Memory Lane Gehrig expectation vs reality

[Snowman]

I won this 33 Goudey Gehrig from Memory Lane last month. To say the card was misrepresented would be an understatement. Here's a couple of side-by-sides showing the auction photos vs how they look in hand. And yes, I fully realize that it was in a PSA 1 holder. But the problem nowadays is that PSA's grading is all over the place, and they regularly put VG cards into PSA 1 holders, and this is a brand new cert number, graded within the past few months. So there was reason to believe that the flaws on the card were as seen and described in the listing. It sold for 150% of what an average PSA 1 goes for because of it too ($3750 vs $2500).

Item description from the listing reads as follows:

1933 Goudey #160 Lou Gehrig is offered here in a PSA 1 PR holder. Soiling and wear are evident on the front, but nothing takes away from the pinstriped Gehrig central image. Clear verso.

This is starting to become a pretty big problem, in my opinion. It's always been this way to some degree, but I feel as though it's gotten worse lately. Numerous auction houses are either intentionally hiding major flaws or are exhibiting extreme negligence in their omissions and scans. Say what you will about how annoying the eBay Authenticity Guarantee program is, they at least provide a layer of protection against stuff like this happening. They will reject cards that exhibit major flaws that are not disclosed or shown in the listings.

I reached out to them this morning and sent them these images. We'll see how they respond. Needless to say, I wasn't happy.

[Casey2296]

Holy Cow!

[jsfriedm]

The Memory Lane scans look like they could have been taken directly from the PSA website: https://www.psacard.com/cert/78153729

[irv]

Wow, that is just uncalled for.
Calling it deceitful does not begin to describe what Memory Lane did here.

I would not settle for anything other than a full refund with some swag/credit of some sort thrown in to.

[calvindog]

You should probably not partake in Heritage auctions.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by jsfriedm

The Memory Lane scans look like they could have been taken directly from the PSA website: https://www.psacard.com/cert/78153729

Saw that same thing.

I wonder if this is a case where the creases were removed, but then returned after grading.

Or it could just be a really blurry scan by PSA.

[CardPadre]

That’s pretty terrible, especially for the premium the card commanded based on the perceived absence of most the creases/wrinkles.

I had a similar situation recently with a Sport Thrills Jackie that showed up with full-length wrinkles that you would never be able to pick up in the scans (AH also used PSA scans). That card didn’t command such a premium and I was able to move it for just about what I had into it, so I never made a fuss about it, but I was very displeased.

[jacksons]

I checked the page source code for the Gehrig card .jpg file on both sites (PSA and ML) and the scans are different but very close. Neither obviously shows the evident creasing.

Originally Posted by jsfriedm

The Memory Lane scans look like they could have been taken directly from the PSA website: https://www.psacard.com/cert/78153729

[molenick]

I once won a PSA 4 card that looked like it just had corner wear but actually had a crease down the middle (which I discovered when I received the card). Because of this, I have started calling AHs and asking them to pull any cards graded EX or below and go over them with me over the phone.

Not saying in any way that that is what you should have done...if the scan did not show those creases, they should have been mentioned in the description.

But calling for details has helped me on several occasions avoid unpleasant surprises.

[ElCabron]

If you don’t like this then you’ll probably want to steer clear of Diamond Dave Kohler’s SCP Auctions.

[NiceDocter]

That almost rises to the level of a photoshopped scam. Im hoping they make this right by you. Im sure you felt sick when you got the card in hand. Please keep us posted on the resolution of this problem. Sorry it happened.....

[Fred]

There's a distinct difference in the background texture of the card. The picture/scan from the auction description has a very smooth black background and the picture/scan of the wrinkled card has a bit of texture.

Is the "after" graphic a scan or a picture? Is it possible the item description is a scan with crappy settings on the scanner?

In any case, I'd be communicating with the AH because that is such a misrepresentation of the card.

Totally mind blowing.

It has the appearance that it was cracked out of the slab and was soaked and pressed. But then that wouldn't explain the same cert#.

Edited to add - Let's hope the AH doesn't come back and say that a PSA1 can have creases, etc, and then try to close it out without further discussion.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by calvindog

You should probably not partake in Heritage auctions.

