PWCC's 1936 Goudey World Wide Gum DiMaggio PSA 7

[Leon]

3. I think you are wrong on this account. After speaking with an attorney just now (not about this particular thing) this question came up. Statement absolutely could have meant the bid would be so low someone else will beat you anyway....that comment is commonplace in the hobby.

4. Value of the card actually went up AFTER this thread started. This card is probably worth just about what the selling price has been, imo, stain or no stain. I could see the PWCC buyer asking for a return but that is it. And I think that this particular card, even with transparency of the stain, will be worth as much or more in the future. Others will disagree....

6. I have never had any "tacit' approval from SGC or anyone, anywhere to erase anything. If a mark is erased, and it can't be seen any longer AND there is no indention from it, NO grader can discount for it. So if that is a tacit approval, ok.

Originally Posted by swarmee

It's been a while since I've posted in this thread, so here are my current thoughts:
1) The vast majority of people reading this thread probably think board member Dick Towle cleaned these cards, whether or not it's been stated in the thread. He is the most visible self-promoter of cleaning stains out of cards, and he claims to do it not to make them more valuable, but to allow people to enjoy their prized items more. The link I quoted about him being giddy about improving a 4 into a 7 seem to discount that premise.
2) There is definite egg on PWCC's face, and it's surprising to me that no one in hundreds of posts has even alluded to the fact that they used to promote California sales tax fraud and consignor's "hidden reserve" bidding on eBay when they started.
3) To the common man, both Brent and Cortney seem liable for different things, but as PWCC is a multimillion dollar company, they stand the greatest to lose. Their request to "take the high bid; it will get outbid" could be loose talk among friends, but I would think a jury would read it as direction to shill the auction and that they have another party willing to bid/push it higher.
4) I'm surprised the winner of the auction has not come on here or been identified. I'm wondering if PWCC will contact them directly and at least inform them of the thread and the likely decrease in value of this card in the future, and give the buyer the option to return the card. I realize this would hurt the consignor of the card, who is a member of this board.
5) I was glad that PWCC claimed to have the card re-inspected by PSA, but the timeline doesn't really add up unless they happened to do walk-through service and hand-delivered the card to PSA. Was the card given a new case and Cert number; if so, that would require the addition of a new set of scans uploaded to the auction. PSA claims that toning is not highly evaluated when scoring a card, unless it is uneven or causes an eyesore. I believe this card (if unaltered) could be a 7, since they are lenient on centering. Oddly enough, it probably couldn't be a 6.5. It could have also been knocked to a 7(MK) or a 5 due to the light stains on the back top.
6) As it currently stands, soaking a card in distilled water is an approved technique to clean up a card and a number grade should still be given to cards that have been soaked. However, cleaning with anything other than water is not accepted by the vast majority of the buyers of cards. I am not experienced enough in vintage cards to say whether or not this card was professionally cleaned with something other than water, but I can believe it. It still doesn't seem to be accepted for people to erase pencil marks from cards, despite the board host's doing it on his cards and having tacit approval from SGC (based on a previous thread, I believe). I believe PSA will still give erasure marks a (MK) designation if they detect erasures.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Leon

6. I have never had any "tacit' approval from SGC or anyone, anywhere to erase anything. If a mark is erased, and it can't be seen any longer AND there is no indention from it, NO grader can discount for it. So if that is a tacit approval, ok.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=152038

Originally Posted by Leon

Aloha Dave. I politely disagree with your statements. I think very light pencil marks can be taken off with no remnants of vestiges of a mark being left. As a matter of fact they can be taken off and not be able to be seen under high magnification. This is a fact but we can debate it all we want to. I will agree that technically erasing is altering the card as something is coming off. It is an acceptable alteration to me and most others. BTW, I consider SGC, BVG and PSA to be reputable companies and none of them have seen marks taken off, even when specifically looking for them. I know the graders at 2 of those 3 companies very well and have spent countless hours with them asking these questions. I assume you have to?

Here is the quote I was remembering when the thread was linked in a different thread and my interpretation was that if you spent countless hours discussing erasing pencil marks with all three main graders (not just SGC), that that would bestow tacit approval on removing pencil marks with erasers. I realize they can't catch everything, but don't believe the majority of card buyers would value a card with an undetectable erasure the same as one that never had been written on in the first place, if they were given the choice. Kind of the same discussion we're having about the toning removal in this thread. There have also been times they've goofed (I think I remember seeing a Red Hearts Mantle linked that had writing on the card, and was not given a (MK) though it should have.

