that as long as there is a price differential there is a huge motive to alter to deceive.

PS I don't WANT a restored card. I am guessing the overwhelming majority of people here do not WANT restored cards. You're way off base, as evidenced by the reception you're getting so far.

Simple response to your thoughts Peter. Stagnation. Enjoy your message board to continue venting while nothing changes and all we hear about are controversial topics.

At some point TPG's need to recognize restored cards as did CGC. This includes publishing guidelines for tolerances of conservation vs restoration. This is exactly what PWCC is trying to convey in their tenets. Else it will always be a taboo topic with hidden motives. I'll also refer back to my comment about TPG's needing to give more effort in distinguishing the two. Thus the idea of creating a "purple" label of their own like CGC does.

Most comic book collectors in the silver age and modern book era do not want "restored" purple label books. Most golden age collectors have no choice if they want to own a key book. But at least CGC openly recognizes the differences.

I provided ideas with examples from other TPG's from the comic industry.
I already have a profession so it is not my job to make the change. But I can certainly be an advocate for it.

I'm open ears to constructive ideas. Complaining and stagnation is not my idea of constructive.

[Peter_Spaeth]

PWCC doesn't even understand what conservation is. They misuse the word throughout.

Call me a skeptic, but I'm not seeing anything necessary or positive in it. What we need, as I've said, is for TPGs to improve and for card doctors and their enablers to be prosecuted.

[bounce]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

At some point TPG's need to recognize restored cards as did CGC.

Martin - They already do, why do you keep saying this? PSA has multiple different options, including "restored" which they can use.

EDIT: Added pictures of before and after, courtesy of t206resource.com



They also have published standards for grading, see this link.
https://www.psacard.com/Resources/gr...tandards#cards

They probably haven't really dealt with the definitions as well as they could, however:
N2 - Evidence of restoration - When a card's paper stock appears to have been built up - for example, when ripped corners are built up to look like new corners.
N5 - Altered Stock - This includes, but is not limited to characteristics on the card that appear to show some form of alteration such as paper restoration, crease/wrinkle pressing or enhanced gloss.
N7 - Evidence of Cleaning - When a whitener is used to whiten borders or a solution is used to remove wax, candy, gum or tobacco stains.
AA - Authentic Altered - This means that while PSA is certifying that the item is genuine, due to the existence of alterations, the item cannot receive a numerical grade. The term altered may mean that the card shows evidence of one or more of the following: trimming, recoloring, restoration, and/or cleaning. Items receiving the "Authentic Altered" designation, in our opinion, are genuine with the presence of some type of alteration. This is done on a case-by-case basis only, and must be notated on the submission form at the time of submission.

As I've continued to state, just be consistent and use them.

For whatever reason, that Wagner got I believe the N2 - Restored. Why it's not AA - Authentic Altered I have no idea, considering it had recoloring, restoration and cleaning done to it. Are we to accept that because the card wasn't submitted on the form to be AA that's why I ended up in a N2? Or is it because "restored" just sounds better than "altered", especially when you're talking about a multi-hundred thousand $ card?

The 52 Mantle that's been discussed has clear evidence of at least being cleaned. There's speculation of other work to it as well, including trimming and recoloring, but I don't know that I have seen sufficient evidence to say exactly what that is - but the circumstantial evidence of something else besides cleaning being done to it is pretty compelling. Regardless, it got a 4.5 grade instead of say N7. Brent has brought up that he's never seen N7 used, I don't think I have either so seems he has a valid point on that. However, in hindsight, something was done to that card, it was cracked and resubbed, whether or not you can actually SEE evidence of something done to it in hand the pictures prove something was done. PSA should reslab this thing at a minimum, and Brent needs to stop pretending the pictures don't exist.


And finally, regarding making "examples"...I certainly don't FEEL like you made an example of me or any of my posts. As a matter of fact, I think you've added credence to much of what myself and others have pointed out, so thank you for that.

