If this thread shows one thing it shows that it is the rare grader who was born to grade.

I know cracking out and resubmitting is commonplace and bumps happen every day. I have no problem with that. However, I do have a problem when those bumps are clearly not deserved (such as the Shell and Ryan) and when it seems to happen quite often to certain individuals.

David- are you going to honestly tell me that no other auction venues have consignors that have not "goosed" the bids on their items?? If you honestly believe that, my god man, please buy my 6 acres of mountain property in florida.....

Proof of what, Kevin? I showed you proof of the bumps that weren't deserved. Look at the bid history and you'lll see proof of the shills. What more proof are you asking for?

http://cdn.ifanboy.com/wp-content/up...ad-in-Sand.gif

I never said that and no, I don't believe it. Grow a set and quit putting words in my mouth.

Obviously the shilling is fraudulent and the bumps were clearly not deserved on some of these cards, but I'm surprised more people haven't brought up or questioned the buyer of this 1973 football card. You would think someone who paid $3K+ for a 1970s football card would be serious enough to notice that the same exact card sold for about 1/65th of the price the week before. I mean, the original poster of this thread sure noticed, and found out that it was shilled as well. Are the PSA Registry collectors really this competitive? The same card was worth way more to people when it had a different number on it. This is what I dislike about PSA. In a perfect world, TPG companies would just tell you if the card is real or not, and buyers can judge it on its eye appeal.

I have to feel sorry for the consignors, They have lost at least 10% on every item they have consigned with Rick since all of this has come to light. Dont you think he owes it to them for at least some restitution on his commission. I hear he is such a top notch guy. Any other comments on what can be done?

David- you know what pal, you are a wannabee. Do you know what that is? Someone that is jealous from someone else kicking them in the ass, and dreaming they could do what they are doing. Maybe if you are lucky, rick will hire you as a receptionist.....On the other hand, I doubt it.

Yup, you nailed me.

yup??????

Yup. PSA struck a gold mine when it instituted it.

Not at all--not when you're dealing with post-war issues that are available in droves each week. I would bet the buyer sets his search parameters for 1973 football PSA 10 and doesn't bother looking at anything less--certainly not 8s.

This buyer was looking to upgrade his already #1 set on the registry with a rookie HOFer in PSA 10. He is not likely to get caught on his registry GPA so it may be a case of a guy just wanting to have the best set possible based on some quasi-objective standard known as TPG. If you hand-drew Art Shell in magic marker on an empty and untampered case showing a PSA 10 flip, it would sell.

I am not prepared to give anyone a pass on this one, and will watch this seller's auctions more carefully, along with the first buyer/shiller. Seems to me he could not have achieved that turnaround time on grading unless he paid for expedited service or paid the larger on-site grading fee at the National. Kind of risky to basically spend that for a $40 card unless you are damn confident you will get a bump, and I don't see that card as a sure 9, much less a 10. Maybe I crack it out and send it in when there's a grading special so that risk is minimal, but to rush that puppy through at the higher grading fee seems strange to me. BTW, there is no chance that grading at the National is purely blind--they often know who is submitting what and you are beyond naive if you think otherwise, so maybe that played a factor. I won't go off the deep end with accusations, but this surely isn't passing the smell test with me, particularly given the apparently uncontroverted fact that there was shilling.

[QUOTE=nolemmings;1027239]Not at all--not when you're dealing with post-war issues that are available in droves each week. I would bet the buyer sets his search parameters for 1973 football PSA 10 and doesn't bother looking at anything less--certainly not 8s.



Makes sense. I don't collect 70's or high grade cards but I guess that would make sense for a hardcore registry collector.

There definitely seems to be something amiss here to me, which is troubling. What is equally troubling to me, however, is the level of incivility that has crept into some of the recent threads on here. I like a good spirited debate, but there seems to be a recent increase in mean-spirited posts. :-(

[QUOTE=vintagerookies51;1027242]It would be interesting to know how set registry people behave when they see a card in the grade they want but it is clearly overgraded, or too off center not to rate a qualifier (I have seen innumberable marginally centered PSA 8 low pop commons). I would cynically guess most would buy the card, but I really don't know.

don't you people have a life??!

Bcauley, you might be the biggest idiot of them all.... By the way, do you have a life??????????

Dude, seriously? I started reading the thread and got to that post (which I think was one of the first), saw the thing about Dateline, and figured I'd actually have fun with it.

Really, if you're THAT spun up about this, you should probably take a step back, go turn on the news, and see that there are far more important things going on in the world. Either that, or just lighten up.

Now, back to reading pages 2 through however long this thing is.

A shilled Shell
 

I did not know you could shill a Shell, Sam I am.

Seriously, there are two distinct, shady actions going on here. The first is shilling. I believe most folks on here think it is wrong in any case, though a small number believe that it is OK, at least in some circumstances. Fine, we can agree to disagree, though most auction sites disallow this practice because it undermines their creditability.

The second is the significant bumping of a grade by PSA, which underscores the subjectivity (at best) or favoritism to certain submitters (at worst) of the whole grading business. While this may provide short term profits for the sellers, surely the more widespread and known this practice becomes, the less creditability that the graders will retain. If a TPG can bump the same card up two grades and increase it's 'value' (and I use the term lightly) that much, is it really different than a fraudelent autograph authenticator taking a forged Mantle 8x10 (that is worth no more than the cost of the photo, say $5) and authenticating it, thereby increasing it's value 500x? The problem here lies strictly with the TPG, not the folks resubmitting the cards. They are only playing the system as it is set up, much like all of us who take advantage of tax breaks that have been allowed by the gov't.

