Gary,

Critical in your post and in your conduct is that you note imperfections in the auction listing. I am satisfied if the listing notes creases and wrinkles even if they're hard to see or cannot be seen in the scan. This often happens with T213-2s, although that set is one of the few that is so rife with creases, most of them hard to see, that you probably should assume they are there.

I have been told that I should expect to find small creases in cards graded 4 because the TPGs allow for them in their stated graded policies. Well most as in nearly all of the 4s I own do not have such creases, and the Altoona Baker I showed on the other thread was worthy of a 4 without the crease, IMO ( I would grade it a 3 or 3.5 now). If I should expect to find them, why is it the seller shouldn't expect to look for them once he sees the grade assigned, and then identify them in the listing?

I'd say I agree with this. This is not acceptable in other industries, why here. If your making errors, maybe the volume is too big and something needs to change.

I would like AHs making it known how they scan their items. It would just be something to tie to the card and possibly provide some more info on the card. I really don't care how they do it, just make it as representative as possible.

The scans below are the same card, left has the default and the right has 2 modifications. The one on the right is far closer to the real card as it doesn't "glow" like the other scan.

This reply, my first in either thread on this topic, is not intended to dispute the existence of a scan problem. However, focusing solely on the scanner and its quality and settings is akin to talking only about the mayo used to make a BLT. Multiple scanners with identical settings WILL generate scans nearly identical. Unfortunately, on the home front, monitor quality, settings, and size will offer varying scan results. Factor in the lighting in the room, the individual's eyesight and color recognition and you will find that any scan deemed perfect by one will possibly be deemed flawed by another. The ONLY answer is a "No Questions Asked, Satisfaction Guaranteed, Full Money Refund Policy". I shall now retreat to the shadows of my ill-lit computer den and squint, awaiting the next post.:)

Maybe in addition to buyers requiring all sellers of cards to use the exact same scanner using the exact same settings, sellers can require all buyers to have the exact same monitor, video card, and operating system. Requiring a certified eye exam, while desirable, is just too silly. :rolleyes:

Gary, you must have gotten some great prices on your consignments with PWCC. You're twisting yourself into a pretzel defending some pretty obvious fraud.

Only human?
 

There are days, thru my eyes, when my collection looks NM-MT :):)and other days when it looks only EX-MTor worse.:(:( Do scanners have bad days too?

Huh, just the other day I had the same thought...except some days they look Gd/Vg and other days when it looks like crap...

I wish. I think I only did well on that Exhibits Cobb that you won.

As far as I can tell, we haven't done a single thing to rectify the problem. All we've done is hold a massive kangaroo court with a bunch of people snapping at each other. We've got a lawyer who thinks that everyone ought to complain to law enforcement, but if you ask him specifically whom we ought to call, he can't tell you. He won't say. So we have reached the point where absolutely nothing has been done except create three threads that are a basically just a bunch of people bickering with each other about scans and scanners. Maybe that's because no one other than us even cares about this. Maybe law enforcement isn't the least bit interested, and this whole thing has been nothing more than a source of entertainment.

I agree, a whole lot of entertainment....Brent's laughing all the way to the bank....

Does anyone know how many Rocky movies there were?

FYI - a seventh is being planned.:eek:

There ya go Frank, defusing an argument about nothing that is gonna change, with a question that requires too much thought for a Friday night.:D

Yes Jamie. That's what is called due process. If you've been scammed report it. The authorities will investigate, or not depending on how solid your complaint is. "Some guy cheated some other guy out of $100 over the internet" Probably isn't going to go far. They have to balance the cost of investigating with the end result. And they need more than our saved copies of scans to make it stick.

Jeff L - Please correct me if I have any of this wrong.

I'm assuming the cost of making the case and seeing it through would be .....A lot, at least by my standards.

Frankly, while I think altering scans to get a few extra bucks is very wrong and not at all smart (Because eventually someone will add up all the times it was likely done and see a nice number to go after) I'd rather see the FBI and even the local PD spend their time on the people doing far worse things.

