FS: 1948 Leaf Jackie Robinson PSA 4.5

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

I promised to provide an update and just heard back from PSA today.

I sent the card via prepaid fedex to Jackie who informed me that she gave the card blind to their head grader (no knowledge of the evidence provided in the blowout link). The grader measured the card and looked for evidence of trim or alteration and found none. Jackie then gave the grader the link to the evidence which she said was reviewed by the grader. Upon 2nd inspection by the same grader, Jackie informs me that they still didn't find evidence of alteration or trimming and are standing by the 4.5 grade. They validated the cert # and took scans for their records. As is PSA practice, Jackie tells me they don't give written acknowledgment of the review but she says my account will reflect the review (which I have provided here).

I have no plans to sell the card in the immediate future, but the question I think now is that I'll need to include the "story" of the card to whomever might someday purchase and let them decide.

[Bicem]

So PSA can't detect trimming even when shown said trimming.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Man. Not surprised, I guess, but it sure seemed a clear cut case. Meet the new boss. (riff) Same as the old boss. (riff)

AJ, I don't suppose you know if Reza reviewed it?

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Man. Not surprised, I guess, but it sure seemed a clear cut case. Meet the new boss. (riff) Same as the old boss. (riff)

AJ, I don't suppose you know if Reza reviewed it?

PSA won't get fooled again (loud riff)

[dio]

FBI can't and won't do anything about it.
it's PSA and grading company's opinion, and you agree when you send the card to them. It's THEIR OPINION not you and everyone else opinion

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by dio

FBI can't and won't do anything about it.
it's PSA and grading company's opinion, and you agree when you send the card to them. It's THEIR OPINION not you and everyone else opinion

Agree I’ve been saying this for months. PSA has Done ZERO NOTHING CLOSE THAT RISES TO CRIMINAL...IT’s just their opinion, nothing more nothing less.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Agree I’ve been saying this for months. PSA has Done ZERO NOTHING CLOSE THAT RISES TO CRIMINAL...IT’s just their opinion, nothing more nothing less.

Bill Hughes has been quoted as saying he and everyone else in the room KNEW the Wagner was trimmed (not to mention sheet cut in the first place). It is slabbed an 8. Is that "just their opinion"?

Again, suppose some of their "opinions" were not genuinely held?

The evidence may not be there to support a criminal charge, but that's an entirely different question from are there circumstances in which they could be criminally culpable for rendering an "opinion."

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Agree I’ve been saying this for months. PSA has Done ZERO NOTHING CLOSE THAT RISES TO CRIMINAL...IT’s just their opinion, nothing more nothing less.

I'm going to respectfully disagree with this statement as calling something an opinion in and of itself does not absolve the issuer of criminal liability if it can be shown it was issued knowing it was false and people would rely on it to their detriment. Admittedly proving this criminal intent would be difficult, as the issuer can reply that it is no crime to be stupid. So given these challenges I can understand how the FBI might feel its resources are better spent pursuing other matters.

IMO the matter from the civil perspective is materially different. Underlying the PSA guaranty will be a duty for PSA to act in good faith. They wrote the guaranty and inasmuch as it does not contain a phrase such as "in our sole and absolute discretion", a court would likely find the opinion must be reasonably given, which is an objective standard. Hypothetically, if I owned say, a million dollars of PSA 8s and 9s T206s that I bought in good faith believing the cards to be unaltered, and I later learned that Blowout had exposed all those cards to be altered (thereby destroying their market value), I sure as heck would pursue a civil action against PSA if they did not make good on the guaranty. Sure they may say they disagree with Blowout's conclusions and stand by their original assessment. But will a jury believe them after having been instructed to base its verdict on what a reasonable and unbiased person, upon having been presented with the evidence of trimming, would conclude. On top of that I would introduce evidence to establish that PSA's contingent liabilities materially exceed their net worth, which would make a trier of fact more likely to conclude (by the civil standard of preponderance of the evidence) PSA did not act in good faith in not making good on the guaranty.

You will note that in my example I explicitly stated that Blowout's outing of the cards destroyed their market value, thus incentivizing me to take the matter to court. This to me is the key as to whether such a suit will ever take place, given the enormous expense to do so. Right now I suspect there are many people who own altered cards who believe they are altered. But as long as the cards hold their value, these people will see no reason to sue. But should the day come when at least one of these persons (or funds) has reason to believe the cards they are holding are so tainted as to have lost much of their value, then at that point I believe we may see a serious lawsuit. I believe the risk may be particularly high in the case of funds that have invested in such cards. These funds owe a fiduciary duty to their investors, and I can foresee an instance where it might feel it has no choice but to try to invoke the guaranty.

The key consideration to me in this discussion is my simple belief the emperor has no clothes. I believe the overwhelming majority of experienced collectors know there is no way there can be such great numbers of 8s and higher of certain vintage issues in circulation, cards that were produced when cards had no value and no one would have taken the care to preserve them in a way such as to maintain an 8 or higher condition. Consider for example the T206 Wagner, a card if ever one existed that one would surmise a person would have taken more care to preserve due to its perceived scarcity. None (that are untrimmed and were issued in cigarette packs) are believed to exist in better than a generally excellent condition. The few at the top of the totem pole, whose provenance suggest their original owners knew at the time of their importance, none of them would grade higher than a 5, 5.5 tops. To me at least that has to say something as to how cards of that vintage were preserved.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

the question I think now is that I'll need to include the "story" of the card to whomever might someday purchase and let them decide.

That would be appropriate. Do unto others and whatnot. I bet you'd still realize full price on it.

[perezfan]

By being in complete denial (and trying to limit their own liability), PSA continues to create a huge credibility problem for the hobby.

Sure, AJ can sell the card with full disclosure. Very commendable on his part.

But what about the next seller. And how about the seller after that? At what point does the card change hands without any proper disclosure? There is absolutely no doubt that this altered card will remain in circulation with zero disclosure at some point in time. Someone will ultimately get burned for many thousands of dollars.

A huge disservice to the hobby, courtesy of PSA. The fact that they can ignore obvious "before and after" evidence doesn't surprise me in the least. But it is still a self-serving and bitter disappointment.

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

but the question I think now is that I'll need to include the "story" of the card to whomever might someday purchase and let them decide.

Lawsuit? Create a go fund me page, I will kick in significantly.

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Lawsuit? Create a go fund me page, I will kick in significantly.

To force a clearly necessary independent opinionwhich at best I imagine would prove that they "got it wrong" - I imagine it would be much harder to prove it was done as a perpetration of fraud to limit their liability. Any attorneys care to chime in?

This is the equivalent of asking the Fox with wool around his mouth if he ate the sheep he was guarding and taking his word for it when he responds no!

[benjulmag]

No surprise to me at least that PSA would not accept evidence of trimming by Blowout. What would be the implications if they did? IMO PSA's contingent liabilities grossly exceed their net worth given the amount of altered cards that have received grades. The problem is proving that such as to be legally able to invoke their guarantee. So if PSA were to concede that evidence of trimming by Blowout in and of itself requires it to make good on their guarantee, that concession could have significant adverse financial consequences.

EDITED TO ADD that regardless what Blowout did or did not find, the notion that a company will objectively evaluate whether it needs to make good on a guarantee is unrealistic. The entire concept behind the legitimacy of TPG is based on the principle that the grading company has no economic stake in the outcome. So we are to believe that a TPG will objectively evaluate that it made a mistake, the consequences of which will be to trigger a significant financial liability? Your Kool-Aid better be pretty strong to swallow that one.

[AGuinness]

Thanks for the update, AJ.
Sad to see it go this way, but not at all unexpected. Remember that "interview" of Brent at PWCC a couple years ago when he argued that if alterations couldn't be detected then there shouldn't be a problem (I'm certainly paraphrasing)? I think he called it "restoration" rather than alteration. Seems like the hobby has clearly hit that unfortunate target. I don't believe that PSA is involved in a conspiracy about this, just that they actually cannot detect the alterations of this card and so many many more.
Does anyone know of a serial numbered card that BODA has outed and then was reviewed by the TPG that graded it and revised it's assessment to acknowledge the alteration(s), or standing by the assessment? I know BODA has found a number of serial numbered cards like this and it would be tougher to question their discoveries as it is iron clad going to be the same card.