You and I do agree on a few things (like what the TPGs can and should do), on quite a number of others we don't. I think I've been pretty open and direct in expressing the basis upon which my disagreement is based. If you feel like that's not "constructive", so be it - I feel pretty good you're in the minority in that view.

Maybe I'm just not "mature" enough...fortunately I have the card hobby to fall back into.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by bounce

Martin - They already do, why do you keep saying this? PSA has multiple different options, including "restored" which they can use.

EDIT: Added pictures of before and after, courtesy of t206resource.com



They also have published standards for grading, see this link.
https://www.psacard.com/Resources/gr...tandards#cards

They probably haven't really dealt with the definitions as well as they could, however:
N2 - Evidence of restoration - When a card's paper stock appears to have been built up - for example, when ripped corners are built up to look like new corners.
N5 - Altered Stock - This includes, but is not limited to characteristics on the card that appear to show some form of alteration such as paper restoration, crease/wrinkle pressing or enhanced gloss.
N7 - Evidence of Cleaning - When a whitener is used to whiten borders or a solution is used to remove wax, candy, gum or tobacco stains.
AA - Authentic Altered - This means that while PSA is certifying that the item is genuine, due to the existence of alterations, the item cannot receive a numerical grade. The term altered may mean that the card shows evidence of one or more of the following: trimming, recoloring, restoration, and/or cleaning. Items receiving the "Authentic Altered" designation, in our opinion, are genuine with the presence of some type of alteration. This is done on a case-by-case basis only, and must be notated on the submission form at the time of submission.

As I've continued to state, just be consistent and use them.

For whatever reason, that Wagner got I believe the N2 - Restored. Why it's not AA - Authentic Altered I have no idea, considering it had recoloring, restoration and cleaning done to it. Are we to accept that because the card wasn't submitted on the form to be AA that's why I ended up in a N2? Or is it because "restored" just sounds better than "altered", especially when you're talking about a multi-hundred thousand $ card?

The 52 Mantle that's been discussed has clear evidence of at least being cleaned. There's speculation of other work to it as well, including trimming and recoloring, but I don't know that I have seen sufficient evidence to say exactly what that is - but the circumstantial evidence of something else besides cleaning being done to it is pretty compelling. Regardless, it got a 4.5 grade instead of say N7. Brent has brought up that he's never seen N7 used, I don't think I have either so seems he has a valid point on that. However, in hindsight, something was done to that card, it was cracked and resubbed, whether or not you can actually SEE evidence of something done to it in hand the pictures prove something was done. PSA should reslab this thing at a minimum, and Brent needs to stop pretending the pictures don't exist.


And finally, regarding making "examples"...I certainly don't FEEL like you made an example of me or any of my posts. As a matter of fact, I think you've added credence to much of what myself and others have pointed out, so thank you for that.

You and I do agree on a few things (like what the TPGs can and should do), on quite a number of others we don't. I think I've been pretty open and direct in expressing the basis upon which my disagreement is based. If you feel like that's not "constructive", so be it - I feel pretty good you're in the minority in that view.

Maybe I'm just not "mature" enough...fortunately I have the card hobby to fall back into.

I would love a card restored like that! As long as it's disclosed from the beginning and not an attempt to fraud, which is what Brent Mastro is doing now.

[jchcollins]

All this talk about hobby practices maturing to be more like comics and the insuation that being more accepting of alterations will also make it easy to properly identify them is great, but I think this is all pointless if there is not also a market at large who would not only be accepting of this, but demanding of it - and at least right now I don't think that is the case. Grading companies were started ostensibly because of alteration problems and things going undetected in the 1990's right? The difference is that they were just supposed to reject such cards and not attempt to understand what had been done to them. The result, rather quickly was TPG's establishing incentives for cards that not only were not altered, but were in super-high grade. By going down this road so quickly, they made truly altered cards ultra-black sheep, and quickly - it would seem at least thoretically - lost any true incentive not to try to cut corners so they would be able to avoid giving out these designations. Because obviously continually doing so, even if it was the right thing to do - is going to be bad for your business as a TPG.

