Its not just moser/pwcc...more trimmers exposed

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by calvindog

No one is laughing.

I'm laughing.

I find this entire thread incredibly funny.

The people who get paid for their opinions are just going to slide down in their cellar and wait for the storm to blow over, then back to business as usual.

Doug "everybody gets exactly what they pay for" Goodman

[Peter_Spaeth]

I'm not laughing but I am smiling because I have known for 10 years or more that this stuff was going on and I never thought it would be exposed so dramatically.

Good for the hobby my body part.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I'm not laughing but I am smiling because I have known for 10 years or more that this stuff was going on and I never thought it would be exposed so dramatically.

Me too. Many did. But the depth and breadth is more astonishing than I had anticipated it would be, to say the least.

[Popcorn]

Trimming is very risky, they must have some kind of “back up” Incase it does not grade.

[bounce]

Originally Posted by Popcorn

Trimming is very risky, they must have some kind of “back up” Incase it does not grade.

TOTAL SPECULATION on my part...

I think they were submitting the altered cards under "minimum grade" service.

We know there are chunks of certain submissions with missing/unused numbers around cards that have been shown to likely be altered.

I don't submit cards for grading so I can't say this for certain, maybe someone who does can chime in.

My understanding is that if you just submit under normal service and they think it's been altered, you get it back with an "evidence of trimming" or "altered" label on the card saver.

However, if you submit under minimum grade and it doesn't make it for any reason, it just comes back saying it didn't meet minimum grade.

If you didn't want to "know" that PSA thought it was trimmed, the min grade service would be a good way to do it.

Again, not sure I'm right on this so hoping someone else who really does know can confirm or correct.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by bounce

TOTAL SPECULATION on my part...

I think they were submitting the altered cards under "minimum grade" service.

We know there are chunks of certain submissions with missing/unused numbers around cards that have been shown to likely be altered.

I don't submit cards for grading so I can't say this for certain, maybe someone who does can chime in.

My understanding is that if you just submit under normal service and they think it's been altered, you get it back with an "evidence of trimming" or "altered" label on the card saver.

However, if you submit under minimum grade and it doesn't make it for any reason, it just comes back saying it didn't meet minimum grade.

If you didn't want to "know" that PSA thought it was trimmed, the min grade service would be a good way to do it.

Again, not sure I'm right on this so hoping someone else who really does know can confirm or correct.

Correct, and the ones that don't make it through, get pushed through again and again and again. Nice business model Brent Mastro.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Popcorn

Trimming is very risky, they must have some kind of “back up” Incase it does not grade.

Their back up plan is "oh well, bummer" on to the next one.

Compared to the potential profit for a successful upping of opinion level, the cost of losing a card is minimal, and they can always send it in again.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

Their back up plan is "oh well, bummer" on to the next one.

Compared to the potential profit for a successful upping of opinion level, the cost of losing a card is minimal, and they can always send it in again.

Cost of doing business, all factored in based on years of knowing what percentage get through I would imagine. Plus I think they use inexpensive cards for practice to reduce risk, see what gets by, what doesn't.

[Arazi4442]

There was plenty of shady stuff going on before TPGs got involved.

I imagine there always will be anywhere big money is involved. Seems the best you can hope for is that the bad guys get caught/punished and that minimizes people doing the same thing in the future.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Arazi4442

There was plenty of shady stuff going on before TPGs got involved.

I imagine there always will be anywhere big money is involved. Seems the best you can hope for is that the bad guys get caught/punished and that minimizes people doing the same thing in the future.

The sellers of opinions have actively promoted the "shady" stuff from that first paid opinion #00000001.

[doug.goodman]

But the depth and breadth is more astonishing than I had anticipated it would be, to say the least.

And the jokes just keep coming...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Me too. Many did. But the depth and breadth is more astonishing than I had anticipated it would be, to say the least.

Yeah. The irony is these young guys (I am assuming) over on BO were initially out to expose the trimmers in their modern segment.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I'm not laughing but I am smiling because I have known for 10 years or more that this stuff was going on and I never thought it would be exposed so dramatically.

You have only been collecting for 10 years.

