Memory Lane Gehrig expectation vs reality

[Snowman]

I won this 33 Goudey Gehrig from Memory Lane last month. To say the card was misrepresented would be an understatement. Here's a couple of side-by-sides showing the auction photos vs how they look in hand. And yes, I fully realize that it was in a PSA 1 holder. But the problem nowadays is that PSA's grading is all over the place, and they regularly put VG cards into PSA 1 holders, and this is a brand new cert number, graded within the past few months. So there was reason to believe that the flaws on the card were as seen and described in the listing. It sold for 150% of what an average PSA 1 goes for because of it too ($3750 vs $2500).

Item description from the listing reads as follows:

1933 Goudey #160 Lou Gehrig is offered here in a PSA 1 PR holder. Soiling and wear are evident on the front, but nothing takes away from the pinstriped Gehrig central image. Clear verso.

This is starting to become a pretty big problem, in my opinion. It's always been this way to some degree, but I feel as though it's gotten worse lately. Numerous auction houses are either intentionally hiding major flaws or are exhibiting extreme negligence in their omissions and scans. Say what you will about how annoying the eBay Authenticity Guarantee program is, they at least provide a layer of protection against stuff like this happening. They will reject cards that exhibit major flaws that are not disclosed or shown in the listings.

I reached out to them this morning and sent them these images. We'll see how they respond. Needless to say, I wasn't happy.

[Casey2296]

Holy Cow!

[jsfriedm]

The Memory Lane scans look like they could have been taken directly from the PSA website: https://www.psacard.com/cert/78153729

[irv]

Wow, that is just uncalled for.
Calling it deceitful does not begin to describe what Memory Lane did here.

I would not settle for anything other than a full refund with some swag/credit of some sort thrown in to.

[calvindog]

You should probably not partake in Heritage auctions.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by calvindog

You should probably not partake in Heritage auctions.

I can't say I've done it a lot, but a while back I purchased a card from heritage, My 1952 Bowman Mickey Mantle, and the Scan was near identical to what I received. Granted that should always be the case, but still.

[Snowman]

Memory Lane got back to me. Apparently, these images are not sufficient for them to determine that the card was misrepresented.

I'm sorry you're not happy with your purchase. However, I can't agree with your scans without holding the cards to compare what the actual card looks like. Being this said, if you want me to further examine your position send the cards back to my attn.

[oldjudge]

Last year I was contemplating bidding on a high end card in HA. I called and asked about the condition and a little while later Joe Orlando called back. He completely described the card to me and could not have been any nicer. If you have questions about a card ask before you bid and definitely don’t call out an auction house before you give them an opportunity to respond to your issue.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by calvindog

You should probably not partake in Heritage auctions.

Doesn't Heritage provide really high resolution pictures/scans that can be exploded to be HUGE on a computer screen? I've found many defects by exploding the picture. I can't remember how long Heritage has been using this format, but it has helped me recently. Now if it was similar to this case and the exploded Gehrig card picture/scan didn't show the creases/wrinkles, then that would be problematic.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by jsfriedm

The Memory Lane scans look like they could have been taken directly from the PSA website: https://www.psacard.com/cert/78153729

Saw that same thing.

I wonder if this is a case where the creases were removed, but then returned after grading.

Or it could just be a really blurry scan by PSA.

[jacksons]

I checked the page source code for the Gehrig card .jpg file on both sites (PSA and ML) and the scans are different but very close. Neither obviously shows the evident creasing.

Originally Posted by jsfriedm

The Memory Lane scans look like they could have been taken directly from the PSA website: https://www.psacard.com/cert/78153729

[molenick]

I once won a PSA 4 card that looked like it just had corner wear but actually had a crease down the middle (which I discovered when I received the card). Because of this, I have started calling AHs and asking them to pull any cards graded EX or below and go over them with me over the phone.

Not saying in any way that that is what you should have done...if the scan did not show those creases, they should have been mentioned in the description.

But calling for details has helped me on several occasions avoid unpleasant surprises.

[ElCabron]

If you don’t like this then you’ll probably want to steer clear of Diamond Dave Kohler’s SCP Auctions.

[NiceDocter]

That almost rises to the level of a photoshopped scam. Im hoping they make this right by you. Im sure you felt sick when you got the card in hand. Please keep us posted on the resolution of this problem. Sorry it happened.....

[Fred]

There's a distinct difference in the background texture of the card. The picture/scan from the auction description has a very smooth black background and the picture/scan of the wrinkled card has a bit of texture.

