Conservation vs restoration defined by other genres of collectibles

[steve B]

Originally Posted by drcy

My ex brother-in-law was a vintage big movie memorabilia collector and he explained how it works with movie posters. If you restore (or conserve) a Vg vintage movie poster to NrmMt, it will be worth more than Vg but less than NrmMt. And it was the hobby requirement that any restoration be disclosed at sale. Not disclosing restoration or conservation would be considered fraud, because it affected the valued

In that area, taste and sentiment would vary between collectors, but restoration and conservation wasn't frowned upon, and often was seen as positive for the preservation of the delicate posters. However, the pricing and requirement for disclosure was as was stated in paragraph #1. In all areas of collecting, whether it is common and accepted (paintings, movie posters) or not (American Indian artifacts), conservation and restoration affects market value, and, thus, has to be disclosed.

Also, conservation (which could include restoration) was a serious, scientific treatment, including of the paper, to stabilize it and preserve it for posterity. It was not "spooning out wrinkles."

To repeat: SPOONING OUT WRINKLES AND REMOVING WAX STAINS IS NOT CONSERVATION. No one in the other hobbies, the art or artifacts world, defines conservation as PWCC does. And, even if they did, the 'conservation' would still have to be disclosed at sale. Not disclosing it would be considered fraud. It does not matter what word you call it, you're still altering ('doing work on' if you prefer) the item, and that has to be disclosed. If Brent insists on calling it 'conservation,' fine. But that does not change the fact that it has to be disclosed, and, because knowledge that the card has been 'conserved' would lower the market value, it is fraud.

This is pretty much exactly how it should be.

Lets face a few facts, without some actual conservation, some of our cards won't last another hundred years. Many of the 1920's strip cards are shaky already. Even some really modern stuff is already having problems.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

This is pretty much exactly how it should be.

Lets face a few facts, without some actual conservation, some of our cards won't last another hundred years. Many of the 1920's strip cards are shaky already. Even some really modern stuff is already having problems.

What modern stuff do you see having problems?

[steve B]

Here is how another hobby handles an alteration.

This was I think 3 months getting a certificate, at $35. I didn't know the cancel was fake, but the PF did. I'm still very happy with it, as it's a new discovery. (Not my discovery, but I believe this was the first copy certified) I don't know if they needed it, but I sent a copy of the article identifying this as a foreign entry along with it.

The fake cancel may have been added for a couple reasons. The stamp may have had damaged gum, or been stuck down so the gum was removed. A nice used copy probably sells faster than an unused copy that's got a problem like no gum. (decent price reduction). It's also possible that there's a very light cancel in a common color, and the blue fake was added to increase the value( decent addition to catalog value for a blue cancel)

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What modern stuff do you see having problems?

Most anything produced by Collectors Edge, more than half of my clear cards have yellowed already.
and I forget the set, but one of my modern sets that should have nice white edges has browned. The fronts and backs look fine, but the cardstock will eventually destroy itself. since it's modern shiny cards on stock that's coated front and back, I'm not sure even a professional deacidification would reach the center of the card.
Most Topps produced up to 1991 will eventually have problems. The cream/white backs may be ok, but I don't know if anyone has ever actually studied the cardstock for acidity. The gray/brown stuff is largely wood pulp, and will degrade eventually. so far things don't seem too bad, but if you take the very long view a 10 today will not be a 10 100 years from now.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Absolutely no incentive to try and get alterations “past” the TPG. As they sell for less.

The big question here is if TPG’s in the card industry are willing to change their business structure to do what CGC does and recognize conservation, restoration. I know that’s a huge change and likely not good for the bottom line. But as it stands there is incentive and a proven “loophole” of sorts because there is no consistent standard for recognizing alterations.

I know Brent touches on how we have not “matured” in this hobby. I kind of agree we aren’t there yet. Even comics are ahead of the “game”.

Yeah, Brent Mastro, would love to continue to mature his relationship Edward Scissorhands. He is full of S, I mean hot air. I have seen him blabber mouthing, but has not done 1 THING he said he would as of yet. He is an idiot, a picked scab, IMHO until he makes a move and it is made public.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

To rely on internet sources to flag altered cards is not good for our hobby. It causes drama, unnecessary bad publicity, conspiracy theories etc etc. It needs to be done at a collective industry level. My only solution is getting TPG’s to step up their game. Follow what CGC does.

and for guys like Brent Mastro to STOP what he is doing by cozying up to known scumbag losers, like his pal and good customer, Edward Scissorhands

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

Most anything produced by Collectors Edge, more than half of my clear cards have yellowed already.
and I forget the set, but one of my modern sets that should have nice white edges has browned. The fronts and backs look fine, but the cardstock will eventually destroy itself. since it's modern shiny cards on stock that's coated front and back, I'm not sure even a professional deacidification would reach the center of the card.
Most Topps produced up to 1991 will eventually have problems. The cream/white backs may be ok, but I don't know if anyone has ever actually studied the cardstock for acidity. The gray/brown stuff is largely wood pulp, and will degrade eventually. so far things don't seem too bad, but if you take the very long view a 10 today will not be a 10 100 years from now.