So what are we saying, the goal is the same as it was earlier to prevent / crack down on alterations - but um, it didn't work the first time, so now we need to go back and embrace a certain degree of permissable alterations so we can get better about calling things out? Again, ok - but I don't think outside of concerned true collectors on forums like this one - we likely aren't anywhere near a majority - that anyone will give much of a damn. It's not going to be a market reality. As we've said before, the vast majority of the deep-pocketed investing and even high-end collecting world is going to continue along an ends-justify-the-means trail and be happy with their ridiculously high-graded vintage cards in slabs whether or not they were trimmed or restored or what have you.

So at the end of the day until we see a dramatic shift in the overall marketplace, I think that TPG's are useful tools, only - upon which not nearly so much weight should be assigned. It's an opinion of an examination, nothing more. Notice that while we lobby for change, be it with the TPG's or an entity like PWCC - we all still seem to approach the matter of slabbing as a "finality." Not just something that happened to the card in it's lifespan and was then moved-on from. No buddy, this card is now a PSA 8 for life! Hehe. You've got to admit we do that here, too. If we could somehow get around that in the honest discussion of what types of weight to assign to what issues, I think the hobby would be a lot better off.

[Goudey77]

Good post jhcollins!

Seems these challenging ideas/questions on threads are mostly click bait for the naysayers.

So I Appreciate your articulated thoughts on the subject.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Good post jhcollins!

Seems these challenging ideas/questions on threads are mostly click bait for the naysayers.

So I Appreciate your articulated thoughts on the subject.

Thank you. By the way I appreciate your insight on the comic hobby. I have always found grading of any type "interesting"; it's almost like a sub-hobby of mine. Instead of going after only cards in high grade - as is affordable I like to get examples of cards in all grades above poor and fair - in a better attempt to understand granding norms and trends. Even if some of the standards applied to comic books don't really translate to cards, it's great stuff to read about.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

So at the end of the day until we see a dramatic shift in the overall marketplace, I think that TPG's are useful tools, only - upon which not nearly so much weight should be assigned.

Agree. Obviously the same with TPA autograph opinions. They're independent opinions.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

All this talk about hobby practices maturing to be more like comics and the insuation that being more accepting of alterations will also make it easy to properly identify them is great, but I think this is all pointless if there is not also a market at large who would not only be accepting of this, but demanding of it - and at least right now I don't think that is the case. Grading companies were started ostensibly because of alteration problems and things going undetected in the 1990's right? The difference is that they were just supposed to reject such cards and not attempt to understand what had been done to them. The result, rather quickly was TPG's establishing incentives for cards that not only were not altered, but were in super-high grade. By going down this road so quickly, they made truly altered cards ultra-black sheep, and quickly - it would seem at least thoretically - lost any true incentive not to try to cut corners so they would be able to avoid giving out these designations. Because obviously continually doing so, even if it was the right thing to do - is going to be bad for your business as a TPG.

So what are we saying, the goal is the same as it was earlier to prevent / crack down on alterations - but um, it didn't work the first time, so now we need to go back and embrace a certain degree of permissable alterations so we can get better about calling things out? Again, ok - but I don't think outside of concerned true collectors on forums like this one - we likely aren't anywhere near a majority - that anyone will give much of a damn. It's not going to be a market reality. As we've said before, the vast majority of the deep-pocketed investing and even high-end collecting world is going to continue along an ends-justify-the-means trail and be happy with their ridiculously high-graded vintage cards in slabs whether or not they were trimmed or restored or what have you.

So at the end of the day until we see a dramatic shift in the overall marketplace, I think that TPG's are useful tools, only - upon which not nearly so much weight should be assigned. It's an opinion of an examination, nothing more. Notice that while we lobby for change, be it with the TPG's or an entity like PWCC - we all still seem to approach the matter of slabbing as a "finality." Not just something that happened to the card in it's lifespan and was then moved-on from. No buddy, this card is now a PSA 8 for life! Hehe. You've got to admit we do that here, too. If we could somehow get around that in the honest discussion of what types of weight to assign to what issues, I think the hobby would be a lot better off.

always appreciate your viewpoint JC

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by bounce

Martin - They already do, why do you keep saying this? PSA has multiple different options, including "restored" which they can use.