I have been collecting for almost 35 years now and found out about the shady side very early on.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bnorth

You have only been collecting for 10 years.

I have been collecting for almost 35 years now and found out about the shady side very early on.

I meant the specific person and relationship now in the spotlight.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

I'm laughing.

I find this entire thread incredibly funny.

The people who get paid for their opinions are just going to slide down in their cellar and wait for the storm to blow over, then back to business as usual.

Doug "everybody gets exactly what they pay for" Goodman

Um, I wasn't referring to the peanut gallery. More like the people in the soup.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Um, I wasn't referring to the peanut gallery. More like the people in the soup.

I'm not the peanut gallery.

I have plenty of soup, I just don't pay people for opinions on mine.

Everybody who has purchased a card in the last 20 years is effected by this issue, but anybody who is just now finding out about this issue must not have noticed that the very first paid opinion delivered by the king of all paid opinion givers was for a trimmed card.

It's all been down hill from there, and anybody who ever thought it wasn't, well, they were / are delusional.

EVERY card EVER given a paid opinion is suspect.

Break out those kitchen knives (at least that's what I use) and get back to where this hobby was when (many (most?) of us) started, and before it was hijacked.

Each and every one of us who has paid for an opinion is part of the problem.

Doug "but maybe I'm completely wrong" Goodman

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

I'm not the peanut gallery.

I have plenty of soup, I just don't pay people for opinions on mine.

Everybody who has purchased a card in the last 20 years is effected by this issue, but anybody who is just now finding out about this issue must not have noticed that the very first paid opinion delivered by the king of all paid opinion givers was for a trimmed card.

It's all been down hill from there, and anybody who ever thought it wasn't, well, they were / are delusional.

EVERY card EVER given a paid opinion is suspect.

Break out those kitchen knives (at least that's what I use) and get back to where this hobby was when (many (most?) of us) started, and before it was hijacked.

Each and every one of us who has paid for an opinion is part of the problem.

Doug "but maybe I'm completely wrong" Goodman

It started around the Copeland auction, right? Wasn't that auction full of trimmed cards besides the Wagner?

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It started around the Copeland auction, right? Wasn't that auction full of trimmed cards besides the Wagner?

No, it started the moment we started paying people for their opinions and then treating those opinions as gospel.

Actually, the opinions were never completely treated as gospel, because most of the card "deserved a better opinion" according to their sellers.

So even though nobody ever seemed to get an opinion as good as they deserved (by definition a bad opinion), they still continued paying for them.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

No, it started the moment we started paying people for their opinions and then treating those opinions as gospel.

Yes but you said let's get the hobby back where it was. I think where it was, was riddled with trimmed cards.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Yes but you said let's get the hobby back where it was. I think where it was, was riddled with trimmed cards.

Not sure which response is best :

1 - Which we didn't buy because we were buying the card instead of the opinion...

2 - oh, you mean like today (based on this thread)?

[Bram99]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

I'm not the peanut gallery.

I have plenty of soup, I just don't pay people for opinions on mine.

Everybody who has purchased a card in the last 20 years is effected by this issue, but anybody who is just now finding out about this issue must not have noticed that the very first paid opinion delivered by the king of all paid opinion givers was for a trimmed card.

It's all been down hill from there, and anybody who ever thought it wasn't, well, they were / are delusional.

EVERY card EVER given a paid opinion is suspect.

Break out those kitchen knives (at least that's what I use) and get back to where this hobby was when (many (most?) of us) started, and before it was hijacked.

Each and every one of us who has paid for an opinion is part of the problem.

Doug "but maybe I'm completely wrong" Goodman

Doug, solid post, but the scenario you suggest is farcical. The hobby is not going back to the good old days of having raw cards that may or may not have been altered anyway.

I agree that all cards in TPG holders are now more suspect than they were before. But come on - cracking all cards of my TPG cards out of their cases is going to do exactly what? There won't be much value in this purification ritual and it won't make them any more or less pure.

