http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=152038
Here is the quote I was remembering when the thread was linked in a different thread and my interpretation was that if you spent countless hours discussing erasing pencil marks with all three main graders (not just SGC), that that would bestow tacit approval on removing pencil marks with erasers. I realize they can't catch everything, but don't believe the majority of card buyers would value a card with an undetectable erasure the same as one that never had been written on in the first place, if they were given the choice. Kind of the same discussion we're having about the toning removal in this thread. There have also been times they've goofed (I think I remember seeing a Red Hearts Mantle linked that had writing on the card, and was not given a (MK) though it should have.

I will also disagree. Five years ago it was a $6,000 card, right? Just because it went up after this thread started, doesn't mean it was due to the thread. I posit that it was due to the other bidders not knowing about this thread. And I don't believe this card is now given the mythical Honus Wagner provenance that since it's altered and now more famous, that it's worth more. That will only be proven/disproven once the card goes back on the market again and all the buyers know of it's murky history.

I only have my 20 yrs of experiences to go on.
And on those quotes, you're interpretation is not correct, as to what I said. As I said, they never gave tacit approval nor did I ask them if I could do it. As for discussing everything under the sun with graders, I try to

Thanks for the response; I'm glad the grading companies don't condone erasures that they can detect or recommend people erase off their cards for higher grades.

So after 66 pages, where do we stand on this debate?

what debate? :) I will go out on a limb and say the same place we started LMAO....is it time for lunch?

.

We are all waiting on the entire conversation history.

4.
Spin.. The winner of the 36WW DiMaggio was instructed by Brent to win the card. This could be a close friend or family member. This is why Cortney was told to make higher bids as it wòuld better for the public to see multiple bidders on it. Brent knew Cortney would not win it for this reason. Since all hell broke out on this card during the auction (this Net54 thread) , I'm sure Brent wanted this card to disappear for many reasons for a long time.

Plus, the ending price worked out just about perfect for John the consignor of the card to PWCC where he broke even or up 1k from his purchase price from Goldin.

So, the perfect storm for Brent was this card returning to PWCC to be sold. Then, this thread started which educated Cortney whose lack of research of the card came to light. Cortney had a great mutual business relationship with Brent over 5 years and that all came to an end, as it's easy to read his bias to Brent.

It's safe to say this card won't be seen for many years to come and if it does I can't wait to see how the auction company discloses the murky history of it.

5.
Agreed, the timeline does not add up and there's was no visual evidence that this occurred. The card should have a qualifier on it with the numerical grade. I am disappointed that PWCC didn't add to their description about the history once this thread started, but we all know why now. I'm also surprised no one spotted this in the Goldin auction. I see PWCC uses the word "Completeness" on other cards to be accurate.

Bottom line is I like Brent and think they are professional and have a great team. I see the same pattern forming that happened to Doug Allen who I used to be close to. I think his success along with greed caught up to him and then being around the wrong type of people. Doug Allen/John Rogers..... Brent/Cortney. Best advice to everyone is just keep doing what got you there and pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered.

While there's a break in the action
 

Did anyone else happen to notice that Evan M.'s avatar is an 88 Topps Bo Jackson in a BVG 1? I found this hilarious and cool as hell and an otherwise shining light in a dumpster fire of a thread.

Note that I've heard from a reputable source that it was recently successfully crossed to a PSA 1, but there is no suspicion of any alterations. ;)

Just trying to add a bit of levity. Carry on.

It would not surprise me if someone "really" won the card. The whole world doesn't read this Board, there are folks out there who wouldn't care about the restoration, and the price was not that high for a PSA 7 WWG DiMaggio. Could it have gone for less than it otherwise would have, sure.

I'll post my last thought on this thread. It will go on and on, then slip off the front page and all will be swept under the rug and nothing will come of it. Maybe in a year or two, Peter will pull a quote from it while we are discussing something similarly atrocious. I remember a few months ago a thread started by a member where received a nice card back from PSA with a top corner practically folded over as it had been damaged after submission. He sent it back to them, they FIXED IT and sent it back reholdered as an "8". That thread lasted about 3 day and practically no one blinked. People....nothing is going to change.

+1000

"I expect most people would describe that as "defending" certain price levels of cards, but I wouldn't expect that to be considered negative. However, if a group of collectors got together and were to engage in this sort of "defensive" bidding with the cards just changing hands between the group, I can certainly see how that would be viewed differently."

David - I think that defending a price is when someone is willing to bid on the card and at the right price win that said card or cards if their bid holds up. I don't think any collector has a problem when people legitimately bid and win cards.

The issue that this thread has brought to light is one that most have speculated has been going on, had strong evidence has been going on, and some have posted on message boards the last few years about. People started noticing irregularities with bids back in April/May last year with certain cards that were increasing in price for no apparent reason at an exponential rate - Clemente rookies, Koufax rookies, Rose rookies, a few Ryan rookies... Same bidder was bidding up the 7's and 8's but only in certain auction and with a certain seller. Care to connect the dots and figure out the seller in quesion and the person who has stated they were bidding them up in this thread are where this happened.