Fellas, circumstantial evidence can be "proof." And it's very powerful evidence in court. We don't require CSI-level "proof" to conclude a fraud is afoot. In addition, short of a Perry Mason-type confession on Net 54, circumstantial evidence is usually as good as you'll find in these situations.

Well, after scanning through the thread, it looks fishy to me. BUT, that's all I can really pull from it. I figure a card's grade can be different, though hopefully in the same neighborhood, any day of the week. It is after all, human beings doing the grading and we all know that we are not perfect. However, I think it's pretty obvious that there are side deals that go on all the time in many facets of work and life and I wouldn't expect card grading to be immune to this aspect.

This particular situation though just doesn't sit well with me, though that's probably mostly due to my cynical nature.

Kevin I have a question for you, have you ever consigned any items to Probstein123 or any other ebay consignment sellers?

Poof

The Bauer card listed in post 47 and Gibson card in post 52 are no longer available for sale. It reads Transaction blocked. Interesting!

+1 for BCauley (that's pretty funny)

wow
 

Folks almost universally pan Ken Goldin based on stuff that occurred over a decade ago, when he allegedly screwed others. Maybe I skipped over it, but I don't recall one person saying that they personally got taken. Not saying that the widespread disgust isn't warranted -- I share it -- but I am setting a timeline.

Then I read this thread about a current event. Amazingly (at least to me), some folks volunteer that they are OK with being the victims of fraud so long as they aren't defrauded beyond what they were willing to pay initially. Being the victim of attempted fraud is just fine because they didn't get hit this time. That has to be the craziest sh*t I've heard in a while.

If you paid $600K for a house that you could have gotten for $300K without the mysterious (and non-existent) bidder who cost you the extra cash, is that OK because $600K was your budget? If the answer is yes, then you either have more money than sense or are simply an idiot. The same is true for being shilled on a card. And, shilling hurts people other than the idiots who think its OK, because it makes the cheaters feel enabled. Then they try to do it again, which is detrimental to those of us who actually care about whether or not we've been screwed.

Not for nothing, but I'd give that Bauer a 9 all day long.....

Can someone post a link to the CU thread. I can't find it even after Google searching (however, I've never visited the CU forum before, so I don't know if I'm just in the wrong place).

It was deleted...

The link is on post #1. But it just went "poof". Must be guilty about something. Game on.

That's convenient! ;)

How often does that happen over at the CU board?

The $600/$300K house example is a good one to work with. What if the shill in that example was legitimate, does that mean your house is still worth $600K? It only retains that value if the runner up is still in the market at that price.

To the extent shilling messes up the market price of an asset, then I see a real concern engaging in an auction in that market. I would certainly be reluctant to bid in auctions where I depend on the value of an item not being the result of a potential shill. But I will gladly pay $1,000+ more than the next highest bidder on a signed T206 that I don't already own. In that case, market value is wholly irrelevant to me.

What is a "legitimate" shill? Is that like a "legal" fraud? I guess we need to define terms before we discuss further because I'm not getting it. By definition, shilling is fraud. By definition, fraud carries both civil and criminal penalties. Shilling is neither legitimate nor legal. Period.

Insofar as whether you are willing to pay $1,000 more than someone else for a given card, that's wonderful but irrelevant to the discussion. Many people are willing to do that. But what they aren't willing (or shouldn't be willing to do), at least IMO, is pay $1,000 more than a person who has no real intent to purchase the item, but who has bid it up anyway. I guess that's where we diverge.

+1

+2

+1000000

I have been wondering the same thing. I am officially calling for a one day cease-fire so all pantiesinawad thread participants can go get laid. That usually calms me down and resets my outlook immensely.:cool:

Not bad! How about:

"Sally sells shilled Shells by the seashore."

Now say that three times!:)

Difficult to prevent fraud when people don't have a problem being defrauded.

Please re-read my last post with the understanding that I meant a "legitimate" bid to be the opposite of a "shill" bid.

I think where we diverge is that so many people on here think that if we don't worry much about shilling we must like being taken advantage of, or that we like spending more money for things. These are not mutually exclusive. I hate mosquitos, but I will go outside anyway. If posting on the internet about how much you hate mosquitos makes you feel better, go right ahead. I'd prefer to enjoy the great outdoors, smacking the occasional mosquito, but not worrying about when the next one will come.

Call me an idiot all you want, but the fact of the matter is that plenty of intelligent people on here don't care much about this issue. This really seems to annoy a certain crowd on here -- but if that crowd is only seeing this in black and white, we will never truly join on this issue to discuss it. And you may never understand if there is a key to ridding the world of shilling once and for all. Might it not help your crusade to truly understand why many people don't mind being defrauded in this context?

/

Shall I Shill My Shell Today
 

Is the use of a hidden reserve fraudulent/criminal?

On eBay, aren't all reserves hidden until they're met or unless the seller is willing to divulge that information?

Or am I missing something?

Wow that's messed up.

If I answer this question will it be deemed that I am not enjoying the hobby?

Correct

Another problem with this shill issue "as a hidden reserve" argument is that it is cheating Ebay out of the fees paid for a legitimate reserve.

maybe

Right, I was thinking more of a situation where the FACT of a reserve is hidden in addition to the amount.