Steve B

That's ok, Gary, I had a better year than you -- by the end of January.

There is not a lot we can do as a group. However, we can do our own individual part. I made a commitment not to bid on any of Probstein's auctions after it was discovered he was protecting shill bidders. I have honored that commitment. It's been hard as I've seen some cards that I wanted to bid on, but I refrained from doing so. As I mentioned in the other thread, I don't bid on Brent's stuff anyway. So, I feel like I'm doing my part by not giving them any of my business.

If what has been brought to light bothers anyone, they can choose not to do business with these guys. If they continue to do business with them, then they have no right to complain. Right?

Jamie, three people who sold fraudulent game used jerseys were sentenced today to jail time in a federal court in Rockford, IL. Again, as usual, you're clueless. Of course that won't stop you from typing up every thought that crosses your brain. Law enforcement reads not only Net 54 but this thread -- and yes, they're laughing at you as well.

Again at the end of the day you are ultimately responsible for what you do. If you think something smells and you continue to bid anyway then I guess it didn't really bother you that much did it. It's good to know when you think this stuff goes on so you can make a personal decision about who to and not to do business with.

I don't think even "we" care enough to make a stand. How many people here (among those who believe this auctioneer has some serious issues that have yet to be addressed) would refuse to bid with him or consign to him? I hope I am wrong but my presumption is that most people are not wiling to take a stand if it means any degree of sacrifice including passing on a baseball card they want.

Unless Brent is prosecuted, then I'd say that you're the one who is clueless, Jeff. Because if law enforcement is reading this, and they don't prosecute Brent, then clearly they are laughing at you.

You're never going to get a boycott of an auction house unless it's a de facto boycott because everyone is terrified that they won't get their cards or consignment checks as what occurred to one poster who consigned with Legendary and got stiffed. If there is enough easily noticed fraud or funny business with an auction house, some law enforcement body will investigate. Doesn't have to be the feds. Keep in mind that there are NUMEROUS investigations going on right now of auction houses in our hobby. Just because they're not public doesn't mean that they don't exist. People are going to prison. Auction house principles have been sued for fraud. Consignors who have conspired with auction houses to defraud bidders have been successfully sued or have reached out of court settlements. The bottom line is, as victims here we have more power than we think. Don't be so quick to assume everyone is getting away with it, they're not.

Do you talk out of your ass all day? I mean is that what you do for a living? You have no idea how the process works and yet you continue to blabber on like a fourth grader. Why don't you focus on what you know? Like your scanner.

Jeff, don't be so sensitive. I was being sarcastic, and obviously the cost of that card was chump change for you.

Don't think that insults are going to get you out of this. You said that we should complain to law enforcement, then where is the phone number? You said that Brent's committed fraud, then where is the prosecution? It's put up or shut up. Like always.

Again, I loathe to tread...however...have a question. Would a class action lawsuit be in order? It seems as though a skilled prosecutor might be able to line up a great many similarly situated plaintiffs.

A successfully litigated case just might be enough to deter future fraudsters from misrepresenting the online images of the items being offered for sale...at least, it should do so for the major players.

If PWCC realizes exceptionally high prices for their items through manipulating images in an unscrupulous manner, then drag them into court. If not, then cut bait and move on. I really don't see any other way to handle this issue.

Just my two cents. Others can, will, and should disagree.

Best Regards,

Eric

You're a jackass. There's not an auction house law enforcement hotline to call. And just because fraud is committed does not mean that a prosecution starts an hour later. Do you think grand juries are dispatched every time you post on Net 54? Have you ever been a part of a criminal investigation? Or do you just blather on and on and on about things you have no personal experience of and no training for?

And get me out of what? The hot light of your pinpoint questioning? I don't work for you. And I certainly wouldn't share with you what I do or don't do in connection with the reporting of any auction house fraud. If you're a victim I'd advise you to make yourself known on this page.