Maybe one of the card doctors' great grandkids will be able to turn it back into a 10.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by steve B

This is pretty much exactly how it should be.

Lets face a few facts, without some actual conservation, some of our cards won't last another hundred years. Many of the 1920's strip cards are shaky already. Even some really modern stuff is already having problems.

I believe they are already being "conserved" just by putting them in those dumb plastic holders, without the haircuts.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

Most anything produced by Collectors Edge, more than half of my clear cards have yellowed already.
and I forget the set, but one of my modern sets that should have nice white edges has browned. The fronts and backs look fine, but the cardstock will eventually destroy itself. since it's modern shiny cards on stock that's coated front and back, I'm not sure even a professional deacidification would reach the center of the card.
Most Topps produced up to 1991 will eventually have problems. The cream/white backs may be ok, but I don't know if anyone has ever actually studied the cardstock for acidity. The gray/brown stuff is largely wood pulp, and will degrade eventually. so far things don't seem too bad, but if you take the very long view a 10 today will not be a 10 100 years from now.

Collectors Edge, now there's a company I forgot about already, now i remember a little from the early 90s.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Collectors Edge, now there's a company I forgot about already, now i remember a little from the early 90s.

I didn't say it was rare modern stuff...…..

[Peter_Spaeth]

I remember them and Wild Card football from that timeframe.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

I believe they are already being "conserved" just by putting them in those dumb plastic holders, without the haircuts.

As the cardstock decays, it gives off acid, which, inside a holder stays in the cadstock and promotes more decay/acid.

I've believed for years that the holders used for grading will actually damage some cards over a lengthy period of time. I asked SGC how sealed theirs were, and the answer was that they pretty much aren't. Will there be enough air transfer to vent the acidic air? Maybe. I've wanted to slab a card along with a strip of litmus paper, but can't imagine any of the companies allowing that.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I remember them and Wild Card football from that timeframe.

I collected both pretty avidly.

Now that you mention it, I should check and see if the browning ones are the wild card.... darn, forget the name. The thick embossed foilish rookie set that finally ended them because it sort of wasn't licensed.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

I collected both pretty avidly.

Now that you mention it, I should check and see if the browning ones are the wild card.... darn, forget the name. The thick embossed foilish rookie set that finally ended them because it sort of wasn't licensed.

Was that Action Packed maybe?

[bounce]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

But I think it’s good we talk amongst our community about these definitions. But can we do it constructively?

Is this Brent? I realize this is the internet, so I didn't hear you say it, but "can we do it constructively" probably isn't the best phrasing. Just saying...

This discussion has been going on for decades now? It isn't "new", it's just become more common in the recent weeks, and more public.

Originally Posted by Goudey77

The way I see it our hobby is in a vulnerable spot, growing pains of sorts, in a phase where these restored cards are going undetected by TPG’s and being sold to the community.

Again, not new. These things have been going on for decades as well. Restored/altered cards were getting through the TPGs from the very beginning. The hobby isn't more vulnerable than any other time, again it's just become more public thanks to the internet and hobbyists pointing out all the parties involved and how they are/may be linked to each other.

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Could this mean conservation and restoration is legitimately recognized by the TPG. Grading such cards under a different label?

Also, not new as it already exists (at least at PSA). There is a "Restored" label to go on flips.

Originally Posted by Goudey77

But what happens if SGC or PSA follows every other collectibles industry who has clearly defined restoration? Grades under a “restored” flip..Will that satisfy the collectors here and put the subject to rest?

Who in the art world is official standard setter of "restoration"?

I don't collect comics, but I am at least generally aware of CGC and their grading. I'm also pretty sure that they disclose a fair bit more any restoration/alteration work they see on the comics, no? It's frequently a list of those things, whereas in cards it's just the one word on the flip.

I'm also going to go on record as saying that cards and comics are NOT similar collectibles. Comics are multiple pages attached together in some manner, much thinner stock normally than cards, it's generally a more "elaborate" collectible than a single card that's a few inches each direction, and damage to inside pages affects the grade, not just the cover and the back.

One last item. This is off the CGC site, and it's identified as a "restoration" technique that would get called out on a slab. Maybe I misunderstood the video discussion, but certainly didn't sound to me like "cleaning" was something that was likely to get called out on a slab unless it "smelled" of something, in which case it became alteration.

Again, I don't think cards and comics are particularly similar, just simply pointing out that even with these "mature" markets and their definitions the card "leaders" aren't even being consistent with those. Who should we believe then?


CLEANED (lightened). An aqueous process to lighten the paper color or remove soluble acids, often using chemical oxidation, solvents, or water. This process is sometimes called cleaned and pressed or C&P. Common chemicals used to lighten paper include benzene, acetone, xylene, sodium hypochlorite, hydrogen peroxide, chloramine-T, chlorine dioxide, sodium borohydrate, etc.

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by bounce

"can we do it constructively" probably isn't the best phrasing. Just saying...

This discussion has been going on for decades now? It isn't "new", it's just become more common in the recent weeks, and more public.

