How Far does the CU dictatorship go to silence whisleblowers?

[BigRedOne]

updateIn light of being banned on the CU board for questioning the possible corruption that goes on concerning the questionable and favorable grades that big clients and consignors like Probenstein seem to mysteriously accuire over and over,

I was wondering just how far the CU board Mods would go to make those who question their authority disappear?

With their Ironfisted refusal to allow ANY kind of transparent discussion to address the concerns and legitimate questions the collecting community might have concerning the possible fraud and corruption I wanted them to address, It became even more obvious that there was something more to my "Banning" than....

"Your looking to start trouble by posting unfounded conspiracy therories"

I hadn't checked in awhile, but it now seems they have also removed my 1972 Topps Football set from the PSA Set Registry. It was setting at #2 for the longest time. It actually hit #1 briefly for a few days.
Why would they do this? What was it that they feared so much that they felt the need to try and silence me and completely make me disappear?

Spite?
I did ream the Mods ass when they emailed me to ask if I wanted them to contact any of the board members I had deals going with. I basicaly told them that I would rather the deals fall through rather than have a liar and cheat like you speaking for me.

Conspiracy Theories?

We all know the Trimmed Hornus Wagner card was conviently overlooked in order to get it into a PSA holder for the noterity and exposure it would bring the company. Your Top graders unknowenly misgrade a card of that stature?
I wasn't telling anybody nothing new here.
"Conspiracy Theory?"

Joe Orlando's famous speech about how PSA would NEVER go to the half grade system (thus validating SGC which already had the 1/2 grades)
Only to flip flop on the issue when he realized what a money grab it would be by sticking it to PSA collectors by baiting them into paying a second time to have cards "Reviewed"
Surely this was obvious to everyone, even the PSA apologists had to know this.
"Conspiracy Theory?"

The mysterious top grades Demetri Young had on weak cards? Again a High profile celebrity collector with some "favorable" Grades
"Conspiracy Theory?" Maybe.


The Multitude of weak cards in PSA 10 holders that seem to be available from 4 sharp corners.
"conspiracy Theory?" Again Maybe.


The Probenstein PSA 8 Art Shell Rookie that mysteriously became a PSA 10 in a matter of days?
"Conspiracy Theory?" I think it a legitimate question and concern that any respectable company would look to openly address and explain.
By banning any and all who raise these concerns it only adds fuel to the fire and cast even more suspicions that there is something more going on.

In todays world of Greed, Fraud and corruption, its getting harder and harder to believe that the company that initially sought to proect the hobby has somehow now fallen prey to the very things it once set out protect against.

john cla.yes

[Leon]

Originally Posted by BigRedOne

In light of being banned on the CU board for questioning the possible corruption that goes on concerning the questionable and favorable grades that big clients and consignors like Probenstein seem to mysteriously accuire over and over,

I was wondering just how far the CU board Mods would go to make those who question their authority disappear?

With their Ironfisted refusal to allow ANY kind of transparent discussion to address the concerns and legitimate questions the collecting community might have concerning the possible fraud and corruption I wanted them to address, It became even more obvious that there was something more to my "Banning" than....

"Your looking to start trouble by posting unfounded conspiracy therories"

I hadn't checked in awhile, but it now seems they have also removed my 1972 Topps Football set from the PSA Set Registry. It was setting at #2 for the longest time. It actually hit #1 briefly for a few days.

Why would they do this? What was it that they feared so much that they felt the need to try and silence me and completely make me disappear?

Spite?
I did ream the Mods ass when they emailed me to ask if I wanted them to contact any of the board members I had deals going with. I basicaly told them that I would rather the deals fall through rather than have a liar and cheat like you speaking for me.

Conspiracy Theories?

We all know the Trimmed Hornus Wagner card was conviently overlooked in order to get it into a PSA holder for the noterity and exposure it would bring the company. Your Top graders unknowenly misgrade a card of that stature?
I wasn't telling anybody nothing new here.
"Conspiracy Theory?"