[Leon]

I only have my 20 yrs of experiences to go on.
And on those quotes, you're interpretation is not correct, as to what I said. As I said, they never gave tacit approval nor did I ask them if I could do it. As for discussing everything under the sun with graders, I try to

Originally Posted by swarmee

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=152038


Here is the quote I was remembering when the thread was linked in a different thread and my interpretation was that if you spent countless hours discussing erasing pencil marks with all three main graders (not just SGC), that that would bestow tacit approval on removing pencil marks with erasers. I realize they can't catch everything, but don't believe the majority of card buyers would value a card with an undetectable erasure the same as one that never had been written on in the first place, if they were given the choice. Kind of the same discussion we're having about the toning removal in this thread. There have also been times they've goofed (I think I remember seeing a Red Hearts Mantle linked that had writing on the card, and was not given a (MK) though it should have.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Leon

I only have my 20 yrs of experiences to go on. And on those, you're interpretation is not correct, as to what I said. As I said, they never gave tacit approval nor did I ask them if I could do it. As for discussing everything under the sun with graders, I try to

Thanks for the response; I'm glad the grading companies don't condone erasures that they can detect or recommend people erase off their cards for higher grades.

[Bruinsfan94]

So after 66 pages, where do we stand on this debate?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Bruinsfan94

So after 66 pages, where do we stand on this debate?

what debate? I will go out on a limb and say the same place we started LMAO....is it time for lunch?

.

[Bruinsfan94]

Originally Posted by Leon

what debate? I will go out on a limb and say the same place we started LMAO....is it time for lunch?

.

lol I could use a drink after reading this thread. I'm dizzy.

[PhillipAbbott79]

Originally Posted by Bruinsfan94

So after 66 pages, where do we stand on this debate?

We are all waiting on the entire conversation history.

[mechanicalman]

Did anyone else happen to notice that Evan M.'s avatar is an 88 Topps Bo Jackson in a BVG 1? I found this hilarious and cool as hell and an otherwise shining light in a dumpster fire of a thread.

Note that I've heard from a reputable source that it was recently successfully crossed to a PSA 1, but there is no suspicion of any alterations.

Just trying to add a bit of levity. Carry on.

[Beastmode]

Originally Posted by Bruinsfan94

So after 66 pages, where do we stand on this debate?

This is where we stand:

Those that didn't do business with PWCC before and are verbally harpooning Brent and PWCC on this thread; Net effect; none

Those that enjoy PWCC's low fees, e-bay platform, wide breath of consignments and industry leading eyeballs, will continue to use PWCC; Net effect; none

Those on the fence must make a decision; who is the most moral and ethical Auction House to consign my cards? or, who is going to get the most money for my consignment?

[irv]

Originally Posted by Beastmode

This is where we stand:

Those that didn't do business with PWCC before and are verbally harpooning Brent and PWCC on this thread; Net effect; none

Those that enjoy PWCC's low fees, e-bay platform, wide breath of consignments and industry leading eyeballs, will continue to use PWCC; Net effect; none

Those on the fence must make a decision; who is the most moral and ethical Auction House to consign my cards? or, who is going to get the most money for my consignment?

What about buyers? I have, embarrassingly, spoke highly of them in the past, but I don't think I'll be visiting them anytime soon, even though I am a very low end, $20 dollar buyer mostly.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Leon

4. Value of the card actually went up AFTER this thread started. This card is probably worth just about what the selling price has been, imo, stain or no stain. I could see the PWCC buyer asking for a return but that is it. And I think that this particular card, even with transparency of the stain, will be worth as much or more in the future. Others will disagree....

I will also disagree. Five years ago it was a $6,000 card, right? Just because it went up after this thread started, doesn't mean it was due to the thread. I posit that it was due to the other bidders not knowing about this thread. And I don't believe this card is now given the mythical Honus Wagner provenance that since it's altered and now more famous, that it's worth more. That will only be proven/disproven once the card goes back on the market again and all the buyers know of it's murky history.