PWCC's 1936 Goudey World Wide Gum DiMaggio PSA 7

[Leon]

Originally Posted by ugaskidawg

I'm a bit curious about that as well. It doesn't seem like 7 material, but I don't get paid the big bucks to make those decisions.

It is as much as 7 as this is a 2. People need to get over the grade. It isn't in the top 100000000 of problem grades I have seen.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Leon

It is as much as 7 as this is a 2. People need to get over the grade. It isn't in the top 100000000 of problem grades I have seen.

Right people...cuz PSA is totally innocent here...leave them alone!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Leaving aside whether it should have been graded at all, the grade is generous but not indefensible. There are lots of cards where the number grade is marginal but technically accurate.

Leon, what's your opinion on the disclosure issue, now that the facts have emerged?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Leaving aside whether it should have been graded at all, the grade is generous but not indefensible. There are lots of cards where the number grade is marginal but technically accurate.

Leon, what's your opinion on the disclosure issue?

I would disclose things I have done to a card as I have before. I have never sent any card off to be cleaned or conserved. I routinely use water, Q tip and a Mars Plastic eraser. Those are my tools of trade and the only ones I find personally acceptable. That Dimaggio doesn't look out of place in a 7 holder to me. And if if there is nothing to detect, minus the shadow left, I don't know how any sane person can fault a grader for not seeing something that can't be seen. Such idiotic comments ....but then again, we are a microcosm of society. Not much better or worse....

[PhillipAbbott79]

Originally Posted by Leon

I would disclose things I have done to a card as I have before. I have never sent any card off to be cleaned or conserved. I routinely use water, Q tip and a Mars Plastic eraser. Those are my tools of trade and the only ones I find personally acceptable. That Dimaggio doesn't look out of place in a 7 holder to me. And if if there is nothing to detect, minus the shadow left, I don't know how any sane person can fault a grader for not seeing something that can't be seen. Such idiotic comments ....but then again, we are a microcosm of society. Not much better or worse....

What do you think about the images of the text messages from Brent to Cortney?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

I would disclose things I have done to a card as I have before. I have never sent any card off to be cleaned or conserved. I routinely use water, Q tip and a Mars Plastic eraser. Those are my tools of trade and the only ones I find personally acceptable. That Dimaggio doesn't look out of place in a 7 holder to me. And if if there is nothing to detect, minus the shadow left, I don't know how any sane person can fault a grader for not seeing something that can't be seen. Such idiotic comments ....but then again, we are a microcosm of society. Not much better or worse....

So you agree PWCC withheld a material fact, given his prior involvement with and knowledge of the card's history?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So you agree PWCC withheld a material fact, given his prior involvement with and knowledge of the card's history?

I am not being interrogated here. Please get that straight...same with the previous question from the other member. I said I would disclose things I have had done to a card.

[PhillipAbbott79]

Originally Posted by Leon

I am not being interrogated here. Please get that straight...same with the previous question from the other member. I said I would disclose things I have had done to a card.

If you are referring to me, I am not trying to interrogate you. I am merely looking for you opinion. Do you think that Brent has done something wrong? Whether it is the request to bid issue, or not disclosing information about the card.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

I am not being interrogated here. Please get that straight...same with the previous question from the other member. I said I would disclose things I have had done to a card.

That seems unnecessarily defensive, Leon. I was simply asking your opinion, as I didn't think you had stated one, and after all you are the moderator and a leading hobby voice.

[1952boyntoncollector]

[QUOTE=Peter_Spaeth;1632041]So you agree PWCC withheld a material fact, given his prior involvement with and knowledge of the card's history?[/QUOTE

Leon appeared to say that the card doesnt look out of place in a PSA 7, and PSA was not totally in the wrong for grading the card a 7 So that would mean that someone bought a legit PSA 7. Thats far from scam behavior. Someone bought a PSA 7 and received a PSA 7 as far as the scam side. As far as integrity and civil issues aside, this does not look criminal/scam if some people share those views.

PWCC may of withheld a material fact as well as you keep saying, and other sellers would of disclosed things but that does not change what i said above. Others may disagree but my position is supported as well. The shilling and colluding is another issue.

[botn]

Originally Posted by Leon

That Dimaggio doesn't look out of place in a 7 holder to me. And if if there is nothing to detect, minus the shadow left, I don't know how any sane person can fault a grader for not seeing something that can't be seen. Such idiotic comments ....but then again, we are a microcosm of society. Not much better or worse....

At the risk of your feeling interrogated I think you make a leap of faith when you conclude that there is nothing for PSA to detect. PSA misses stuff all the time, intentionally and not, so without your handling the card yourself after it was cleaned you cannot assume because it is in a holder now that there was nothing to detect.