David sorry I'm going to make an example of your response.
Nothing in what you say is constructive or added value to this topic.
To throw your hands up and say it's been going on for decades and that TPG's cannot follow similar standards as other industries is just wrong.

You say it's been known for years, its been talked about for decades, its part of the hobby since the beginning, there are already "restored" flips available. So does the hobby keep going in the direction that it is?

The stubborn mentality that fears change will always fall behind.

As I said before similar parallels to the comic industry years ago about this subject. Now that CGC recognizes conservation/restoration fully and has their own "tenets" there is nothing taboo about the subject.

If CGC can do this then it would appear to be a less intrusive process for PSA or SGC to follow in analyzing a simple card that is not as "elaborate" as a comic book right?

The point of my thread is to call out what's been done by similar hobby grading methodologies where things like pressing, cleaning, color touch, identifying trim etc. are part of conservation or restoration.

Again if CGC can do it with books there is absolutely no reason PSA or SGC could not do it on a card.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

David sorry I'm going to make an example of your response.
Nothing in what you say is constructive or added value to this topic.
To throw your hands up and say it's been going on for decades and that TPG's cannot follow similar standards as other industries is just wrong.

You say it's been known for years, its been talked about for decades, its part of the hobby since the beginning, there are already "restored" flips available. So does the hobby keep going in the direction that it is?

The stubborn mentality that fears change will always fall behind.

As I said before similar parallels to the comic industry years ago about this subject. Now that CGC recognizes conservation/restoration fully and has their own "tenets" there is nothing taboo about the subject.

If CGC can do this then it would appear to be a less intrusive process for PSA or SGC to follow in analyzing a simple card that is not as "elaborate" as a comic book right?

The point of my thread is to call out what's been done by similar hobby grading methodologies where things like pressing, cleaning, color touch, identifying trim etc. are part of conservation or restoration.

Again if CGC can do it with books there is absolutely no reason PSA or SGC could not do it on a card.

Whether they could or not, why should they? You haven't made that case at all IMO. Nor have you responded to the point that as long as there is a price differential there is a huge motive to alter to deceive.

PS I don't WANT a restored card. I am guessing the overwhelming majority of people here do not WANT restored cards. You're way off base, as evidenced by the reception you're getting so far.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Was that Action Packed maybe?

No, had to google them

Wild card superchromix rookies.

That may be the set having problems, I'll have to check. If it's not them, then it's a hunt through loads of boxes, a hunt I'm not enthusiastic about.

[drcy]

Real, useful conservation of trading cards, especially old ones, would involve them being deacidified by putting them in a solution. That's actually something good that could be done conservation-wise with fragile cards and photos, and could be something held up as reasonable standard practice. Conservation in the art world is done to preserve/protect the item for posterity.

I've never stated that restoration and conservation are bad. And grading card companies labelling this work (if they can identify it) seems perfectly reasonable philosophy. It should be done right now if it could. If that's what Goudey is talking about, I agree. But the key is any work on the card has to be disclosed.

"Absolutely no incentive to try and get alterations “past” the TPG. As they sell for less."

I work in philosophy (logic), have a published peer-reviewed university philosophy textbook and am a lifetime member of the international philosophy society at Oxford, and I just have to note for the logic-record that that quoted line makes absolutely no sense. It makes anti-sense.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

David sorry I'm going to make an example of your response.
Nothing in what you say is constructive or added value to this topic.
To throw your hands up and say it's been going on for decades and that TPG's cannot follow similar standards as other industries is just wrong.

You say it's been known for years, its been talked about for decades, its part of the hobby since the beginning, there are already "restored" flips available. So does the hobby keep going in the direction that it is?

The stubborn mentality that fears change will always fall behind.

As I said before similar parallels to the comic industry years ago about this subject. Now that CGC recognizes conservation/restoration fully and has their own "tenets" there is nothing taboo about the subject.

If CGC can do this then it would appear to be a less intrusive process for PSA or SGC to follow in analyzing a simple card that is not as "elaborate" as a comic book right?

The point of my thread is to call out what's been done by similar hobby grading methodologies where things like pressing, cleaning, color touch, identifying trim etc. are part of conservation or restoration.

Again if CGC can do it with books there is absolutely no reason PSA or SGC could not do it on a card.

Martin, I just am having a hard time believing that you don’t work for PWCC or are in some way associated with the company or at the minimum are close friends with one of the principal people within the company. I have never in my life seen someone on a message board attempting to defend a business/individual with the vigor and determination that you are for PWCC. Just tell us the truth, what is your deal?

I have largely stayed out of this discussion as it all makes me sick. S*** has been going on in this hobby for decades and it all sucks. The spin that Brent is attempting right now is utterly ridiculous... if he didn’t know what was going on to some degree or another he was voluntarily living in ignorance. That being said PSA/BGS also are at fault for their inability to detect some of the most obviously trimmed vintage cards I have ever seen.

