Article about Collecting and Fraud in the Hobby

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I have a hard time seeing how altering an item without disclosing it for the purpose of increasing price is not fraud.

I also think the odds Brent gets charged for this are very small. The feds are not going to take the time and effort to clean up a hobby almost nobody actually wants cleaned up.

You might want to run that by Brian Brusokas. You are aware presumably the FBI started an investigation in 2019, issued scads of subpoenas, and that Brent as a target or potential target agreed to cooperate, right?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You might want to run that by Brian Brusokas. You are aware presumably the FBI started an investigation in 2019, issued scads of subpoenas, and that Brent as a target or potential target agreed to cooperate, right?

I am well aware. Hence why I said “charged”. I don’t think this is going to end up with Brent with in court on charges of fraud for altering cards. That is why I said, specifically, what I said. You are aware that that is different from being investigated, right?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I am well aware. Hence why I said “charged”. I don’t think this is going to end up with Brent with in court on charges of fraud for altering cards. That is why I said, specifically, what I said. You are aware that that is different from being investigated, right?

Man you are being smug today. You also said the feds would not take the time and effort, suggesting to me you were not aware they are in fact devoting a substantial time and effort.

PS, he would not be charged with altering cards, it would be with mail and wire fraud for selling without disclosure.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Man you are being smug today. You also said the feds would not take the time and effort, suggesting to me you were not aware they are in fact devoting a substantial time and effort.

PS, he would not be charged with altering cards, it would be with mail and wire fraud for selling without disclosure.

I copied your exact condescending phrasing, that you chose to use first. Smugness breeds smugness.

I am, again, aware, which is why I said exactly what I said. “Charged for fraud”. “Fraud for altering cards” is, very obviously, not the literal name of the crime but a descriptor of what has happened, on which we seem to agree. We are, of course, all intimately aware that Brent did not alter cards to silently keep in his personal collection.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I copied your exact condescending phrasing, that you chose to use first. Smugness breeds smugness.

I am, again, aware, which is why I said exactly what I said. “Charged for fraud”. “Fraud for altering cards” is, very obviously, not the literal name of the crime but a descriptor of what has happened, on which we seem to agree. We are, of course, all intimately aware that Brent did not alter cards to silently keep in his personal collection.

He might also be charged with knowingly selling cards others had altered, which would also fit the statute. I have no idea if he will be charged or not, but I do think you are wrong to say the feds won't take the time or effort.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

He might also be charged with knowingly selling cards others had altered, which would also fit the statute. I have no idea if he will be charged or not, but I do think you are wrong to say the feds won't take the time or effort.

What is the language of the statute you are referencing though? And how do we even determine what things must be disclosed? And who determines it? Surely this stuff is not spelled out in the letter of the law (unless I'm wrong, and there is an explicit law on the books that reads something along the lines of "alterations made to sports cards must be disclosed when reselling"). It seems to me that it would have to be open to some fairly liberal interpretation in order to arrive at the conclusion that altering a baseball card with the intent to profit from it is somehow a crime. When taken to the extreme, selling a car without disclosing to the buyer that you replaced the headlights could be construed as criminal behavior, no? How is this any different from failing to disclose that someone flattened out a lifted corner with the back of their fingernail on a baseball card? This is certainly a form of "alteration" that many in this hobby find to be dishonest and something they think ought to be disclosed. How would a court of law distinguish between which things are criminal if not disclosed and which things aren't necessary to disclose? The ability to profit from it surely cannot be the dividing line. I cracked a Lebron James SGC 9 RC out of its holder and wiped off a noticeable fingerprint on it, then subbed it to PSA and it came back in a 10 holder. I later resold it without disclosing that it previously had a fingerprint and was in an SGC 9 holder. Does that make me a criminal?

Even on the other end of the spectrum though with respect to some of the more egregious alterations like trimming. There are countless people in this hobby who believe that if it isn't detectable by an expert senior grader with decades of experience, then those differences simply do not matter. Just read the comments on Instagram whenever Cardporn posts a trimmed card. The comment section is tattooed with people saying, "what difference does it make?" And it's not like someone has been defrauded by purchasing a trimmed card in a PSA holder. There will always be another buyer for it. Everyone knows the 00000001 Wagner was trimmed or "hand cut". But nobody cares. The next time that card trades hands, it's still going to break the record and will always outsell any other Wagner. If I were PSA, I would do the best I could at detecting alterations while being open and honest about the fact that some alterations simply aren't detectable and that the grades they assign to cards reflects their best judgment and leave it at that. Then just let the market decide what the value of their opinion/service is worth instead of them pretending like they are some unpenetrable wall through which alterations cannot cross.

[G1911]

If I sold broken headlights, but told the buyer they were working fine and had my pal at an auto put a sticker on them certifying they were in 10/10 amazing condition, it would not be legal.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Snowman

What is the language of the statute you are referencing though? And how do we even determine what things must be disclosed? And who determines it? Surely this stuff is not spelled out in the letter of the law (unless I'm wrong, and there is an explicit law on the books that reads something along the lines of "alterations made to sports cards must be disclosed when reselling").

I'm not a lawyer, although I did take a business law class once about 23 years ago.

I suspect that "fraud in the inducement" could potentially be used here.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snowman

What is the language of the statute you are referencing though? And how do we even determine what things must be disclosed? And who determines it? Surely this stuff is not spelled out in the letter of the law (unless I'm wrong, and there is an explicit law on the books that reads something along the lines of "alterations made to sports cards must be disclosed when reselling"). It seems to me that it would have to be open to some fairly liberal interpretation in order to arrive at the conclusion that altering a baseball card with the intent to profit from it is somehow a crime. When taken to the extreme, selling a car without disclosing to the buyer that you replaced the headlights could be construed as criminal behavior, no? How is this any different from failing to disclose that someone flattened out a lifted corner with the back of their fingernail on a baseball card? This is certainly a form of "alteration" that many in this hobby find to be dishonest and something they think ought to be disclosed. How would a court of law distinguish between which things are criminal if not disclosed and which things aren't necessary to disclose? The ability to profit from it surely cannot be the dividing line. I cracked a Lebron James SGC 9 RC out of its holder and wiped off a noticeable fingerprint on it, then subbed it to PSA and it came back in a 10 holder. I later resold it without disclosing that it previously had a fingerprint and was in an SGC 9 holder. Does that make me a criminal?

Even on the other end of the spectrum though with respect to some of the more egregious alterations like trimming. There are countless people in this hobby who believe that if it isn't detectable by an expert senior grader with decades of experience, then those differences simply do not matter. Just read the comments on Instagram whenever Cardporn posts a trimmed card. The comment section is tattooed with people saying, "what difference does it make?" And it's not like someone has been defrauded by purchasing a trimmed card in a PSA holder. There will always be another buyer for it. Everyone knows the 00000001 Wagner was trimmed or "hand cut". But nobody cares. The next time that card trades hands, it's still going to break the record and will always outsell any other Wagner. If I were PSA, I would do the best I could at detecting alterations while being open and honest about the fact that some alterations simply aren't detectable and that the grades they assign to cards reflects their best judgment and leave it at that. Then just let the market decide what the value of their opinion/service is worth instead of them pretending like they are some unpenetrable wall through which alterations cannot cross.

I think if one to were to do anything to a sports card, that at a minimum, is grounds for being rejected by a respectable 3rd party grader (based solely on their written description of what deems a card not worthy of a numerical grade), it would constitute an alteration. If that alteration was done to enhance the value or appearance of the card and it is not disclosed and sold, it probably meets the definition of fraud. On the flip side, "respected" TPG pass altered cards all the time either in error or by design.