Okay, help me understand this

[Archive]

Posted By: David 

I haven't combed through the posts, as my consitution is weak. From what I understand, this PRO Graded 9 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle is being offered on eBay not to sell but to try and gather an accurate market price. Whether or not this card is altered, I have no idea as I've never seen it in person-- but it doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that a PRO9 52 Topps Mickey Mantle 'has issues.' .... I would guess that the motives for doing this is either because the seller is doing research for an expose or someone is in or soon will be in big legal trouble. Perhaps Dr. Koos is being sued or plans of suing another seller or PRO, and the offering of this card on eBay is to gather factual information.

If someone would explain to me exactly why this card is being offered on eBay, I and others would like to hear.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

As stated in another thread, more than likely, the dear Doktor is is running this auction with an insane reserve. He will then contact the high bidder offering him the card at the price saying it was close enough to his reserve. The sale will then not be covered by eBay and he screw the bidder with no repercussions.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: David

If that is the case (which I'm not saying it is), then the seller may belong in jail

If Dr. Koos wishes to explain why this card is being offered of eBay, I am listening

[Archive]

Posted By: jay berhens

sadly, I don't think that there are any legal repercussions, which is why somemany scumbags work eBay.

Until such time tougher laws are enacted and law enforcement actually starts pursuing these cases, there isn't much that can be done other than trying to warn unsuspecting bidders. This why privat auctions are so poular with the con artists.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Assuming that Koos still believes that the card is worthless, he might simply be trying to get a fat number to give the insurance company so that Mantle can meet with an untimely demise and Koos can then re-coop his ill-advised investment. Koos is creative, so I would expect the card to be accidentally dropped in a vat of beer, although we know from his previous posts that he has a different fluid of choice.

But I'm sure Bruce has a more logical scenario, perhaps one that involves alien space monkeys.

--------------------------------------------
no disclaimer - temporarily taking responsibility for my actions

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

The card is seriously altered and restored -- however, it is a beautiful example of what a restored card can look like, and it probably has a true value of $3,000 - $5,000. For the collector who wants a really nice-looking card, but can't afford anything over a Good example of this card, this version will display much more nicely.

MS

[Archive]

Posted By: David

I remember in one of his old vintage card auctions, Solomon Cramer had a 52 Topps Mantle that was permanently affixed to the bottom of an ashtray. To look at Mickey's face you had to look through the ashtray. As I recall, it fetched an okay price too.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

which sold last night and had been found nailed to a deer hide on someone's wall - PSA even encapsulated it with deer hide still attached.

--------------------------------------------
no disclaimer - temporarily taking responsibility for my actions

[Archive]

Posted By: David

I might of bid, but I'm a vegitarian. Perhaps if it had been found nailed to a turnip or eggplant.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

--------------------------------------------
no disclaimer - temporarily taking responsibility for my actions

[Archive]

Posted By: David

You've obviously never seen my turnip pants. Warm and stylish.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Moreland

I don't know what is going on. I think it could be a test auction. Maybe he is trying to rip people off.

Just because I can conceive of ill intent doesn't mean that I can accuse. I don't know, therefore I don't accuse.

That was the point of the post that you are spoofing with the space thingies comment.

Any of us can sit down and think of a way that Dr. Koos could be trying to be mean and nasty. This is not some science fiction world where conceiving of something makes it real.

bruce

[Archive]

Posted By: David

Bruce, with due respect, I don't understand your reasoning. Do you give similar allowances to Libertyforall and those people selling fake T206 Honus Wagners or someone selling an obviously fored Babe Ruth baseball? If someone offers a fake for auction, the onus is on the seller to either eplain what's going on or remove it.

I have asked the seller for an explanation and am still waiting for an explanation. If the seller wishes not to publicly announce his reasons, he is welcome to email me at cycleback@cycleback.com. I am a completely honerable person, and will not divulge his reasoning if he so wishes, as long as it does not involve fraud or similar. If his reasoning is resonable I will state here that I think he reasons are resonable and ask people to give him the benifit of the doubt until the auction ends.