Anyone could have looked at the auction results on VCP I figured the a***t bidder was clueless when it came to bidding on cards. Would bid 15-20 times on the same card rather than a snipe at the end costing themselves a lot of money and always losing out on the card and being the underbidder; however, the easy tip off was that the same bidder had over 50+ retractions with the same seller. This person was not clueless about how to bid they were just clueless that nobody had figured out who was doing it, what they were doing, and a bunch of people knew who it was and why they were doing it.

This week's events are a good thing for the hobby in the long run. Those who do business the right way will continue to do so, and they will see their sales increase, pick up new customers, and the hobby will go on. I have no issues buying from the people I deal with and will only buy even more from them exclusively.

I also think that those who were ignorant enough to publicly out themselves and all of their dirty shenanigans will become no longer welcome in the hobby or lose business. Believe that happened a while back, and all the events of this week did was make it public and let the collecting community decide who they would not deal with going forward. Interesting part is all of the items being brought forth are going to be decided on with the help of some lawyers, maybe some federal bureaus looking into it... When you add the potential fraud, items being shipped across state lines, and the dollar amounts being discussed I think the delete button would have been a really good idea for some parties involved. They have now have made investigating this whole thing on both sides a whole lot easier. :D

WWG Joe
 

Just my little tidbit.

Guy please, don't act like because I made 1000 or so that I am satisfied.
I did not consign this card and put up a lot of money to purchase it, to make 1000. I wholeheartedly feel screwed by this thread. My estimate was this card was going to hit the 60k mark at a minimum.

Be that as it may, it is what it is.

What you are all neglecting here is the real culprit of this disaster.

PSA, We pay them handsomely for their service and judgement.
For the most part we trust their flips.

This board probably deserves a response from Joe Orlando as it relates to this card. PSA took at least two looks at The DiMaggio and one of the looks came after this thread started.

Many people have been accused and have had their personal character insulted, while PSA has skated clean here. Not fair!

John, I agree however this WON'T happen in 1000 years!!

I alluded to that in another post, (pg 51, #510) that there are 3 players here, not 2 but that was quickly dismissed.

Been looking at their grading service as well as a ton of other #7 cards and I still can't figure this one out? :confused:
http://www.psacard.com/resources/gra...andards/#cards
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=...&_skc=50&rt=nc

Mistakes happen, I get that, and maybe that's all there is to it, but I think I'll keep my suspicions for a while yet. ;)

Its a bit presumptive to think you were going to clear 10k on a card that you bought a short time ago and all of those experienced bidders opinion's in the auction you won the card are wrong. There could of been a good reason why you won the card at the price you did in those other bidders minds that also spend tons of money on high dollar cards as flippers. I do not think you were remotely 'wholeheartedly screwed' in making a $1000 on the card. There are a lot worst scenerios that would qualify. I wish my biggest buy/sell regret was only making $1000.

Also you did say earlier on this thread you were going to lose money or least there was a high risk on the card due to what was said on this thread and it turns out you did not so your predictions have not always been so accurate.

lol I could use a drink after reading this thread. I'm dizzy.

Can somelist all the high dollar PSA graded cards the should not have been put in a holder?

Mastero wangner

Pwcc DiMaggio

What else is out there ?

There was once a newspaper clipping of Nolan Ryan that someone cut out of a Sporting News and submitted as a card. Yes..you heard me right....A NEWSPAPER CLIPPING!!! Not sure the year of anything like that, but this person submitted three or so of them, they all got graded, and all brought big money. They included it into the master set.

May be quite a list.

Im telling you...that newspaper clipping takes the cake!! Maybe they should start grading that little vinyl record that has ball player images too!

I think it was mentioned in an earlier post that Brent gave the card to Joe Orlando to have special handling of the card. I think it's common sense that large customers of PSA have a direct line to Joe Orlando for special handling. The question is why would PSA turn a blind eye on accurately grading (yes I know subjective) on a high valued card and how many favors are being done on a yearly basis. I'm sure the the big boy submitters who get the special handling done from Joe are taking care of their personal cards or a special consignor.

Lets see the listing on the PSA registry.


Also as far as PSA having to do research when grading a card to see if the 'same' card had marks or whatever and perhaps cleaned. This is impractical unless they previously held the card in hand. They cant assume there was toning or other issues unless really see it. Scanners can show different things and what may look like a line on a card, may be on the holder etc..

Im sure auction houses are more flexible in disclosing flaws in certain cards from big consignors versus the everyday guy.

If you have a 1952 Topps Mantle PSA 8 and only with a microscope you maybe can detect a small small micro wrinkle. How many auction houses would disclose that? As Peter says, if its not material, why not disclose it? I think auction houses would say that only if its material, they will disclose it.

Now for other cards, dont you think with some consignors, auction houses will disclose (small timers like me) that small small wrinkle but for others they wont....thats how it goes..

