How would you react to a personal attack (by SGC)?

[scottglevy]

I tend not to like to get involved in drama, but recently my dad had a disagreement with SGC regarding a controversial brown old mill card.

We are all adults here and business is business. I understand that making someone whole on a card that was cracked out can be a contentious thing -- especially given that my dad has no written records of a purchase price and has repeatedly mentioned that he doesn't know what he paid for it. I don't begrudge SGC for taking their time in trying to assess what the true "make good" value of a card that they deemed incorrectly graded - even though this process has dragged on a few months. But here's where I want the board's advice.....

My dad forwarded on some comments make by Sean from SGC that were honestly pretty hurtful when I read them. For instance ...

"In an earlier email you mentioned that you were concerned about your integrity among other collectors with respect to this situation. Based on my research your concern is valid."

In looking through the email history, I see a lengthy discussion, but no personal insults....until now. If getting made whole from SGC means withstanding verbal insults if you won't accept SGC's first offer, what type of "guarantee" is that?

But my question is more basic than this. If it was YOUR dad who was being insulted in this manner --- how would you handle it?



P.S.

As for the card, if and when this situation is resolved, I plan on letting a few experts from the forum examine the card --- to get an unbiased opinion.

[glchen]

I think from that one sentence, it can be interpreted in different ways, and it might not be meant as an insult. If that's the only verbal insult that you think SGC has made, I think you should give them the benefit of the doubt, and that no insult was meant.

Interpretation 1 (which I think you are seeing):

(1) "Based on my research your concern is valid."

This could mean that SGC is saying that your dad has no integrity, which I believe is the interpretation that you are taking.

(2) This same sentence could also mean that SGC understand that your dad is concerned about his loss of integrity among other collectors, and they understand why he is concerned BUT they themselves don't question his integrity.

I think this second one what SGC probably meant, and they should be given the benefit of the doubt. Just from my personal experience, SGC has always provided superlative customer service for me although I have never been in this type of situation.

[barrysloate]

Scott- I know you are upset, and you and your dad are both my friends. But given the card was cracked out, and you have no receipt of purchase price, you should be a little more flexible.

I don't know how you got to the point with SGC that things got contentious, but I'll guess it had something to do with the amount of money they offered you, which you feel is not enough.

At this point I'm not sure if it is the amount of money that you are upset with, or the tenor of the email you received, or both. I would suggest both sides take a time out, that SGC offer an apology for the email, and that both parties agree on a reasonably fair compensation...and then everybody move on.

We have the Bill Latzko-REA thread churning along and I feel the same way about that one. Rob made a fair offer, and even if Bill didn't find it to be perfect he should have accepted it and moved on. Believe me, I've had disputes with customers that didn't always work out exactly as both parties would have liked. Well you know what- life can be like that sometimes. No reason to end friendships or relationships over it. Just work out something that both sides can live with and move on.

But it would be a nice gesture if SGC apologized to Hank and Scott over that email.

[John V]

This may be another example of how an email message can be misinterpreted. I trust Gary's #2 is what they meant. I would hope that no one at SGC, even on a bad day, would be dumb enough to insult a customer.

Regarding the card, what happened? I missed something. Was it damaged by SGC?

[cfc1909]

I have been asking for a scan of this card in question for several years, maybe now I will get a chance to look at it in person.

I would think if there was a large amount of coin spent on this card, somewhere there would be a record of it.

As far as a personal attack, I will weigh in on that after I check out the card and receive the rest of the facts.

[Bridwell]

Is this about that Brown Old Mill southern leaguer T206 that was in the Goodwin auction and then pulled? It had appeared to me that SGC had mislabeled this card and it wasn't a Brown back after all, just a faded black back.

If this is what this thread is about, it was interesting to me that the Levy's took SGC's labeling as fact, when the card really didn't look brown on the back. It's also interesting that Goodwin accepted the consignment without questioning the SGC label either. You guys have so much trust in SGC that I guess nobody expects SGC to ever make a mistake. Has SGC admitted to an error? If so, can you show that the error was costly to you?

[FrankWakefield]

SGC makes mistakes. All of the 3pgs do. We all do...

