I’m sure. I just always found this particular seller was able to get make believe prices, but I did not think it was for “conserved” items.

Yeah, that's a whole 'nother issue, those prices, especially during the market manipulation of 2016.

e90-1 Clarke 2 to 6
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3781

Splish Splash and

The card gets the sticker that Bobby Darin was denied.

Cepeda rookie $5K gain recolored.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3782

That is some "Baby Bullsh*t" right there. :rolleyes:

Wilt RC 3K gain
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3784

What is alleged to have been done to this card?

I can't tell that anything has been done other than a bump in grade. The thick mylar sleeve that BVG uses causes scans to look different.

A 2 grade bump, especially FROM a Beckett holder to a PSA, seems highly unlikely to me without some improvement, but I'm not sure. The descriptions by PWCC sure are night and day which in and of itself is interesting.

The shadows from the photo corners have been removed, and probably the indents they caused as well.

If Moser has recolored cards I wonder why the white dot next to the L is gone but one is above the A.


The right edge looks rougher in the PSA holder. The chipping on the upper left on the reverse looks worse.

All hazards of working with scans that aren't al that high res.

I think the white dots in that area of the front are debris inside the slab or on the scanner. That they weren't called out on the blowout post makes me think they see it that way too rather than as recoloring.

I sort of whish it was in a PSA slab before. I looks like the red got brightened a lot, but that could be the scanner. A comparable before would help tell, but we don't have that.

Both the chipping and roughness could be made worse by the soaking that removed the shadows from the album and corners. I had a good long look at them and sort of see what you're saying, but also see areas of the edges that are a tiny bit smoother.
Again, that could just be the scans, but there has been some cleaning.

I thought soaking was deemed okay.

So has anything really wrong been done?

Soaking in a chemical bath is not OK according to many or most.

Soaking of any post-war card is probably against the general consensus, because the composition of the cardboard differs. Soaking a pre-war card in distilled water does not damage the card, done properly. Soaking a post-war card probably does, especially with chemical solvents. And yes, this card appears to have the toning removed (a la the WWG DiMaggio).

Dpeck, just because some random guys on a message board say that "soaking is okay" doesn't make all soaking okay. Especially when PSA has N-7 and SGC has Cleaned as reasons they don't give number grades to cards that have been soaked with bleach.

There is a print dot or something on the BVG that is not there later. Almost like a pen mark.

It is hard for me to understand how the cleaning process works. I honestly have no clue how people get cards wet and they dry even better.

That said it sounds very challenging to me if people can do this and there are no after effects that show they have done this other then perhaps prior photos of the same card.

My understanding is that if you look hard enough and use sophisticated equipment it leaves traces that the typical TPG look might not see.

Peter so what you are saying is good luck detecting it.

Some of it is obvious, many cleaned cards are blinding white for example and how the hell a TPG missed them is beyond me. Some no doubt are difficult to detect at least with an assembly line grader.

I have to yield to your expertise on this topic.

If there are ways to clean cards and improve them without a grading company being able to tell than it is impossible to stop it.

I am not certain though that high end buyers are totally in the dark on this issue based on Brent's video. Most wouldn't watch it because they can't stand the guy. I watched the entire video and it appears this "conservation" has taken place to many cards and the way he framed it was it was very well known.

You know how every single person that tries to get on a commercial airplane in the US goes through a metal detector in the airport?
Does every single card that a grading company inspects go through a similar gate check to detect alterations? If not, why not?

The way I interpreted Peter's statement was that it could be detected, if they really tried.

I used to pay $4.75 to get one of my worthless wrestling cards graded and now if I want to only do 50 it is $10 per card plus shipping there and back.

If we got to the point of the current TSA it would price most of us out of the market. I am very cautious on what I submit at the current pricing and so are many others in every genre and demand is still close to 2 million cards a year.

Easier said then done.

To your first point, then what value does grading have?

To your second, it's not like the video was posted on Brent's website or www.psacard.com for anyone to see it except for people like us who read message boards.

Since you agree that the "alterations" are widespread ("conservation" just being subterfuge), and PSA and other grading companies are INCOMPETENT at their core mission of detecting alterations, where do we go from here? How long until the word actually spreads among the collectors that aren't on message boards and nobody pays PSA/Beckett/SGC thousands of dollars a year (or card) on grading fees because there is no longer a premium awarded for high-grade cards?

No matter the price point of the grading, PSA is telling you that they're inspecting them properly for authenticity and lack of alterations. They have never claimed they do true authentication work only for higher graded cards.

PSA was alerted to Gary Moser and his friends 15 years ago at the National and asked what they're going to do about it. And they basically answered that they were going to stick their heads in the sand and hope it goes away on its own. That decision has and will continue to bite them in the butt.

The buck stops here.

With you? Very gentlemanly of you.

I don't really see the cleaning as incompetence. This board educated me on the concepts of alterations on older cards and it is clear there are techniques that you can't consistently detect.

There are loads of collectors like me who buy raw cards and filter them and send in the best ones. That is not going to stop. Obviously after hearing Ken Kendrick's comments on the Wagner the whales aren't going to just quit buying cards either.

As for grading the idea that it is going to die is ridiculous. This to me sounds like people boycotting Chick-fil-a. Plenty already weren't going there and they don't impact demand and as others drop off new people emerge.

The overwhelming percentage of people who submit cards have no clue how to doctor them. Those are the facts.

Allegedly altered cards in the new PWCC auction.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1304350

I have been told by people who know much more than I do. I think some of that discussion may be in the thread on the WWG DiMaggio.

Seriously David? Pretty sure that was a direct jab at my joking tongue in cheek gentlelady comment.

kat, I don't think that joke was directed at you. Just that since I used a hundred year old phrase, that he addressed me in a hundred year old way.

I have some mixed feelings about soaking/cleaning.

To me the answer is "it depends" soaking to remove stuff from scrapbook pages seems to be generally accepted, and in many cases, it should be. Lots of scrapbook pages are very acidic and will eventually color or damage the card.

I'm not 100% certain about using water to clean if it's by soaking. Most papers are slightly different, for example, the stuff used for T206s is largely rag, meaning it hasn't got much if any wood fiber in it. It's probably mostly cotton, and flax, maybe with a bit of wool. It also has a coating on the front that is probably some sort of clay. And some sizing, which helps the surface and physical properties of the paper, but can sometimes be washed off by soaking.

Without knowing what sizing they have and what water will do to it, soaking may not be ok, and may in fact be detectable. I'm fairly sure the sizing is visible under a microscope at not all that much magnification.
If I ever find the Clarke card from the water causing an offset experiment, I can actually check for differences.

Soaking in chemicals is almost certainly not ok. The exception I'd make would be deacidification fluid on some sets like most strip cards that are on really bad cardboard that is usually already decaying. And that should really be disclosed. Not only is it a bit involved, but it's not cheap and may be a positive thing.

I've cleaned 1 1/2 cards, one a T206 I've shown that was pretty grimy with soot on the front, which would have done some real damage after a while. (The remaining soot in the microcracks of the glazed surface will too, but cleaning them is going too far. ) The other a T206 with a lot of soot on the back. I stopped that one when the soot was too ingrained and the card surface started fraying.
Both were just with a water dampened q-tip. (A good medical non-linting one)

One thing that's certain, a casual glance at a card for centering and wear won't detect most of that, or most chemical soaks. That's on the grading companies.

What I find so odd about this entire discussion is this guy just puts it right out in the open.

https://www.gonewiththestain.com/samples-of-work.html

My good friend Rob who actually had one of the outed Moser cards from the Parkhurst wrestling set knows a dealer on EBAY who routinely sends cards to this guy to have improved. And as advertised it works.

This is the first time I have visited this guys site and there you have before and after photos of cards inside third party grader slabs that clearly have had work done to them. They showcase a SGC 6 Mantle that was removed from a scrapbook. When you navigate to the testimonial section you will find real life customers elated with the work. It seems there is no shortage of collectors and dealers willing to send their cards to this company to have them improved.

The Mantle story is particularly interesting because it sites they had articles in the SCD and that an auctioneer contacted them to try and rescue the cards. I was under the impression that SCD was a very serious publication geared towards top level hobby enthusiasts.

What am I missing here if it has been known for this long that guys like this have come up with ways to restore a cards condition and don't feel like they are doing anything wrong? I have yet to ever read an auction write up that says this card was restored and now resides in this higher graded slab thanks to Dick Towle.

Towle is banned from this site.

Gotcha.

I went to their Facebook page and man as of August 2018 they indicate they had worked on 5,600 cards year to date.

My Google search turned up this thread.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...=185334&page=2

Seems this football has been kicked around for awhile on this site. Very informative read and only on page two.

Restoration is a very involved subject in most hobbies. Almost all accept some level of it. Usually a simple cleaning is ok, as long as it's done properly.
Most silver coins that are shiny have been cleaned in a solvent that removes tarnish
Part of identifying stamps is figuring out the watermark or lack of one. That means dipping it in fluid, which is a mild solvent and happens to do a bit of cleaning in the process. That's also done to detect creases, tears, thins, and some repairs. (The fluid is necessary on most old US stamps, on many foreign ones the watermark can be seen much more easily usually it just takes holding it up to some light. )

What hasn't really happened in cards is any consistent attitude as to what's ok and what isn't
I personally think Dick Towle goes too far. Although I have one card that has a sticky tape residue I'd love to be rid of, removing the stain is too much. And a penny sleeve keeps it from sticking to other cards, so it's good until I end up with a better one.

We as card collectors have no tradition of standard practice like coins or stamps, or cars, or.... anything else. Without that, disclosure becomes very important. And most of the people doing any work at all hide behind a TPG opinion, which is just not right. (To me, others may have a different tolerance for that) There's a general idea of what's too much, like trimming, or taking a marker to the borders of 71Topps.

trimmed parkhurst howe

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3855

recolored and whitened e90-1 Jackson

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3852

The Blowout detectives are going to blow the case if they allege that these 2 Applings are in fact the same card. Why would the doctors add blood shot eyelids to a perfectly well registered PSA6? See post #278 for a better scan.

Same red line along his neck in both cards as well as same everything else. They sure look like the same card to me. Scans are different degrees of sharpness, may account for what you are seeing?

trimmed 53 bowman nearly 1k gain ouch the trim job

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3882

I'm noticing a lot of reholdered BSF E98's in the pwcc auction. To me this is suspicious.

That 1952 topps psa 8 from a psa 6 john rutherford with a 10k price increase in one year time turn around also should be added to the 5k and above list..

I am not keeping such a list, feel free.

Altered PSA 6 E96 Lajoie card just pulled from current PWCC.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3897

PSA 5 to 7 Play Ball DiMaggio just pulled from PWCC.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3896

Cj Cobb 2 in Clean Sweep, to 4 in PWCC.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3920

More Brent purchases like the WWG DiMaggio?
 

Well, it appears BO has uncovered more cards like the WWG DiMaggio from a couple of years back, purchased by Brent (he admitted to that one after being confronted with irrefutable information), then altered, then sold by PWCC. There is confirmation on some of these that Brent did in fact purchase them (not everyone is willing to talk). Since these cards are all from one submission, the inference is that he also purchased the rest, but judge for yourself.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3941

Regarding the DiMaggio, posts 147 and 149 of this thread are interesting.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...se#post1655249

Thanks for posting all this. Over the years I can count on one hand all my purchases with PWCC. Im scared to buy anything from PWCC at this point, and its safe to say Im done.