[Peter_Spaeth]

This is really a new low the more I think about it == to be clear, PSA and the giant middle finger it just gave the hobby.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This is really a new low the more I think about it == to be clear, PSA and the giant middle finger it just gave the hobby.

Not a new low, just another day at the orifice, I mean office.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

No surprise to me at least that PSA would not accept evidence of trimming by Blowout. What would be the implications if they did? IMO PSA's contingent liabilities grossly exceed their net worth given the amount of altered cards that have received grades. The problem is proving that such as to be legally able to invoke their guarantee. So if PSA were to concede that evidence of trimming by Blowout in and of itself requires it to make good on their guarantee, that concession could have significant adverse financial consequences.

EDITED TO ADD that regardless what Blowout did or did not find, the notion that a company will objectively evaluate whether it needs to make good on a guarantee is unrealistic. The entire concept behind the legitimacy of TPG is based on the principle that the grading company has no economic stake in the outcome. So we are to believe that a TPG will objectively evaluate that it made a mistake, the consequences of which will be to trigger a significant financial liability? Your Kool-Aid better be pretty strong to swallow that one.

Yup. When it costs you 20K to admit you were wrong, and there are no consequences to insisting you were right even if you were wrong, which do you pick?

I would guess this was not really left to the judgment of a grader. Or the grader was smart enough to know what he was supposed to conclude.

[dariushou]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Lawsuit? Create a go fund me page, I will kick in significantly.

I second this. I'm sure others will, too.

[swarmee]

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1457965

Interesting that PSA is now cracking down on cards previously submitted through them that they have visual evidence of being graded before. Wonder if this is only for serial numbered cards, and currently only certain grading levels are getting scanned by PSA.
Nat Turner has also responded to a thread or two on Blowout calling out PSA for doing their customers wrong, however, he has smartly stayed out of any thread having to do with their inability or complicity in the altered cards scandal.

[Peter_Spaeth]

He understands that the vast majority of the hobby doesn't care.

If they say it isn't trimmed, it isn't trimmed. Even if it is.

If I say it's safe to surf this beach, it's safe to surf this beach.

Ipse dixit or whatever the figure of speech is.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by swarmee

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1457965

Interesting that PSA is now cracking down on cards previously submitted through them that they have visual evidence of being graded before. Wonder if this is only for serial numbered cards, and currently only certain grading levels are getting scanned by PSA.
Nat Turner has also responded to a thread or two on Blowout calling out PSA for doing their customers wrong, however, he has smartly stayed out of any thread having to do with their inability or complicity in the altered cards scandal.

To me this denial despite being shown before and after is enough to push them over the line into complicit.

But they'll skate on this like they do with everything, because all that matters is "value added"

SGC is the same.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by steve B

To me this denial despite being shown before and after is enough to push them over the line into complicit.

But they'll skate on this like they do with everything, because all that matters is "value added"

SGC is the same.

Excellent point. Even though we've long suspected PSA's complicity and favoritism towards "preferred" customers.... This is now hard evidence that they not only misidentified an altered card, but also shunned iron-clad evidence that the card is altered.

At a bare minimum, they are in violation of their so called "guarantee". More accurately however, this categorizes them as purveyors of fraud.

I know there are thousands of similar corrupt instances, but really hope the FBI is all over this particular one (as the stakes are far higher with this case).

[jad22]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

I promised to provide an update and just heard back from PSA today.

I sent the card via prepaid fedex to Jackie who informed me that she gave the card blind to their head grader (no knowledge of the evidence provided in the blowout link). The grader measured the card and looked for evidence of trim or alteration and found none. Jackie then gave the grader the link to the evidence which she said was reviewed by the grader. Upon 2nd inspection by the same grader, Jackie informs me that they still didn't find evidence of alteration or trimming and are standing by the 4.5 grade. They validated the cert # and took scans for their records. As is PSA practice, Jackie tells me they don't give written acknowledgment of the review but she says my account will reflect the review (which I have provided here).

I have no plans to sell the card in the immediate future, but the question I think now is that I'll need to include the "story" of the card to whomever might someday purchase and let them decide.

You should crack it out and resubmit under another name it and see if it comes back as trimmed.