Is the "after" graphic a scan or a picture? Is it possible the item description is a scan with crappy settings on the scanner?

In any case, I'd be communicating with the AH because that is such a misrepresentation of the card.

Totally mind blowing.

It has the appearance that it was cracked out of the slab and was soaked and pressed. But then that wouldn't explain the same cert#.

Edited to add - Let's hope the AH doesn't come back and say that a PSA1 can have creases, etc, and then try to close it out without further discussion.

[CardPadre]

That’s pretty terrible, especially for the premium the card commanded based on the perceived absence of most the creases/wrinkles.

I had a similar situation recently with a Sport Thrills Jackie that showed up with full-length wrinkles that you would never be able to pick up in the scans (AH also used PSA scans). That card didn’t command such a premium and I was able to move it for just about what I had into it, so I never made a fuss about it, but I was very displeased.

[4815162342]

.

[Jobu]

Chances are eBay would have passed this as a PSA 1 where the holder wasn't compromised and sent it to you. And once they clear it the sale is final, there is nothing you can do. I bought a graded card where the seller edited out colors so it looked like an error, eBay approved it, and no matter how hard I complained my way up the chain they said 'tough shit, we're not the experts, the authenticator is and what they say is final." Now, a raw card in this situation and you might have a chance of hearing from them before they pass it.

Originally Posted by Snowman

Say what you will about how annoying the eBay Authenticity Guarantee program is, they at least provide a layer of protection against stuff like this happening. They will reject cards that exhibit major flaws that are not disclosed or shown in the listings.

[vthobby]

Just another reason I only deal with REA.

That is plain fraud on their (Memory Lane) part. I'd dispute the charge on your credit card (hopefully you paid this way) and never deal with them again.

Very bad!

REA all the way!

[michael3322]

Very interesting comments.

I initially didn't understand why collectors would care about MBA ratings on top of graded slabs, but given the recent examples of inconsistencies, maybe the graders of the graders are actually providing a useful service after all? What do you think?



FYI: I have never used the MBA service and don't own any MBA graded cards.

[Snapolit1]

Never heard of MBA. Not one time.

[3-2-count]

It’s inexcusable for an AH to represent a card that they’re selling with scans like that.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by michael3322

Very interesting comments.

I initially didn't understand why collectors would care about MBA ratings on top of graded slabs, but given the recent examples of inconsistencies, maybe the graders of the graders are actually providing a useful service after all? What do you think?



FYI: I have never used the MBA service and don't own any MBA graded cards.

Isn't that the same Mike baker that authenticated 10's of thousands of FAKE Mantle DiMaggio's Williams Koufax et al, autographs while with GAI? Yea, I really want his FAKE sticker on my stupid slab.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

Isn't that the same Mike baker that authenticated 10's of thousands of FAKE Mantle DiMaggio's Williams Koufax et al, autographs while with GAI? Yea, I really want his FAKE sticker on my stupid slab.

Mike Baker did not authenticate any autographs ever.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Jobu

Chances are eBay would have passed this as a PSA 1 where the holder wasn't compromised and sent it to you. And once they clear it the sale is final, there is nothing you can do. I bought a graded card where the seller edited out colors so it looked like an error, eBay approved it, and no matter how hard I complained my way up the chain they said 'tough shit, we're not the experts, the authenticator is and what they say is final." Now, a raw card in this situation and you might have a chance of hearing from them before they pass it.

But you can return saying "changed mind" no?

[Jobu]

Nope.

If the seller accepts returns, you can return the card under the terms they set.

If it is listed as no returns and the authenticator passes the card, it is yours forever as soon as it hits your doorstep. (I assume with provisions for a card damaged during shipping.)

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

But you can return saying "changed mind" no?

[Luke]

Yeah, they should want to take care of this for you. Those scans are incredibly deceiving.

[rjackson44]

Originally Posted by Luke

Yeah, they should want to take care of this for you. Those scans are incredibly deceiving.

Hi Luke im sure they will ,, never had issues with them ,,im sure snowman will be happy..

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by Jobu

Nope.

If the seller accepts returns, you can return the card under the terms they set.

If it is listed as no returns and the authenticator passes the card, it is yours forever as soon as it hits your doorstep. (I assume with provisions for a card damaged during shipping.)

Even if the card is "not as described"?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Jobu

Nope.

If the seller accepts returns, you can return the card under the terms they set.

If it is listed as no returns and the authenticator passes the card, it is yours forever as soon as it hits your doorstep. (I assume with provisions for a card damaged during shipping.)

