1952 Bowman Stan Musial PSA 10 on eBay :o

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Bram99

I refuse to believe that someone would take the chance to have the card cracked out, found to be altered, and turn from a "9" to "authentic" with the corresponding loss in more than 90% of it's value. The poster is dead accurate here. This is the best sign I have seen yet that this was not just Moser/PWCC but that there had to be a third actor of some kind.

Yes. Coupled with the comment someone else made, that politics might be involved with getting 10s. Way too much downside to try this in a "normal" way....

But I wonder what the mechanics could be, to see a card like this shepherded through the system end to end. That part still seems implausible.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Yes. Coupled with the comment someone else made, that politics might be involved with getting 10s. Way too much downside to try this in a "normal" way....

But I wonder what the mechanics could be, to see a card like this shepherded through the system end to end. That part still seems implausible.

Downside only exists relative to upside. You guys are not seeing how this man operates. He risked 3K. He made 25K. 3K is a trivial risk to him. Context.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Downside only exists relative to upside. You guys are not seeing how this man operates.

You are correct Peter.

I have thrown 3k at a trade that had two days until the option expired. A ticking time bomb. He clearly had asymmetric risk here. It appears more that he has confidence in his work and isn't concerned about getting rendered with the AUTH grade or it staying there.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

You are correct Peter.

I have thrown 3k at a trade that had two days until the option expired. A ticking time bomb. He clearly had asymmetric risk here. It appears more that he has confidence in his work and isn't concerned about getting rendered with the AUTH grade or it staying there.

He made 25K from a 3K purchase which he could afford easily to blow up. Even with a relatively low chance of success it's an obvious gamble to take. He has 20 years of experience and knows his chances. Nothing to see.

[Mark17]

1390 of these things have been graded, and until this one, zero achieved a 10. I can see risking $3k for a possible $25k - I understand the concept - but the odds would have to be a little better to make it a good play. Here we're talking about trying to achieve a grade that had never been given for this card in the history of PSA.

I generally agree, it looks like what appears to have happened, happened. But I base that on not being able to see how any grading manipulation could have taken this card through the process, not on the smartness of the play.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

1390 of these things have been graded, and until this one, zero achieved a 10. I can see risking $3k for a possible $25k - I understand the concept - but the odds would have to be a little better to make it a good play. Here we're talking about trying to achieve a grade that had never been given for this card in the history of PSA.

I generally agree, it looks like what appears to have happened, happened. But I base that on not being able to see how any grading manipulation could have taken this card through the process, not on the smartness of the play.

If he had an inside grader at PSA, he could make an incredible fortune just doing reviews, he wouldn't have to alter cards at all. He obviously has a tremendous eye, and he is an expert at 52 Bowmans by reputation, he probably saw one he thought might finally be the one and went with the opportunity.

[CuriousGeorge]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If he had an inside grader at PSA, he could make an incredible fortune just doing reviews, he wouldn't have to alter cards at all. He obviously has a tremendous eye, and he is an expert at 52 Bowmans by reputation, he probably saw one he thought might finally be the one and went with the opportunity.

Peter, would you mind writing this question down so when he’s under oath we don’t forget to ask him?

[barrysloate]

I'm going with the nobody risks a 9 to try and get a 10. I don't think there is a single collector/submitter who can even tell you what the difference is. To me the only way you get a 10 is if the grader feels like giving it a 10. I smell something fishy too.

You might risk a 5 to get a 6, or a 6 to get an 8, because each of those cards has a flaw that can be improved. But a 9 is flawless. If you had a 9 and a magic wand to change it, what would you even attempt to do to make it better?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I'm going with the nobody risks a 9 to try and get a 10. I don't think there is a single collector/submitter who can even tell you what the difference is. To me the only way you get a 10 is if the grader feels like giving it a 10. I smell something fishy too.

You might risk a 5 to get a 6, or a 6 to get an 8, because each of those cards has a flaw that can be improved. But a 9 is flawless. If you had a 9 and a magic wand to change it, what would you even attempt to do to make it better?

Look what he DID do in this case, why speculate? There are before and after pics on BO. I give up, Dave and I seem to be the only ones posting who understand this in context.

[Dpeck100]

It seems like there are more white specs in the after pic on his sleeve right by his wrist.

Anyone else see that?

[CuriousGeorge]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Look what he DID do in this case, why speculate? There are before and after pics on BO. I give up, Dave and I seem to be the only ones posting who understand this in context.

Peter, without question you are correct. Any loss is meaningless in this context and I’m sure he has lost plenty. He has such made up on many more.

[nolemmings]

That's one explanation Peter, but I'm not buying it here. At most you’ve explained the submitter’s motivation, but it doesn’t eliminate or even reduce the likelihood of the TPG involvement, which is why I stay suspicious.

PSA knows, or with an eye-blink's worth of investigation can learn that there are no graded tens of this 67 year old card depicting one of the most popular players collected. Now it comes to the grader in the course of his mundane, look at hundreds of cards for for a few seconds each day, and he says, hey neat, we got ourselves a 10. Strange that we only hand out that highest grade to about a 10th of one percent of the cards submitted from that set, but wow, somehow this card just pops. No need for extra scrutiny just because this is one of the keys to the set, and I live in a bubble so I have no idea what my grade might mean to the owner financially, so let's just slap a 10 on this bad boy.

Now of course it could be that several graders and even an upper mgmt type look at cards this valuable before they get slabbed, if only because of potential liability in the event of a mistake. In that case, they are not necessarily a knowing participant in fraud, just grossly incompetent. But I believe it is folly to dismiss their potential involvement just because you’ve concluded the submitter has money or cards to burn and would of course take the risk of eating a few thousand here and there.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Look what he DID do in this case, why speculate? There are before and after pics on BO. I give up, Dave and I seem to be the only ones posting who understand this in context.

I just looked at the pictures on BO again, and the before and after look identical. Can anybody discern what was done to the 9 to improve it? My eyes aren't perfect, but they look the same to me.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I just looked at the pictures on BO again, and the before and after look identical. Can anybody discern what was done to the 9 to improve it? My eyes aren't perfect, but they look the same to me.

Yes, they analyzed the recoloring over there.

[swarmee]

Colored print dot on front left border white.
Colored some of the red line on shoulder red to fill gaps.
Colored the whitish spot on the sleeve blue to match.
Colored the gap in the bottom right of the A on back in black to hide.

As well as, the PSA 9 might have also been altered prior to because it doesn't have either left or right edge with a rough cut, which would seem to indicate it was trimmed or sheet cut.

[japhi]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Look what he DID do in this case, why speculate? There are before and after pics on BO. I give up, Dave and I seem to be the only ones posting who understand this in context.

I agree with you and would add his risk is much less then the 9 to altered value delta. If PSA kills it, it goes to SGC then BVG then back to PSA. Guy has altered thousands of cards and has enough data to know what his chance is of it slipping through, somewhere. He knows they consistently miss these types of alterations. I mean these guys are getting 52 mantles through, its incompetence at the TPG IMO

[mark evans]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Look what he DID do in this case, why speculate? There are before and after pics on BO. I give up, Dave and I seem to be the only ones posting who understand this in context.

I agree with Peter. I don't think this implicates PSA.

I agree with Barry on another point. The difference between a '9' and '10' is largely subjective, except maybe as to centering. Like Barry, I have never understood the enormous difference in values at the high end.

[MULLINS5]

Brent actually owned/owns a separate business restoring antiques.

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by mark evans

I agree with Peter. I don't think this implicates PSA.

Except they're supposed to be experts at authentication.