Also, I've successfully sued auction house owners, I've reached cash settlements with crooked consignors, I've represented numerous witnesses in grand juries investigating auction house fraud, I've represented numerous defendants in criminal cases relating to the hobby. What have you done besides drone on like a braying jackass?

Lastly, why am I even talking to you?

Eric a prosecutor works for a government, and does not bring a class action lawsuit.

I agree a boycott is too ambitious to be practical, but as a matter of principle I still think people should refuse to deal with people they think are fraudulent. I know we have disagreed on this before.

A class action could be handled by a private civil lawyer. Peter, don't you do class actions? :)

You were the one who wrote that we should complain to law enforcement.

I'm not a victim.

Otherwise, Jeff, here's a little piece of advice. Grow up and stop hurling insults. Now, I know that the only reason you're insulting me is because you've gotten your butt kicked in this argument. And if law enforcement is reading this, then terrific. But if they are, then you really ought to think about how you conduct yourself. Even if they weren't, it's something you ought to consider.

And frankly, I don't think Brent ought to be prosecuted. I've written that before, and I'll say it again now. I just wanted to see what you really had, and so far the answer seems to be nothing. And if you can get law enforcement to prosecute Brent over $110.27 of fraud, more power to you. But I'll have to see it to believe it.

Good night, sir.

First off, if you think I've gotten my butt kicked in this argument you're more delusional than you appear.

Second, it's obvious that you don't think Brent should be held accountable for the fraud which has been revealed on Net 54. It's very clear that you're doing all that you can to protect him. Why, I have no idea and don't care.

Lastly, now you're dispensing professional advice? Why don't you stick to what you know -- nothing.

Peter,

With all due respect, then, who does?

Please know that I am not taking a swipe at you. It simply seems to me that a great many people might have been defrauded by PWCC. If this is the case, who should represent them?

Very truly yours,

Eric

Yup. But usually on the defense side.

Eric, as Jeff says, a private civil lawyer. I haven't given it much thought, but I could see a number of obstacles given the technicalities of class action law.

If Brent is indicted, you'll be proven correct indeed. Gooooood luck! :D

Peter,

Again, I am not taking a swipe at you. I simply wish to ask a question.

In the case of public opinion v. auction house fraud, does the public opinion have a colorable claim?

Best Regards,

Eric

So now a person has to be indicted in order for it to be true that he committed fraud. Got it. Another pearl of wisdom.

Make an exception. We'll split the depositions.

Eric I am not exactly sure what you are asking. Only a person who can allege that he/she has been harmed can bring a civil claim for damages, and to allege fraud one needs at least a reasonable factual basis for making that allegation, mere speculation is not enough. The "public" has no standing to sue, although of course a governmental body can vindicate the public interest.

That's why we have a judicial system, right?

That's a non-sequitur. Again, you're wrong.

Now, I might not have a law degree, but I am pretty darn sure that the function of a trial court is to determine guilt vs. innocence.

So if you shoot someone dead with a gun and get away with it, that means you're not a murderer. You're smarter than I thought.

You said he was guilty of fraud and ought to be prosecuted. If you are correct on all accounts, he will be convicted. Everything else you write is bullshit.:cool:

I'll be watching... gooooooooood luck!:rolleyes:

It seems to be non sequitur night.

You said that unless he is indicted then he's not guilty of fraud -- that was wrong.

I said fraud occurred in his auctions and that whether or not he's indicted, fraud still occurred in his auctions -- that is correct. PS -- he can also be found liable for civil fraud.

As I'm not a prosecutor I don't control who gets indicted -- that is correct.

I understand these concepts are difficult for you because you're a clueless moron with no experience in these issues -- again, correct.

Big surprise that fraud runs rampant in our hobby. Jamie Bone.parth is exhibit A.

I think that the final determinant of Brent's is innocence or guilt will be a matter decided by the court, not by you or I. As I've said before, you think he's guilty and ought to be prosecuted - if you are correct, then I'm sure we'll see him behind bars. Now goodnight.