When I see a 3pg mistake I'm amused, not infuriated. One of the few cards I have that is slabbed and not cracked out is an SGC mistake. My amusement is possible because I don't care about nor rely upon what a slip on a slab says.

Busting out a card is akin to removing the back of a Rolex, or breaking the hood seal on a Rolls Royce... I took an iPhone apart a few weeks ago, in a futile attempt to dry it out and get it working again. (A daughter ran it through the washer.) That was not successful, but I did enjoy the Youtube video's about how to try to do it.

What if.... 1- SGC had gotten it right, 2- you didn't rely on 3pg, 3- you'd left it in the holder, or you didn't collect 3pg cards. With any of those 'what if's' the problem would not exist.

Having said all of that, to your question. You're the son. Let your Dad deal with it. I'd be annoyed that someone sent such emails to my Dad, but it isn't my place to do anything at all about it unless he asks for assistance. So I think you should stay out of it, not offer assistance, but be willing to assist if he does ask for it.

[Kotton King]

Originally Posted by glchen

(2) This same sentence could also mean that SGC understand that your dad is concerned about his loss of integrity among other collectors, and they understand why he is concerned BUT they themselves don't question his integrity.

I think this second one what SGC probably meant, and they should be given the benefit of the doubt. Just from my personal experience, SGC has always provided superlative customer service for me although I have never been in this type of situation.

This is the same way that I interpret the comment. SGC has a lot of integrity and I don't think they would insult collectors, especially through email where their comments could be posted for other clientele to see.

[bbcard1]

One of my mantras is that email is a fine way to impart information but a lousy way to communicate. Intent can be misconstrued. I can think of two clients (at least) that I have lost because of hasty emails by my staff that were misconstrued. Sometime talking is better. Maybe you should have your dad call the person he has been communicating with with openness and start over.

As for what I do when I am attacked personally, I usually go with the crane kick. When you do it right, no can defense.

[Sterling Sports Auctions]

Correct me if I am wrong Scott, but I believe you and your dad have owned and maybe wtill own legitimate T206 brown backs (your dad once sent me pictures one 2). If this is the case than you should have been able to tell when you received this card that it was not a legit brown back.

If this is the case, I think you need to assess your decision to try and resell the card as a brown back and not return it when you initially received the card.

Lee

[Abravefan11]

I know the card was up for auction before being pulled but beyond that is there another thread containing the Who/What/When/Where of this card and the dispute?

[uffda51]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

One of my mantras is that email is a fine way to impart information but a lousy way to communicate. Intent can be misconstrued.

Amen to that.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The card did not look remotely brown to me. Just saying.

[Misunderestimated]

I'm with Gary etc. on interpreting the email. Without the entire context its hard to say what someone intended to say and this is especially so in an email which is a less than exact form of communication.
Although it may be too late now you might want to ask Sean what me meant by his comment before construing it as malicious and insulting....
The remark seems a bit snarky to me, but that's all. Hopefully you and your father will be able to resolve your real problem with SGC without creating a satellite conflict.....
If I sound too harsh, remember I don't know the entire story and context.

[wonkaticket]

Scott, it’s not a brown Old Mill IMO.I would bet that the top 10 T206 guys I know would agree with me on this.

As for having knowledgeable collectors review it?

With one phone call you and your dad could have had plenty of folks look over this card who know T206’s you know that.

Also you guys own browns you could compare them side by side not many folks can do that. I find it odd that you of all collectors would think this is brown? I can’t tell you how many times you guys have shared cards with the strangest of tiny little details of oddity but this one slips by?

So why would you consign this card to Goodwin and be so bummed that it was pulled when it’s so obvious it’s not brown? Why Scott?

As for compensation there is no way you guys have anything close to brown Old Mill money in this card, so looking for anything close to that is like winning the lottery on SGC’s labeling mistake. SGC should give you guys a few hundred bucks for the trouble a more than fair rate for a G-VG southern league card.

Then all of you SGC, Goodwin and you and your dad should be glad nobody got dealt a bogus card in a mislabeled holder.

You of all folks should know the sting of getting a card in a holder which isn’t legit.

Cheers,

John

P.S. Quan is right there are quite a few facts being left out here......

