How would you react to a personal attack (by SGC)?

[philliesphan]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Why would the COLOR look any different under a loupe??

Because there is more of it, of course. And it looks bigger, too!

[Thrill-of-the-Hunt]

wow, those two cards are not even in the same game.

here are my questions: did SGC contact the auction company directly and request the card to be sent to them? did the consignor give permission for the card to go to SGC? did SGC crack the card out of the holder before reviewing it with its owner?

[wonkaticket]

“1. At some point years ago my dad purchased a slabbed SGC card labeled as a brown old mill. I vaguely remember my dad telling me about it but I certainly don't remember how, from who or at what price he purchased it.”

From previous thread….

“Dad and I purchased this card years ago because we happened to compare it against several black examples and saw a difference in ink color.”



Really now I’m really confused? Seems to me if the above point #1 is true you bought the card based upon the label, or you bought the card raw something doesn’t make sense Scott?

“4. When this card was consigned to Bill Goodwin for his auction - My dad made sure to mention these particular issues AND ALSO mentioned that when he compared it side by side against other typical old mill cards with a loupe --- all the others were black while this one was brown. My dad asked Mr. Goodwin to consider listing the card on this basis. Bill then inspected the card, agreed with my dad's assessment and listed it in his auction.”

Was the card rejected by REA yes or no? If so why did you consign to Goodwin and did you make Bill aware the card was rejected by Rob Lifson and REA?

Also is it not also true you have an outstanding balance with Goodwin for an unpaid lot for whatever reason? And that your recent consignments were to offset this balance and that this card going for Brown Old Mill money would have significantly reduced said balance if in fact it does exist?

I’m happy to be corrected on any of these points Scott please do if I’m wrong. But I’m being direct and honest here.

This is tough for me to call this out as I consider you two collecting friends and highly respected collectors. But the facts and the details on this just look bad and I can’t help but feel a little disappointed here.

From outside looking in here’s what I see…

You guys know brown Old Mill cards, you own them. In fact you know them enough that you recently even sold Pat Chan a multi-strike brown and black Old Mill card where the brown was so subtle most collectors would have missed it.

You have a card which is at best questionable brown and isn’t hand cut, the wrong player and you guys don’t raise an eyebrow? You don’t show the card to Jim R, Myself, Dan McKee, Brian W, Art M, Ted Z, Scott M or any other collectors whom you see and or talk to quite often? Heck you mentioned this card to Jim R about having a factory cut brown Old Mill and Jimmy has been chasing me and you for a scan for a year..LOL. (Like a dog with a bone that guy Jim R)

You decide to consign the card to REA a very reputable seller and he sends it back and says no way even in the holder. The same seller who contacted Jim and me for help on the overprint he had. Rob is the kind of guy that if he thinks something can be a new variation he’s not afraid to ask for help from fellow collectors especially of that helps leads to a successful auction and commission for REA and the seller.



Then you consign the same card to Goodwin whom you may or may not have an outstanding balance with for an unpaid lot. You then hype the auction on the main board.

When the card is questioned you say it was... “Dad and I purchased this card years ago because we happened to compare it against several black examples and saw a difference in ink color.” But then you claim the card was bought in a holder labeled brown Old Mill.

Now you claim that SGC is attacking your father and or making childish remarks. In a way calling out their creditability and way of handling customers.

That about sums up the timeline as I see it…

You guys as collectors given your experience and given the rejection by REA should have really had this looked at prior to listing it with anybody IMO. It just seems that from the outside looking in on this you were passing off questionable potato labeled as an apple to the next guy.

Also you guys as collectors have always kept choice cards I know that I’ve seen your collection. A true Brown Old Mill factory cut new color variation on a new player I just think that would be one you guys would never let go basically one of a kind.

I can’t imagine you guys passing off even a questionable card given your collecting history with the bad Drum and the overprint that many folks worked very hard on making you guys whole on by busting Pat Chan.

Scott I hope I’m wrong on all this but it just looks odd and a bit bad.

Cheers,

John

[danmckee]

I am biting a large protion of my tongue here but I will say one thing on this:

"but we collect primarily for fun. I know that I've personally almost never kept a record of any card that I've bought --- simply because it doesn't matter to me"

I am calling bullshit on this statement.

Touche' Wonka for stating the facts! You will always be my hero!
And you stated them softly as the Levy's were good friends of yours, you should be a politician.

All of you here know that I am not a fan of 3rd party grading as I have made that very clear. Cards I submit get double checked mainly for this reason as the companies feel I may be trying to set them up for something like this incident.

In this particular case, my opinion is that SGC has done nothing wrong, nor is liable for anything except mislabeling a flip.

As Eric stated, they should return the card raw plus the grading fees plus all shipping involved and call it a day. SGC has my full respect and support in this matter. Eric, you have a good head on your shoulders.

Also, I would like to state that there is no way the pictured card above is BROWN, or even close to BROWN print. Even Art M. who is legitimately color blind can see this Old Mill is not BROWN. No offense Art.

This entire incident has been driven by one thing and one thing only.

The dollar.

[scottglevy]

John,

I consider you to be a personal and hobby friend.

To the best of my knowledge the card was purchased slabbed from SGC as a brown old mill.

I appreciate yours and others efforts to bust Chan and to make my dad whole on a clearly bad transaction. I think that drawing parallels to him here is grossly unfair however. What Chan did was fraudulently create a card with the intent to profit from it. What my dad did was buy a card (that was very likely preslabbed), hold it for awhile and re-auction it. IF my dad thought that is was black and he tried to pass the proverbial hot potato, I could accept the bulk of your criticism. BUT If my dad thinks (which he does) that the card is 'browner' that a typical Old Mill and decides that it should be auctioned off as it's labeled...even if it's not light brown - there is nothing unethical about that.

Did he offer the card to REA first and get turned down, Yes. Did he offer it to Bill G. next, Yes. Does he still think that it's visually different from other Old Mills, Yes. Do we recognize that it's not as brown as most other brown old mills -- of course we do. But that fact was never hidden from Bill G, it's not hidden now. Bill G. pointed out the differences that were noted under magnification.

Yes it's true that we are quite experienced T206 collectors and I know that Old Mills are usually 1) trimmed 2) on certain players 3) light brown. But I have seen exceptions ... even beyond this card. For example a card with 3 strikes of Old Mill on it ... with one being light brown. Just because this card doesn't fit a pre-described pattern doesn't mean that it's not different from others.

If I was ashamed that my dad brought a card like this out for auction, I'd probably be silent on the issue ---but I'm not, not then and not now. You can disagree with my dad or with me, and I'll respect that. But if I held a different point of view than you, I wouldn't call into question your integrity - especially if the difference was based purely on how something perceived to look from a scan. Which is the whole point of my post in a nutshell.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Scott are you saying the scan is not accurate?

[scottglevy]

The scan probably is a fair representation of the card. The difference is admittedly subtle - but it is there.

[danmckee]

Difference of what is subtle?? The one on the left is a common black and the one on the right is the rare Brown. Am I missing something here?? post #27

[Matt]

If your Dad still believes the card is Brown, why not just get the raw card back from SGC and a refund of the grading fees?

[slidekellyslide]

Does one have to request the "Brown" label on the holder or did SGC just mistakenly label it as "Brown?" SGC cards have serial numbers on them so I'm assuming they keep records of who originally submitted the card, right?