1952 Bowman Stan Musial PSA 10 on eBay :o

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

Back to the Musial, this is why I am really suspicious of PSA's involvement. It seems to me incredibly unlikely that someone would take a PSA 9 of a vintage superstar and doctor it in "hopes" of a 10, thereby risking discovery of the alteration by the TPG and a tanking in value. And who knows if you get the 10 even if you're not caught, that grade being so subjective. IMO, the only way you take that chance is if you are cock-sure you are going to beat the grader or if you somehow know that you will.

+1. Who the hell has balls big enough to take a 9 of a fairly big time card/player and alter it hoping for a 10. Even if he knew for sure that you could successfully make all the alterations without detection, what makes him think he wood get a 10 when there none previous. HUGE balls or the fix was in from the getgo. This one seems to indicate the latter

Edited - I just read all the posts after the quote. I do believe the Doctor could make a business risk-reward proposition on $3k - the ups are worth the downs. The problem is there were NO/ZERO 10’s previously. Risking $3k to get an 8x multiple return makes sense. But not when the historical odds of achieving that goal is nil. I guess there always could be a first, but shouldn’t that have alerted psa? All these 52 Musials graded and never a 10 and then one just comes out of nowhere?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

+1. Who the hell has balls big enough to take a 9 of a fairly big time card/player and alter it hoping for a 10. Even if he knew for sure that you could successfully make all the alterations without detection, what makes him think he wood get a 10 when there none previous. HUGE balls or the fix was in from the getgo. This one seems to indicate the latter

It takes no balls at all for someone with hundreds of thousands of dollars in cards and probably millions in the bank to take a gamble on a 3K card, with a huge upside. You can't see that?

[Bicem]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It takes no balls at all for someone with hundreds of thousands of dollars in cards and probably millions in the bank to take a gamble on a 3K card, with a huge upside. You can't see that?

Exactly, plus if it comes back a 9 he's lost nothing.

[swarmee]

Actually, at a 9, it probably still goes higher after the touchups. He's made a lot of profit on cards that stayed the same technical grade if you check the thread on Blowout, just by improving the centering or eye appeal.

[japhi]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Actually, at a 9, it probably still goes higher after the touchups. He's made a lot of profit on cards that stayed the same technical grade if you check the thread on Blowout, just by improving the centering or eye appeal.

Yes, his auction partner throws a HE sticker on it and rally’s his big time buyers to run up the price, with Moser playing shill. Even a 9 likely ends with big profit. Thats a big part of the racket, the auctioneer is not impartial. He is coaching buyers, would be fascinating to see the bid history on the cards Moser buys vs those he sells, and analyze for bid history / retractions etc

[Steve D]

I just noticed something:

If you look at the scan of the PSA 9 from 10 years ago (Heritage), the white spot on Stan's left sleeve is NOT there. This matches with the PSA 10 scan.

So, on the scan from 2017 of the reholdered PSA 9, the visible white spot must simply be a speck of dust either on the slab, or on the scanner.

It would be interesting to know if the black dot in the left upper front border of the card is actually there on the PSA 10. Some scanners, depending on the setting, are known to automatically take out extraneous dots, due to their auto-correct functions.

Steve

[PiratesWS1979]

Originally Posted by Steve D

I just noticed something:

If you look at the scan of the PSA 9 from 10 years ago (Heritage), the white spot on Stan's left sleeve is NOT there. This matches with the PSA 10 scan.

So, on the scan from 2017 of the reholdered PSA 9, the visible white spot must simply be a speck of dust either on the slab, or on the scanner.

It would be interesting to know if the black dot in the left upper front border of the card is actually there on the PSA 10. Some scanners, depending on the setting, are known to automatically take out extraneous dots, due to their auto-correct functions.

Steve

Here's 3.5X, the black dot is barely visible while there's and extra one lower

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by Bicem

Exactly, plus if it comes back a 9 he's lost nothing.

True!! It did not occur to me it could come back something other than a 10 or altered (but I am not that smart to begin with!). And I guess if it comes back altered, or a 8 or 9, he cracks a resubmits, over and over until he gets the 10 or gives up. Perhaps that is what happened.

Ok Peter, I am convinced. It’s not PSA on this one; at least they were not knowingly involved.

[MULLINS5]

When you're making money this easy, $3k ain't nothing to roll the dice on. My money is on PSA NOT being a knowing party to the fraud.

[Bpm0014]

He only has to make it work 1 time in 8 for this to pay off.

"Pot odds..."

[sportscardtheory]

Some rose-colored glasses up in here. The core reason for PSA and BGS' existance is keeping their customers safe from fraud. lol 'This is fine' comes to mind. As if these companies will police themselves.