THE MARKEL REPORT: Are Graded Baseball Cards Being “Juiced” (Aesthetically Enhanced)?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

Um....both, probably make that all 3 (Okeefe, FBI, Postal Inspector) are already aware of this thread, I assure you. I am not quite sure this rises to the top of the priority scale, but that is their call. They know about it.

I would much rather overpay for a good card than get a bad one at an unshilled price, personally.

[stone193]

Thanx Dan - I see what ya mean.

Altho this is very compelling - what do you plan to do about it?

Is this a problem with guys like Susor or PSA or both?

Proving this in a court may be different - I would believe - than convincing the board membership.

Does anyone think PSA is an intentional part of this problem?

That would just seem dumb - for a few more grading fees they're gonna risk their entire collective operation?

mike

[Peter_Spaeth]

I don't think PSA is in cahoots with this seller if he did anything or anyone else. To me it suggests that the 10 second review you get for your 5 bucks is insufficient to detect high quality microtrimming. EDIT TO ADD If asked I might feel differently about a bygone era at PSA when different graders were there.

[barrysloate]

Peter- all the card doctors know that too. I'm sure they all brag about the fact that their work is so good they can get it past the graders.

[Lothar52]

Originally Posted by stone193

Altho this is very compelling - what do you plan to do about it?

Is this a problem with guys like Susor or PSA or both?

mike

I see it as a problem for both, especially after I just had a few cards denied by PSA for trimming because their "border were smooth"....and all of theborders were smooth....and they still were to size and what i believe not trimmed....but yet they graded these??? HUH?? one was a SGC crackout they said was trimmed..pfft!!!

Loth

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I don't think PSA is in cahoots with this seller if he did anything or anyone else. To me it suggests that the 10 second review you get for your 5 bucks is insufficient to detect high quality microtrimming. EDIT TO ADD If asked I might feel differently about a bygone era at PSA when different graders were there.

Anyone who consistently gets cards rejected for evidence of trimming should be placed on a watchlist by the grading companies....I would bet a donut that PSA knows who the trimmers are, and if in fact they do and continue to allow them to send in submission then by my definition they are "In cahoots" with the trimmers.

[Dakota]

Great work Dan. You put a tremendous amount of work and money into this and I appreciate you trying help clean up the hobby.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Anyone who consistently gets cards rejected for evidence of trimming should be placed on a watchlist by the grading companies....I would bet a donut that PSA knows who the trimmers are, and if in fact they do and continue to allow them to send in submission then by my definition they are "In cahoots" with the trimmers.

Dan, you're right of course -- but how would that help PSA make money? In a bizarre way, the Set Registry -- which makes a load of money for PSA -- actually encourages trimming. PSA wants more collectors to want higher graded cards so the trimming will continue, unabated.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Dan, you're right of course -- but how would that help PSA make money? In a bizarre way, the Set Registry -- which makes a load of money for PSA -- actually encourages trimming. PSA wants more collectors to want higher graded cards so the trimming will continue, unabated.

It's interesting to me that this guys name is not allowed to be uttered on the PSA boards yet he is still allowed to submit cards to them. Things that make you go Hmmmmmmmmm....

[HRBAKER]

I've figured it out. The low pop commons are so high because there is so much more labor cost involved. This is disturbing but haven't we really figured as much for a long time now?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

It's interesting to me that this guys name is not allowed to be uttered on the PSA boards yet he is still allowed to submit cards to them. Things that make you go Hmmmmmmmmm....

Exactly. More PSA money = Susor continuing to submit. Less PSA money = discussions regarding Susor and his ability to get trimmed cards past PSA graders.

By the way, did we ever learn if Susor worked at PSA? And if so, under what circumstances did he leave?

[botn]

High percentages of rejected cards do not always indicate a submitter trying to get altered cards past graders. Depending on the service level, value of cards, grade of the card and who is submitting the cards, grading companies are known to reject 100% original cards.

Things to think about:
1) Graders can know whose cards they are grading.
2) Higher graded cards and more expensive cards are rejected more frequently than lower graded or less valuable cards.
3) Not all graders are competent and some lack sufficient experience/abilities to assess alterations or the lack thereof.
4) Most cards are not graded by more than 1 grader.

Of course grading companies will deny most of the above but anyone who submits frequently will tell you the same thing.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by botn

High percentages of rejected cards do not always indicate a submitter trying to get altered cards past graders. Depending on the service level, value of cards, grade of the card and who is submitting the cards, grading companies are known to reject 100% original cards.

Things to think about:
1) Graders can know whose cards they are grading.
2) Higher graded cards and more expensive cards are rejected more frequently than lower graded or less valuable cards.
3) Not all graders are competent and some lack sufficient experience/abilities to assess alterations or the lack thereof.
4) Most cards are not graded by more than 1 grader.

Of course grading companies will deny most of the above but anyone who submits frequently will tell you the same thing.

Greg,
Does your average grader know how many PSA9 1961 Dick Cheneys there are? Thanks. Jeff

[Lothar52]

Originally Posted by botn

High percentages of rejected cards do not always indicate a submitter trying to get altered cards past graders. Depending on the service level, value of cards, grade of the card and who is submitting the cards, grading companies are known to reject 100% original cards.

Things to think about:
1) Graders can know whose cards they are grading.
2) Higher graded cards and more expensive cards are rejected more frequently than lower graded or less valuable cards.
3) Not all graders are competent and some lack sufficient experience/abilities to assess alterations or the lack thereof.
4) Most cards are not graded by more than 1 grader.

Of course grading companies will deny most of the above but anyone who submits frequently will tell you the same thing.

I would have to agree 100% based on the 500 cards ive recently sent in...one like I said was a SGC crack...and they are just as stern with trimming as PSA. Makes me concerned of double-standards

loth

[Peter_Spaeth]

The good news is that no one is forcing us to buy cards that are short in the holder. Simply don't buy them, maybe you miss out on some legit ones, but in my opinion you vastly improve your odds of not getting trimmed ones. Of course it's hard to tell without a large scan sometimes ....

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To me it suggests that the 10 second review you get for your 5 bucks is insufficient to detect high quality microtrimming.

Case closed....that is for those who really care to know what lies WITHIN the slab.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Corey, good point. There probably are registry guys who wouldn't care if you proved to them their cards were trimmed, so long as the label reads 8 or 9. Incredible that things have come to this juncture, where the flip means so much more than the card itself.

[botn]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Corey, good point. There probably are registry guys who wouldn't care if you proved to them their cards were trimmed, so long as the label reads 8 or 9. Incredible that things have come to this juncture, where the flip means so much more than the card itself.

Peter,

I don't think much has really changed. In in the infancy of grading, when auctions appeared in SCD, dealers used to joke about not really needing to show the entire card but just the label so they could fit more cards on a page and save ad space. Think there are simply more collectors who have bought into that and more collectors with more money. Not sure how many of them really care if their cards are altered, as long as their grading company of choice remains in business.

[base_ball]

Shocked, shocked!

[WhenItWasAHobby]

There were several topics up for discussion since I last posted.

Leon wondered about several things. This may help:

1. Yes, the postal inspectors office in Dallas and Houston are both aware of what's been going on and in Dallas for quite awhile. An agent at the Houston office said they are backed up but have an interest in this case and may get to it in the near future.

2. Besides the postal inspectors, a criminal complaint was filed through the F.B.I.'s website to the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) on July 31st. The Complaint Id is I0907311626469362.

3. Michael O'Keefe was contacted by one of the team members several months ago and was asked if he would publicize a civil case related to this issue and he said he would. As far as I know he hasn't seen this thread.


The other topic was PSA.

I'm not going to say anything good or bad about them right now. This is what I know. Susor had a long history of having a significant portion of his invoices rejected for trimming. We know this by checking his cert runs. By the way, a very invaluable thanks to the Network54 member who designed that program on Card Target. That saved us a lot of time. Someone did a calculation of his rejected for evidence of trimmings in 2007 and it was 38%. So in short, I don't have any reason to believe PSA was in bed with him.

One other thing. I talked to a PSA Customer Rep named Shane at the January 2008 Tri-Star in Houston for about 20 minutes. Shane was very nice and I warned him that I was convinced that someone was intentionally submitting altered cards to PSA. I explained Susor's MO to a tee without mentioning his name and give him a lot of circumstantial evidence. His response was in essence: "We always catch the bad cards, so if someone wants to throw his money away and try getting altered cards past us - go ahead." He also said that when an invoice goes over a certain percentage of trimmed cards, something like 30%, they call the submitter. I walked away shaking my head thinking they must have Susor's number on speed dial.

One other thing, shortly after that conversation, the PSA website would no longer show if a cert number was rejected for evidence of trimming to the public.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by botn

I don't think much has really changed. In in the infancy of grading, when auctions appeared in SCD, dealers used to joke about not really needing to show the entire card but just the label so they could fit more cards on a page and save ad space. Think there are simply more collectors who have bought into that and more collectors with more money. Not sure how many of them really care if their cards are altered, as long as their grading company of choice remains in business.

I think a lot has changed in that NOW there is serious question what the correlation is between the number on the flip and the card that lies within. In contrast, in the infancy of grading, I suspect there was much less concern over the percentage of cards that were altered and whether they would pass undetected by the grading company. Yes, one could say that a collector not caring to see the card signifies that the grade matters more than the card's physical appearance. But underlying this statement would be the purchaser's assumption that the card is unaltered. Or, to put it another way, the fact that a purchaser doesn't care to see the actual card speaks only to the question that grade means more than APPEARANCE. It doesn't necesssarily follow that to such a purchaser grade means more than the card being UNALTERED.

[barrysloate]

Corey expressed something I've been thinking about throughout this thread. I'm sure there are many collectors who would be more than happy to see their card receive a 9 even if they believe it only merits say an 8. A little grade inflation would be welcomed by just about anybody.

But it's hard for me to imagine that the same collector would be just as happy if he found out that the 8 he just purchased for big money was altered. That's not a scenario where the buyer would feel whole because the label reads 8.

I see a distinct difference between overgraded cards and altered ones. The guy whose 9 should really be an 8 might feel he beat the system in some way. But the one who unknowingly bought an altered card would think the system beat him. Big difference.

[benjulmag]

A lot has been said that to many registry people, they are in it for the competition and, to that end, all that matters is the grade. But does it necessarily follow that these people really don't care if their cards are altered? I would think they do because in addition to the competitive aspect, there is also the investment aspect. Such people, whether they admit it or not, have to be concerned that if the hobby continues on its current track of discrediting the accuracy of the flip, the value of their collection could plummet like (and pardon the pun) like a house of cards.

While I'm only hypothesising, I think what the typical registry person would say is that the degree of undetected alterations is grossly overstated, and that the overwhelming majority of their high-grade cards are unaltered. I don't think they would say that if it was somehow proven that a significant percentage of their cards were altered, they still wouldn't care.

[Matt]

Barry and Corey - excellent points, both.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

There were several topics up for discussion since I last posted.

Leon wondered about several things. This may help:

1. Yes, the postal inspectors office in Dallas and Houston are both aware of what's been going on and in Dallas for quite awhile. An agent at the Houston office said they are backed up but have an interest in this case and may get to it in the near future.

2. Besides the postal inspectors, a criminal complaint was filed through the F.B.I.'s website to the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) on July 31st. The Complaint Id is I0907311626469362.

3. Michael O'Keefe was contacted by one of the team members several months ago and was asked if he would publicize a civil case related to this issue and he said he would. As far as I know he hasn't seen this thread.


The other topic was PSA.

I'm not going to say anything good or bad about them right now. This is what I know. Susor had a long history of having a significant portion of his invoices rejected for trimming. We know this by checking his cert runs. By the way, a very invaluable thanks to the Network54 member who designed that program on Card Target. That saved us a lot of time. Someone did a calculation of his rejected for evidence of trimmings in 2007 and it was 38%. So in short, I don't have any reason to believe PSA was in bed with him.

One other thing. I talked to a PSA Customer Rep named Shane at the January 2008 Tri-Star in Houston for about 20 minutes. Shane was very nice and I warned him that I was convinced that someone was intentionally submitting altered cards to PSA. I explained Susor's MO to a tee without mentioning his name and give him a lot of circumstantial evidence. His response was in essense: "We always catch the bad cards, so if someone wants to throw his money away and try getting altered cards past us - go ahead." He also said that when an invoice goes over a certain percentage of trimmed cards, something like 30%, they call the submitter. I walked away shaking my head thinking they must have Susor's number on speed dial.

One other thing, shortly after that conversation, the PSA website would no longer show if a cert number was rejected for evidence of tirmming to the public.

Hmmm...PSA may not be in bed with him, but they are obviously aware of what he is doing. I sure hope they've reported this suspicious activity to the FBI.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

While I'm only hypothesising, I think what the typical registry person would say is that the degree of undetected alterations is grossly overstated, and that the overwhelming majority of their high-grade cards are unaltered. I don't think they would say that if it was somehow proven that a significant percentage of their cards were altered, they still wouldn't care.

I too am only speculating based on observation, but while I agree that almost everyone would be concerned if it ended up affecting card values, I believe there are a lot of registry types who don't care from an intellectual/aesthetic point of view if some of their cards are microtrimmed, as long as they have the number on the slab they need for the competition.

[Peter_Spaeth]

There are, as most of us know, any number of people with reputations as card doctors. Obviously they continue to submit to the grading companies. It will be interesting to find out, some day through litigation, what the grading companies know about these people and how they deal with them.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

The term "microtrimming" has been tossed around on this thread.
This next example by eBay seller "scottsusor" is worth a look.
The raw card was sold to scottsusor by a member of our investigation
group.





The alteration on this edge of the card appears to about the
width of one or two razor blades. Here is the reserve upper right
corner before and after:

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Again a PSA 8.5 from eBay seller "scottsusor". The raw card sold
to scottsusor on eBay around March 2007

[onlychild]

The term "microtrimming" has been tossed around on this thread.

From experience, to trim so thin in a specific area and with the side fibers smoothed (or removed), my guess is that this the result of delicate card sanding as opposed to the conventional blade job. Again, just an educated guess.

Great detective work Dan...and team!


Kevin

[Flintboy]

What should bother everyone is what this effect is having on everyones collection monetarily. For example, I find a 61 Jim Gentile raw, a very low pop and grade it. It comes back an "8." I sell my legitimate card on Ebay for "X." I check VCP and see that several cards have sold prior to this by someone who I suspect is altering cards. My card sells for a quite a few dollars less because "seller X" has sold 3 other Gentiles in an "8". Basically that guy just cost me good money. How much has your collection suffered cash wise because of this? Im bettin quite abit.......

[WhenItWasAHobby]

I guess this shouldn't come as a surprise, but I've been banned from the Collectors Universe Boards after being a member for 8 years plus 2 years prior when it was the PSA Board.

I have no regrets regarding the way I've handled this. I believed from the start of this investigation that I should distance myself from anyone or organization that would compromise the integrity of the findings or try to suppress the truth and I'll just leave it at that.

I do find it curious that Joe Orlando would do such a thing when he's in such a vulnerable position as he is right now. This isn't about a vendetta against PSA - I still own about 600 PSA graded cards. It's about stopping someone from systematically defauding the collecting community and hopefully the victims getting back what they lost.


There's actually one real good development in the making. It should become self-evident in the next several days.

[calvindog]

Dan, it's disappointing that the hair-trigger response from PSA is not to try to get to the bottom of a horrible situation of which they were probably an unwitting party but instead to shoot the messenger. Such a typical, paranoid response from Joe Orlando. I'm disappointed as I really thought this presented him a chance to do some good and show the collecting community that he cares about the quality of his product. Oh well, no wonder he's such a great guy.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Dan -- under the circumstances banishment would seem to be a badge of honor. Have you heard from Susor?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Dan, it's disappointing that the hair-trigger response from PSA is not to try to get to the bottom of a horrible situation of which they were probably an unwitting party but instead to shoot the messenger. Such a typical, paranoid response from Joe Orlando. I'm disappointed as I really thought this presented him a chance to do some good and show the collecting community that he cares about the quality of his product. Oh well, no wonder he's such a great guy.

Jeff I don't condone PSA's attitude but I can understand it. An admission that a dealer/card doctor can regularly get trimmed cards past their graders could be devastating. Against that, any backlash from banning a dissident is probably minor.

[calvindog]

It's certainly understandable for them to circle the wagons but kicking one guy off their boards will not make the problem go away nor prevent others from learning about it. Why not take the high road by announcing steps to prevent this sort of thing from happening again?

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

I guess this shouldn't come as a surprise, but I've been banned from the Collectors Universe Boards after being a member for 8 years plus 2 years prior when it was the PSA Board.

Looking at things from the bright side, at least Boards such as the ones you describe choose only banning. They do not (at least not yet) add such other niceties as imprisonment and torture.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

It's certainly understandable for them to circle the wagons but kicking one guy off their boards will not make the problem go away nor prevent others from learning about it. Why not take the high road by announcing steps to prevent this sort of thing from happening again?

Because they already have graded millions of cards, and an admission would created unmanageable fear, uncertainty and doubt.

[calvindog]

Sounds like we need a special prosecutor on this one. Or perhaps a Slab Czar.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Sounds like we need a special prosecutor on this one. Or perhaps a Slab Czar.

Sounds like Net54's Jeff is volunteering for the job .
I think he would make an outstanding special prosecutor.

[daviddbreadman]

I apologize if this had link had already been posted.. more on Scott Susor from several years ago including comments of him "scouring the net for raw cards.

http://forums.collectors.com/message...70&STARTPAGE=8

Also its noticeable that PSA seems to use Scott Susor in their articles at times. Not really proof of anything but I don't seem to have PSA calling me up for quotes for articles.

http://www.psacard.com/articles/arti...tml?artid=5122

http://www.psacard.com/articles/arti...tml?artid=5582

[WhenItWasAHobby]

After filing a complaint with eBay on Friday, I just received this response back:

Thank you for writing eBay in regard to item number 310156210162 (1961
TOPPS #494 TOM CHENEY Pirates PSA 8 NM-MT) that you purchased from
scottsusor. As you stated, the seller sold you a card which was altered
and you have already filed criminal charges with IC3 against him.
Because of the seller's activity, you would like us this seller be no
longer allowed to sell on the site. I know it's taken us a while to get
back to you and I'm sorry about the wait.

Rest assured that we thoroughly reviewed your report about the seller
and will take appropriate action. We may take a range of steps that
include giving a warning, canceling a listing, restricting or suspending
an account, or removing PowerSeller status.

We protect the privacy of our members, so we can't share the results of
our investigation with you. We appreciate you taking the time to file a
report and help make eBay a safe place to buy and sell.

At this time, to help you decide what would work best for you, I
recommend the following options (details below):

-- Contact us by phone --

As you're a valued member of eBay, we would like to help you resolve
your concern the soonest time possible.

Kindly call us at the number provided below and we'll be glad to assist
you.

eBay Customer Hotline Number for "Item Not Received or Significantly Not
as Described" disputes : 1-866-643-3720


So I did call eBay and talked to a very helpful person named Joe. It appears that is will only be a matter of time before these two two eBay accounts are shutdown.

Also, thanks Jeff, Peter, et al, for all of your supporting thoughts.

[botn]

An attempt to suppress or silence those who point out flaws in PSA's system is the typical response from the company. PSA has been permitted to cover up stuff like this rather than fix it.

Corruption and deception exist at all levels in this hobby.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

......here's a dandy.

http://forums.collectors.com/message...hreadid=575079


Need I say this who this dealer was?

[calvindog]

So when are you getting sued by Susor? I'm guessing sometime around the 4th of Never.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

So when are you getting sued by Susor? I'm guessing sometime around the 4th of Never.

That's a good question Jeff. I was notified by eBay last Friday stating that he was requesting me to change the negative feedback I gave him since it was libelous (which it wasn't even if he didn't alter the card. It said, "He sells altered cards..."). It's a safe bet that was before he knew I had the goods on him.

At this point I'd love to have him file suit against me and take that stand under oath claiming he's been an innocent victim and then get cross examined by a renowned attorney like you. That would be pay-per-view kind of stuff. Heck, I'd even pickup the filing fees and even pay for a limousine to take him to the courthouse.

[Anthony S.]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

Heck, I'd even pickup the filing fees and even pay for a limousine to take him to the courthouse.

Jeff only travels by hovercraft.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Actually I was referring to Susor regarding the limo. Nothing against Jeff, but that's a stiff fare from New York to Houston.

[Anthony S.]

True. Also, the luxuriousness of a limo might lose its appeal during hour 34 of the trip.

This has been a fascinating read, Dan. I admire your dedication and perseverance on this matter. Keep up the good fight.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Sounds like Net54's Jeff is volunteering for the job .
I think he would make an outstanding special prosecutor.

I think Jeff would rather prosecute great guys than defend them, truth be told.