I can't say I've done it a lot, but a while back I purchased a card from heritage, My 1952 Bowman Mickey Mantle, and the Scan was near identical to what I received. Granted that should always be the case, but still.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by calvindog

You should probably not partake in Heritage auctions.

Doesn't Heritage provide really high resolution pictures/scans that can be exploded to be HUGE on a computer screen? I've found many defects by exploding the picture. I can't remember how long Heritage has been using this format, but it has helped me recently. Now if it was similar to this case and the exploded Gehrig card picture/scan didn't show the creases/wrinkles, then that would be problematic.

[4815162342]

.

[Snowman]

Memory Lane got back to me. Apparently, these images are not sufficient for them to determine that the card was misrepresented.

I'm sorry you're not happy with your purchase. However, I can't agree with your scans without holding the cards to compare what the actual card looks like. Being this said, if you want me to further examine your position send the cards back to my attn.

[oldjudge]

Last year I was contemplating bidding on a high end card in HA. I called and asked about the condition and a little while later Joe Orlando called back. He completely described the card to me and could not have been any nicer. If you have questions about a card ask before you bid and definitely don’t call out an auction house before you give them an opportunity to respond to your issue.

[Leon]

+1

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Last year I was contemplating bidding on a high end card in HA. I called and asked about the condition and a little while later Joe Orlando called back. He completely described the card to me and could not have been any nicer. If you have questions about a card ask before you bid and definitely don’t call out an auction house before you give them an opportunity to respond to your issue.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Leon

+1

It's one thing to call and ask for specifics about a card's condition when no description is given. I do that with at least some degree of regularity. But in this case, there was no reason to ask questions about this card because they gave specifics about the card's condition in the description ("Soiling and wear are evident on the front, but nothing takes away from the pinstriped Gehrig central image. Clear verso."). To call them up and ask if they omitted something else significant (like a half dozen giant creases) would have been to assume that they were lying.

As far as calling them out, I disagree. This sort of behavior is rampant in this hobby and it's completely inexcusable. They did what they did, and bidders should be made aware of it. And this wasn't the only card they did it with either. I have another, much more expensive card that had an even more in-depth description, but which also omitted the fact that there were multiple creases on it. In fact, I would say that the description of the other card was so precise that it could be effectively interpreted as "there are no creases on this card". Yet it arrived with multiple hidden creases as well.

They have an opportunity to make this right. If they do, then I will certainly be sharing that information. People make mistakes. But when auction houses do wrong by their customers, that information needs to be shared with the community.

[irv]

Originally Posted by Snowman

It's one thing to call and ask for specifics about a card's condition when no description is given. I do that with at least some degree of regularity. But in this case, there was no reason to ask questions about this card because they gave specifics about the card's condition in the description ("Soiling and wear are evident on the front, but nothing takes away from the pinstriped Gehrig central image. Clear verso."). To call them up and ask if they omitted something else significant (like a half dozen giant creases) would have been to assume that they were lying.

As far as calling them out, I disagree. This sort of behavior is rampant in this hobby and it's completely inexcusable. They did what they did, and bidders should be made aware of it. And this wasn't the only card they did it with either. I have another, much more expensive card that had an even more in-depth description, but which also omitted the fact that there were multiple creases on it. In fact, I would say that the description of the other card was so precise that it could be effectively interpreted as "there are no creases on this card". Yet it arrived with multiple hidden creases as well.

They have an opportunity to make this right. If they do, then I will certainly be sharing that information. People make mistakes. But when auction houses do wrong by their customers, that information needs to be shared with the community.

Exactly! This is on the AH to get right, not on the potential buyer that is using and trusting them to be upfront and honest.

[Casey2296]

TIL; Auction Houses use PSA pix for some of their listings. I honestly didn't know that.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

TIL; Auction Houses use PSA pix for some of their listings. I honestly didn't know that.

They didn't use PSA's scan. The image is from their own scanner.

[tjisonline]

I suggested posting more on social media (tag the auction house) and let a YouTube blog post about it. I have a few to recommend who actually helped users w/ Goldin.

[Jobu]

Chances are eBay would have passed this as a PSA 1 where the holder wasn't compromised and sent it to you. And once they clear it the sale is final, there is nothing you can do. I bought a graded card where the seller edited out colors so it looked like an error, eBay approved it, and no matter how hard I complained my way up the chain they said 'tough shit, we're not the experts, the authenticator is and what they say is final." Now, a raw card in this situation and you might have a chance of hearing from them before they pass it.

Originally Posted by Snowman

Say what you will about how annoying the eBay Authenticity Guarantee program is, they at least provide a layer of protection against stuff like this happening. They will reject cards that exhibit major flaws that are not disclosed or shown in the listings.

[vthobby]

Just another reason I only deal with REA.

That is plain fraud on their (Memory Lane) part. I'd dispute the charge on your credit card (hopefully you paid this way) and never deal with them again.

Very bad!

REA all the way!

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Jobu

Chances are eBay would have passed this as a PSA 1 where the holder wasn't compromised and sent it to you. And once they clear it the sale is final, there is nothing you can do. I bought a graded card where the seller edited out colors so it looked like an error, eBay approved it, and no matter how hard I complained my way up the chain they said 'tough shit, we're not the experts, the authenticator is and what they say is final." Now, a raw card in this situation and you might have a chance of hearing from them before they pass it.

But you can return saying "changed mind" no?

[michael3322]

Very interesting comments.

I initially didn't understand why collectors would care about MBA ratings on top of graded slabs, but given the recent examples of inconsistencies, maybe the graders of the graders are actually providing a useful service after all? What do you think?



FYI: I have never used the MBA service and don't own any MBA graded cards.

[Snapolit1]

Never heard of MBA. Not one time.

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by Snowman

It's one thing to call and ask for specifics about a card's condition when no description is given. I do that with at least some degree of regularity. But in this case, there was no reason to ask questions about this card because they gave specifics about the card's condition in the description ("Soiling and wear are evident on the front, but nothing takes away from the pinstriped Gehrig central image. Clear verso."). To call them up and ask if they omitted something else significant (like a half dozen giant creases) would have been to assume that they were lying.

As far as calling them out, I disagree. This sort of behavior is rampant in this hobby and it's completely inexcusable. They did what they did, and bidders should be made aware of it. And this wasn't the only card they did it with either. I have another, much more expensive card that had an even more in-depth description, but which also omitted the fact that there were multiple creases on it. In fact, I would say that the description of the other card was so precise that it could be effectively interpreted as "there are no creases on this card". Yet it arrived with multiple hidden creases as well.

They have an opportunity to make this right. If they do, then I will certainly be sharing that information. People make mistakes. But when auction houses do wrong by their customers, that information needs to be shared with the community.

You reasonably relied on how the auction house advertised/described the card, and the scans that it provided. In my lay opinion, the description and scans do not reveal the card’s obvious and main patent defects. You have a valid complaint. Hopefully, you all can reach a compromise. Good luck, and keep us posted.

[Lucas00]

This is why I like to take scans 100% raw. Dust specs and all, zero alterations to any settings aside from resolution.

[ullmandds]

That's bullshit and I would be pissed off as well. I'd be in their best interest to make you whole.

[3-2-count]

It’s inexcusable for an AH to represent a card that they’re selling with scans like that.

[Carter08]

Really ridiculous. Hope it works out.

[Brian]

That is one horrendous misrepresentation, and I agree that it should be overkill to ask for further details when a detailed description has been provided.

But then again, if it is over a certain price point, I will ask anyway, to be safe. This does not always work, however, as I found out with a pricey card a couple of years ago. In the end, the AH said they would take it back because they "missed" the wrinkle I asked about, but by then I was so fed up, I just kept the card. It was not nearly as egregious as this, however, or I would have demanded my money back for sure.....

[Gorditadogg]

It looks like the Memory Lane picture is blurry, Gehrig's face is out of focus compared to Travis's scan. I would think an auction house would take better quality pictures than that.

Do you think the AH got duped, too, and used a picture provided by the seller? Whatever happened, it is a major screw up.

Please keep us informed as this develops.


Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[Mungo Hungo]

Might be worth filing in small claims court. Depends on whether it would be worth your time, but since the auction house delivered to your address, your small claims court presumably would have jurisdiction.

