Washington Post article on the altered card scandal

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Nope. As far as I’m aware, they’re the only seller that has a user friendly consignment portal that charges fees under 4%.

Selling stuff on eBay isn’t enjoyable. I am happy to send my consignments elsewhere, but right now PWCC seems like the best option. I’m happy to give them their 1-4% cut if they want to do all the work for me.

I assume then you're completely fine paying retail for graded cards that are actually altered/authentic. No? Can't have it both ways.

Arthur

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Bicem

Good point, I mean what's a little fraud between friends?

And with a little shilling mixed in, it's the perfect venue for consignors who have no use for integrity, honesty and morality.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by Bicem

Good point, I mean what's a little fraud between friends?

I have never met Brent, nor am I defending him. I enjoy this hobby and being able to easily sell items to fund purchases is an important part of what makes it enjoyable for me.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by HasselhoffsCheeseburger

I assume then you're completely fine paying retail for graded cards that are actually altered/authentic. No? Can't have it both ways.

Arthur

I'm not fine with paying retail for any card.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Nope. As far as I’m aware, they’re the only seller that has a user friendly consignment portal that charges fees under 4%.

Selling stuff on eBay isn’t enjoyable. I am happy to send my consignments elsewhere, but right now PWCC seems like the best option. I’m happy to give them their 1-4% cut if they want to do all the work for me.

ahhhhh...that "service!" I wonder if this is part of their business model...to undercharge for consignments in lieu of the back end where shill bidding and the moser connection more than make up the difference.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

ahhhhh...that "service!" I wonder if this is part of their business model...to undercharge for consignments in lieu of the back end where shill bidding and the moser connection more than make up the difference.

I'd imagine they get heavily reduced rates through eBay, but who knows.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by AGuinness

The bigger question is why didn't the Washington Post run before and after photos of a doctored card. I can't imagine they wouldn't have permission from the BODA people to do so.

Because the BODA guys don't own the rights to those images?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Right I hear you man....but here is the thing.......what prof do you have to say specific person or persons did this? Did you see such and such trim bleach or re color a card? Where is the physical evidence? It’s all circumstantial.....still can hold same weight in court but I’m banking it won’t make it there...at least not to the specific alleged doctor or doctors...they’re gonna be very very difficult to pinch

You're not listening (reading?) if there are documents such as emails between conspirators about which cards they're going to buy and trim etc... that would be pretty ironclad.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Nope. As far as I’m aware, they’re the only seller that has a user friendly consignment portal that charges fees under 4%.

Selling stuff on eBay isn’t enjoyable. I am happy to send my consignments elsewhere, but right now PWCC seems like the best option. I’m happy to give them their 1-4% cut if they want to do all the work for me.

This has nothing to do PWCC, and it should be obvious not defending them (I've already stated that they and Gary Moser should go under and get any legal prosecution they are due). However, many collectors who sell their own stuff on eBay don't understand that many collectors don't enjoy, or have the time, to do their own eBay auctions. They are willing to pay the extra percentage for the ability to send their stuff to someone else sell for them.

It's like you may enjoy painting your kitchen walls, but others don't and prefer to pay someone else to do it-- and they also may feel the professional will do a better job.

When someone says "Why don't they sell it themselves," the same can be said when you pay someone to paint your kitchen or mow your law.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

I can't read it. It says I have run out of "free stories". And I refuse to pay The Washington Post a copper penny. If someone can post it here somehow, or a link I can read, that would be AWESOME!!!!

So you read enough of their articles to have used up all your free ones for the month, but you think it's worthless???

[Bicem]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

I have never met Brent, nor am I defending him. I enjoy this hobby and being able to easily sell items to fund purchases is an important part of what makes it enjoyable for me.

Not defending but supporting them financially by consigning, which is actually worse in my opinion.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by drcy

This has nothing to do PWCC, and obviously not defending them (I've already stated that they and Gary Moser should go under). However, many collectors who sell their own stuff on eBay don't understand that many collectors don't enjoy, or have the time, to do their own eBay auctions. They are willing to pay the extra percentage for the ability to send their stuff to someone else sell for them.

Honestly, selling on eBay sucks. I appreciate that some collectors do not regularly sell items, but I do. I would prefer to send it to someone who can reliably sell my items than spend my time doing it myself. I am not going to take time away from my life because of this scandal. If someone wants to come up with a similar platform, fine, I will consider switching. However, right now, PWCC has no viable counterparts.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

So you read enough of their articles to have used up all your free ones for the month, but you think it's worthless???

