Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

...this time it's being sold by Wayne Varner in a PSA holder. This is truly pathetic. Wayne, if you are reading this board - kindly remove me from your catalog mailings.

This is a true statement of how low our hobby has sunken:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=31718&item=5128907885&rd=1&ssPageName=WD1V

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I would venture to guess with almost 3,000 positives and 1 negative this seller is trying not trying to do anything wrong...I have heard too much good about them....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

and has a good record; it ain't him. If you want to post blame, put it on PSA and GAI for encapsulating a bad card. Oh, but I forgot, as Joe Orlando testified at the trial, they don't make mistakes...

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

and if they have an unslabbed card that they think is a better "ex-mint" than a slabbed one, they'll charge the higher price for their unslabbed one. If two slabbed (graded) cards have the same grade, and they think one superior to the other, there will be a price difference.

They've never sold me anything remotely questionable..I've probably bought 10-12 cards from them--conserevative estimate (out of their catalogue); they carry GAI, PSA SGC--I think that's it, besides ungraded.
This was a graded card they sold me, a 5 or a 6.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob L

Sorry all. I'm clueless on this one. What's the story behind his card?

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe P.

As you probably know by now, I'm not a slab fan.
I've known Wayne and Zimp for about 20 years.
They're members of the Nice Guys and Straight Shooters Club.

Any newbie coming into the selling side of this hobby, would only hope to have their rep after X amount of years.

Wayne, I may not be into slabs, but please keep me on your mailing list.

Joe Pelaez -- (tobacco-r-us)

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

The previous owner of the card told me months ago (after the last controversy about this had subsided) that he had sold it to 'someone' for $200 and told them that it had been altered, and also that that person elected to send it to PSA anyway, and that it was slabbed as a '3'.

Now it shows up as a Wayne Varner card. The person who last owned it is now telling me (email today) that he sold it to Wayne and elected NOT to tell Wayne that it had been altered, and that Wayne then sent it to PSA.

I now have scans of this same e95 card in SGC, GAI and PSA holders, as well as a scan of when I owned it, prior to the doctoring. This is a truly sad statement about our hobby.

[Archive]

Posted By: ChuckkieB

...can someone kindly explain to me how the card has been altered?

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

Should be EASY to see with black light...fairly subtle--the borders just barely touched.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

there was a horizontal paper tear that was "fixed".

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Well, I can't blame the seller, I blame PSA. If you can get the card encapsulated by one of the few reputable graders, so be it. But Scott's before and after pics make it painfully clear that the card for sale has been altered (and frankly it doesn't even look very real in the PSA slab). How in the hell did this card get through?

[Archive]

Posted By: jonnycat

"I blame PSA"
you might as well blame SGC & GAI too! Since the same card resided in their holders at 1 time. Ungraded is where its at!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe P.

runscott:
"I don't know Wayne, but I DO know this"...
*
*
The above is obvious.
-----------------------
runscott:
"The previous owner of the card told me months ago (after the last controversy about this had subsided) that he had sold it to 'someone' for $200 and told them that it had been altered, and also that that person elected to send it to PSA anyway, and that it was slabbed as a '3'."
*
*
The road map points to PSA
-----------------------------
runscott:
"Now it shows up as a Wayne Varner card. The person who last owned it is now telling me (email today) that he sold it to Wayne and elected NOT to tell Wayne that it had been altered, and that Wayne then sent it to PSA."
*
*
Now we have a picture of a Questionable previous owner, and the road map still pointing to PSA.
-----------------------------
runscott:
"I now have scans of this same e95 card in SGC, GAI and PSA holders, as well as a scan of when I owned it, prior to the doctoring. This is a truly sad statement about our hobby."
*
*
Scott, WHO DID THE DOCTORING?
Did any of the expert slabbers, SGC, GAI, PSA - indicate the word ALTERED?

Scott, I want to thank you for updating us with information on a thread that you started.
Having said that.
Don't you think that you owe Wayne Varner of Shoebax an apology?