While this is usually the case, it's not always. It really depends. I had a card show up that passed ebay authenticity but that was altered on the back and they missed it. At first, eBay told me to pound sand, but I got a hold of a representative and provided proof with good photos of the issue and they had me send the card back to the authenticators for review. After seeing my pics and reviewing the card, they agreed with me and I was refunded.

[Lucas00]

This is why I like to take scans 100% raw. Dust specs and all, zero alterations to any settings aside from resolution.

[ullmandds]

That's bullshit and I would be pissed off as well. I'd be in their best interest to make you whole.

[Carter08]

Really ridiculous. Hope it works out.

[Gorditadogg]

It looks like the Memory Lane picture is blurry, Gehrig's face is out of focus compared to Travis's scan. I would think an auction house would take better quality pictures than that.

Do you think the AH got duped, too, and used a picture provided by the seller? Whatever happened, it is a major screw up.

Please keep us informed as this develops.


Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[Mungo Hungo]

Might be worth filing in small claims court. Depends on whether it would be worth your time, but since the auction house delivered to your address, your small claims court presumably would have jurisdiction.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I won this 33 Goudey Gehrig from Memory Lane last month. To say the card was misrepresented would be an understatement. Here's a couple of side-by-sides showing the auction photos vs how they look in hand. And yes, I fully realize that it was in a PSA 1 holder. But the problem nowadays is that PSA's grading is all over the place, and they regularly put VG cards into PSA 1 holders, and this is a brand new cert number, graded within the past few months. So there was reason to believe that the flaws on the card were as seen and described in the listing. It sold for 150% of what an average PSA 1 goes for because of it too ($3750 vs $2500).

Item description from the listing reads as follows:



This is starting to become a pretty big problem, in my opinion. It's always been this way to some degree, but I feel as though it's gotten worse lately. Numerous auction houses are either intentionally hiding major flaws or are exhibiting extreme negligence in their omissions and scans. Say what you will about how annoying the eBay Authenticity Guarantee program is, they at least provide a layer of protection against stuff like this happening. They will reject cards that exhibit major flaws that are not disclosed or shown in the listings.

I reached out to them this morning and sent them these images. We'll see how they respond. Needless to say, I wasn't happy.

There is no question the scan ML used was misleading as it hides the very heavy creases. The person responsible for the description should have mentioned heavy wrinkles IF they were looking at the card AND the scan when writing the description. Possible this was innocent oversight and it is not that expensive of a card that a whole lot of attention was going to be given to it.

I think your mistake was assuming with PSA grading overly harsh, that it had a bump. From what I have been told, ML is on the short list of favorites at PSA and their stuff is not going to get the same harsh grading the rest of us experience.

Also if this purchase was made on eBay and the same misleading scan was used, the card would have passed authentication. If the seller was an All Sales Final seller, you would have no recourse. You will have a better chance getting ML to refund you than you would had this been purchased on eBay.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

I think your mistake was assuming with PSA grading overly harsh, that it had a bump. From what I have been told, ML is on the short list of favorites at PSA and their stuff is not going to get the same harsh grading the rest of us experience.

I think your mistake is thinking that a card that has no creases mentioned in the description, and no creases show in the pictures, is allowed to have creases.

Another mistake of yours evidently is to feel that it's ok for certain clients to get better opinions from the opinion sellers than other clients.

[tjisonline]

With auction houses, there’s a level of expectation that you’re allowed to have by not using more popular platforms such as eBay. Buyers are paying a 20% premium. Least the auction houses can do is provide accurate descriptions. Additionally, this Lou Gehrig card appears blurry in the areas where the creases are. If the creases were disclosed like in some of their other listings, this card would have sold for less as some buyers would have stayed away.

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

I think your mistake is thinking that a card that has no creases mentioned in the description, and no creases show in the pictures, is allowed to have creases.

Another mistake of yours evidently is to feel that it's ok for certain clients to get better opinions from the opinion sellers than other clients.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I won this 33 Goudey Gehrig from Memory Lane last month. To say the card was misrepresented would be an understatement. Here's a couple of side-by-sides showing the auction photos vs how they look in hand. And yes, I fully realize that it was in a PSA 1 holder. But the problem nowadays is that PSA's grading is all over the place, and they regularly put VG cards into PSA 1 holders, and this is a brand new cert number, graded within the past few months. So there was reason to believe that the flaws on the card were as seen and described in the listing. It sold for 150% of what an average PSA 1 goes for because of it too ($3750 vs $2500).