Id also like to hear from any member on this board that consigned a card and noticed that an auction house listed your card but failed to disclose some flaw. How many of you contacted the auction house to tell them about the flaw and to be sure to put it in the description. Afterall, if its not that big of a deal, why not disclose it...

You can research it yourself. I'm busy. Here's the card (cough cough).

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1966-The-Spo...-/201012634337

Right Robert I remember those now ! I thought becket was grading cuts for a while though . But maybe if we can put a list together of all the "know" major grading errors it will hold more weight then " hey look at this card psa" ( whiny little girl voice must be used with the last quotations).

Then we could even put a gross before and after price of theses errors.



Disclaimer:
All puns intended at all times

Jake please, if you don't think this thread cost my final sale at least $7500 you are really freakin crazy!

Blowout link
 

Noting good about this thread just sharing it because someone asked . http://www.blowoutcards.com/forums/v...n-pickups.html

It was not Dick to the best of my information.

The Plank that Doug had rebacked. Probably countless others. PSA 6 Doyle altered to look like the impossible rarity that apparently was submitted in a stack of commons.

John forgive me but I am confused a bit. During the auction weren't you vigorously defending the grade? Now you say PSA is the culprit?

LOL

Another forum even hates him:

"What one of the JPs went to jail? The thread on Net54 would also be a lot better if the 2 idiots(David James and Jake Lieberman) never posted in it. "

http://www.blowoutcards.com/forums/v...pickups-2.html

That has to go down in history some where.

Peter,
First off, when you got 50k on the line and a thread pops up while your card is in auction you will do whatever you can to protect yourself.

That being said, I've read you guys
Attack Pwcc, Cortney and anyone else with an opinion.
Not saying you specifically but the board as a whole.

What got my attention is PSA has been skating clean throughout this thread.
They graded the card, whether it's accurate or not. This card has gained a lot of attention and I believe PSA owes this board a statement.
I'm not a grader and while the card was in my possession I never questioned it.
But if a blame is going to be made , I think you all should start with the grading company.

That is me. I am itradeerrors on BO. I posted the same in this thread. I truly believe David just posts to argue for no reason and I honestly still have no idea what Jake even posts about most times.

Right ! Good ones plus all the others Greg uncovered which I'm sure there must be more of .

John I too would like to understand PSA's rationale for grading the card, particularly as they presumably knew what had been done to it when Brent sent it back to them (assuming he did). But Joe is too smart for that, he is not going to post here about anything controversial, and why should he given PSA's amazing success despite a number of controversies.

I've seen countless high end cards I thought were trimmed, but none with any particular notoriety.

Peter, Sadly, I tend to agree with you.
PSA knows about the card and pretty sure they know about this thread.
While we probably would only get a canned statement, official recognition from PSA is warranted.

Feelings were hurt because of this card and from what I've read enemies made.
i know I've acted defensive due to such a large investment on the line and I'm sorry for being a bit of a jerk.

Joe Orlando if you read this, we would all like to hear your point of view with this card.
I really think we deserve to hear what you have to say.

It's a virtual certainty PSA knew about the thread. They have in my opinion chosen a business model of relative lack of communication and transparency, including poofing every controversial thread that comes up on CU, but obviously they have made the judgment that that's the best way to run their business, and their success validates that.

Oh. Ok.

John your right . Like I said if we could put a comprehensive list together of major cards that's psa has made errors on. Then maybe if they see this list it might be a reality check for them. What would they do if every single one of sent this list with a complaint to them?

Money talks. Numbers talk. They are hugely popular and have nothing to gain really by posting other than giving us an explanation (which I would love to hear). I still think they would "ignore" it until it affects their bottom line.

These made it to the market but eventually were taken off.
http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=27012#more-27012

Wow ! Great read peter . So you can get PSAs attention. I'm not saying that they really give a šhït. I think it would bring more attention to what's going on either way.


Psa Favoritism grades for bigger fish :
It seems real to me . But if it is, you would think someone by would have said hey I send in psa 5s and get 7s back almost all the time! Right ? And if this is a real thing then why not have that entity send in your cards for you ? For a cost of course.

Phillip Abbott, you are a true d!ckhead

John, did those left side marks/stains look as visible in hand as they do in the scans?

I, personally, would be a little more forgiving and less suspicious of the TPG if they are very hard to see, but I can't imagine that with the technology they have and likely use.

I still haven't been able find a PSA 7 card that comes remotely close to looking like this one, not even an older slabbed one? :confused:

This is where we stand:

Those that didn't do business with PWCC before and are verbally harpooning Brent and PWCC on this thread; Net effect; none

Those that enjoy PWCC's low fees, e-bay platform, wide breath of consignments and industry leading eyeballs, will continue to use PWCC; Net effect; none

Those on the fence must make a decision; who is the most moral and ethical Auction House to consign my cards? or, who is going to get the most money for my consignment?

What about buyers? I have, embarrassingly, spoke highly of them in the past, but I don't think I'll be visiting them anytime soon, even though I am a very low end, $20 dollar buyer mostly.

LOL, So were you also lucky enough to also receive a profanity laced PM from David?