REA Auction - Noting prior work done to cards

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Right but the soaking process most here use or maybe all use, is that using water. The Doyle underwent something much different, it would seem given it took weeks of analysis and an explanation to SGC. Not sure anyone here has an issue with removal as a general concept.

This would be my second objection; this does not sound like a normal soaking but that something fairly extreme but vague was done (and not entirely successfully after weeks of preparing this process and discussing it with the graders, looks like some bits of paper loss). Then again, auctioneers are so used to writing superfluous and exaggerated crap for their catalogs, maybe it was just a quick soak!

[Rhotchkiss]

I have no issue with Doyle- the goal was to detach a card, not improve it, and if that all is they did, then I don’t care. The Plank is a bit more problematic. Attached are pics of the plank with the water stain and now. If all that was done is the stain was removed/erased (as opposed to recolored, etc), then I really don’t have a problem; it’s not much different from removing the Doyle from an album. But if the card was improved by addition, then I have an issue. Regardless, it’s not ideal and I think REA is very classy (per usual) to disclose it; although they didn’t have to and anyone doing their own research could figure it out

Also noteworthy is the grade on the Plank. SGC gave it a 2. Water stain “removed” and PSA gives it a 2.5 with that paper missing in upper left corner and large crease midway down card. Compare that to this 2.5, which has a minor marking from an album removal

[Exhibitman]

I am perfectly OK with a trained conservator removing an item from an album or removing a water stain (which, frankly, is little more than a soak with some mild cleaner). Full stop.

The grades on the Plank piss me off, though. That kind of crease causing paper loss? If I send in that card maybe I get a 1.5. That card and this card are equals?



And this one is worse???

[Lorewalker]

Membership has its privileges.

[steve B]

Grading has been very lenient on the more expensive cards since before there was anything like PSA. Especially Wagners.

The one I saw in person sold as poor, it had writing and creases, but was a Wagner. It sold maybe 3 times in the next 3 years or so, always called a higher grade and with a big bump in the asking price, eventually being a G-VG.... No alterations, just dealers grading on the curve.
(which for some really uncommon cards might be a better way)

[bnorth]

They are just preparing everyone for the future of cards. One small step before the giant leap.

[Prof]

Originally Posted by G1911

This would be my second objection; this does not sound like a normal soaking but that something fairly extreme but vague was done (and not entirely successfully after weeks of preparing this process and discussing it with the graders, looks like some bits of paper loss). Then again, auctioneers are so used to writing superfluous and exaggerated crap for their catalogs, maybe it was just a quick soak!

'Weeks of scrutiny' sounds a hell of a lot more professional and enticing than 'we chucked it in some water.'

Who knows what they actually did? But, it's definitely using some descriptive flair for a card that will draw a bunch of casual eyeballs and potential news stories.

I respect the disclosure, even if most heavy collectors inherently expect the soaking.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Prof

'Weeks of scrutiny' sounds a hell of a lot more professional and enticing than 'we chucked it in some water.'

Who knows what they actually did? But, it's definitely using some descriptive flair for a card that will draw a bunch of casual eyeballs and potential news stories.

I respect the disclosure, even if most heavy collectors inherently expect the soaking.

Definitely seems like some poetic license. Or maybe a whole lot of omphaloskepsis couched as more thrilling action.