Item description from the listing reads as follows:



This is starting to become a pretty big problem, in my opinion. It's always been this way to some degree, but I feel as though it's gotten worse lately. Numerous auction houses are either intentionally hiding major flaws or are exhibiting extreme negligence in their omissions and scans. Say what you will about how annoying the eBay Authenticity Guarantee program is, they at least provide a layer of protection against stuff like this happening. They will reject cards that exhibit major flaws that are not disclosed or shown in the listings.

I reached out to them this morning and sent them these images. We'll see how they respond. Needless to say, I wasn't happy.

It's 'Centered" though with extremely good eye appeal,
Seriously though, this is horsesh**. I don't see E-bay authenticity doing anything but passing that right through. Denying your return and making you wait 6 weeks to get pay pal involved.

AND I wouldn't buy Squat from Memory Lane again if I was you. In fact, I'd probably not buy a thing for a month or 2 and dream of selling it all. Anything less than them demanding the card back with egg on their face is not acceptable, IMHO.

In fact I just signed up at "Thanks for the memories", LOL...never to bid on a thing. Thanks for the "memories" we hardly knew ya

[4815162342]

They have added the additional photos. Most notably:

[brianp-beme]

[QUOTE=4815162342;2426417]They have added the additional photos. /QUOTE]

Claws like those could scratch the slab!

Brian

[tjisonline]

Really wish we could now remove “Memory Lane” & “Gehrig” (Replace with “Auction House”) from the title as this is an ongoing issue with the majority of auction houses.

Note: I’m happy Snowman’s issue was resolved & looking forward to the hammer price of the re-listing.

Personally, I wish the topic of image / scan manipulation would get more attention. Same for lack of detail in descriptions.

Here’s an example.

This SGC 2.5 1968 Topps 3-D Test Roberto Clemente card was sold in 2017 by PWCC via eBay. Nice pics & description. Plus, this card is really condition sensitive (plastic was used & degrades over decades) so when buying online, an accurate listing is important. E.g. cracks & discoloration will only worsen over time and i know from owning a graded mint on card kenner star wars vinyl cape jawa that i consigned w/ Hake's last yr (it developed 2 small discoloration spots sometime between 2020 and 2023 that Hake's perfectly disclosed in their July 2023 auction )
https://www.pwccmarketplace.com/items/1500138

This exact card sold again last month via Goldin. While they mentioned the front discoloration was faint (it isn’t) , there was no mention of be back crease / wrinkle. I get it though. The final price wouldn’t have been so high if the pics didn’t have the settings configured as it (e.g. brightness).
https://goldin.co/item/1968-topps-3-...-good-2-5sowtt

[MattyC]

Precisely, TJ. Given how scans can not always tell the full picture (in either direction— either overstating or understating a card's flaws), if one is really very interested in a card at auction it can only be helpful to be a proactive buyer and inquire, ask for more images, etc.

We'd all love to collect/buy cards in some ideal reality where every AH takes a beat to make sure each and every lot description and image accurately presents the card as it is in hand— but it is doubtful that will ever be the standard or reality. Wanting AH's to operate in that ideal fashion makes all the sense in the world yet expecting it can lead to frustration and disappointment. So one way to try and mitigate those headaches is to be proactive.

[Mozzie22]

Watch for this card again after Kurt's Card Care gets his hands on it.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Mozzie22

Watch for this card again after Kurt's Card Care gets his hands on it.

I definitely would have cracked it and cleaned it if I had kept it, but I don't press out creases, so I didn't want it after it showed up with those giant creases.

[Snowman]

There's been a new development in this saga with Memory Lane. In response to me posting this thread, they have revoked my bidding privileges. Clearly, they'd like to make a statement. If you criticize them publicly, they will punish you.

Thanks for showing your true colors Memory Lane. GFY.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I definitely would have cracked it and cleaned it if I had kept it, but I don't press out creases, so I didn't want it after it showed up with those giant creases.

Centering isn't perfect, so would you disclose this cleaning when selling?

Asking for a friend.

[Lucas00]

Its really not hard to scan a card with zero clean up effects. I would recommend everybody scanning cards to not alter the scan settings at all.
The official SGC scan BARELY shows the crease, just checked.

Its hard sometimes, even unedited scans (like regular photos) hide flaws just because of the angle.

[ruth-gehrig]

"Not readily noticeable"?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

They mention the light horizontal crease but omit mention of the heavy vertical one? That's just weird.