So, seller, please contact me at the above address and clear up this situation.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: David

If an item is altered in a significant way (such as, for example,to signifiantly effect the value) and the alteration is not clearly expressed in description, the item is a fake.

In some cases, significant alteration can legitimately be called forgery.

As I have mentioned before, I have never seen the card in person and thus cannot offer an opinion as to whether or not it has been altered. However, if it has been altered, it is most definately a fake.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

<< However, if it has been altered, it is most definately a fake. >>


Say what? I don't know of many collectors who would agree with your terminology. Think about it David. If what you are saying is true, then a 1914 Cracker Jack Joe Jackson that has been trimmed is no more real than a wide-bordered, coffee stained 1980s reprint of the same card.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

David --

I think you are slightly confused. A T206 "Nodgrass" could be labeled as a "forgery" if the "S" has been erased. But the Dr. Koos 1952 Topps Mantle has not been altered to make it appear as if it is a DIFFERENT baseball card that possesses a greater value. To that extent, it is not a fake. It's a real card that has allegedly been altered.

[Archive]

Posted By: David

What I said is correct. Authenticity and fakery is a matter of representation. If an item is significantly misrepresented, the representation and the item itself is not authentic. If an item is not what it is represented to be, it is a fake. You and I may agree or disagree on what constitutes significant misrepresentation, but my description is accurate.

If I have a grade Poor 1980 Topps Rickey Henderson (37 creases and 7 stains), and I represent it as "The higest grade Gem Mint Henderson Rookie ever", my description is not authentic and the items is a fake.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

<edited

[Archive]

Posted By: David

Michael, I understand that you are differentiating between condition and non-forgery alteration and the item's 'core' identity. However, my description of fakery and authenticity is accurate. Authenticity, and fakery is judged by comparing the description or label with the actual item. If there is a significant discrepency (again, 'significant' is subjective as long as it conforms with with widely held standards within the hobby) between the label and the item, then the item is not authentic and it is a fake.

I'm not suggesting that a 1957 Topps common misgraded Vg instead of VgEx is a fake (see 'significant' above). However if a card is purposely and significantly altered and incorrectly labeled so as to raise its value from, say, $5,000 to $70,000, it is most certainly a fake. If it makes you more comfertable, you can switch the word 'fake' to 'fraud' in my definition (though fraud usually implies money is infolved, while fakery does not neccesarily involve money).

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Moreland

This all boils down to whether or not you think that he's doing a test auction, or whether you think that there is either a sane reserve on the card or he's going to try to sell it to the high bidder(s) if the reserve isn't met.

If it meets the reserve, we'll all know what is going on, and if it doesn't, we won't.

There is also the question of whether the item could legally be on eBay, regardless of whether the reserve is reachable or not. I think that the question comes down to whether Dr. Koss would be legally required to disclose the alterations if he sold that card.

I don't know the truth of that. It is almost certain that eBay will not shut down this auction, and that any other attempt to get to the heart of this before the auction ends will be too late.

If the auction ends with reserve not met, it will be hard to argue that anything illegal may have transpired, since the auction results are not binding, and in fact according to eBay rules the buyer and seller aren't even allowed to contact each other.

Let's remove eBay from this for a moment. Do you think that Dr. Koos would legally be able to put a picture of this on his web page, with no description, and the line, "For sale, best offer"?

If it is legal for him to run this auction, then I think he is fine, since we don't know his motives.

bruce

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

David --

Your definition is not accurate (or precise) because the threshold you've established is impossible to define.

In other words, how "altered" does a card have to be before it can be labeled as "fake?"

Again, I think you are confused. Referring back to my previous example, a Snodgrass with the "S" removed (i.e., erased) is not an actual variation. In this sense, some may refer to it as a fake "Nodgrass." But please keep in mind that the card itself is not fake -- even though it has been altered. Therefore, the act of representing or selling the card as a variation would be considered fraudulent. However, it would not make sense to refer to the card as a fraud. So, in either case, a simple test of your definition provides verification of specious reasoning.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Moreland

The question is whether you can call this a '52 Topps #311 Mantle, and whether you are legally obliged to disclose alterations you know about.