If the cards we have purchased with 3rd party opinions are trimmed/altered/conserved whatever you want to call it, then how will breaking them out of their holders fix anything? Will it somehow purify the cards? Are raw cards more pure and thus less prone to trimming, recoloring, or as PWCC calls some practices - conservation? While I am discouraged and feel that this fiasco cannot help but result in the diminution of the value of everyone's graded collections, I don't for a minute think that my cards would be worth more cracked out than not. I would bet that even though there will be a cloud over the TPG's opinions, a slabbed card will continue to carry a premium over a raw card because it has a better chance of being the grade shown than a raw card that looks like it might be.

Someday, either a new grading company or an existing grading company will come out with a process to remove the humans from the grading process and use optical scanning and CMM tools to measure card size. They might provide this service as an upgraded service alongside human opinions which will be viewed as less reliable but perhaps ok for lower priced, lower grade commons as an authentication option.

When that day comes, there will be a new class of graded cards whose value will exceed those of the human-graded slabbed cards of today's TPG's. I would expect that PSA will actually do this themselves to clean up their image but more importantly, open up a re-grading market for themselves. It will be like the after-market parts business is for cars. It will be more lucrative than the first wave of grading and it will cost them less.

In the process they will create another pool of over 3M cards that will be the target of their next money making endeavor - regrading their previously PSA human-graded cards, but with their new technology.

This will be the only reason that I can think of (other than to alter and resubmit or play the PSA lottery game of hoping for a bump up for a re-grade) that would result mass waves of people cracking out their cards from their holders.

Until that day, I will continue to use my kitchen knives to butter my biscuits.

Tony

[Beastmode]

Someday, either a new grading company or an existing grading company will come out with a process to remove the humans from the grading process and use optical scanning and CMM tools to measure card size. They might provide this service as an upgraded service alongside human opinions which will be viewed as less reliable but perhaps ok for lower priced, lower grade commons as an authentication option.

When that day comes, there will be a new class of graded cards whose value will exceed those of the human-graded slabbed cards of today's TPG's. I would expect that PSA will actually do this themselves to clean up their image but more importantly, open up a re-grading market for themselves. It will be like the after-market parts business is for cars. It will be more lucrative than the first wave of grading and it will cost them less.

In the process they will create another pool of over 3M cards that will be the target of their next money making endeavor - regrading their previously PSA human-graded cards, but with their new technology.

This will be the only reason that I can think of (other than to alter and resubmit or play the PSA lottery game of hoping for a bump up for a re-grade) that would result mass waves of people cracking out their cards from their holders.

Until that day, I will continue to use my kitchen knives to butter my biscuits.

Tony[/QUOTE]


And there you have it. We should just end this thread right here. We've come full circle to the ultimate motive of this entire debacle. A new high end grading service from PSA that will detect any form of alteration, conservation, trimming, etc., of any card, either raw or slabbed. Using state of the art technology and forensics, you can own a card that is as original as they day it was born.

[benjulmag]

It makes sense that if the technology exists to in a cost-effective way provide a significantly more reliable method of "grading" cards that it is just a matter of time before such a service is introduced to the market place.

Whether PSA would be the one to do it, that is another question. If it is PSA, that would be some spectacle -- PSA offering a new service that would put into plain view all the trimmed/altered cards that were missed by its old service. Just curious -- would a submitter be willing to pay a company for a service that shows that the company misgraded the card initially? In my view the reason many of the cards were misgraded initially was not because the old grading methods could not reasonably spot the alterations. They were initially misgraded because of sheer incompetence. So why then should someone have to pay the company to get it right the second time? And even if PSA would not demand the submitter pay if the re-grade established the initial grade was wrong, what about their warranty that accompanied the initial grade? I would think the first thing the submitter would do is demand PSA buy back the card. Then we would be getting into the whole mess of whether PSA would be required to make good on its warranty and the legal issues that could follow. In fact, the more I think about it, given this contingent liability, I question whether PSA would have any incentive to offer a more-technologically advanced grading service.

I continue to marvel at the spectacle of people caring little what was done to the card as long as the flip says what they want it to say. I'm trying to think of another "commodity" where the price is based not on what the commodity is but on what false branding says it is. An analogy would be the price of, say, gold being independent of whether the product being sold is real gold or gold-plated bronze. Maybe I am being naïve but I just can't believe the day will not come when such a superior grading service has become common-place and the market will demand that for a card to hold its value it will need to be re-graded by this new technology. Should that happen, I sure would not want to be an investor holding a long position in high-grade PSA vintage cards graded under the old method.

