Biggest Takeaway from "Claim of $80k+ theft at the National" Thread

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

I would like to add
5. He's #1 and #3.

I assume this is pertaining to the dealer. Not sure why anybody would pick 2 unless it comes out this was some kind of ploy they were both in on.

Attempting to defraud an insurance company by making a false claim of a false theft that never happened would qualify for 2.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by G1911

Attempting to defraud an insurance company by making a false claim of a false theft that never happened would qualify for 2.

It would also be a crime to make an insurance claim, valuing the stolen cards way higher than their condition would actually be realistically worth.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Mark17

It would also be a crime to make an insurance claim, valuing the stolen cards way higher than their condition would actually be realistically worth.

Excellent point.

[icurnmedic]

Originally Posted by Mark17

It would also be a crime to make an insurance claim, valuing the stolen cards way higher than their condition would actually be realistically worth.

So how does one value a raw card? Beckett book value?
A lot of room for discourse when valuing raw.
Maybe that is the plan. Claim better condition than they are.
Of course that would mean the seller is a crook and I don’t personally know or ever dealt with the seller so I will bow out on the crook argument.
Regardless,someone in this deal is a crook. Not sure why name withholding is necessary. I like to know who I may potentially deal with.
Thomas

[Lorewalker]

I don't think any of us knows a single collector who would fork over the kind of money mentioned in the article for the valuations on those cards. These were ungraded cards.

[jingram058]

Hey Jolly, I went with both 2 and 3, as that seems to sum it up nicely.