Joe Orlando's famous speech about how PSA would NEVER go to the half grade system (thus validating SGC which already had the 1/2 grades)
Only to flip flop on the issue when he realized what a money grab it would be by sticking it to PSA collectors by baiting them into paying a second time to have cards "Reviewed"
Surely this was obvious to everyone, even the PSA apologists had to know this.
"Conspiracy Theory?"

The mysterious top grades Demetri Young had on weak cards? Again a High profile celebrity collector with some "favorable" Grades
"Conspiracy Theory?" Maybe.


The Multitude of weak cards in PSA 10 holders that seem to be available from 4 sharp corners.
"conspiracy Theory?" Again Maybe.


The Probenstein PSA 8 Art Shell Rookie that mysteriously became a PSA 10 in a matter of days?
"Conspiracy Theory?" I think it a legitimate question and concern that any respectable company would look to openly address and explain.
By banning any and all who raise these concerns it only adds fuel to the fire and cast even more suspicions that there is something more going on.

In todays world of Greed, Fraud and corruption, its getting harder and harder to believe that the company that initially sought to proect the hobby has somehow now fallen prey to the very things it once set out protect against.

You need to put your name by your post please. You can use a period in the middle of your last name in order not to show up in searches, if you want to. thanks

[drc]

Leon's as bad as CU

Welcome to the board. If you do some searching here you will find many threads about those same issues. Just remember that Joe O does read this board so be careful of any slander. Even though it may be truthful you can still be liable. Kinda amazing what a lot of money will do for you huh.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Pup6913

Just remember that Joe O does read this board so be careful of any slander. Even though it may be truthful you can still be liable. Kinda amazing what a lot of money will do for you huh.

That's not true concerning libel. The truth is an absolute defense. That being said it can (and usually is) expensive to defend oneself even if you have done nothing wrong. And one other thing I should mention, after thinking a bit, I guess there could be a situation where someone bringing a false claim could be liable for legal fees of the other party? I ain't know lawyer (sic).

[smtjoy]

Welcome BigRedOne and yes there was a good thread over here about the Art Shell after it was deleted over on CU. We still never heard anything back from PSA about that card and the 6-7 other questionable cards that were all bumped by as you said a big submitter during the National.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by BigRedOne

... my 1972 Topps Football set from the PSA Set Registry...

Your post is a list of reasons why not to pay people money to tell you what condition your cards are in, yet you evidently like to pay people to tell you what condition your cards are in.

As long as people want to brag about having the best condition cards, as ranked by the people who get paid to tell you what condition your cards are in, then none of the things that you (validly) complain about will ever change.

In todays world of Greed, Fraud and corruption, it's getting harder and harder to believe that the company that initially sought to protect the hobby has somehow now fallen prey to the very things it once set out to protect against.

Laughing out loud.

Is that what they initially sought to do? Ok, sure.

But, what was it you (and the FBI) said about that very first card that they graded...


Happy collecting,
Doug "I spend my money on cards, not opinions" Goodman


PS - welcome to Net54

[BigRedOne]

I appriciate you guy's input.

While the vast majority of my collection is raw, I picked a few sets to do graded as I can appriciate how nicely they can present. While yes I did pay for those "opinons", I was never caught up in the Registry Ego or "Bragging" rights as you put it.
Most of the cards were self submitted from my own personal set, And it just so happend it landed high in the registry. Weather it raw or graded I was proud of that set indeed.

Thanks for setting me straight Doug! I now have seen the light!

Im pretty proud of the work Ive done over the last 30 years on my Raw sets and none more so than my Mint 72 Sunoco Stamp Set. You are right that I don't need to pay anyone to tell me what I already know here. After all the hard work I put into one of my all-time favorite childhood sets....... Yea.... I do want to show it off and brag about it a little bit.

A few of my favorites:

[glynparson]

I dont think They are as corrupt as they are incompetent. I have a bigger problem with corruption than incompetence. Though I am not a fan of either. I also believe a lot of people consign their mistakes to places like probstein so they have more annonimity when selling. Mistakes meaning over grades or even sometimes graded altered cards, I have heard of some people doing this that is why you see some people that sell on eBay also consignto some of these places. In probsteins defense they do offer a nice service for a very reasonable price, so some people give them stuff because they are small and can't handle all the listing and shipping on their own. For the record I have never consigned to probstein but would consider it in the future. again having submitted over a thousand cards at a time on numerous occasions and also having worked for one of their biggest dealers, I have NEVER seen any evidence of favoritism from PSA, I do think they have better access to getting cards reviewed but I do not think you get favoritism.