There was a #311 Mantle in there someplace, so I think that part is settled. The rest is still at issue.

Is it legal to sell a trimmed card without telling the buyer that the card is trimmed, if you know for a fact that it is?

Is it legal to call a trimmed card NM/MT, if you know that it is trimmed?

bruce

[Archive]

Posted By: David

With due respect, Bruce, Michael and I were discussing the definition of the word 'fake', and it was essentially idependant to the Koos issue. I thought the discussion was legitimate and sincere. You may think my every thought is about Koos, but I promose that it isn't.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: David

Specious? If I knew what that meant I might be mad.

[Archive]

Posted By: z28jd

i have nothing to add but i figure since im up at 430 in the morning id let everyone know,continue on gentlemen

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Your last post made me laugh so I thought I would join in. I actually agree with MW on this one. To me, a fake is not a real thing. An altered card is definitely a real thing just changed from it's original state..... But then again what do us Texas Eskimo's know?.....carry on.....

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike Williams

fake

adj.
Having a false or misleading appearance; fraudulent.

n.
One that is not authentic or genuine; a sham.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

it's actually a BUCK-et of ****, so don't fork over your DOE.

Don't ever get me started with bad puns

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

From all your posts supporting Koos, especially this last one, it sounds like you think it is perfectly acceptable not to disclose card problems that you know about, simply because you can legally get away with it.

Please let us know if this is the case, just in case we see some of your cards on ebay that we might be interestred in.

[Archive]

Posted By: vorthian

<< PSA even encapsulated it with deer hide still attached. >>

Does that make it a variation?

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

--------------------------------------------
no disclaimer - temporarily taking responsibility for my actions

[Archive]

Posted By: David Vargha

(Venison Stain)

DavidVargha@hotmail.com

[Archive]

Posted By: leonl

it's a "deeriation"......I couldn't resist.....

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Moreland

If you are going to make such implications about me, you should have enough respect for me to do the research first. I am surprised and disappointed to see this kind of thing from a regular poster.

My email address is included along with my posts; it is a simple matter to extract it and look me up. Furthermore, if you do look me up, you will discover that my ungraded card auctions contain a link to a page that explains how I think cards should be graded, and in fact there is a section in there on trimmed cards.

I will save you the time and post links.

http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&userid=brucemo@seanet.com&completed=0&sort=3&since=30&include=0&page=1&rows=-1

http://www.seanet.com/~brucemo/card_articles/grading.htm#trimming

I edited the web page today, only to add the bookmark. The underlying text is all the same.

Regarding the situation with Dr. Koos, I am not pro-Koos, I am anti-mob. I oppose lynching even if the person being lynched is guilty.

There is always the risk that you'll be strung up by the mob, too, when you oppose it.

Regarding why I asked those questions, I think it matters.

First, I don't know the answer, so I asked the questions because I want to know. I don't know if the people selling these crap PRO cards are breaking the law or not.

Second, if it is legal for Koos to do what he has done, and it is in accord with eBay rules, then I don't see that anyone has much complaint if what he is doing is running a test auction.

If it is not legal to even offer the stuff, then what Dr. Koos is not legal, and it is hard for me to say that it is alright to do it under any circumstances.

I know that it is not legal to offer a fake autograph, even if you don't complete a transaction. I honestly don't know if it is legal to offer a trimmed card that you know to be trimmed.