Joe

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

I bought the card in the GAI holder and crossed it to SGC prior to knowing the history. The card sat on my webpage for months in both the GAI and SGC holders. It was also listed on ebay twice with a reserve and did not sell.

In March I placed it up with no reserve and it sold for $750. At that time Scott identified the card as being one he had owned. He posted an image of the card illustrating its condition when in his possession. I told the buyer of the card I could not sell it since it appeared that it may have been restored and I refunded his money. I sent the card back to SGC who offered to buy it back from me at $750. I declined and asked they send the card back to me in an ungraded state. I received $200 in free grading for my gesture.

In May I sold the card for $200 to a customer disclosing the history. He did not feel that the card was altered and sent it to PSA and they graded it. I informed Scott of this at the time and sent him a scan of the card in the PSA holder and Scott assured me he would not post about the card anymore and stir up controversy.

In Mid July my customer's Father died and he needed money. I met him at the National and purchased his collection. At the same show I sold the card to Wayne along with several other pre war cards. As I told Scott today, I made a judgment call not to go into the history of the card with Wayne. The card had been graded by GAI, SGC and now PSA. To me it was now irrelevant.

Contrary to what some of the board (bored) experts write, this card does not light up like a Christmas tree. I examined the card in an ungraded state under high band and low band blacklights after SGC sent it back to me. NO COLOR WAS ADDED TO THIS CARD. It seems the card was rolled out. There was still evidence of the tear or flap on the back as well. It appeared to be nothing more than a break in the paper stock from the surface crease.

Wayne is owed an apology. Wayne is a great guy and an honorable dealer.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Mike,

Since when does my opinion, one that you have concluded is uneducated and inexperienced, trump that of GAI, SGC and PSA? I did not "roll out" the card and did not send it in for grading.

It is easy to conclude that Wisconsin is not held to similar disclosure requirements. Of course this is just a small sampling. I assume these will be in significantly higher holders soon.


[edited to fix link]

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

You should apologize to Wayne for knowingly selling him an altered card and exposing him to the same reputation that you have.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Whatever

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

Im not taking any sides Scott but your initial post still makes Wayne from shoebox look like hes also partly guilty which hes obviously not.So the apology part of Joe's post should at least be something to think about.Its not hard to go back and edit it or apologize.

Ive only bought from shoebox once and had a great experience but ive talked to them numerous times at fort washington and as a group they are very nice and knowledgable people with a great reputation

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Wayne, I apologize.

I think that anyone who is involved in our hobby should take advantage of every resource available to them, and certainly this board is such a resource.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

"It seems the card was rolled out. There was still evidence of the tear or flap on the back as well."

You elected not to reveal this to Wayne? As I read it, you owe Wayne an apology and an explanation and should probably buy it back for whatever he paid you.

MW, as far as California law goes, you have the right statute but the wrong locale. The transaction in question took place entirely in Cleveland, so Ohio law is likely to apply to it because the contract was formed and performed in Ohio.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

3 grading companies graded the card as VG. The card was therefore not altered. Apparently whatever was done to the card did not meet the definition of an alteration since it was holdered 3 different times.

It was only due to this boards lynch mob practices that SGC thought it would be best to have the card out of their holder.

MW

Can you please explain these purchases to us?

Back in March you explained to me in PM's that you never buy lower graded cards unless they are within collections. Guess you have to start somewhere. This is the beginning of the evolution of a MINT card. It will be exciting once the work is done and I can show the before and after images.

[edited to fix link]

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe S

So, let me get this straight. This card is an issue, despite being graded by 3 company's, but the fact that WHEAT makes tons off of REPRINT cards that are a very serious problem within the Vintage collecting industry?

MW, you may also want to go back to Legal School, you seemed to have missed some classes there.

[Archive]

Posted By: 823dek

Iam not so sure that the MW"S that you are refering to are the same people !

BE SURE !