The hobby has determined (long before Brent/Betsy/Martin ever even thought about it) what is and isn’t okay. Yes there is some gray area as to what the hard line in the sand is but there are many things that are now and have always been not okay (and everyone mentioned in this and the other threads know what those are despite the spin they are trying to put forth). Everyone involved bears responsibility for the current situation despite what Martin would have us believe...

-PSA/BGS sucks at detecting the altered cards that have been submitted. They bear responsibility for that fact.
-PWCC (including all involved in that entity) suck at detecting the obvious shenanigans going on with their auctions (that or they are willfully involved, but I will give them the benefit of the doubt here). They bear responsibility for this, what they have and are doing IS NOT ENOUGH! Their attempts to reshape the narrative, redefine hobby standards, claim ignorance are comical to watch.

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Whether they could or not, why should they? You haven't made that case at all IMO. Nor have you responded to the point that as long as there is a price differential there is a huge motive to alter to deceive.

PS I don't WANT a restored card. I am guessing the overwhelming majority of people here do not WANT restored cards. You're way off base, as evidenced by the reception you're getting so far.

Simple response to your thoughts Peter. Stagnation. Enjoy your message board to continue venting while nothing changes and all we hear about are controversial topics.

At some point TPG's need to recognize restored cards as did CGC. This includes publishing guidelines for tolerances of conservation vs restoration. This is exactly what PWCC is trying to convey in their tenets. Else it will always be a taboo topic with hidden motives. I'll also refer back to my comment about TPG's needing to give more effort in distinguishing the two. Thus the idea of creating a "purple" label of their own like CGC does.

Most comic book collectors in the silver age and modern book era do not want "restored" purple label books. Most golden age collectors have no choice if they want to own a key book. But at least CGC openly recognizes the differences.

I provided ideas with examples from other TPG's from the comic industry.
I already have a profession so it is not my job to make the change. But I can certainly be an advocate for it.

I'm open ears to constructive ideas. Complaining and stagnation is not my idea of constructive.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Whether they could or not, why should they? You haven't made that case at all IMO. Nor have you responded to the point that as long as there is a price differential there is a huge motive to alter to deceive.

PS I don't WANT a restored card. I am guessing the overwhelming majority of people here do not WANT restored cards. You're way off base, as evidenced by the reception you're getting so far.

He does bring up some tough questions though.

While I don't "want" a restored card, I have a very wide range of what I think is "acceptable" as far as condition goes. Much of that to me is related to the price.*
I have cards that I know are altered, as well as some pretty nice originals, and some real beaters.
I think if someone had for instance a green Cobb that had been a total wreck but had borders added and some scuffs etc fixed, and it was cheap enough, I might be interested. It would have to be way less than even an original beater.

I can also see someone wanting a restored card to display with another item, like while framing a jersey or autograph.

Realistically, I think we have to acknowledge that alterations, either fraudulent or well meant will always happen. People colored the edges of 71T when commons were going for a few cents each. (Badly, but still... )

If the grading companies got much better at catching it, and conveyed the alteration in any degree of detail, I think that's a positive step.

Our hobby does need to do some growing up. No other major hobby I can think of (Maybe comics? ) gets by without some national organization that supposedly has some sway over dealers and ethics and what is/is not acceptable. If we don't have one, dealers who think they're big enough will define that themselves.

*In 1978 I found half of a card I needed in the street on my way home. I kept it in my collection for about 2 years before I happened across a complete one. At the time I could have replaced it for 5 cents.

[Peter_Spaeth]

PWCC doesn't even understand what conservation is. They misuse the word throughout.

Call me a skeptic, but I'm not seeing anything necessary or positive in it. What we need, as I've said, is for TPGs to improve and for card doctors and their enablers to be prosecuted.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

He does bring up some tough questions though.

While I don't "want" a restored card, I have a very wide range of what I think is "acceptable" as far as condition goes. Much of that to me is related to the price.*
I have cards that I know are altered, as well as some pretty nice originals, and some real beaters.
I think if someone had for instance a green Cobb that had been a total wreck but had borders added and some scuffs etc fixed, and it was cheap enough, I might be interested. It would have to be way less than even an original beater.

I can also see someone wanting a restored card to display with another item, like while framing a jersey or autograph.

Realistically, I think we have to acknowledge that alterations, either fraudulent or well meant will always happen. People colored the edges of 71T when commons were going for a few cents each. (Badly, but still... )

If the grading companies got much better at catching it, and conveyed the alteration in any degree of detail, I think that's a positive step.

Our hobby does need to do some growing up. No other major hobby I can think of (Maybe comics? ) gets by without some national organization that supposedly has some sway over dealers and ethics and what is/is not acceptable. If we don't have one, dealers who think they're big enough will define that themselves.

*In 1978 I found half of a card I needed in the street on my way home. I kept it in my collection for about 2 years before I happened across a complete one. At the time I could have replaced it for 5 cents.

I have no issue with grading companies getting better. That would be huge. And yes, some self-regulation would be great too. I do have an issue with changing the rules of the game to somehow legitimize a world of fraud. Particularly considering the source, and I don't mean Martin.