[barrysloate]

"your looking to start trouble by posting unfounded conspiracy therories."

I would never want to post on a message board that can't correctly spell "you're" and "theories." That's the real problem.

And "Big Red One" still hasn't put his name out. Please do so.

[BigRedOne]

Ahhh! teh ole grammarr(2 r's?) Polelice.... Wait.... Polease..... Wait P..o? Wait aminute.... Poleast.... No that not wright.. POLIGHTS? Aw shucks! i'd bst just go wit Coop..... Wait.... COPE.... Dam it..... COPS.... YESSSSS!


John

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by BigRedOne

Ahhh! teh ole grammarr(2 r's?) Polelice.... Wait.... Polease..... Wait P..o? Wait aminute.... Poleast.... No that not wright.. POLIGHTS? Aw shucks! i'd bst just go wit Coop..... Wait.... COPE.... Dam it..... COPS.... YESSSSS!


John

conspiracy theory probably isn't the ONLY reason he got kicked off the CU board

[barrysloate]

Clever post John...and you still haven't put out your last name so I'm guessing you are about to be kicked off your second message board this week.

I see your name up at the top. I stand corrected.

[markf31]

IMO...I think it’s too easy to simply point to high profile instances and examples and scream conspiracy. The examples that you bring up and quote are obviously the high profile ones from either big sellers like Probstein, famous collections like the Young collection or even more famous cards such as the T206 Wagner that get discussed almost to nausea on boards. When cases like these get favorable grades or re-grades, it’s easy to point and yell and scream conspiracy because of the high public profile the seller, collection or card itself already have. But the fact is that the majority of PSA’s work never sees, or is never subject to the high levels of scrutiny that these examples are. If Fred Shmuck from Anytown, USA re-submits an 8 and gets it bumped to a 10 you most likely will never hear of it.

[Wite3]

Originally Posted by markf31

If Fred Shmuck from Anytown, USA re-submits an 8 and gets it bumped to a 10 you most likely will never hear of it.

Probably because it never happens...

[Leon]

First of all I also don't think there are conspiracies going on or favoritism at PSA (in the way of a preferential grade). I think with a company that large they just make some mistakes. I would be shocked if Joe O had anything to do with a fraud type issue at his company. Could it happen and him not know about it, absolutely.

As for the card that went from an 8 to a 10, Joe told me it is rare but does happen. I asked him about that particular card last time he and I spoke, which was a few months ago (I believe). I don't think anyone would be too happy if they owned a card in an 8 holder and then saw the same card a bit later in a 10 holder. That is a lot of extra value. And lastly I appreciate the original poster putting his name in his post. Our rules are quite simple.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by Leon

That's not true concerning libel. The truth is an absolute defense. That being said it can (and usually is) expensive to defend oneself even if you have done nothing wrong. And one other thing I should mention, after thinking a bit, I guess there could be a situation where someone bringing a false claim could be liable for legal fees of the other party? I ain't know lawyer (sic).

Leon,

I'm not a lawyer either, but since you're a Texan like me, I do know a few things about Texas laws regarding libel. First, yes truth is an absolute defense and along with a fair comment on a public controversy. Both have been codified in Texas Civil P&R Code 73 . Second, you'll be happy to know in June 2011, Texas adopted an Anti-SLAPP law which can fend off frivolous harassment suits in their early stages and if you prevail, the other party is liable for your attorneys fees. Here's a link:

http://slappedintexas.com/primer/


As for the initial thread, yes I agree that PSA has some major problems as pointed out. The biggest problem in my opinion is that certain parties have been successfully aesthetically enhancing cards to increase their value and getting the cards graded into PSA holders. Sadly people are buying these cards with no knowledge of these alterations.

The big question that begs to be asked is how legitimate is a grading service when its nothing more than a means of facilitating the sale of altered cards for people who fail to disclose these alterations? At what point do regulatory agencies and law enforcement step in and challenge the grading companies to show that they are making some effort to offer the service they claim to provide?