[hank_jp]

WOW!

When someone once said a little information could be a dangerous thing he was on to something. I usually do not prefer to comment on matters I'm invovled with until they are either resolved or unresolvable. Clearly I feel there is a need for some factual commentary here.

When I first purchased this card I did so only because it was certified by SGC as a 1909-11 Old Mill Cigarettes T206 Dolly Stark Brown Back SGC 30. I would not have been interested based on the scan, since it clearly looked to me to be black. I wanted to know why the label guaranteed it was brown. After I received it, again, to the naked eye, it was a faded black. Then I looked at it under magnification and I saw that the ink was brown. That was enough for me to understand how it got labeled. It wasn't enough for me to be thrilled at having this as the one example for my back set because the hand cut, easily visible light brown examples appealed to me more. But this was still one to keep in my opinion.

I looked at all my other OM Southern League cards under a loupe and they were all clearly black to me, only this one appeared brown - much darker than the hand cut ones [obviously] but still brown. I always assumed there may be others like this out there, so eventhough this was the only labeled an Old Mill brown back with a number grade I still did not consider it unique or spectacular. It might be both, but because the brown color was not visible to the naked eye it had less appeal to me than many of my other cards.

Over the years I have sold cards that in retrospect I would like to have back - I imagine we all have. With the money raised I pursued other items I wanted. When I decided to see what this card would bring at auction I sent it to REA along with other cards. I told Rob that he should review this card carefully since it looked faded black and only under a loupe could I detect the brown back, and if for any reason he felt uncomfortable listing it to send it back to me. He did send it back. I mentioned this card to Bill Goodwin and sent it to him along with other cards with the same explicit information. He reviewed it himself under magnification and was satisfied that it was brown. I insisted that in any description of the item that potential bidders understand that it looked faded black but appeared brown under a loupe and also that SGC said it was brown.

I would never have kept the card initially if I did not feel it was brown [under magnification] nor would I have sent it in as an auction item if for any reason I was convinced that it was black.

For those who questioned if I told Goodwin that REA passed on the item I have this to say. How many of you had a T206 card for many years and finally sent it in for grading only to be told that a card looking perfectly fine to you was trimmed? Then, when you either resubmitted it to the same or different grading company because you disagreed with the assesment, I'm sure that you included a note saying, "By the way XYZ Grading Company said this was trimmed. I just wanted you to know that." That is the way it works, right?

When Bill told me a number of collectors questioned the card, we both agreed to pull it and send it back to SGC for a thorough review. There was no hesitation to do this.

I was expecting SGC to contact me fairly quickly. When about a month had passed I decided to call them for an update. I was expecting a detailed explanation of what they did and what they decided. What I got was a grilling about what I paid, when I bought the card, from whom and where. Not a single word about their findings. I had to call them back the next day to actually hear them say that their graders decided it was black. When I asked if it was looked at under magnification I receved no answer ... and I still have no answer to this day. When I asked for a written evaluation I was told they would not provide that and I still have not received one. When I asked why it was originally labeled as a brown back among the answers I received were:
A. The head grader in 2005 believed it was a brown back
B. It was submitted for grading as a brown back on the form and their data entry entry person at the time may have kept that brown back designation on the final label.

I then asked if the fact that all other Old Mill brown back cards known to exist were hand cut with a light brown ink back while this one was factory cut with the brown only visible under magnification was the reason it was deemed not to be a brown back this time. I never received an answer to this question and it still has not been answered.

Eventhough one of SGC's employees told me "when I look at the card, it looks to be faded ink that appears slightly brown", he added that he was not a grader and not an expert but the current chief grader "immediately recognized the card was a mistake." However, that still did not address the issue if the card at that time, was viewed under magnification, because I also immediately thought it was black until I saw it wasn't. [OMG I'm having flashes of John Kerry - OY!]

Many of you have thoughts about what compensation I should receive for this once SGC verified card IF IT IS NOT BROWN. But what should be done, if under magnification it clearly is brown? SGC broke it out of the holder and refuses to return it as they received it. We have a difference of opinion about this card and what once, based on their say so was a truly remarkable and rare card is now apparantly just another common.