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by drcy

Real, useful conservation of trading cards, especially old ones, would involve them being deacidified by putting them in a solution. That's actually something good that could be done conservation-wise, and might be wise for photos and other items.

I've never stated that restoration and conservation are bad. And grading card companies labelling this work (if they can identify it) seems perfectly reasonable philosophy. It should be done right now if it could. If that's what Goudey is talking about, I agree. But the key is any work on the card has to be disclosed.

"Absolutely no incentive to try and get alterations “past” the TPG. As they sell for less."

I work in philosophy (logic), have a published peer-reviewed university philosophy textbook and am a lifetime member of the international philosophy society at Oxford, and I just have to note for the logic-record that that quoted line makes absolutely no sense. It makes anti-sense.

DRCY,
I do appreciate your comments so far. Very useful examples that you provided.
As for the comment about having no incentive for card doctors. If we keep it the way it is today the incentive to get a altered card past the TPG is profitable. If the TPG moves to a CGC model and can recognize restorations/conservations and place them in a separate "restored" label then the profit is marginal.

Bottom line though. TPG's in our card hobby need to step up their services.
Change is needed regardless.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

DRCY,
I do appreciate your comments so far. Very useful examples that you provided.
As for the comment about having no incentive for card doctors. If we keep it the way it is today the incentive to get a altered card past the TPG is profitable. If the TPG moves to a CGC model and can recognize restorations/conservations and place them in a separate "restored" label then the profit is marginal.

Bottom line though. TPG's in our card hobby need to step up their services.
Change is needed regardless.

You're totally wrong IMO. As long as there is a large price differential between original and restored there is a huge incentive to try to deceive, to get the original not the restored designation. Why can't you see this, everyone else can. You keep asserting it in mantra like fashion and just ignore the logic on the other side.

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

Martin, I just am having a hard time believing that you don’t work for PWCC or are in some way associated with the company or at the minimum are close friends with one of the principal people within the company. I have never in my life seen someone on a message board attempting to defend a business/individual with the vigor and determination that you are for PWCC. Just tell us the truth, what is your deal?

Rhett,

I have no association with PWCC. I have been a customer of theirs since the "pre war card collector" days. Yes I have had thoughts about reaching out to them as an advocate for change. I am from the same area as their offices but that's just coincidence.

I'm here to challenge the nay sayers. Because there needs to be a shake up. Complaining on a message board and doing nothing about it is pointless.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Rhett,

I have no association with PWCC. I have been a customer of theirs since the "pre war card collector" days. Yes I have had thoughts about reaching out to them as an advocate for change. I am from the same area as their offices but that's just coincidence.

I'm here to challenge the nay sayers. Because there needs to be a shake up. Complaining on a message board and doing nothing about it is pointless.

Explain to me please why, if there is a large price gap between original and restored, there would not continue to be a huge incentive to alter cards to try to get the original designation as opposed to the restored one. I'm listening.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You're totally wrong IMO. As long as there is a large price differential between original and restored there is a huge incentive to try to deceive, to get the original not the restored designation. Why can't you see this, everyone else can. You keep asserting it in mantra like fashion and just ignore the logic on the other side.

I think he sees it, and always saw it.

Rhett: "I just am having a hard time believing that you don’t work for PWCC or are in some way associated with the company or at the minimum are close friends with one of the principal people within the company."

That would be a logical guess.

Or, as the old guy on Seinfeld said, "I may die tomorrow, but I wasn't born yesterday."

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by drcy

I think he sees it, and always saw it.

It would seem, as it seemed to earlier poster, that he is here posting on PWCC's behalf.

As the old guy on Seinfeld said, "I may die tomorrow, but I wasn't born yesterday."

I'll take him at his word that he's not affiliated, but he isn't, at least so far, making much sense on his no incentive point, to me anyhow.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Rhett,

I have no association with PWCC. I have been a customer of theirs since the "pre war card collector" days. Yes I have had thoughts about reaching out to them as an advocate for change. I am from the same area as their offices but that's just coincidence.

I'm here to challenge the nay sayers. Because there needs to be a shake up. Complaining on a message board and doing nothing about it is pointless.

Why then do you seemingly not hold PWCC responsible in any way. Every post you have made has defended them either directly or indirectly and then proceed to deflect all responsibility to the TPG industry? You understand that they can both suck at their jobs simultaneously, right?

I understand the sentiment behind your posts but they seem to be obviously thinly veiled defenses of PWCC.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I'll take him at his word that he's not affiliated, but he isn't, at least so far, making much sense on his no incentive point, to me anyhow.

It's not just you anyhow. There's no more further need to debate or discuss that that line of reasoning makes no sense. I think everyone here knows it makes no sense. Of course, it makes no sense. Or as I say when someone states a fact that is so obvious to everyone a fact that there's no need for the person to have even stated it: "And the sky is blue and Austin is the capital of Texas."

Now, the argument that the baseball card hobby should "mature" concerning conservation/alteration/labeling, that is a fair argument to which I can agree. Restoration (disclosed and labeled as restoration, and receiving a grade of AUTH) actually has become more accepted in the hobby in recent years. Collecting-wise, I'm not interested in restored or altered cards, but there are others in the hobby who are okay with it (when it's disclosed and the price is right), and the major auction houses has auctioned (disclosed as) restored cards. In cases, restoring and conserving a card is prudent. Obviously, the hobby 'maturing' would have to start, and only can start, with grading companies being able to identify alterations and conservation, which may be a high starting hurdle, because, despite what Goudey says, people WILL still try to sneak alterations past graders.

Here's a hobby 'maturing' rule for consideration: All trading cards that have been restored or conserved have to be clearly and permanently marked on the card itself. It may be a visible-light mark, or, if people don't like that idea, a black light identifiable mark. Any restored or conserved card that does not have such mark is automatically considered breaking the hobby rules and ethical standards written in black and white.

30 plus years ago, there was a guy who restored old cards, usually Goudeys, by building up the corners with foreign paper and glue. And apparently, he did an excellent job.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by drcy

It's not just you anyhow. There's no more further need to debate or discuss that that line of reasoning makes no sense. I think everyone here knows it makes no sense. Of course, it makes no sense.

It seems to me if anything, legitimizing "restored" would increase the incentive to doctor, because the worst case becomes something that has a decent residual value instead of a rejected and tainted card.

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You're totally wrong IMO. As long as there is a large price differential between original and restored there is a huge incentive to try to deceive, to get the original not the restored designation. Why can't you see this, everyone else can. You keep asserting it in mantra like fashion and just ignore the logic on the other side.

Peter,

I get what you are saying. I won't argue that price gap. But this comes down to better analysis of cards and identifying restorations. Also defining tolerances so we can clearly address before and after photos popping up on message boards claiming fraud. TPG's simply need to take a stance. PWCC tenets did this.

CGC took a stance and it became a big part of their everyday operations. Who here questions card TPG's ability to do the same.

Ask a comic book veteran if they think a comic restoration expert can slip a book past CGC graders into the un-restored blue label.

Ask a sports card hobby veteran the same question about PSA or SGC.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

Martin, I just am having a hard time believing that you don’t work for PWCC or are in some way associated with the company or at the minimum are close friends with one of the principal people within the company. I have never in my life seen someone on a message board attempting to defend a business/individual with the vigor and determination that you are for PWCC. Just tell us the truth, what is your deal.

You didn't notice "Pacific Northwest" in his personal details?


It a slow day here on Oswego Lake....

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Rhett,

Because there needs to be a shake up. Complaining on a message board and doing nothing about it is pointless.

Unless I am missing something most of this information has pretty recently come to light so I think we are jumping the gun concluding that we are “doing nothing” because only time will tell if nothing is done. IMO bringing up all this information is the opposite of “doing nothing” and the only one that seems to have a problem with all these revelations is PWCC and (inexplicably) you. You seem to want to redirect the narrative to a similar point but not really what we are all talking about right now. This conversation is a good one but probably not one that should be initiated by the biggest PWCC apologist in the known universe.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Peter,

I get what you are saying. I won't argue that price gap. But this comes down to better analysis of cards and identifying restorations. Also defining tolerances so we can clearly address before and after photos popping up on message boards claiming fraud. TPG's simply need to take a stance. PWCC tenets did this.

CGC took a stance and it became a big part of their everyday operations. Who here questions card TPG's ability to do the same.

Ask a comic book veteran if they think a comic restoration expert can slip a book past CGC graders into the un-restored blue label.

Ask a sports card hobby veteran the same question about PSA or SGC.

I think PSA's current standards reflect, with some gray area perhaps around the edges, the collective hobby ethos of what is and is not acceptable. I see no need for any change to that. I don't think PWCC's proposals to change standards, leaving aside my personal sense of their disingenuousness, are helpful. The key is to improve detection and discourage card doctors and their enablers. Anyhow, I keep saying this so I'll stop.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

You didn't notice "Pacific Northwest" in his personal details?


It a slow day here on Oswego Lake....

LOL, I certainly noticed that the first time I saw his post, I just want him to be honest.

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

You didn't notice "Pacific Northwest" in his personal details?


It a slow day here on Oswego Lake....

That's Lake Oswego Ted. You get the purple label for that one.

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I think PSA's current standards reflect, with some gray area perhaps around the edges, the collective hobby ethos of what is and is not acceptable. I see no need for any change to that. I don't think PWCC's proposals to change standards, leaving aside my personal sense of their disingenuousness, are helpful. The key is to improve detection and discourage card doctors and their enablers. Anyhow, I keep saying this so I'll stop.

Glad you finally agree to what i've been saying Peter.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Glad you finally agree to what i've been saying Peter.

I've said this till I'm blue in the face all along, I have no idea what you're talking about but whatever.

[drcy]

Duly note that I live in and am posting from the Pacific Northwest

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by drcy

Duly note that I live in and am posting from the Pacific Northwest

If we are fully disclosing, I was in Lake Oswego a month ago and a month and a half ago. Did not see anyone associated with PWCC as far as I know. Didn't see the Gangster from West Linn either.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It seems to me if anything, legitimizing "restored" would increase the incentive to doctor, because the worst case becomes something that has a decent residual value instead of a rejected and tainted card.

I think there are cases where restoration have been reasonable (a torn card where the tear will be getting worse with time, a card where half is missing or has major damage to the central graphics), but have always been of the sentiment that restored cards should the rare exceptions. I believe it should be the norm, as it is, that alterations are considered detrimental to the card, lowers the value and the hobby should be against it.

Your point, and what I just said, may go against the idea of graders being able to label conservation/restoration, but just label all alterations as altered AUTH. If they get into the conservation/restoration etc labels, then it may make the practices seem more legitimate and acceptable, when restoration should be the rare exception for specific reasons. You may have just convinced me that graders should simply label altered cards as altered AUTH. If an AUTH card was restored for good reason, the owner of the card can make his case-- but the card doesn't get a special label.

Graders are actually by name condition graders, and they should say "We condition grade (assign numbers) only cards that are unaltered, and the cards have been altered. You people can debate the merits of restoration and conservation or what types of alterations are okay-- fine and dandy--, but we are strictly in the technical business of authenticating identity, condition grading unaltered cards and identifying cards that have been altered."

[bounce]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

At some point TPG's need to recognize restored cards as did CGC.

Martin - They already do, why do you keep saying this? PSA has multiple different options, including "restored" which they can use.

EDIT: Added pictures of before and after, courtesy of t206resource.com



They also have published standards for grading, see this link.
https://www.psacard.com/Resources/gr...tandards#cards

They probably haven't really dealt with the definitions as well as they could, however:
N2 - Evidence of restoration - When a card's paper stock appears to have been built up - for example, when ripped corners are built up to look like new corners.
N5 - Altered Stock - This includes, but is not limited to characteristics on the card that appear to show some form of alteration such as paper restoration, crease/wrinkle pressing or enhanced gloss.
N7 - Evidence of Cleaning - When a whitener is used to whiten borders or a solution is used to remove wax, candy, gum or tobacco stains.
AA - Authentic Altered - This means that while PSA is certifying that the item is genuine, due to the existence of alterations, the item cannot receive a numerical grade. The term altered may mean that the card shows evidence of one or more of the following: trimming, recoloring, restoration, and/or cleaning. Items receiving the "Authentic Altered" designation, in our opinion, are genuine with the presence of some type of alteration. This is done on a case-by-case basis only, and must be notated on the submission form at the time of submission.

As I've continued to state, just be consistent and use them.

For whatever reason, that Wagner got I believe the N2 - Restored. Why it's not AA - Authentic Altered I have no idea, considering it had recoloring, restoration and cleaning done to it. Are we to accept that because the card wasn't submitted on the form to be AA that's why I ended up in a N2? Or is it because "restored" just sounds better than "altered", especially when you're talking about a multi-hundred thousand $ card?

The 52 Mantle that's been discussed has clear evidence of at least being cleaned. There's speculation of other work to it as well, including trimming and recoloring, but I don't know that I have seen sufficient evidence to say exactly what that is - but the circumstantial evidence of something else besides cleaning being done to it is pretty compelling. Regardless, it got a 4.5 grade instead of say N7. Brent has brought up that he's never seen N7 used, I don't think I have either so seems he has a valid point on that. However, in hindsight, something was done to that card, it was cracked and resubbed, whether or not you can actually SEE evidence of something done to it in hand the pictures prove something was done. PSA should reslab this thing at a minimum, and Brent needs to stop pretending the pictures don't exist.


And finally, regarding making "examples"...I certainly don't FEEL like you made an example of me or any of my posts. As a matter of fact, I think you've added credence to much of what myself and others have pointed out, so thank you for that.

You and I do agree on a few things (like what the TPGs can and should do), on quite a number of others we don't. I think I've been pretty open and direct in expressing the basis upon which my disagreement is based. If you feel like that's not "constructive", so be it - I feel pretty good you're in the minority in that view.

Maybe I'm just not "mature" enough...fortunately I have the card hobby to fall back into.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by bounce

Martin - They already do, why do you keep saying this? PSA has multiple different options, including "restored" which they can use.

EDIT: Added pictures of before and after, courtesy of t206resource.com



They also have published standards for grading, see this link.
https://www.psacard.com/Resources/gr...tandards#cards

They probably haven't really dealt with the definitions as well as they could, however:
N2 - Evidence of restoration - When a card's paper stock appears to have been built up - for example, when ripped corners are built up to look like new corners.
N5 - Altered Stock - This includes, but is not limited to characteristics on the card that appear to show some form of alteration such as paper restoration, crease/wrinkle pressing or enhanced gloss.
N7 - Evidence of Cleaning - When a whitener is used to whiten borders or a solution is used to remove wax, candy, gum or tobacco stains.
AA - Authentic Altered - This means that while PSA is certifying that the item is genuine, due to the existence of alterations, the item cannot receive a numerical grade. The term altered may mean that the card shows evidence of one or more of the following: trimming, recoloring, restoration, and/or cleaning. Items receiving the "Authentic Altered" designation, in our opinion, are genuine with the presence of some type of alteration. This is done on a case-by-case basis only, and must be notated on the submission form at the time of submission.

As I've continued to state, just be consistent and use them.

For whatever reason, that Wagner got I believe the N2 - Restored. Why it's not AA - Authentic Altered I have no idea, considering it had recoloring, restoration and cleaning done to it. Are we to accept that because the card wasn't submitted on the form to be AA that's why I ended up in a N2? Or is it because "restored" just sounds better than "altered", especially when you're talking about a multi-hundred thousand $ card?

The 52 Mantle that's been discussed has clear evidence of at least being cleaned. There's speculation of other work to it as well, including trimming and recoloring, but I don't know that I have seen sufficient evidence to say exactly what that is - but the circumstantial evidence of something else besides cleaning being done to it is pretty compelling. Regardless, it got a 4.5 grade instead of say N7. Brent has brought up that he's never seen N7 used, I don't think I have either so seems he has a valid point on that. However, in hindsight, something was done to that card, it was cracked and resubbed, whether or not you can actually SEE evidence of something done to it in hand the pictures prove something was done. PSA should reslab this thing at a minimum, and Brent needs to stop pretending the pictures don't exist.


And finally, regarding making "examples"...I certainly don't FEEL like you made an example of me or any of my posts. As a matter of fact, I think you've added credence to much of what myself and others have pointed out, so thank you for that.

You and I do agree on a few things (like what the TPGs can and should do), on quite a number of others we don't. I think I've been pretty open and direct in expressing the basis upon which my disagreement is based. If you feel like that's not "constructive", so be it - I feel pretty good you're in the minority in that view.

Maybe I'm just not "mature" enough...fortunately I have the card hobby to fall back into.

I would love a card restored like that! As long as it's disclosed from the beginning and not an attempt to fraud, which is what Brent Mastro is doing now.

[jchcollins]

All this talk about hobby practices maturing to be more like comics and the insuation that being more accepting of alterations will also make it easy to properly identify them is great, but I think this is all pointless if there is not also a market at large who would not only be accepting of this, but demanding of it - and at least right now I don't think that is the case. Grading companies were started ostensibly because of alteration problems and things going undetected in the 1990's right? The difference is that they were just supposed to reject such cards and not attempt to understand what had been done to them. The result, rather quickly was TPG's establishing incentives for cards that not only were not altered, but were in super-high grade. By going down this road so quickly, they made truly altered cards ultra-black sheep, and quickly - it would seem at least thoretically - lost any true incentive not to try to cut corners so they would be able to avoid giving out these designations. Because obviously continually doing so, even if it was the right thing to do - is going to be bad for your business as a TPG.

So what are we saying, the goal is the same as it was earlier to prevent / crack down on alterations - but um, it didn't work the first time, so now we need to go back and embrace a certain degree of permissable alterations so we can get better about calling things out? Again, ok - but I don't think outside of concerned true collectors on forums like this one - we likely aren't anywhere near a majority - that anyone will give much of a damn. It's not going to be a market reality. As we've said before, the vast majority of the deep-pocketed investing and even high-end collecting world is going to continue along an ends-justify-the-means trail and be happy with their ridiculously high-graded vintage cards in slabs whether or not they were trimmed or restored or what have you.

So at the end of the day until we see a dramatic shift in the overall marketplace, I think that TPG's are useful tools, only - upon which not nearly so much weight should be assigned. It's an opinion of an examination, nothing more. Notice that while we lobby for change, be it with the TPG's or an entity like PWCC - we all still seem to approach the matter of slabbing as a "finality." Not just something that happened to the card in it's lifespan and was then moved-on from. No buddy, this card is now a PSA 8 for life! Hehe. You've got to admit we do that here, too. If we could somehow get around that in the honest discussion of what types of weight to assign to what issues, I think the hobby would be a lot better off.

[Goudey77]

Good post jhcollins!

Seems these challenging ideas/questions on threads are mostly click bait for the naysayers.

So I Appreciate your articulated thoughts on the subject.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

So at the end of the day until we see a dramatic shift in the overall marketplace, I think that TPG's are useful tools, only - upon which not nearly so much weight should be assigned.

Agree. Obviously the same with TPA autograph opinions. They're independent opinions.

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by bounce

Martin - They already do, why do you keep saying this? PSA has multiple different options, including "restored" which they can use.

Maybe I'm just not "mature" enough...fortunately I have the card hobby to fall back into.

My point is that TPG’s like PSA as you pointed out could use some changes to the way they define, address and label these various scenarios.
While I appreciate a good old “restored” T206 Wagner slab, it’s archaic in comparison to what CGC has done so far.

I don’t want to repeat myself I just want to make it a point that we could learn from other sectors of collectibles.

Watch the CGC interview you’d be amazed at their openness and knowledge on the matter. Card TPG’s are very tight lipped and seem to take every incident case by case. There is no clear line in the sand. Thus a need for a stance and tenets of sort like PWCC has done. Crap on the idea all you want but someone needs to be a voice if TPG’s won’t speak up.