Not a single thing you wrote above is correct. LOL

Law enforcement has the means to investigate a small fraction of the frauds that occur in the hobby and elsewhere. Therefore, the notion that if someone is not the subject of a criminal proceeding they did not commit fraud is demonstrably false and patently absurd.

Conversely, the mere fact that someone is investigated or even indicted does not mean they committed fraud. An indictment is an allegation, nothing more.

Never wrote that.

I confused the words indictment and conviction. Meant to say convicted.

Jeff says he is guilty and ought to be prosecuted. I never said Brent was innocent, just that he shouldn't be prosecuted. If law enforcement chooses not to prosecute Brent, then obviously they agree with me and disagree with Jeff. If Brent is prosecuted and found innocent, then he still shouldn't have been prosecuted as he will have been exonerated. So for Jeff to be correct, Brent needs to be both prosecuted and convicted.

Not a single thing about who you are as a human being is at all decent. Your attitude and manner are disgusting. And in fact you are wrong. You have said yourself that Brent has committed fraud and ought to be prosecuted, so go and do it. Otherwise, shut up about it already. Because anything other than getting it done is just blowing smoke up people's ass. It is all talk and no walk. If you think Brent has committed fraud and ought to be prosecuted, then either go find a way to put him behind bars, or just shut up already.

This thread sux....too much bickering and you lose the importance of the subject

It's rare to find someone who is so proud to be an ignorant jackass. You now have multiple lawyers on this thread pointing out how the educational system has failed you -- or perhaps you were just too busy braying like the jackass that you are and weren't listening in class that day or month. Your understanding of the legal system would appear as if you learned it all from watching the Flintstones.

One of the purposes of this board is to point out fraud. And fraud exists in PWCC auctions with the scans and the shill bidding. When the fraud stops, the comments about the fraud will stop, not just because a low grade moron like you wants it to stop. Just as I wasn't cowed by other jackasses years ago when I pointed out the Mastro fraud and they tried to change the subject, I won't be deterred by a simpleton like you. By screaming that if Brent isn't 'locked up behind bars' by sundown today then we should stop talking about it isn't going to work if you haven't noticed. But let's keep this issue going, the more we talk about it on here the more people are coming out with examples of fraud in his auctions. You're doing a great job of keeping the spotlight on the fraud in PWCC auctions.

Bert speaks
 

"All rise.............................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ................................................
You may be seated"

Sorry, Judy is still with her make-up artist. The judge is averse to wrinkles ya know.

I'll ignore the insults, but let me say this - based on what I have seen so far, the only evidence against him seems to be that his scans are minimally brighter and that he allegedly doctored the image of a $643 hockey card. That doesn't seem like much to go on for a prosecution. If you have other people coming to you with examples that I don't know about, that is a different story.

I'm sorry that I got so upset, it's just that I don't like seeing people go to jail. And I just can't equate PWCC with Mastro. Maybe if there were more compelling evidence, I would feel differently. Anyways, I do apologize and I know that you think I'm an idiot. I just feel like I want to end my role in this, so this will be my last post on this thread.

Adieu.

I must agree that us talking about this and keeping it at the forefront and making others aware and citing examples...is DOING something...despite the sentiment of some that since I'm not a blue collar worker...I'm a pussy for not busting knee caps and threatening people with bodily harm because I was shilled out of some cash.

You know who u are GiantSlayer!!!!!

Jeez, I'm not a lawyer and even I know that one can't be found "innocent" in a court of law. Just "not guilty". There's a difference. Look it up.

Long story short, PWCC gets UNREAL prices for his items, which attracts consignors, which attracts sales. Just check out completed listings for a 1956 Mantle #135 PSA 6 to see what I am talking about. Typically, a $800 card, his sells for over $2,000. My mind is blown everytime I see the prices his cards gets. Someone could make a decent living just buying my stuff and consigning it with Brent!! :p

Jamie, it's one thing to be argumentative and confrontational, which is something I totally get, as I'm right there with you, but when someone who knows an area much better than you tells you that you are blowing hot air, why can't you just say thanks for the education and go from there? If you did that, you wouldn't get forced into a corner where all you can do is hurl insults.