[Archive]

Posted By: 823dek

look over your shoulder whatever it is that your doing then you too can sleep at night !

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

sacrificing our daughters, and it doesn't seem so bad anymore...

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe P.

Three (3) different crack slabbers, count 'em three (3).
SGC - GAI - PSA sang together like a rap trio, and the Alter word was left in Rio.

Even an 1980 - 1970 vintage collector newbie can walk right onto this forum for the first time and see the difference between the ungraded Cobb, and the thrice graded Cobb.
Same Cobb, but we now really know what they mean by plastic surgery.

Questions abound.
1. Who doctored the card?
2. Who had it slabbed by GAI?
3. Why did a dealer on this board feel that just because 3 different morticians slabbed the card it thus became a cleansed card and there was no need to alert the buyer of same, namely another dealer.
Let me stop here and try to digest this tale.
Let me see if I can understand this correctly?
The SGC Slabbers, offered to buy back their mistake for $750.00 in an effort to protect their credibility -- an intelligent move.
The dealor generously declined the offer, wanted his card back ungraded and gracefully accepted $200.00 of free slabbing.

In May the dealer sells the card to a customer.
Customer is advised of the sordid details.
Customer says, not a problem, and he sends the card for a PSA grading - card is graded - what else is new?
Dealer informs Scott of this and sends him a scan of the card in the PSA holder and Scott assured him that he would not post about the card anymore and stir up controversy.

In Mid July the dealer's customer's Father passed away and the customer needed money.
He met him at the National and purchased his collection.
Whereupon, at the same show he sold the card to Wayne along with several other pre war cards.
As he told Scott, he made a judgment call not to go into the history of the card with Wayne.
The card had been graded by GAI, SGC and now PSA.
To the dealer, "it was now irrelevant."

In other words, this particular dealer negated what he saw with his own eye's in favor of the mistake done by the 3 slab experts (sic) because their mistake inadvertently gave him the chance to deal.

BOTN:
"Wayne is owed an apology. Wayne is a great guy and an honorable dealer."
*
*
You got that right.
At what point did you decide that he didn't have to know the details about that card?

Joe

[Archive]

Posted By: BOTN

Joe

It was not a premeditated act and in no way was I trying to deceive Wayne. I have a very good relationship with him. I just simply no longer felt it was relevant. 3 grading companies saw the card in a raw state. All 3 agreed it was ok. Whatever has been done to the card did not warrant it coming back as restored. I am just not sure how much farther my responsibility is supposed to go when I was not the one who flattened out the card, not the one who sent it in for grading and not the one who encapsulated it with my 3 initials on the holder.

If you had any idea of exactly how many cards in holders have undergone some kind of extra assistance, you might not be so appalled by this Cobb. Cards like the Cobb and ones that have had far more done to them trade hands countless times a day and also reside on numerous dealers' webpages, even some who post here.

I sell graded cards. I cannot start to second guess every single card I have in inventory. That is why we have PSA, GAI and SGC. These are the experts and for the most part I have a great deal of faith in them.

As for the Cobb, SGC was willing to buy the card back due to the negative publicity surrounding it. I did not want them to take a hit for $750 when they charge $10 to grade. My declining their offer was not in an attempt to get the card back either. Keep in mind they were not obligated to encapsulate it once I sent it in the GAI holder for a crossover, even after breaking it out. They could have said, "Sorry Greg but after we broke the card out we saw that it was restored and therefore we cannot holder it."

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

MW: I don't know Ohio law so I don't know if they even have a law pertaining to altered sports cards. My guess is not; CA often leads the way on laws like this.

Greg: I don't follow your reasoning here:

SGC was willing to pay your price on the card to get it out of circulation and you turned them down?

You could see it had been altered but since it was graded anyway you decided not to tell Wayne it had been altered?

