Oh good, somebody altered my N172 (w/before and after photos)

[Anthony S.]

A couple days ago I came to the unfortunate realization that the N172 Sowders I was about to put up for sale had been altered. One of the alterations was so well done, and on a relatively low condition Old Judge no less, that I thought I would share both my story and before and after photos of the alterations as a warning to fellow collectors. Just because you buy a low grade slabbed card, doesn't mean somebody hasn't monkeyed with it.

I bought the N172 Sowders in its current SGC 10 holder on Ebay in July of this year (see 2nd photo). In the past few months I've narrowed the focus of exactly what type of N172s I intend to collect, so I'm selling off a few Old Judges that don't meet those parameters.

So I zipped over to Vintage Card Prices to get a sense of how much this card has sold for in the past (and to remind myself how my I paid). My card is inadvertently listed as an SGC A on VCP, but as you can see if you subscribe to the service, I paid $153.50 on July 18th, 2010.

Then I noticed that a N172 Sowders PSA Authentic had sold for $100.99 on March 7th, 2009. I decided to click on the photo link to see how that card compared to mine. That photo is the 1st photo beneath this text.

My first thought was "Hey, mine's in better condition. The PSA Sowders has two spots of paper loss near the top border." Then, I noticed that the vertical crease on the PSA Sowders that starts at the bottom border and makes a beeline for his groin (kind of like Paris Hilton) was identical to the vertical crease on my SGC Sowders. Coincidence, I thought. Then I glanced at the seemingly minor paper loss directly above Sowders' head on my SGC card and realized it was in the exact same location as the more extensive paper loss on the PSA Sowders. At this point I took out a magnifying glass (I make that part sound easy, but in reality I live in such a feral state it took about 45 minutes and several profanities before I found my magnifying glass), and realized that some restoration had been done to the SGC Sowders' paper loss. In actuality, the fireplace poker shape of the paper loss on the PSA Hornung is identical to the shape of the area on the SGC Sowders where the restoration had been performed.

That's when I realized it was the same card. But, here's the part that blows me away. Check out the 2nd area of paper loss on the PSA Sowders, the area directly above his pitching hand. That's pretty substantial. Now look at the same area on the SGC Sowders. Pretty damn hard to tell that anything has been done. Only on the closeup, the 3rd photo, can you barely make out the outline of the area that was restored.

[cfc1909]

and we think its just the high grades-unbelievable-thanks for sharing Anthony.

Now we need SGC to tell us who submitted the card! I know you are reading this-the doctor and SGC. Sooner or later we will find out. I know its against SGC rules to tell but the doctor will keep at it until?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Submitters' identities are sacred in the TPG world. Imagine if one could look them up, what hell would break loose.

[rhettyeakley]

Anthony, either the card doctor is amazing at what he does OR I suspect that second area of "loss" on that first scan may have in fact been extra paper that when moistened came right off as I'm not seeing anything of that shape & size on your "after" scan.

[Anthony S.]

Hey Rhett,

That may well prove to be the case, but the more I've looked at it under magnification, the more I've come to believe that the paper has been transplanted. I agree that the closeup photo doesn't convey that. I just ordered a jewelers loupe and will know better in a few days.

[Bosox Blair]

Black light might be interesting too. Thanks for posting this - fascinating! (Nice detective work using the VCP too.)

Cheers,
Blair

[botn]

According to VCP the ebay seller is foodledotnet. That ID must have undergone an id change as there is no listing for it on ebay. However someone who signed in as Eric on the old board identified himself as foodledotnet on the 5/7/08 post on this thread http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=89599.

And a more recent post on another board links someone by the name of cozmokramer to that ebay id http://www.sportscardfreaks.com/foru...ards-sale.html. If this is the same cozmokramer who posts here maybe he can tell us who he sold the card to.

[Anthony S.]

Originally Posted by botn

According to VCP the ebay seller is foodledotnet. That ID must have undergone an id change as there is no listing for it on ebay. However someone who signed in as Eric on the old board identified himself as foodledotnet on the 5/7/08 post on this thread http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=89599.

And a more recent post on another board links someone by the name of cozmokramer to that ebay id http://www.sportscardfreaks.com/foru...ards-sale.html. If this is the same cozmokramer who posts here maybe he can tell us who he sold the card to.

