Blatantly Hacked and Kudos to Rob Lifson PSA should be ashamed!

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

I'm sorry, but this is horrible in my opinion (I know many people do not agree). These cards are obviously trimmed and it IS their responsibility to turn these cards away.

I admit, 4 out of 5 auction houses would sell these cards without any sort of disclaimer, but is this acceptable? Just because the status quo is "it's good if it came from PSA" doesn't mean it's an acceptable practice to dump your trimmed cards onto another person. Yes, the buyer MAY not care, but somewhere down the line these will change hands and change hands again and they will eventually end up in the collection of someone who does care. If REA's policy is, "we said they were trimmed so our hands are clean" then I will stick to my guns and say, they should be ashamed.

if the auction house is positive, knows for sure these are trimmed cards, they should turn them away. it's their duty. just as it is their duty to turn away an autograph they know to be bad that is slabbed in an abc or xyz company holder. you dont say you know the autograph to be bad, but let the sale go on anyway, and if you only suspect the autograph to be bad, but dont know for sure, it isnt proper to list it as "suspected" fake, it's not fair, you either know it is a fake or not.

so the AH either knows these are trimmed or not, and if not, should list it like normal and all is well. if they know it's trimmed, should turn the lot away. but suspecting them to be trimmed isn't anything. all lots are available for inspection by the public at anytime during business hours. so there you go, the buyer should either inspect it firsthand or if they buy the lot but don't like the cards, take it with the authentication company, but the AH should only get involved if they know for sure that a card is one way or the other. otherwise they could suspect they were trimmed, but what if they actually weren't? not fair.

If the AH says evidence of trimming, it seems like they are saying that it is trimmed in their opinion? so why are they allowing it to be sold in the graded holder? If they aren't sure, then they shouldn't say evidence, evidence is evidence. Do auction houses say that there is evidence the autograph is a fake, but still allow it to be sold? I have shown auction houses fake autographs in a slabbed holder, and the AH's pulled the item. Would they say in the listing that there is evidence it is a fake, but still allow it to be sold, no way.

They also didn't say they suspect it to be a fake either, because if they don't know for sure, they shouldn't say anything.

[wonkaticket]

Jason,

REA has put the choice in your hands the bidder to decide if you agree or not.

If you do not agree and think REA is incorrect then bid, if you agree with REA that they look suspect then don't bid and be thankful that they had the integrity to bring to your attention.

Cheers,

John

[drc]

My opinion is if any trimming is disclosed in the auction description, that's fine with me. Would it be better to reject the cards? Perhaps, perhaps not. I understand the sentiments and reasoning behind those who wish they were rejected. But if the auction house is accurately describing the condition of the cards they are offering, I'd have a very hard time classifying that as unethical behavior.

Just my opinion.

[Sean]

I don't see what good would be accomplished if REA rejected these cards. The consigner would simply list them with an AH that didn't ask questions or make disclosures. The cards would still be in circulation, and some of us could unknowingly end up with them. This way we have the ability to make an informed decision whether or not to bid on them.

[Runscott]

Travis, I think cards and autographs are so different that they have to be treated very differently by AH's. Example - REA is not saying that these cards are fakes; rather, they are saying that they have been incorrectly authenticated. It's the TPA's job to grade them correctly, not REA's - the TPA failed. If it were a fake card, that's very different (to me, anyway), and should be handled the same as a forged autograph;i.e-pull it.

Also, there is a big difference in skills required to tell if a card is trimmed, versus whether or not an autograph is a forgery. REA could much more easily do the former and feel confident expressing their opinion. On the other hand, if they said "this PSA authenticated Ruth looks like it might be fake to us", they are basically saying that they are now Babe Ruth autograph experts, and that PSA is not. If it comes to that, they should follow Lelands' path. If they ever get to that same point with slabbed cards, they really don't have the option of starting their own card-grading service. That would be a disaster for an auction house. Cards and autographs are not quite apples and oranges, but close enough to go in separate bags.