[Bram99]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

It makes sense that if the technology exists to in a cost-effective way provide a significantly more reliable method of "grading" cards that it is just a matter of time before such a service is introduced to the market place.

Whether PSA would be the one to do it, that is another question. If it is PSA, that would be some spectacle -- PSA offering a new service that would put into plain view all the trimmed/altered cards that were missed by its old service. Just curious -- would a submitter be willing to pay a company for a service that shows that the company misgraded the card initially? In my view the reason many of the cards were misgraded initially was not because the old grading methods could not reasonably spot the alterations. They were initially misgraded because of sheer incompetence. So why then should someone have to pay the company to get it right the second time? And even if PSA would not demand the submitter pay if the re-grade established the initial grade was wrong, what about their warranty that accompanied the initial grade? I would think the first thing the submitter would do is demand PSA buy back the card. Then we would be getting into the whole mess of whether PSA would be required to make good on its warranty and the legal issues that could follow. In fact, the more I think about it, given this contingent liability, I question whether PSA would have any incentive to offer a more-technologically advanced grading service? .

Collectors Universe can simply start or invest in a competing company with better technology that is separate and avoid the need to refund original people duped by owning cards incorrectly graded by PSA. A great way to hedge their bets. Premiums for PSA opinions should fall no doubt.

[griffon512]

"Someday, either a new grading company or an existing grading company will come out with a process to remove the humans from the grading process and use optical scanning and CMM tools to measure card size. They might provide this service as an upgraded service alongside human opinions which will be viewed as less reliable but perhaps ok for lower priced, lower grade commons as an authentication option."

Size among vintage cards should not be the sole determinant of whether a card is trimmed. There are many oversized vintage cards that are trimmed and many undersized vintage cards that are not trimmed versus a given set's standard size. Obviously an undersized card is more likely to be trimmed than a non-undersized card. The fact that all the statements above are true means that technology alone can not determine whether size was reduced post-production. That means that the likelihood a grading company will introduce a grading technology that will change many numerical grades to authentic based on size -- and presumably guarantee the loss in value of the card -- is extremely low. Common sense and anecdotal evidence reinforces that a large percentage of high grade pre-WWII cards are altered. That should not be a surprise to any knowledgeable person in the hobby. There will always be a cloud of uncertainty over the hobby, as is the case with most collectibles. It's up to each person how much they want to rely on faith versus certainty in what they buy. Until now -- and I don't see this changing much -- faith has trumped certainty.

[ullmandds]

I was thinking about this the other day...what I think should be done is a catalogue/resourse of every type of card ever made should be created using cards most likely known to be in their original state. Cards from the burdick collection for example can be used. High res macro photos/scans of all aspects of the card...especially the appearance of the edges...cut, color, patina from aging.

Then this resource should be used as the definitive for grading/evaluating cards as to whether they were trimmed.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by griffon512

"Someday, either a new grading company or an existing grading company will come out with a process to remove the humans from the grading process and use optical scanning and CMM tools to measure card size. They might provide this service as an upgraded service alongside human opinions which will be viewed as less reliable but perhaps ok for lower priced, lower grade commons as an authentication option."

Size among vintage cards should not be the sole determinant of whether a card is trimmed. There are many oversized vintage cards that are trimmed and many undersized vintage cards that are not trimmed versus a given set's standard size. Obviously an undersized card is more likely to be trimmed than a non-undersized card. The fact that all the statements above are true means that technology alone can not determine whether size was reduced post-production. That means that the likelihood a grading company will introduce a grading technology that will change many numerical grades to authentic based on size -- and presumably guarantee the loss in value of the card -- is extremely low. Common sense and anecdotal evidence reinforces that a large percentage of high grade pre-WWII cards are altered. That should not be a surprise to any knowledgeable person in the hobby. There will always be a cloud of uncertainty over the hobby, as is the case with most collectibles. It's up to each person how much they want to rely on faith versus certainty in what they buy. Until now -- and I don't see this changing much -- faith has trumped certainty.