My feeling at this time is that I want this card brought to the National Show in Baltimore. I want a group of knowledgeable T 206 collectors [you guys from this board are fine with me] to look at it ... under magnification. If you say it is black I'll take the raw card and put it in my raw T206 set. BUT, if when viewed under a loupe you say it is brown, SGC should agree to do one of three things:

1. Put it back in their holder with the prior description on the label including the fact that it is a brown back with a number grade. Also include certification as to how this latest review was arrived at.

2. Keep it out of their holder but replace it with an Old Mill brown back that they have no problem labeling as such.

3. Keep it out of their holder and compensate me somewhere between a commom price and a brown back price and return the raw card to me.

Of course another solution is possible, which is the one have been anxiously trying to facilitate. Namely, in order for SGC to keep this out of their holder, labeled as it was, we should reach a satisfactory solution that we both can live with and return the raw card to me [because I still want to show it at the National]. That is the solution I was pursuing and I hope SGC's tone will now change and that they will not insist on waiting until they are good and ready to make a decision, but instead act in a more timely manner.

I apologize for the very long post but I felt the questions raised deserved a serious response. I also hope you will excuse me from further posts on this topic at this time. Those of you who know my son or me are always welcome to call us at any time, especially on issues as significant as this.

Regards,

Hank

[D. Bergin]

I am still a bit stumped as to how SGC should be financially responsible for paying the market value of a card based on a labeling error.

When PSA mis-labeled a T206 Heinie Wagner card as a Honus Wagner card.....did they have to pay the lucky owner of the Heinie card the difference between a Heinie card and a Honus card?

[ullmandds]

I think the mislabeled heinie card was kept by a collector...and obviously no one would pay honus $$$ for it...while...if sgc mislabeled the levy card as brown...then it was purchased based on the assumption that it is/was brown...I could see SGC having some liability.

[Rob D.]

Originally Posted by hank_jp

For those who questioned if I told Goodwin that REA passed on the item I have this to say. How many of you had a T206 card for many years and finally sent it in for grading only to be told that a card looking perfectly fine to you was trimmed? Then, when you either resubmitted it to the same or different grading company because you disagreed with the assesment, I'm sure that you included a note saying, "By the way XYZ Grading Company said this was trimmed. I just wanted you to know that." That is the way it works, right?

On May 9 I posted on the B/S/T a group of Butter Cream cards for sale. Here's an excerpt from the description:

Finally, PSA's grade of a 6 for Glen Wright should be considered fairly high grade for this issue. Full disclosure: When submitted for a crossover, SGC said the card is trimmed. Again, I don't see it, because the size is correct, and when I examine it with a loupe, I see no evidence of trimming. Welcome to the world of professional grading.

So, no, it's not unheard of for people to be forthcoming with what some might consider key details regarding a card they're trying to sell.

[wonkaticket]

Rob D. correct....another example..

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/.../2008/198.html

[Peter_Spaeth]

I still don't understand why color would appear different under a loupe? Can someone explain?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I still don't understand why color would appear different under a loupe? Can someone explain?

it's bigger

[jobermeyer2]

Originally Posted by hank_jp

WOW!

For those who questioned if I told Goodwin that REA passed on the item I have this to say. How many of you had a T206 card for many years and finally sent it in for grading only to be told that a card looking perfectly fine to you was trimmed? Then, when you either resubmitted it to the same or different grading company because you disagreed with the assesment, I'm sure that you included a note saying, "By the way XYZ Grading Company said this was trimmed. I just wanted you to know that." That is the way it works, right?

Um, so the answer is no, you didn't tell Goodwin that REA passed on it, right? I got lost, cuz you used a lot of words...

Jeff

[Peter_Spaeth]

Bought it, realized it wasn't brown, buried it for a good long while instead of showing it to a soul, tried to consign it taking advantage of the label, got called on it, tried to get sgc to buy it back? Just wondering, does that seems to fit the chronology better?

I just louped a bunch of cards, I didn't notice any changes in color. Whatever.

[HRBAKER]

I just louped a bunch of cards, I didn't notice any changes in color. Whatever.[I][/I]

Did you make them big enough?

[Bridwell]

Lots of collectors getting loupy?