|
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Peter, you know I agree that card doctoring - and fraud in general - is a huge problem in this hobby. It has been for a long time.
A cert number lookup, IMO, does nothing to tell you about the card that you're holding, except in rare instances. I actually don't believe that the hobby is configured to protect card doctors. I believe that capable authentication companies protect consumers from far more fraud than we know. In my mind, the "old" hobby was designed to protect card doctors. None of that changes the fact that fraud is a huge problem, though, we can definitely agree on that. -Al |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Al as you know I think they catch a lot but that a lot also gets through, for whatever reason, and we can speculate endlessly about that. I do know from personal experience and the experience of others that it is a very risky business to crack cards out of holders and resubmit them, and this applies to SGC and PSA too.
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Oh, I wouldn't crack it out.
I'd just send it to the grading company with a note that says "This card is surrounded by cert numbers that were rejected for trimming, which devalues the card. Please give it a new cert number." I'm not sure what the answer is, aside from educating yourself, trusting the grader you choose (if you choose one), and buying from reputable sellers. But a cert number lookup is not on my radar of tools to help protect me, aside from using it for its intended purpose. -Al |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
I also think that if auction houses identified their consignors, and all cards could be traced to their original submitter, many cards would sell for less. Thus my statement about the hobby being configured to protect card doctors. That is not to say it was not even worse before grading services.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
I understand your concern, but we're talking about ignoring the privacy of the overwhelming majority of good people in this hobby so that we can learn the identity of consignors/submitters who MAY be fraudsters, and who MAY be committing fraud.
I've seen multiple threads and had multiple conversations where one person or group of people thinks an individual engages in fraud, while another group disagrees. More and more I'm starting to think that the answer is to identify the fraud - don't reject it, just holder it differently somehow. Create a market for it. The only question is whether there's too much stuff out there already, and I suspect the answer to that might be yes. -Al |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Matt, my main concern is not that people use the tool incorrectly, it's that the tool itself, for the most part, tells you nothing about the card in question and simultaneously raises all sorts of privacy issues.
-Al |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
I hear you - the tool does have some value, but it is minimal with the possibility of copied flips and cracked slabs.
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
I would like to see an image of the card along with the cert number. That would eliminate substituting a fraud card.
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Al - I'm not a fan of the argument to not give people a tool because some people out there misuse it. Certainly people misuse all sorts of information and draw wrong conclusions, but exposing the cert checker doesn't cause those things; irresponsible people do. Would you argue that the CU forums should be shut down because more people use them to pick fights, shill their own consignments and wrongly accuse people then use them for good? IMO I can chose not to go there because of those things and the users there can chose not to partake in those things, but removing the option altogether seems like something I'd do with my children, not a way to deal with adults.
Last edited by Matt; 11-21-2009 at 06:30 PM. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Greg, there is only so much the grading companies can do. They are not FBI crime labs, and while they certainly will catch blatant alterations most of the time, it's much less certain they will catch subtle alterations by individuals and firms highly sophisticated and skilled in paper restoration. I believe Dave Forman of SGC himself has publicly commented on the difficulty of detecting certain types of alterations, as did Daniel Desmond in the infamous VBCC 7. I think it's just a given that a certain percentage of altered cards are going to get through, which is why any tool in the collector's hands is better than none.
And unlike Al, I think it does add value to see if a card is surrounded by a high percentage of rejects. Is it conclusive, of course not, but it would certainly encourage me to think twice about buying the card. Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 11-21-2009 at 10:06 PM. |
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
The cert # lookup feature has been used successfully in the past to identify questionable submissions..most notably those belonging to Mr. Susor. On balance, I like the cert # look up feature and the additional information it provides collectors.
Power to the people! |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
There's an individual who's name has been mentioned in this thread and others as a trimmer of cards. The evidence has been, in my opinion, pretty conclusive. But let's say I buy a card from that individual, and subsequently resell it on eBay. Someone on a message board decides to search the cert numbers around the one I'm selling, and finds a disproportionate amount of trimmed cards. That person, not knowing where I bought the card, may very well implicate ME as a card doctor, since he/she has no idea whether or not I was the original submitter. All that person can do it look up the cert number and see what cards were around mine. Realistically, that cert number lookup says absolutely nothing about me, about my own submissions, or about the cards I sell - but could hurt my reputation anyway. -Al |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
But how would you know that my card was part of the same invoice as the previous 5? How would you know I didn't buy a large lot of raw cards that were trimmed, and submitted it with a large lot of raw cards that weren't? How would you know that I didn't submit a whole pile of crackouts from a grading service known for grading trimmed cards in hopes that some of them would grade, and a few actually did?
You would be able to see the cert numbers and the results, but none of the circumstances around the submittal. I've had a few circumstances where a few of my submissions had an inordinate amount of cards rejected for trimming. Once I bought a vending box of modern cards, and a half dozen or so were rejected - all of them graded on a second submission. Another time, as suggested above, I bought a bunch of cards graded by a second-tier grading company in hopes of crossing them to PSA and playing the low-pop game. A bunch came back trimmed and a few graded. I'd hate to think I'd be judged based on those two submissions, but that's exactly the kind of thing that could happen with the cert number lookup. I prefer to think that if we're going to embrace grading, we're going to embrace the grading company's ability to judge each card on its own merits and reject that bad ones. If we can't trust the grading companies to do this, then we shouldn't be embracing grading. Just my opinion. -Al |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Let's do some Boxing Card trading... | butcher354435 | Boxing / Wrestling Cards & Memorabilia Forum | 11 | 11-14-2009 07:25 PM |
| Clearing out some room SGC CARDS FOR SALE ROUND 2-SOLD | Archive | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 4 | 09-25-2008 02:23 PM |
| FS:1948 Leaf SGC Graded | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 03-15-2008 02:55 PM |
| GROUP of SGC 1934 Goudeys FS 1/3 set | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 2 | 12-07-2007 05:57 AM |
| SGC 1887 N28 Allen & Ginter Baseball and more | Archive | 19th Century Cards & ALL Baseball Postcards- B/S/T | 1 | 05-15-2005 05:18 PM |