As far as it being graded accurately, I am one who feels they missed the boat, at it should be in a 6. The remnants of the stain/toning are still there and should not be on a NM card. A card of that magnitude I would expect to have more than a cursory examination.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by botn

At the risk of your feeling interrogated I think you make a leap of faith when you conclude that there is nothing for PSA to detect. PSA misses stuff all the time, intentionally and not, so without your handling the card yourself after it was cleaned you cannot assume because it is in a holder now that there was nothing to detect.

As far as it being graded accurately, I am one who feels they missed the boat, at it should be in a 6. The remnants of the stain/toning are still there and should not be on a NM card. A card of that magnitude I would expect to have more than a cursory examination.

I agree it should be a 6 but its in a gray area.


Peter: If you buy a card raw for 10 dollars at a yard sale and then 'restore' it..and send it in to PSA and get a grade of PSA 7 and now that card is worth $7000, i dont think anyone would say that sale of the card for $7000 wasnt fair or that the sale of the card was a SCAM.

Whats really the difference of buying a card in a SGC holder or a raw card in terms of then having the card restored and graded by PSA

You have to send in the raw card first to PSA and get an 'authentic' and then send it in again 'restored' and get a PSA 7 to now have to disclose the prior grade. The fact that the card got a grade before changes everything?

If the card earns a grade it earns a grade. To quote a football coach, you are what your record is....

You may not agree with what i said about a raw card earning a grade but you have to agree that i have never seen an auction in history talk about a card that was sent in to PSA after it was restored ever.

The only exceptions i can see is if the 'restoring' did something that could be reversed as the card sits in the holder where it would be obvious that in a unreasonable amount of time the card was waaaay overgraded. Like seeing a wrinkle after a year on a PSA 8 etc.

[Rookiemonster]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I agree it should be a 6 but its in a gray area.


Peter: If you buy a card raw for 10 dollars at a yard sale and then 'restore' it..and send it in to PSA and get a grade of PSA 7 and now that card is worth $7000, i dont think anyone would say that sale of the card for $7000 wasnt fair or that the sale of the card was a SCAM.

Whats really the difference of buying a card in a SGC holder or a raw card in terms of then having the card restored and graded by PSA

You have to send in the raw card first to PSA and get an 'authentic' and then send it in again 'restored' and get a PSA 7 to now have to disclose the prior grade. The fact that the card got a grade before changes everything?

If the card earns a grade it earns a grade. To quote a football coach, you are what your record is....

You may not agree with what i said about a raw card earning a grade but you have to agree that i have never seen an auction in history talk about a card that was sent in to PSA after it was restored ever.

The only exceptions i can see is if the 'restoring' did something that could be reversed as the card sits in the holder where it would be obvious that in a unreasonable amount of time the card was waaaay overgraded. Like seeing a wrinkle after a year on a PSA 8 etc.

You mean like t206 mastro Wagner? Look where it got them but that only happens when you didn't do anything that wrong and psa was also innocent in that matter.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I agree it should be a 6 but its in a gray area.


Peter: If you buy a card raw for 10 dollars at a yard sale and then 'restore' it..and send it in to PSA and get a grade of PSA 7 and now that card is worth $7000, i dont think anyone would say that sale of the card for $7000 wasnt fair or that the sale of the card was a SCAM.

Whats really the difference of buying a card in a SGC holder or a raw card in terms of then having the card restored and graded by PSA

You have to send in the raw card first to PSA and get an 'authentic' and then send it in again 'restored' and get a PSA 7 to now have to disclose the prior grade. The fact that the card got a grade before changes everything?

If the card earns a grade it earns a grade. To quote a football coach, you are what your record is....

You may not agree with what i said about a raw card earning a grade but you have to agree that i have never seen an auction in history talk about a card that was sent in to PSA after it was restored ever.

The only exceptions i can see is if the 'restoring' did something that could be reversed as the card sits in the holder where it would be obvious that in a unreasonable amount of time the card was waaaay overgraded. Like seeing a wrinkle after a year on a PSA 8 etc.

Altering a raw card and getting it graded is the same thing. How is that not obvious? Your logic would say that if I trim a card and get it past PSA, that's fine too. "If a card earns a grade it earns a grade."

Carry on with the spin and defense. Apparently Brent and Betsy are not posting any more so they need good proxies.

[PhillipAbbott79]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

You may not agree with what i said about a raw card earning a grade but you have to agree that i have never seen an auction in history talk about a card that was sent in to PSA after it was restored ever.

Here you go:

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/...tored-example/

Now let the argument be that its a Wagner and the other card is not as if that matters.