The last thing I would do is try to force my lawn-chair thoughts on law, on Jeff or any of the other lawyers on this forum. Use them as a resource when you want to LEARN about law, and I'm sure they'll use you as a resource when they want to know about whatever it is you're good at.

Has this forum passed a guilty verdict on someone? Sounds like the court of Net54 opinion has passed judgement.

Cmmon guys, lets get back to cardboard!

Peace, love, understanding and all that $hit.... :p

I think the talk about how the forum used to be...has caused this forum to revert back...in some ways...to the way this forum used to be!!!

They misinterpreted my argument. They thought that I felt Brent ought not be prosecuted because I believed he was innocent, but the real reason why is because there seems to be insufficient damages. See posts 69 and 109 where I discuss that so far there seems to be only $110.27 in damages.

That said, another reason that I feel compassionate towards Brent is that he is a small-time ebay dealer. Those guys have very tight margins. Yes, there seems to be some funny business going on in Brent's auctions, but why not go after the big fish first, before worrying about small-fries like Brent?

What about this thread:
http://net54baseball.com/showthread....ight=legendary

As for learning from Jeff, I'd be happy to do so as much as possible if he writes in a respectful, non-abusive manner. Before I wrote my insult, here's some of the things he wrote:

I would like nothing more than to make up with Jeff and get along well. That is why I apologized for the role that I played in the conflict. I would love an apology from him as well, but if that is not forthcoming, then hopefully we can still find a way co-exist in a civil manner.

Brent is a "small time ebay dealer"? Are you serious? He has 22,000 feedbacks in the last 12 months, and as we know that significantly UNDERSTATES the number of items he has sold. What planet is this thread on?

Well, even if he isn't small time, this is just how I feel about him. I went to his website and the photo of him smiling with his significant other. You can tell that they really love each other, and I'm sure that there are all these people in his life who really love him.

When you think about the amount of suffering it would cause to imprison him, it is scary. Based on where he lives, I am guessing that he would go to San Quentin. I have seen a documentary on that prison and it is really scary. There is a tremendous amount of violence in those environments.

The trouble is that when someone is the victim of violence like that, it creates a tremendous amount of trauma and suffering that can stay with them for many years, decades, and their entire life, even. It is a very sad thing and people who experience it often never fully recover.

I myself did volunteer work in a prison when I was a college student. The prisoners are very friendly to you and will smile, but what goes on behind the scenes is really ugly. I was counseling a gang leader in Springfield, and during my time with him, he and his "friends" beat up a rival gang member very badly. That guy had to be transferred to another prison and was in very bad condition. So the dynamics that go into play there are intense.

Now, I understand that Mastro & Co. did millions of dollars worth of fraud and their sentences will be well deserved. It was a tremendous and courageous effort on behalf of Jeff and many others, and I admire that tremendously. But the situation with PWCC seems far from that right now. The best evidence we had right now is just a hockey card scan missing a print dot.

Now, I realize that most likely more went on, but if the only concrete evidence of fraud we had is that hockey card, as well as some scans that are slightly brighter than usual, then to send him away to a place like San Quentin just for that would be incredibly cruel. And that I why I've found myself so upset about this issue.

"You can tell that they really love each other." ha ha ha ha ha hah hah hah ah aha ahahaha hahha hahhha hahhhhhh!

Why do I get the feeling we are being punk'd? Where are you hiding Ashton? :eek:

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Where's Sy Sterling?

I don't think you can make this stuff up. "Once upon a time", is all it is missing.

Probably a lot of dudes that love their significant other in the slammer right now......doubt that would sway a jury.....odd line of reasoning (or lack thereof.....).....

'Chao, party of one.........'

Chao is looking good in the rear view mirror.

Do you some of you guys even ENJOY collecting?!!
 