If I cannot understand the logic, I cannot buy the reasons given. If I don't buy the reasons given I cannot believe the statements or trust the person making them. I've bought a number of cards from you without a hitch, but I am losing my confidence over this situation. I think it would behoove you to explain this a little better and tell us what you plan to do about it.

Regards,

Adam

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

First of all, when Greg told me back in May that he had sold the card for $200 and that it was now in a PSA 3 holder and he would send me a scan, based on his previous actions and correspondences, I had no reason to believe him, i.e - I thought he was "yanking my chain" in an attempt to get me to post something on the board that he would later deny...what would be better than getting Scott to start screaming "Now it's in a PSA holder!!!" and then it turns out to be a lie...and NO, he never sent me the promised scan of the card in a PSA 3 holder. I discussed this with at least two board members back in May and we all agreed that Greg was just ****ing with me.

So I told Greg on May 18, and this is an email quote: "Greg, Thanks for sharing this - yes, please send a picture. I am taking a LONG break from the board, so I won't stir up any more controversy about it. Scott" ...and I never got a scan or any other response.

And in fact, I basically DID take a break from this board for a couple of months (which is LONG for me). And yes, it was primarily because of all the **** I took from Greg back in the Spring, and the pathetic support from others on the board.

When this card did in fact show up in a PSA 3 holder, I was amazed and I posted about it. And before, Joe P, you jump my ass again, for the umpteenth unprovoked time, I apologized to Wayne in an above post, basically because I was stupid enough to believe Greg's previous email once I saw the card in the PSA 3 holder that he had told me about back in May. How in heck was I supposed to know that Greg sold the card, bought it back in yet a third company's holder, then sold it again without notifying the purchaser of the alterations? It was EXTREMELY naive of me, and if I had any sense at all I would have deleted Greg's email without even reading it. I won't make this mistake again.

Yes, the grading companies have a responsibility to do their best to spot alterations. It's odd and encomprehensible that all three companies missed this, but with today's technological advances we will start seeing even more professionally altered cards show up in "safe" holders - there is always someone out there who will do anything to make a buck.

Regarding who altered the card to begin with...there is no proof as to who actually did this. I'm sure that some of you on the board DO know who altered the Cobb, but I don't expect that the answer is ever going to be posted on this board. For every unscrupulous card dealer there are dozens of normally honest collectors who continue to turn their heads the other way when things like this occur. Joe P - I would think that with your investigatory skills and incredible connections to everyone in the hobby, that you would have the answer for us by now? Get on it man.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

there ARE non-flourescing colors, too, made especially for the purpose of secret restoration. I think Greg should return Shoebox's money, and Shoebox should return Greg's card.

The SGC 30 T202 I won from the Sloate auction could really use some ironing out--would probably turn it into a 50. It looks like a--SGC 30 T202! What did I expect, a miracle?
(no point in posting a scan; wrinkles don't show well enough).

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

My T200 'Jints w/Thorpe, Matty. etc. I'm happy as a pig in poop...

[Archive]

Posted By: BOTN

Adam

"SGC was willing to pay your price on the card to get it out of circulation and you turned them down?"

Yes. It did not feel right to me to have them pay me $750 when they did nothing wrong. They took the card out of their holder because of the stink that was made here. I did not want to be the benefactor.

"You could see it had been altered but since it was graded anyway you decided not to tell Wayne it had been altered?"

I never wrote that Adam. I wrote it appeared the card was "rolled out". If I could see that and 3 grading companies could see it, and holdered the card, then it is obviously not considered an alteration is it?

"I've bought a number of cards from you without a hitch, but I am losing my confidence over this situation. I think it would behoove you to explain this a little better and tell us what you plan to do about it."

There is nothing that I can say that will make you or anyone else who posts here have any faith in me. I lost that battle long ago and have moved on. I am not on trial here and I have nothing to explain to any of you. I resent your tone towards me. I am not your son and you are not the judge. Save it for your next case against CU.