If anyone can refrain from impugning my integrity in the course of their answer, I would love an answer to these questions.

bruce

[Archive]

Posted By: Dr.Koos

...Deer!!!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: Dr.Koos

and to THIS DAY, there is NOBODY that I or anyone else know, or had come forward and stated, "_______ was done to that card, here's why". TRIMMING can DEFINITELY be ruled out as one of the possible procedures. The card is a LARGE example of a 52T high number. It measures, with a 1/64th inch ruler, EXACTLY to catalog specs, top to bottom, and side to side is 1/64th of an inch BIGGER than catalog specs (and this is if the measurement INCLUDES the width of the ruler's measuring lines themselves, NOT to just the inside). And it doesn't matter at which point you measure it, because the card is perfectly vertical and horizontal with no tilt to any edge (LOOK at the way it FILLS the holder, especially side to side). It could NOT have been stretched first, then cut, because the portraiture, the area of the photo framing's black lines are IDENTICAL when measured against a "control" G/VG Mantle (the one I auctioned over 1 year ago on Ebay with the broken corner due to a stuck scrapbook photo-corner mount). We can definitely rule out the card being trimmed in any way, shape or form.
Also, Remember last year when I auctioned that G/VG Mantle??? If my memory serves me correctly, 95% of the same people from the OLD message Board JUMPED ALL OVER ME. I was accused THEN of BREAKING THE CORNER OFF OF THE PRO MANTLE IN A DEMONIC EFFORT TO FOIST A RESTORED CARD ON SOMEONE. History sure does repeat itself. Was everyone right then?..... when they had me tried, convicted and ready for sentencing? How about now? I remember the posts, "The friggin' (tm@T-Bob) Pro Mantle is back!!!!", "Dr. Koos, what price is your soul?", "What can we do about that fraud..he broke the corner off the Pro Mantle to bounce it on some poor unsuspecting dolt". REMEMBER????? Or is everyone's memory as selective as their sense of reality? (Not in reference to you Bruce, just using your post as a jump off point).

[Archive]

Posted By: Dr.Koos

...means (with hand waving in the hair gesticulating wildly, hoping I'll be picked to explain)!!!!! It means, living in a place SO small, that you have to step outside to change your mind!!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: David

Then obvious question would then be: if it's a completely legitimate card (highest grade, unaltered, etc), why is it is a PRO Holder?

[Archive]

Posted By: David

No one on the face of this earth, since time = 0, can tell me with sincerity and knowledge that he/she had a legitmate Near Mint-Mint 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle graded by PRO.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

defending Koos' selling of a trimmed card not described as such, that you had to expect someone to eventually call you on it.

If you don't agree with what he is doing, then quit condoning it. Quite frankly, I was surprised to see you doing so and perhaps I over-reacted (sorry).

...but if you want to be appalled by my actions, go check your inbox - you received an email from me yesterday morning about the Koos thing, and elected to ignore me and to continue repeating your arguement on the board.

--------------------------------------------
no disclaimer - temporarily taking responsibility for my actions

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Moreland

I received many emails about this, including emails from people who are very strange.

You weren't one of these people, but I didn't answer yours. You suggested that I let it drop. I started to answer you, then I looked to see what was going on, and decided that I need to respond to a few things. I found the email still open on my desktop this morning, and decided that it wasn't necessary that I respond, since obviously this thread has gone on from there. It is nothing personal.

You are not "calling" me on anything. What you are doing is more accurately described as smearing me. "Calling" someone does not involve trying to dump a little sticky innuendo on them.

I don't know how to respond to that in a way that won't get edited.

I'd like to ask again if you'd be so kind as to take the time to do the research that you should have done before you decided to smear me. Once you've done it, I think that you will realize that you have no basis to say those kinds of things, and you will take what I say more seriously. And once you've done it, I'd like you to share what you find, since I believe that if you do this honestly, you will undo any damage you may have done to my reputation.

Please be man enough to undo what you have done.

bruce

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

...and there is nothing that needs to be un-done. You are going into hysterics over nothing other than a heated chat board discussion. Everyone on this board knows you, and knows that you are honest.

But for the record:

I AM SURE THAT BRUCE MORELAND DOES NOT SELL TRIMMED CARDS. HE'S A GREAT GUY, AND IF YOUNG ENOUGH, SOMEONE THAT I WOULD APPROVE OF DATING MY DAUGHTER. AND IF I EVER GET IN TROUBLE OVER SOMETHING EVIL THAT I REALLY DID DO, I WOULD DEFINITELY WANT HIM DEFENDING ME.