I want to make this very clear. Foodledotnet, ie Cozmokramer, did nothing wrong here. He sold the original unaltered card. I want to make that very clear. The alterations happened after he sold it. I know you're saying that, Greg, but I just want to clarify, because your first sentence sort of implies otherwise.

[chaddurbin]

maybe eric can tell us if it was paperloss (or paper stuck to it) on the card or he knows why it was in an authentic holder...that should clear alot of stuff up. i'm prolly giving too much benefit here but that seems like alot of work to get a low value card from an A to a 10 holder (if more than swab of cotton and water is involved)...

p.s. also well-played A. bringing more attention to the card you're about to sell

[botn]

Originally Posted by Anthony S.

I want to make this very clear. Foodledotnet, ie Cozmokramer, did nothing wrong here. He sold the original unaltered card. I want to make that very clear. The alterations happened after he sold it. I know you're saying that, Greg, but I just want to clarify, because your first sentence sort of implies otherwise.

What the...? You serious? There was nothing in my post that was implying anything, Anthony.

[Anthony S.]

Greg, your first sentence states "the ebay seller is foodlenet." I just wanted to make sure people understood that you were referring to the seller of the original unaltered card in the PSA holder. You make that clear in your 2nd paragraph. That's all I meant.

[birdman42]

Originally Posted by chaddurbin

that seems like alot of work to get a low value card from an A to a 10 holder (if more than swab of cotton and water is involved)...

Unless it's a "practice" card. Not much downside from the original if something went horribly wrong.

Feeling a little cynical this morning,

Bill

[Abravefan11]

Anthony I found a scan of the card prior to being slabbed and paired it with yours. Hope this helps with your comparison.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

Anthony I found a scan of the card prior to being slabbed and paired it with yours. Hope this helps with your comparison.

Ok...we took a card that was $100 and made into a $125 card...Now we got something going. For the record, I would pay a few bucks more for the altered one, an an AUT holder, than the original unaltered one in a 1 holder. No need for me to comment on who did what and when. I have no idea.

I still feel the the percentage of cards messed with goes up with the numerical grade AND have always believed some (much) smaller percentage of lesser grade cards have been missed with too. Again, just my little ole opinion. regards

[M's_Fan]

How has the paper loss on the left been restored so perfectly, while the loss on the right is still visible? I agree with Rhett that the white spot on the left appears to have been paper stuck on that was soaked off.

Its also possible that this card doctor practiced on this low grade card to hone his skills for something of a higher grade.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Looks to me like something stuck to the card not paper loss. Also FWIW there are a couple of tiny white spots on the left that were removed, or soaked off, as well.

[Abravefan11]

I agree with the others that it looks like something stuck to the card was removed to improve eye appeal as opposed to something being added. This coupled with the condition of the back of the card, it doesn't seem to me anything deceptive was done.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The two white spots at the top have a different shade to them. If it was paper loss wouldn't the color be uniform?

[Zach Wheat]

I agree with Peter...you would think the spots would have a different color to them. I will be very interested to see what you find when you examine closely. BOTN, don't take offense, I have worked with Kramer and I had to reread your statement to make certain what you meant. I am glad the second poster clarified.

MWheat

[cozmokramer]

Hey everyone... I'm the foodledotnet ie, cozmokramer who sold that card.

I will have to look through my records of sales, i've sold thousands of cards this year.

Let me see if I can dig up who I sold this to, maybe they can answer some questions for us.

[cozmokramer]

Does VCP say when i sold this card? That would help in finding the communication with the buyer for when I sold this?

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by cozmokramer

does vcp say when i sold this card? That would help in finding the communication with the buyer for when i sold this?

03/07/2009

[jcmtiger]

I really don't see why anyone would mess with the card by adding color. I think they removed paper from the front.

Joe

[cozmokramer]

this card was sold to...

CHRISTOPHER KUN... ebay id was ***boston***bruins***

he's a very well known buyer and seller. we would have to look to see what he did with the card.

emailing him now....

[Anthony S.]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

Anthony I found a scan of the card prior to being slabbed and paired it with yours. Hope this helps with your comparison.

Good job, Tim. Yes, the left area may well prove to be something that was simply stuck to the card and subsequently removed, as Rhett first suggested.