Scott,

The e-mail was sent with the scan of the card in the PSA holder. You are a complete liar and I can expect nothing more of you. I have the e-mail. You have twisted the facts to justify your rants. I have no beef with you except that you have one with me. Get over it and move on. At first I thought this happened only when you were drunk but it seems to be a constant in your life now.

MW,

Are you going to ignore my questions about the auctions that you won under one of your buying ID's, buying_sgc_cards? I enjoyed the constant lies when you denied the Battery arrest in Rosemont in August 2002. I was hoping for more entertainment.

And last but not least, my dear Julie...

The card was not touched up. Like MW, you have never held the card as I have and PSA, SGC and GAI. I am more than happy to buy the card back from Wayne at any price. I can assure you that what I sold it to him for does not cover my car payment for 1 month. In fact I may just hit his Buy It Now and send the card off to each of you to inspect, as long a Scott promises not to spill any of his cheap beer on the card when he is looking at it.

[Archive]

Posted By: honus3415

more famous Cobb card in the world at this point?

Beer doen't have to be expensive to be good, and I for one appreciate having Scott as the Ralph Nader of the hobby.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

your father. I mean you no harm and do not seek to create resentment. However, I think as a customer who has seen some troubling things here, I have the right to ask for an explanation as part of my decision as to whether to engage in further transactions with you. You've responded that you think the card was rolled out (i.e., altered by somebody to remove a crease) but because the slabbers ok'd it, you don't feel any explanation is needed to your buyer. Fine. You've made your position known, which I appreciate and understand. I happen to disagree with selling a card that you have determined to have been altered without a disclosure because the slabber passed it (I certainly don't do it), and consequently, I will take my business elsewhere in the future.

[Archive]

Posted By: BOTN

Adam,

If you were really concerned and really wanted an explanation you could pick up the telephone and call me or send me a private e-mail. You decided the personal pursuit was more suitable in a public forum. This is not the first time that you took your concerns with me to a public forum instead of contacting me directly. I do not agree that you mean me no harm.

Once again you are putting words in my mouth. I never wrote that the card was altered, nor did 3 grading companies think it was altered. By all means take your business elsewhere. One less bottom feeder customer I see as an improvement to my business.

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

its not really like it went from vg to nm.,(and into a slab) now thats altering.that should be told under those circumstances...but a slabbed 3 vg. just my opinion.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Your words and actions speak for themselves. I have nothing further to say about this.

[Archive]

Posted By: BOTN

Gosh Scott. Does this mean that you too will not be spending $259.45 with me every 6 months? Good news for you--more money for booze.

Just get off my back, really. Before you can become the Hobby Protection Committee you need to report the facts. Why have you STILL not come clean with the contact information of the people who you know owned the card after you? Instead you decide to take your personal vendetta out on me and make me the bad guy.

The hobby has changed. This is not 1974 anymore. Any of you who think the Cobb is an isolated event need to wake up too. I sold a card that you feel is altered but was graded by 3 grading companies and I did not tell the buyer of the card that the experts on the Network 54 board feel the card is altered. I only wish this were the most unconscionable thing to have occurred in the hobby. Take a look around. When the card goes from Good plus to EX or as we have seen EXMT to MINT (for a certain Old Judge), let’ talk.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

you're ramblin' Greg ... but I do think I'll have a beer.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: David Vargha

Thanks, Eliot.

DavidVargha@hotmail.com

[Archive]

Posted By: gcalex

I would love to see evidence of an ebay post, or any other communication, where any of you people faulting Greg for his supposed lack of ethics have advertised and sold a graded card while at the same time expressing your opinion that you had reservations about the grading company's opinion as to authenticity, or expressing your opinion that the card was overgraded, or otherwise doing anything less than trying to garner the full benefit of the third party grade. Surely given the volume of prewar cards out there and the prevalence of alteration (however one defines it), you must at some point have encountered a card that in its raw state (or even its graded state) you weren't sure about. I would be very interested in proof that you guys follow the same standards you would now impose on Greg.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited