OT: 3.5 Million Dollar Scam - Pokemon Cards Certified by BBCE

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If I buy an expensive Pujols RC that I think was a factory release and PSA says it's a factory release, I'm not going to be at all happy if I find out he signed it 10 years later and the original autograph was removed. Am I out of touch?

No, you’re not out of touch. You’re a collector, one with higher standards.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Eric72

No, you’re not out of touch. You’re a collector, one with higher standards.

I love all these subtle passive-aggressive jabs you guys take around here. It's like you guys have a secret virtue-signaling competition or something.

"My morals are just higher than yours if you think soaking a card in water to remove the scrapbook paper from the back is acceptable" or "Clearly, you have character flaws if you think a card SIGNED BY ALBERT F***ING PUJOLS and authenticated as such does not constitute fraud, even if he signed it twice."

What difference does it make, even if he signed it 47 times until he had a signature that he was happy with? It's still an Albert Pujols signed RC.

I swear, you guys will bi**h about anything and everything.

[Stampsfan]

Back to the GI Joe cards in the Pokemon packs, maybe it's actually a factory error where the manufacturer accidently put the wrong cards into the packs, and all the third party authenticators were right...

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I love all these subtle passive-aggressive jabs you guys take around here. It's like you guys have a secret virtue-signaling competition or something.

"My morals are just higher than yours if you think soaking a card in water to remove the scrapbook paper from the back is acceptable" or "Clearly, you have character flaws if you think a card SIGNED BY ALBERT F***ING PUJOLS and authenticated as such does not constitute fraud, even if he signed it twice."

What difference does it make, even if he signed it 47 times until he had a signature that he was happy with? It's still an Albert Pujols signed RC.

I swear, you guys will bi**h about anything and everything.

It wasn't one of those "subtle passive-aggressive jabs" of which you wrote. My comment was a compliment to Peter.

A subtle passive aggressive jab would be, "Hey Snowman, it's nice to see things are going well with your treatment. With a little more tweaking, I'm sure the doctors will get your meds just right. Keep up the great work. Your efforts are commendable."

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I love all these subtle passive-aggressive jabs you guys take around here. It's like you guys have a secret virtue-signaling competition or something.

"My morals are just higher than yours if you think soaking a card in water to remove the scrapbook paper from the back is acceptable" or "Clearly, you have character flaws if you think a card SIGNED BY ALBERT F***ING PUJOLS and authenticated as such does not constitute fraud, even if he signed it twice."

What difference does it make, even if he signed it 47 times until he had a signature that he was happy with? It's still an Albert Pujols signed RC.

I swear, you guys will bi**h about anything and everything.

To many collectors, it does make a big difference whether it's a factory issued rookie card that he signed for the manufacturer, or just a rookie card someone later got signed or some card doctor got resigned. You can mock or question it all you want but it's a fact. Nothing to do with morals or superiority. IF the card in question was altered, then it was clearly done to deceive and increase the value.

[Kutcher55]

Seems like this one has come off the rails. Maybe a little off topic, but it very difficult to prove that old wax packs haven’t been tampered with? That’s why I have never been interested in paying $$ for graded wax no matter who slabbed it.