It sounds like a stupid question, but after reading a few pages of this thread, I have to wonder if some of you are truly getting any enjoyment out of this hobby.

With regards to Brent, I have both consigned and won cards from his auctions, and have been satisfied with both. None of the cards I've consigned with him look like they were altered in any way. In fact, I recently consigned a 55 Topps Jackie Robinson PSA 8--very nice card, no doubt, but there was a small black print mark on his chin that is noticeable. When the auction went live, guess what? The print mark was still there. It had not been altered.

As far as prices goes, yes, his auctions usually command premium prices. But so do high-end AH's like REA, Mile High, or Memory Lane, and he has high-end material every month that in many cases can match them, so not only are his auctions going to attract more buyers, but more buyers with deeper pockets.

Does any of this prove he's 100% not a cheat? No, it doesn't. We both live in the SF Bay area, and I did have the chance to meet Brent and his wife once while dropping off a consignment, and both of them seem like down-to-earth, level-headed people... But who knows? They could really be Bonnie and Clyde...lol

What I do know is this: if you spend the majority of your time and energy worrying and complaining about the hobby, what good is it to even be in the hobby in the first place? I'm sure most of you are well-intentioned in trying to preserve the integrity of the hobby, and I commend you for that, but don't let in consume you to the point it no longer becomes fun.

Sorry to chime in--just giving my two cents worth. I'm going to get back to what I love doing--admiring my T3 Turkey Reds. Peace, guys! And enjoy your collections!

This thread has become one of the classics.

To answer your question, I despise fraud, feel like the hobby is rampant with it and yes, I enjoy collecting.

Glad to contribute, Jeff. BTW, did you happen to check out the nice T205 PSA 7 Baker card from last week's REA auction? Awesome card, especially for the very difficult T205 set...

Me too
 

+ 1. I have discussed this with two people in Charlottetown Canada, and they are very, very concerned

The road to hell is paved with apologists.

I've been gone for the day but now have just learned that Jamie actually does believe that Brent committed fraud -- despite his loud protests to the contrary last night -- but because he apparently met him for 30 seconds and believes the man loves his wife, he doesn't want him to get raped at San Quentin. So that's why he acted like a jackass last night and did all that he could to discourage any action to be taken against Brent. Apparently, anyone who discusses fraud in a PWCC auction is worse than those who commit such fraud and needs to be attacked. The fraudsters should be given a pass, of course, because of the whole love for wife thing. Got it.

I would state the obvious that no one put a gun to Brent's head to cause him to fudge scans or do any other funny stuff in his auctions. But to Jamie, Brent apparently has no liability in any of this -- because he loves his wife and he doesn't want Brent to be raped at San Quentin. And Brent will end up at San Quentin because, of course, Jamie knows so much about the American penal system and where crooked baseball card auctioneers go upon conviction: San Quentin, the Big House, Rape City. Got it.

On the topic of personal responsibility -- of which Jamie apparently doesn't believe anyone should have -- he PMed me this morning and asked me to remove his full name that I put in one of my posts. I ignored his request because I find it wrong that he could lie and obfuscate on the board like he did last night in order to protect someone who he himself believes defrauded people in this hobby -- but he doesn't want any possible future employer to see what a dishonest, clearly mentally imbalanced, possibly heavily medicated mental patient that he is. Perhaps if people like him were required to leave their full names by their posts -- without periods in between letters or an @ instead of an "a" -- then they'd be more responsible and honest with what they post out here.

Finally, Jamie, I insulted you last night not because you 'kicked' my 'butt' in the argument out here but because you are a lying, mentally imbalanced moron. Thank you for again proving that today.

Here is what I wrote last night.

Peter,

Thank you for replying in a sincerely civil manner. I have just sent you a PM to discuss this matter further, offline.

Best Regards,

Eric

Jeff,

With all due respect, accusing Jamie of being a fraudster may possibly be outside of your purview. There may be members of Net54 who take exception to his methods of communicating; however, being confrontational does not make one a fraud.

Sincerely,

Eric