Poll: response to recent PWCC revelations

[HRBAKER]

So if you decide to stop or not start doing business with someone bc you believe they engage in conduct detrimental to the "hobby," you are "self-righteous" because there has always been misconduct going on?

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

So if you decide to stop or not start doing business with someone bc you believe they engage in conduct detrimental to the "hobby," you are "self-righteous" because there has always been misconduct going on?

That seems to be his logic. That and he says be careful in this hobby, but if you are he's laughing at you.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

So if you decide to stop or not start doing business with someone bc you believe they engage in conduct detrimental to the "hobby," you are "self-righteous" because there has always been misconduct going on?

It sounds good to say I won't bid on PWCC cards. It is noble to put ethics above the pursuit of cards. That said I am not boycotting any one seller because the same risk exists everywhere.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

It sounds good to say I won't bid on PWCC cards. It is noble to put ethics above the pursuit of cards. That said I am not boycotting any one seller because the same risk exists everywhere.

Thank you, then they aren't all self-righteous.

Also, based on what appears to have been going on I would not agree that the same level of risk exists everywhere.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Thank you, then they aren't all self-righteous.

Also, based on what appears to have been going on I would not agree that the same level of risk exists everywhere.

I hope you're right Jeff but my thinking is that the nature of the search being done on BO is, understandably, skewed to one relationship which left an easier to follow paper trail. I think lots of venues are high risk depending on material.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I hope you're right Jeff but my thinking is that the nature of the search being done on BO is, understandably, skewed to one relationship which left an easier to follow paper trail. I think lots of venues are high risk depending on material.

Peter I could be all wet. Wouldn't be the first time.

I think that at the end of the day what we are going to see is that even a lot of the people who "know" don't care.
As long as the slab maintains its "air" of legitimacy and can be conveyed in a subsequent transaction if desired - nothing to see here.

Give the people what they want.
A lot of people have made a lot of money doing just that.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Peter I could be all wet. Wouldn't be the first time.

You're certainly correct that particular venue is dangerous. And has been, it's nothing new.

And yeah, there is no question a lot of people don't care. The flip sanitizes.

[frankbmd]

If the colonists had only consigned their tea to PWCC, requiring buyers to store it in the vault, according to the tenets, the Boston Tea Party could have been averted. Now that’s a revolutionary idea. Enjoy your tea.

[SMPEP]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

It sounds good to say I won't bid on PWCC cards. It is noble to put ethics above the pursuit of cards. That said I am not boycotting any one seller because the same risk exists everywhere.

No, actually it isn't.

Is there risk everywhere? Yes

Is it the same level of risk at every source? No.

You have one AH that has been proven to deal with altered material at a much higher rate than every other AH. At least to date that is what the evidence shows.

So it ain't noble to stop bidding. It's just prudent.

Now are you right that when folks stop bidding at PWCC, this stuff will just turn up in other AHs? Yes, I think you are. But that isn't the world we live in today. In the world today, there is a different level of risk buying from PWCC than other AHs.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

No, actually it isn't.

Is there risk everywhere? Yes

Is it the same level of risk at every source? No.

You have one AH that has been proven to deal with altered material at a much higher rate than every other AH. At least to date that is what the evidence shows.

So it ain't noble to stop bidding. It's just prudent.

Now are you right that when folks stop bidding at PWCC, this stuff will just turn up in other AHs? Yes, I think you are. But that isn't the world we line in today. In the world today, there is a different level of risk buying from PWCC than other AHs.

So let me get this straight. From what I read you think that the other auction houses would have declined some of these bigger vintage cards.

Is this correct?

I fall on the side that they would have accepted them and so many of these cards can be sold anywhere. They have over 8,000 listings this auction. That is a ton of cards. Many of the cards that have been sold in their auctions turn over again somewhere else.

[SMPEP]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

So let me get this straight. From what I read you think that the other auction houses would have declined some of these bigger vintage cards.

Is this correct?

I fall on the side that they would have accepted them and so many of these cards can be sold anywhere. They have over 8,000 listings this auction. That is a ton of cards. Many of the cards that have been sold in their auctions turn over again somewhere else.

And your comment is relevant how? Who cares what other AHs MIGHT have done?

You said that risk of fraud exists everywhere.

I agree. It does.

But not at the same level.

In the world we live in today, one (and only one) source has been identified for selling altered material.

Have other sources done it? Sure, I bet they have.

But there is a large body of evidence against one AH, and no significant body of evidence against the others.

To say the risk is the same from both sources is flat out wrong.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

And your comment is relevant how? Who cares what other AHs MIGHT have done?

You said that risk of fraud exists everywhere.

I agree. It does.

But not at the same level.

In the world we live in today, one (and only one) source has been identified for selling altered material.

Have other sources done it? Sure, I bet they have.

But there is a large body of evidence against one AH, and no significant body of evidence against the others.

To say the risk is the same from both sources is flat out wrong.

No.

You obviously don't understand how risk works. The same cards can be sold anywhere so the risk is just the same.

So many cards trade on the private market that could have gone to PWCC or were on their way.

At the National this year there will be many cards that were bought through PWCC auctions I would bet.

[SMPEP]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

No.

You obviously don't understand how risk works. The same cards can be sold anywhere so the risk is just the same.

So many cards trade on the private market that could have gone to PWCC or were on their way.

At the National this year there will be many cards that were bought through PWCC auctions I would bet.

Okay, it seems I need to dumb this down for you.

You're going to spend $10K on merchandise (say a used car instead of a baseball card).

Who do you buy from?

Someone who might be a thief or someone who has been arrested for theft?

If you truly think the risk of being defrauded is the same from both sources - there are a lot of people who want your name and phone number.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

And your comment is relevant how? Who cares what other AHs MIGHT have done?

You said that risk of fraud exists everywhere.

I agree. It does.

But not at the same level.

In the world we live in today, one (and only one) source has been identified for selling altered material.

Have other sources done it? Sure, I bet they have.

But there is a large body of evidence against one AH, and no significant body of evidence against the others.

To say the risk is the same from both sources is flat out wrong.

More assumptions and opinions stated as though they're facts. How do you know the risk isn't the same other places, or even worse? What if these guys on blowout are only reviewing cards from PWCC auctions and no where else? We will most likely never know the exact extent of the alterations, or any specific auction house's involvement.

You can assume and believe whatever you want, just as we all can. And it may turn out that more of the cards sold on PWCC were altered than those sold other places. But to say that's been proven at this point is flat out wrong.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

More assumptions and opinions stated as though they're facts. How do you know the risk isn't the same other places, or even worse? What if these guys on blowout are only reviewing cards from PWCC auctions and no where else? We will most likely never know the exact extent of the alterations, or any specific auction house's involvement.

You can assume and believe whatever you want, just as well all can. And it may turn out that more of the cards sold on PWCC were altered than those sold other places. But to say that's been proven at this point is flat out wrong.

That's where the initial focus has been (at least on the vintage side) because the whitman111/PWCC relationship left an easy paper trail to follow. Yes the results are horrifying, but it doesn't mean there aren't other equally bad venues that are going to be much more difficult to trace without cert numbers from the TPGs. The reality is that lots of card doctors have altered shitloads of cards for decades and have placed them in many many venues. That does not, in any way, minimize what PWCC has done here. And I am glad to see them come into focus for what they are, believe me.