+1

And it's my opinion that the trimmed cards are being stretched prior to trimming, so they're being trimmed down to what the card should actually measure. A computer or machine will never be able to distinguish the difference between a card that's been trimmed and one that hasn't based on the size of the card alone. It goes back to what I was saying just a couple posts above. People want to rely on someone or something else to do it for them because they're too damn laze to educate themselves. Sad really.

[LOUCARDFAN]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

+1

And it's my opinion that the trimmed cards are being stretched prior to trimming, so they're being trimmed down to what the card should actually measure. A computer or machine will never be able to distinguish the difference between a card that's been trimmed and one that hasn't based on the size of the card alone. It goes back to what I was saying just a couple posts above. People want to rely on someone or something else to do it for them because they're too damn laze to educate themselves. Sad really.

Yes, lots of people are uneducated these days when it comes to raw cards but this isn't the golden days where most card purchases were made where you could actually hold the card in your hand and examine it BEFORE buying it.

How many purchases has one made with the actual card in hand to examine before purchasing in the last 10-15 years? Probably, not many with the exception of the National and other shows.

Card grading was a great idea that was greatly needed with internet trading being what it has been for the last 20-25 years but then the greed took over and what could have been good thing for the hobby, just gave some a license to print money.

[Peter_Spaeth]

My guiding rules. I feel like Satchel Paige lol.

1. Avoid sellers you don't trust.
2. Use VCP to make sure cards didn't originate with sellers you don't trust.
3. Don't buy cards that look short.
4. Don't buy cards if your first reaction is to question whether they're altered. Trust the unconscious reaction.
5. Don't buy high grade pre-war.
6. Past a certain value threshold, for 50s cards don't buy anything over a 7, and for 60s cards don't buy anything over an 8. And even there, consider 6s and 7s.
7. Don't pay huge premiums for perfect centering.

[Leon]

I get why you said it but number 7 is blasphemy. Just make sure the borders are big AND thick.

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

My guiding rules. I feel like Satchel Paige lol.

1. Avoid sellers you don't trust.
2. Use VCP to make sure cards didn't originate with sellers you don't trust.
3. Don't buy cards that look short.
4. Don't buy cards if your first reaction is to question whether they're altered. Trust the unconscious reaction.
5. Don't buy high grade pre-war.
6. Past a certain value threshold, for 50s cards don't buy anything over a 7, and for 60s cards don't buy anything over an 8. And even there, consider 6s and 7s.
7. Don't pay huge premiums for perfect centering.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Me too. Many did. But the depth and breadth is more astonishing than I had anticipated it would be, to say the least.

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

I'm not the peanut gallery.

I have plenty of soup, I just don't pay people for opinions on mine.

Everybody who has purchased a card in the last 20 years is effected by this issue, but anybody who is just now finding out about this issue must not have noticed that the very first paid opinion delivered by the king of all paid opinion givers was for a trimmed card.

It's all been down hill from there, and anybody who ever thought it wasn't, well, they were / are delusional.

EVERY card EVER given a paid opinion is suspect.

Break out those kitchen knives (at least that's what I use) and get back to where this hobby was when (many (most?) of us) started, and before it was hijacked.

Each and every one of us who has paid for an opinion is part of the problem.

Doug "but maybe I'm completely wrong" Goodman

Doug "but Maybe I'm 50-50" Goodman...

[ALR-bishop]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

I'm not the peanut gallery.

I have plenty of soup, I just don't pay people for opinions on mine.

Everybody who has purchased a card in the last 20 years is effected by this issue, but anybody who is just now finding out about this issue must not have noticed that the very first paid opinion delivered by the king of all paid opinion givers was for a trimmed card.

It's all been down hill from there, and anybody who ever thought it wasn't, well, they were / are delusional.

EVERY card EVER given a paid opinion is suspect.

Break out those kitchen knives (at least that's what I use) and get back to where this hobby was when (many (most?) of us) started, and before it was hijacked.

Each and every one of us who has paid for an opinion is part of the problem.

Doug "but maybe I'm completely wrong" Goodman

Doug--This and a small irrigation screw driver takes 10 seconds. Safer than a kitchen knife