--------------------------------------------
no disclaimer - temporarily taking responsibility for my actions

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Moreland

I assumed that this card was a known restored example. If this is some other card then I don't know what is going on, but I still wouldn't touch that card for anything over $20, no offense.

I used "trimming" as an example when I asked my questions, because everyone understands that, and because trimmed cards are offered for sale every day.

I figured that if it is illegal to attempt to sell a known trimmed card without describing it as such, and this is a card that you know to be restored, that it would be illegal to attempt to sell this, which would mean that the folks who are trying to bash you for selling this would have a point, since whatever the reserve is, it would be hard to argue that putting a card up for auction is not in some way an attempt to sell it.

I would certainly think that someone should be busted for auctioning a fake Ruth ball, even if the reserve was infinity.

If you actually manage to sell it, that's a whole different deal.

If this is a standard "here is a PRO card, and hey, PRO says it's NM/MT" kind of auction, I can't comment other than to say that PRO smells as bad as a burning outhouse, same as I'd say if psa-card, or anyone else who commonly sells this stuff, sold this.

I've made a few assumptions about what is going on here, and I got involved in something that was none of my business. I did this because I feel compelled to try to do something when I see a mob forming.

If this is some sort of bizarre bogus deal, I'm going to get hosed, which is the price I pay for doing what I need to do.

I'd like to point out that if any good can come of this, it's that this will push us a little cloer to the time when everyone realizes that traffic in PRO-graded material taints everyone involved.

bruce

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Moreland

Close enough for modern reality.

Thank you,

bruce

[Archive]

Posted By: David

I have to agree with Scott on this one. Your argument has been that if someone puts up on eBay an item that substantially misrepresented, everyone should automatically give the seller the benefit of the doubt until the auction is over. If this is your philosophy, what is your approach for the man who was selling the fake T206 Wagner with a BIN of $1,700,000? Do you suggest we keep quiet about Libertyforall, as he hasn't yet disclosed his motivation?

When an item that is offered on eBay with bidding in the thousands of dollars, and the item is substantially misrepresented, the seller has some explaining to do-- no ifs, ands or buts. That goes for Libertyforall, that goes for MastroNet, that goes for Dr. Koos and that even goes for Scott if the time ever comes. You apparently say that the benefit of the doubt should be the auctioner of a misrepresented item, I say the benefit of the doubt goes to the potential winning bidder.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Moreland

This is the reason I asked if it is legal to sell a bad card.

It is not legal to try to knowingly sell a bad Ruth ball. I assume that it is not legal to knowingly sell a counterfeit card.

I don't know if it is legal to sell a card that has been altered, without stating that it has been altered. I used trimming as an example of an alteration that everyone is familiar with, but perhaps trimming is too subtle.

In any case, the question was not rhetorical.

That really is a '52 Topps #311 Mantle in there, assuming that nobody is going to claim that it's a reprint or an outright counterfeit. It really was graded 8.0 by PRO, for what that is worth (less than nothing).

Assuming that the card is altered, why am I asking if it is legal to sell this card?

If it is legal (albeit extremely nasty) to sell the card, then it must be legal (and perhaps not really nasty at all) to run a test auction for the same card.

If it is illegal to sell this card, then are essentially all PRO auctions illegal acts?

Once again, these are not rhetorical questions, nor are they indications of my future business plans.

bruce

[Archive]

Posted By: David

Firstly, Bruce, I have no reason to suspect your auctions or auction practices. I understand that you are asking non-rhetorical and sincere questions.

It is illegal to inentionally and deceptively alter or misrepresent an item in order to falsely inflate it's price a substantial amount. This applies to the selling of a house, car, piece of land, Rembrant painting or piece of memorabilia. If someone's misrepresentation intentionally and artificially raises the price of an item, say, $10,000, the seller may find themselves in big trouble. If this sale is done across states lines or using national or international forums, they may find themselves in really big trouble.

It has been my beleif for a long time, that PRO and NASA graded cards should be banned from eBay. They are, essentially, scams.