Maybe I'm just not "mature" enough...fortunately I have the card hobby to fall back into.

My point is that TPG’s like PSA as you pointed out could use some changes to the way they define, address and label these various scenarios.
While I appreciate a good old “restored” T206 Wagner slab, it’s archaic in comparison to what CGC has done so far.

I don’t want to repeat myself I just want to make it a point that we could learn from other sectors of collectibles.

Watch the CGC interview you’d be amazed at their openness and knowledge on the matter. Card TPG’s are very tight lipped and seem to take every incident case by case. There is no clear line in the sand. Thus a need for a stance and tenets of sort like PWCC has done. Crap on the idea all you want but someone needs to be a voice if TPG’s won’t speak up.

[Goudey77]

I’ll post it again. Very informative CGC interview exposing the possibilities of defining conservation and restoration.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0H5j0mQYpy8

[irv]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

I’ll post it again. Very informative CGC interview exposing the possibilities of defining conservation and restoration.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0H5j0mQYpy8

Fairly new here, constantly praising PWCC? Nah, your not a plug for Brent at all.
I'm not really sure what makes others think you are?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

My point is that TPG’s like PSA as you pointed out could use some changes to the way they define, address and label these various scenarios.
While I appreciate a good old “restored” T206 Wagner slab, it’s archaic in comparison to what CGC has done so far.

I don’t want to repeat myself I just want to make it a point that we could learn from other sectors of collectibles.

Watch the CGC interview you’d be amazed at their openness and knowledge on the matter. Card TPG’s are very tight lipped and seem to take every incident case by case. There is no clear line in the sand. Thus a need for a stance and tenets of sort like PWCC has done. Crap on the idea all you want but someone needs to be a voice if TPG’s won’t speak up.

See it's posts like this that make one question your motives. You view PWCC as some sort of savior. Many of us view them as a company that's trying to spin their less than ethical actions of the past. Does that mean we find the TPG's blameless, of course not, but to basically say that PWCC is the solution to the TPG problem is...

...not sure I have the words.

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

See it's posts like this that make one question your motives. You view PWCC as some sort of savior. Many of us view them as a company that's trying to spin their less than ethical actions of the past. Does that mean we find the TPG's blameless, of course not, but to basically say that PWCC is the solution to the TPG problem is...

...not sure I have the words.

Does everyone on here have an agenda or motive? I certainly do not.
I have opinions on specific topics that may align with what PWCC is trying to convey in their communication. If your opinions differ then cool. We should still be able to get along without questioning motives. It is what it is.

Public shaming, defamatory remarks and accusations on a message board is not cool. If you want to be vocal about something take it offline and talk it through with whomever you have a problem with. You might even have a new perspective after the conversation.

Man up and defend your position. Not hide behind a message board moniker.

If anyone wants to reach out and speak to me on subjects i'd be happy to talk. I'm an open book and have no agenda other than talk hobby, meet new people who share the same interest.

If any of you are on Instagram you can look me up @Goudey77 which I use strictly for hobby related networking. DM me or call me. I'd like to chat it up with those who are most passionate about subjects like this.

[Goudey77]

My response is not directed toward Aquarian Sports. Just a general response to the question about my motive. Which many of you have pointed out.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

My response is not directed toward Aquarian Sports. Just a general response to the question about my motive. Which many of you have pointed out.

I don't questions your motives, I just question what the HELL you could be thinking in regards to standing up for a well known and now documented fraud artist? So deep in bed with several guys that spin doctored cards through him back and forth, flip, cut, flip Conserve, cut flip REPEAT until the cards look like Mini's.

We don't agree that'e true. You should really try one small thing...OPEN YOUR EYES...if you look hard enough maybe you can see it also.