Clear your computer cashe/search memory and you can read it.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by griffon512

There's a good likelihood that some or all of the lawyers who regularly post on this Board will read this thread. The question is have you or are you currently giving legal services to PWCC, Brent Huigens, PSA/Collectors Universe, or Gary Moser in any capacity? A simple yes or no would suffice.

No.

[SOX75]

This is great news...it's been hard to wait the last 6 weeks as we've heard nothing about any investigations, while the number of cards impacted keeps climbing.

With the FBI involved they will have subpoena power to get at the emails and text messages that will support the fraud allegations. And you can probably expect Moser or Brent to roll over on each other.

The only thing that bothers me about the article is that they take Brent's public statements at face value, which portray him as a victim. From what I've read he is a co-conspirator.

In terms of still consigning with PWCC, consider that many collectors will do a cert. verification or sales history search on any graded cards they consider buying. If PWCC shows up in the sales history you can bet that prices will fall dramatically. These cards will have the Scarlet Letter A (altered) forever. That will wipe out any potential savings over eBaying the card yourself.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Right I hear you man....but here is the thing.......what prof do you have to say specific person or persons did this? Did you see such and such trim bleach or re color a card? Where is the physical evidence? It’s all circumstantial.....still can hold same weight in court but I’m banking it won’t make it there...at least not to the specific alleged doctor or doctors...they’re gonna be very very difficult to pinch

How so?

It's a pretty easy timeline and possession issue.

Lets say I buy a card on the 10th, and it goes through PSA on the 20th. Then what? 3 months later it's in an auction and it's altered. There was maybe 5 days where it was with me between purchase, and being sent in.

Simple question did I alter the card?
if no,
then who did?
If I don't know
then who had it between my purchase and my sending it in.

Even if it's not that short of a time, the idea is the same. And in the end, either I did it, I take the fall for my friend who did it, or I turn him in.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by Bicem

Not defending but supporting them financially by consigning, which is actually worse in my opinion.

Worse? Morally? Ethically? I don't lose sleep over giving a company my baseball cards to sell on eBay for me.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by griffon512

If they are not giving legal services to these people/entities, why would it be privileged? If they are giving legal services to them, it's the determination of the lawyer whether it's privileged or unethical. If enough lawyers who regularly post respond and one doesn't that alone might reflect something. Not sure why you posted. It should be obvious to you why I did.

Actually, there are certain circumstances where the fact of representation could be a client confidence that an attorney could not reveal without the client's permission, so some attorneys might not be able to answer the question.

I also want to make clear that I have no problems with any attorney who is asked to advise or defend an accused against potential criminal charges. It's part of the system. I don't happen to have the stomach for criminal defense, but that's my personality rather than anything else. I've defended some pretty sleazy people over the years in civil cases. Part of the job: you can pick your nose but you can't always pick your clients. Or their noses.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

So you read enough of their articles to have used up all your free ones for the month, but you think it's worthless???

Bobby can speak for himself, but free is not the same as worthless. And he never said worthless. Just that he wouldn't pay them any money. There IS a difference.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

worse? Morally? Ethically? I don't lose sleep over giving a company - that is clearly operating to the detriment of the hobby, many collectors whom I know, and other companies that are doing things the right way as long as I get my money - my baseball cards to sell on ebay for me.

fyp

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

right now, PWCC has no viable counterparts.

Yeah, actually, there are. COMC, Probstein, and any number of other eBay consignment sellers exist. I bet some of the sellers here would happily take consignments to sell on eBay. Even some AHs sell on eBay regularly. You don't have to do business with PWCC unless you want to.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

fyp

Thanks, Scott. Glad to know it wasn't just me that was reading between the lines.

Actually, that might not be a bad thing if you think about it. It makes it one-stop shopping avoidance. Avoid PWCC and it helps avoid those who have no qualms consigning to PWCC.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Yeah, actually, there are. COMC, Probstein, and any number of other eBay consignment sellers exist. I bet some of the sellers here would happily take consignments to sell on eBay. Even some AHs sell on eBay regularly. You don't have to do business with PWCC unless you want to.

Does COMC do auctions? I thought they were just buy it nows? Probstein has more issues than PWCC. Does Greg Morris have the same sort of consignment portal?

I have sent consignments to maybe a dozen AH's. I currently have consignments with LOTG and HA. If I have a bunch of lower-end cards, PWCC is by far the easiest. Then again, I am always open to other recommendations.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by tschock

Bobby can speak for himself, but free is not the same as worthless. And he never said worthless. Just that he wouldn't pay them any money. There IS a difference.

Got it

None cents isn’t worthless.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

Got it

None cents isn’t worthless.

Yes, to the user. If you have a stack of printer/copier paper only used on one side, I'll take it and use it. But I won't pay you for it. But I won't pay you for your used toilet paper, and I wouldn't take it either. Both are worthless but only one is worthless to me. See?

[barrysloate]

It appears that the story is circulating widely enough that nearly every collector who has a major investment in baseball cards will know about it. Obviously, not everyone will accept this information the same way. But it's too big for it to be swept under the carpet.

I think it all starts with PSA, and they must make a big choice: to face it head on, even though it will cost them dearly, or dismiss it as a minor blip that shouldn't really worry anybody. It's hard for me to believe that they can get away with the latter approach, but stranger things have happened.

IMO, this is a good time for this industry to make some major changes. They are long overdue.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

I can't read it. It says I have run out of "free stories". And I refuse to pay The Washington Post a copper penny. If someone can post it here somehow, or a link I can read, that would be AWESOME!!!!

In your browser, press CTRL-SHIFT-N to open a new private/icognito window. Then paste the URL of the story into that window. Boom, done.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by cubsguy1969

The bigger question is why didn't the Washington Post run before and after photos of a doctored card. I can't imagine they wouldn't have permission from the BODA people to do so.

Because whoever took those photos owns the rights to those photos and would have to get paid for their use, or grant permission for their use. And I imagine they aren't too eager to do that.

I work at a big newspaper and the rules for photo usage have gotten insane. Even star publicity photos, which ostensibly were taken for PUBLICITY, require permission for use. Otherwise the photographer wants paid.

I agree using the SGC photo is bad. That's just lazy. Someone not paying attention.

Since the items are newsworthy, wouldn't use of the photos fall under fair use?

[Jim65]

These guys will start turning on each other. Getting interviewed by the FBI and the prospect of jail time tends to do that.

[Bicem]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Worse? Morally? Ethically? I don't lose sleep over giving a company my baseball cards to sell on eBay for me.

Clearly... hence my original statement of the fraud dismissal.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by tschock

Bobby can speak for himself, but free is not the same as worthless. And he never said worthless. Just that he wouldn't pay them any money. There IS a difference.

Thank you. I read political post. The Washington Post's liberal stance when I google certain political happenings get me riled up. I tend to read them, because I can't comprehend someone being that stupid. But I didn't want to make it (meaning my reply in this post) political. So yes, I am no longer allowed to pursue WP articles. And no, I won't be paying them. Just like I don't want to watch CNN. To each their own.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by Tabe

In your browser, press CTRL-SHIFT-N to open a new private/icognito window. Then paste the URL of the story into that window. Boom, done.

Thank you Chris.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by Bicem

Good point, I mean what's a little fraud between friends?

Lol! Seriously, how little personal integrity does one have to have to still be doing business with them!?!

"A Man is Known by the Company He Keeps" <——-THIS!

[cubsguy1969]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Since the items are newsworthy, wouldn't use of the photos fall under fair use?

I'm pretty sure not. If that were the case, a newspaper photographer could go out, take a photo of a huge news event, post it on the newspaper's site and then anyone could grab it because the event was "newsworthy." Whoever took the photo owns the rights to it. Or the person who paid that person owns the rights. You could run it in your newspaper if you want, but that person could send you a hefty bill for using it. This stuff happens all the time now online. People grab photos from sites and use them for their own purposes. Photographers are coming after these people hard. Pay me! As they should. It's their work. You can't just take it.

[MULLINS5]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Honestly, selling on eBay sucks. I appreciate that some collectors do not regularly sell items, but I do. I would prefer to send it to someone who can reliably sell my items than spend my time doing it myself. I am not going to take time away from my life because of this scandal. If someone wants to come up with a similar platform, fine, I will consider switching. However, right now, PWCC has no viable counterparts.

I won't do business with PWCC, but I agree with Jason. PWCC has a great model for collectors to sell their cards. It's really amazing what Brent built, unfortunately it seems like it was built on fraud.

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

Thank you. I read political post. The Washington Post's liberal stance when I google certain political happenings get me riled up. I tend to read them, because I can't comprehend someone being that stupid. But I didn't want to make it (meaning my reply in this post) political. So yes, I am no longer allowed to pursue WP articles. And no, I won't be paying them. Just like I don't want to watch CNN. To each their own.

But you did it anyway.

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

Thank you. I read political post. The Washington Post's liberal stance when I google certain political happenings get me riled up. I tend to read them, because I can't comprehend someone being that stupid. But I didn't want to make it (meaning my reply in this post) political. So yes, I am no longer allowed to pursue WP articles. And no, I won't be paying them. Just like I don't want to watch CNN. To each their own.

My thoughts about you.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

My thoughts about you.

My thoughts about both of you.

just kidding

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by drcy

My thoughts about both of you.

just kidding

I know, right?

Peter posts a link to an interesting article and despite the "no politics" rule on this forum, some d!ckwad decides to make a political statement. He does it knowing full well that it is not allowed (he did it a month or so ago in another thread where it was pointed out it is not allowed). He does it while insulting a large number of members of this forum. He does it while stupidly saying "I am no longer allowed to pursue WP articles" as he's pursuing a way to read the article. Then another d!ckwad comes along and points out his political post and his stupidity. At least the second d!ckwad made no political statement and only insulted one person, the original stupid d!ckwad. Not much of a defense, but it's all I got.

Peter, my apologies for adding to the distraction of this thread. I also want to thank you for all the information you've posted on this forum regarding PWCC, PSA, and Moser. I know the vast majority is from Blowout, but since I don't read that forum, I would have missed it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Yeah, not sure what the Post's general leanings really had to do with an article by one of their sports reporters about baseball cards, but whatever.

[Leon]

You can't choose not to take a client? Please help me understand how you have been forced to take a client?
If you were a criminal defense lawyer would you defend pwcc? I am sure I am just not understanding.

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Actually, there are certain circumstances where the fact of representation could be a client confidence that an attorney could not reveal without the client's permission, so some attorneys might not be able to answer the question.

I also want to make clear that I have no problems with any attorney who is asked to advise or defend an accused against potential criminal charges. It's part of the system. I don't happen to have the stomach for criminal defense, but that's my personality rather than anything else. I've defended some pretty sleazy people over the years in civil cases. Part of the job: you can pick your nose but you can't always pick your clients. Or their noses.

[jimjim]

When my Dad calls me to ask me about the baseball card scandal, you know it has hit the main stream. He knows nothing about the industry or hobby. He read about it in a local newspaper.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Good article and I'm glad the issue is becoming a widespread news story - although it's actually an old, ongoing problem with new evidence.

One part of the article that was newsworthy to me was the following statement:

The scandal started after a pair of online collectors began identifying and documenting cards that were allegedly improperly modified. They’ve identified 316 such cards, retouched by nearly a dozen “card doctors,” which sold for a combined $1.4 million.

I'm curious who these alleged dozen doctors are? Only one was alleged in the article by name. (Although I'm very sure there's far more than a dozen involved).

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

Good article and I'm glad the issue is becoming a widespread news story - although it's actually an old, ongoing problem with new evidence.

One part of the article that was newsworthy to me was the following statement:

The scandal started after a pair of online collectors began identifying and documenting cards that were allegedly improperly modified. They’ve identified 316 such cards, retouched by nearly a dozen “card doctors,” which sold for a combined $1.4 million.

I'm curious who these alleged dozen doctors are? Only one was alleged in the article by name. (Although I'm very sure there's far more than a dozen involved).

I told Jacob there were many and that Gary was far from the only one. I didn't give a number and I didn't use names. Now he MAY be getting it from adding up all the modern trimmers accused on BO? There are certainly quite a few that I have seen.

[swarmee]

http://www.sportscardradio.com/
There's a whole slew of them that blowout guys have discovered in the past year. And if the FBI casts a wider net to include the PSA submission records of auctionhouses, it might uncover quite a few more. I'd like to see them subpeona the records of Dick Towle.

And the IRS should definitely be taking a harder look at these guys.

[cincyredlegs]

I wonder how many people defending pwcc or what is going on is actually alts of the criminals. We already know Bobby has one or two alts where he defends vcp. There is no logical reason how you could defend it.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by swarmee

http://www.sportscardradio.com/
There's a whole slew of them that blowout guys have discovered in the past year. And if the FBI casts a wider net to include the PSA submission records of auctionhouses, it might uncover quite a few more. I'd like to see them subpeona the records of Dick Towle.

And the IRS should definitely be taking a harder look at these guys.

Interesting link. Some of the aliases made me chuckle. Thanks for laughs and I can assure you there are more than what was revealed on that website.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by cincyredlegs

I wonder how many people defending pwcc or what is going on is actually alts of the criminals. We already know Bobby has one or two alts where he defends vcp. There is no logical reason how you could defend it.

If someone publicly posts that he still buys his cards from PWCC, I hope it doesn't surprise him when he turns to sell that others don't buy from him.