Alteration vs. Conservation Defined

[Goudey77]

Brent speaks on this matter

https://youtu.be/_f3k5VSqVt4

[slipk1068]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Brent speaks on this matter

https://youtu.be/_f3k5VSqVt4

Do you have a bat phone connection to Brent in your study or is he just on speed dial?

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by slipk1068

Do you have a bat phone connection to Brent in your study or is he just on speed dial?

Exceptional post!

[glchen]

OK, I ended up watching the first ten minutes of that video. I see what Brent is trying to say, but I also see the significant problems with it. I don't collect art or comics, but I do dabble in a tiny bit of coin collecting. (I have one coin in my PCGS set registry.) In coins, people clean all of the time. In fact, you can pay your TPG a little more to do the cleaning for you. They add some chemicals, I think, and that removes some of the grime, etc from the coin. The coins still receive a number grade. This practice is mostly accepted by the coin community as far as I know, and people even like it after cleaning if their coins "shine" in a certain way that has some sort of nice color pattern.

So if you apply that practice to card collecting, that is basically saying that soaking with water is okay, and soaking with chemicals is somewhat okay if it is done right. This probably sounds reasonable to a generic collector although more experienced collectors will realize the problems with this.

The bigger problem is what T206Collector states with post 42. That is, the public finds evidence that a card suddenly got a much higher grade after some "conservation." PWCC seems to be basically saying they are not going to withdraw that card from the market, and send it back to the TPG. They are going to say that is now a legit card with the higher grade because the changes weren't caught by the TPG. I have problems with that. That doesn't sound right. I think that most of the times when cards go up in grade is due to "corner sharpening," and I can't see how that is "conservation" although Brent mentions spooning. Here are some ways to improve a card's grade:


(1) Water soaking to remove the card from being glued to a scrapbook.

I think this is acceptable as conservation, and many people do this, and is generally accepted. Saying that I have heard of some paper stocks that will explode if removed from a holder after being soaked. That is, someone soaks the card. It gets encapsulated with a nice grade. Someone tries to remove the card from its plastic prison. Card explodes upon removal. I guess soaking wasn't conservation there.

(2) Removing pencil marks from cards

I was against this at first, but it looks like there is gradual movement in the hobby to allow this. What really bothered me was one case where a collector went to a TPG, and right in front of the TPG, they erased the offending pencil mark, and the TPG then went ahead and put the card in a holder with a higher grade. That just seemed wrong to me. That said, I'm coming around on thinking this is okay as long as the pencil mark didn't indent the card, and somehow this indenting wasn't removed also. Is that really conservation also?

(3) Removing pen marks. Removing pen marks typically requires chemicals, and water soaking or erasure won't do it. Using chemicals on cards is typically a big no no in this hobby although it is allowed in other hobbies like coins if done right. Using chemicals on cards still bugs me. I think one part of it is the fear that although the chemicals may not damage the card in the short term, it may still be present in the paper stock, and damage the card over the longer term. That is, someone puts a chemical on a card, and it looks great! It gets holdered with a nice high grade. However, then over time, the card starts looking worse and worse in the holder because the chemicals are "eating away" at the card or something similar like discoloring it.


(4) Corner sharpening. I just don't see how this can't be alteration. OK, fine you flip a corner over. The card goes from 2 to a 3 for the grade. I can live with that, and say it's not altered. However, many of the examples we see, the card goes to 7 or higher in grade. That's just not possible. It seems to me what's happening is flipping the corner over, then soaking and pressing. However, it seems to me, what happens is that unless paper stock was added (or the card was trimmed), that sharp corner is going to get unsharp in the future as the pressing wears out, and the corner comes apart.

(5) Trimming. I'm assuming everyone agrees that trimming is alteration and not conservation. Saying that, it's generally allowed and accepted in hand cut cards or strip cards, where the card can still receive a number grade after this trimming.


Anyway, I'm sure I'm missing some scenarios but just my initial thoughts on this topic.

[irv]

Originally Posted by irv

Post 1150 onward. (Football player) Betsy was informed of this card currently in their auction but the auction is still up and open.

I guess the old saying talk is cheap is true, or tell the people what they want to hear not what is reality.
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showth...290614&page=46

Why would this card still be up? PWCC/Betsy/Brent (Same thing) were told about this card, and likely others days ago yet it is still up and open? From what I read, going forward, cards from known dr's will no longer be submitted but why would they continue to auction this card even if it was submitted before PWCC's new "Tenets"?
Is Brent hoping the new buyer isn't aware of what is currently going on and therefore is taking the chance that he may never hear from the guy/girl ever again or is he going to tell the person, if they question it, that it has been "conserved"?

I don't know about anyone else, but in light of what has currently been exposed, and the fact this card has been flagged and PWCC has been notified, don't you think, if you were a "reputable" and "trusted" selling entity/company that cares about it's customers and the hobby, that you'd take the card down?

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Never get cheated

Forgot about that one!

Originally Posted by calvindog

I’ve seen no evidence that PSA is crooked, i.e. graders being bribed. While it’s obvious that in such a sloppy company run by such a sloppy guy like Orlando, with such opportunities available, I always felt it possible. But without at least strong circumstantial or some direct evidence, I’d never come out and accuse them of fraud as I have with Brent and PWCC which I can easily say is a crooked operation, knee-deep in easily proven fraud. However, after seeing this before and after set of pics, what else can any objective person think? I mean that shit is crazy. Either Stevie Wonder is grading cards at PSA or something nefarious is going on. What else can it be?

I just read on BO that PSA has slightly different sized slabs that accomodate slightly smaller sizes?

I don't know, but if I had graded some/numerous types of cards then came across one that was a little smaller/shorter that moved around in the "Normal/Approved" slab that I've always used, I think I'd have another look at it to see what is going on first before placing it in this slightly smaller/internal sized slab, especially if this card appeared to good to be true for it's age.

[Peter_Spaeth]

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=1482

Mercy.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=1482

Mercy.

Yowzers! Makes you wonder what superdan does for a living. Or more like what he should be doing. Forensics maybe?

[perezfan]

PSA needs to be held accountable. There must be 20 (or more) still uncovered examples for every one that has been detected. Most will never be uncovered.

If GAI went away, then PSA certainly should. This scandal is more problematic, as there are only two potential reasons for PSA's "mistakes"... Ineptitude or doing "favors".

And neither one merits consumer trust (which is the entire reason for PSA's existence).

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=1482

Mercy.

HowIronic...I feel betrayed!!!!!

[barrysloate]

I listened to the first ten minutes of Brent's youtube video. Oh my oh my.

He differentiates alteration, which is an obvious attempt to improve a card, from conservation, which is a way to enhance a card without any of the work being detected. But what about the card doctors who alter cards with such skill that even the TPG's can't catch it? Doesn't that make it impossible to distinguish whether a card has been altered or conserved?

After careful thought I think I can sum up this new approach in just two words: Oy gevalt.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I listened to the first ten minutes of Brent's youtube video. Oh my oh my.

He differentiates alteration, which is an obvious attempt to improve a card, from conservation, which is a way to enhance a card without any of the work being detected. But what about the card doctors who alter cards with such skill that even the TPG's can't catch it? Doesn't that make it impossible to distinguish whether a card has been altered or conserved?

After careful thought I think I can sum up this new approach in just two words: Oy gevalt.

I can do it in two letters.