[Jobu]

Nope.

If the seller accepts returns, you can return the card under the terms they set.

If it is listed as no returns and the authenticator passes the card, it is yours forever as soon as it hits your doorstep. (I assume with provisions for a card damaged during shipping.)

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

But you can return saying "changed mind" no?

[Luke]

Yeah, they should want to take care of this for you. Those scans are incredibly deceiving.

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by Jobu

Nope.

If the seller accepts returns, you can return the card under the terms they set.

If it is listed as no returns and the authenticator passes the card, it is yours forever as soon as it hits your doorstep. (I assume with provisions for a card damaged during shipping.)

Even if the card is "not as described"?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Jobu

Nope.

If the seller accepts returns, you can return the card under the terms they set.

If it is listed as no returns and the authenticator passes the card, it is yours forever as soon as it hits your doorstep. (I assume with provisions for a card damaged during shipping.)

While this is usually the case, it's not always. It really depends. I had a card show up that passed ebay authenticity but that was altered on the back and they missed it. At first, eBay told me to pound sand, but I got a hold of a representative and provided proof with good photos of the issue and they had me send the card back to the authenticators for review. After seeing my pics and reviewing the card, they agreed with me and I was refunded.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I won this 33 Goudey Gehrig from Memory Lane last month. To say the card was misrepresented would be an understatement. Here's a couple of side-by-sides showing the auction photos vs how they look in hand. And yes, I fully realize that it was in a PSA 1 holder. But the problem nowadays is that PSA's grading is all over the place, and they regularly put VG cards into PSA 1 holders, and this is a brand new cert number, graded within the past few months. So there was reason to believe that the flaws on the card were as seen and described in the listing. It sold for 150% of what an average PSA 1 goes for because of it too ($3750 vs $2500).

Item description from the listing reads as follows:



This is starting to become a pretty big problem, in my opinion. It's always been this way to some degree, but I feel as though it's gotten worse lately. Numerous auction houses are either intentionally hiding major flaws or are exhibiting extreme negligence in their omissions and scans. Say what you will about how annoying the eBay Authenticity Guarantee program is, they at least provide a layer of protection against stuff like this happening. They will reject cards that exhibit major flaws that are not disclosed or shown in the listings.

I reached out to them this morning and sent them these images. We'll see how they respond. Needless to say, I wasn't happy.

There is no question the scan ML used was misleading as it hides the very heavy creases. The person responsible for the description should have mentioned heavy wrinkles IF they were looking at the card AND the scan when writing the description. Possible this was innocent oversight and it is not that expensive of a card that a whole lot of attention was going to be given to it.

I think your mistake was assuming with PSA grading overly harsh, that it had a bump. From what I have been told, ML is on the short list of favorites at PSA and their stuff is not going to get the same harsh grading the rest of us experience.

Also if this purchase was made on eBay and the same misleading scan was used, the card would have passed authentication. If the seller was an All Sales Final seller, you would have no recourse. You will have a better chance getting ML to refund you than you would had this been purchased on eBay.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

I think your mistake was assuming with PSA grading overly harsh, that it had a bump. From what I have been told, ML is on the short list of favorites at PSA and their stuff is not going to get the same harsh grading the rest of us experience.

I think your mistake is thinking that a card that has no creases mentioned in the description, and no creases show in the pictures, is allowed to have creases.

Another mistake of yours evidently is to feel that it's ok for certain clients to get better opinions from the opinion sellers than other clients.

[rjackson44]

Originally Posted by Luke

Yeah, they should want to take care of this for you. Those scans are incredibly deceiving.

Hi Luke im sure they will ,, never had issues with them ,,im sure snowman will be happy..

[tjisonline]

With auction houses, there’s a level of expectation that you’re allowed to have by not using more popular platforms such as eBay. Buyers are paying a 20% premium. Least the auction houses can do is provide accurate descriptions. Additionally, this Lou Gehrig card appears blurry in the areas where the creases are. If the creases were disclosed like in some of their other listings, this card would have sold for less as some buyers would have stayed away.

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

I think your mistake is thinking that a card that has no creases mentioned in the description, and no creases show in the pictures, is allowed to have creases.

Another mistake of yours evidently is to feel that it's ok for certain clients to get better opinions from the opinion sellers than other clients.

[Stonepony]

IMG_6461.jpeg

Golden pulled something similar with me a few years ago. Card on left was their website and auction catalog image. Card on right is what I got. I
Learned my lesson with them. Their reply was crickets

[SyrNy1960]

Originally Posted by Stonepony

Attachment 610363

Golden pulled something similar with me a few years ago. Card on left was their website and auction catalog image. Card on right is what I got. I
Learned my lesson with them. Their reply was crickets

This is insane! Snowman's card and your card clearly shows intentional deception. Anyone can clearly see that. To show a card with no creases in an auction, then the buyer receives the card with obvious creases, is dishonest and unethical.

I'm sorry you both (and others) had that happen to you!

[tjisonline]

100% . I watched the videos about shenanigans you went through with auction houses. Since watching, I now ask for additional pictures, including angled shots. Still not always enough when they answer my request (or just resend the same pics as on the site).

Originally Posted by Stonepony

Attachment 610363

Golden pulled something similar with me a few years ago. Card on left was their website and auction catalog image. Card on right is what I got. I
Learned my lesson with them. Their reply was crickets

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Snowman

As far as calling them out, I disagree. This sort of behavior is rampant in this hobby and it's completely inexcusable. They did what they did, and bidders should be made aware of it. And this wasn't the only card they did it with either. I have another, much more expensive card that had an even more in-depth description, but which also omitted the fact that there were multiple creases on it. In fact, I would say that the description of the other card was so precise that it could be effectively interpreted as "there are no creases on this card". Yet it arrived with multiple hidden creases as well.

They have an opportunity to make this right. If they do, then I will certainly be sharing that information. People make mistakes. But when auction houses do wrong by their customers, that information needs to be shared with the community.

I think there are often two competing concerns here.

One concern is that the auction house should have a chance to address this issue before it's made public. I think we can all agree that auction houses are generally great, but are also fallible, and sometimes will make mistakes. And when it happens, I suspect that the AH prefers not to be publicly embarrassed by a mistake. We all make mistakes, yet I suspect none of us is really excited about having those mistakes paraded around in public, even when they're true.

On the other side, if an AH makes a mistake, to what extent is it important for the broader collecting community to understand what happened so that we can be aware of the situation, and take appropriate precautions ourselves? Certainly we rightfully expect that AHs are experts on the pieces they are auctioning, the stuff is authentic, accurately represented and described. If the AH isn't meeting that standard, then it seems like the sort of thing that the full industry should care about, to make sure that we're able to protect ourselves against the same sort of situation in the future, but also as a means to help to police the AHs and keep them honest.

Not to make this about me, although I clearly can't help myself, but I had something similar happen to me a few years ago. I won an auction from a major AH (not ML) for a collection of items that all turned out to be fake. And not even good fakes, but very obvious and stupid fakes, as they were fantasy pieces with a number of the backs printed on kodak paper, with the kodak logo and everything. As luck would have it, the backs that were printed on kodak paper weren't shown in the pics on the AH listing.

Similar to Travis, I posted about it here, both because I thought the community should know, and because I wanted to push the AH to act on it. And the response to my post was somewhat similar: some thought I should have waited a while longer before posting to give the AH a chance to fix it before I went public, and others supported me and found the mistakes of the AH to be deeply troubling.

I'm not here to re-litigate my experience working through that process with that AH, although I'm happy to report that the AH addressed the issue and refunded my payment. I'm hopeful that Travis will have a similarly positive outcome.

[maniac_73]

Anyone who is backing the AH on this should be ashamed of themselves. This is clearly misrepresentation, and the fact that they doubled down after Travis contacted them is an absolute joke. Will be steering very clear of Memory Lane in the future

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by maniac_73

Anyone who is backing the AH on this should be ashamed of themselves. This is clearly misrepresentation, and the fact that they doubled down after Travis contacted them is an absolute joke. Will be steering very clear of Memory Lane in the future

They still have a chance to make it right though. They didn't tell me to pound sand. At least not yet. They asked me to send it back to them so they can review it.