[barrysloate]

Perhaps it is possible for a card in an 8 holder to be regraded a 10, but in the case of the Art Shell card in question it did not merit a 10 grade. Even from a scan there were minute flaws that could be easily detected with the naked eye.

So the issue isn't is it possible for an 8 to be regraded a 10, which I imagine in rare cases could happen, but why did that particular card receive a 10? That's the issue we've been debating.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Perhaps it is possible for a card in an 8 holder to be regraded a 10, but in the case of the Art Shell card in question it did not merit a 10 grade. Even from a scan there were minute flaws that could be easily detected with the naked eye.

So the issue isn't is it possible for an 8 to be regraded a 10, which I imagine in rare cases could happen, but why did that particular card receive a 10? That's the issue we've been debating.

I understand Barry.....without going back and looking at that card I think I remember it being a weak 10, at best. But hey, anything above a 3 is high grade for me so don't count on me for this high grade debate. Here is one of the nicer "10"s I have!!

[jstef]

I'd rather own a card from the Lionel Carter collection anyday. In fact, IMO the Lionel Carter collection is the only collection that merits recognition.

[vintagecpa]

Originally Posted by Leon

As for the card that went from an 8 to a 10, Joe told me it is rare but does happen.

I would love know the serial numbers of the last 5 cards that went from an 8 to a 10. It should be absolutely impossible for this type of bump to ever happen. I would like to know if a senior grader is required to verify a potential PSA 10 that could push a $50 card to $3000+?

[brob28]

Originally Posted by jstef

I'd rather own a card from the Lionel Carter collection anyday. In fact, IMO the Lionel Carter collection is the only collection that merits recognition.

+1 I'd add Jefferson Burdick to that short list.

[glynparson]

There were altered cards in Mr. Carter's phenomenal collection. Only mentioned because many feel this provenance should carry extra weight for the card being unplayed with. While this is true of cards he acquired in years of issue he did trade for years and years and years and not all trading partners were as honest as Mr. Carter.

[barrysloate]

Hey Leon- how can you have a weak 10? With all due respect, you can't have a weak 10. Another term for a weak 10 is a misgraded card.

As I remember the Art Shell, it had two corners that were imperceptibly touched, and there were two surface print flaws. That's a total of four things wrong with it. Even if they are tiny, that's a strong 8 at best.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Here is the Shell card in question. The registration on the card is way off. Notice the white numbers on the front of the jersey and his socks around the calf area. Both are blurry.

Also, the big fish eye on the back.

[markf31]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Hey Leon- how can you have a weak 10? With all due respect, you can't have a weak 10. Another term for a weak 10 is a misgraded card.

As I remember the Art Shell, it had two corners that were imperceptibly touched, and there were two surface print flaws. That's a total of four things wrong with it. Even if they are tiny, that's a strong 8 at best.

Imperceptibly (impossible or difficult to perceive by the mind or senses) IMO meets the requirements of four sharp corners. If you can't perceive it, how can the corners be imperfect then?

And PSA's own granding standards details that while a card to meet PSA 10 must be free of staining "an allowance may be made for a slight printing imperfection, if it doesn't impair the overall appeal of the card." I tend to agree with Leon that it's a weak 10, I don't think the printing imperfection imparied the appeal of the card. There are many other PSA 10's from the 1970s and 1980s that exhibit similar printing imperfections, but as their own grading standard says, it can be allowed even on a PSA 10.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Perhaps it is possible for a card in an 8 holder to be regraded a 10, but in the case of the Art Shell card in question it did not merit a 10 grade. Even from a scan there were minute flaws that could be easily detected with the naked eye.

So the issue isn't is it possible for an 8 to be regraded a 10, which I imagine in rare cases could happen, but why did that particular card receive a 10? That's the issue we've been debating.

Weak 10's are possible for PSA because PSA does not have the Pristine grade that SGC and Beckett have. Therefore, weak 10's are Gem Mint, and strong 10's are Pristine.

For the Art Shell card in question, that's obviously a misgrade and does not deserve a 10.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by markf31

Imperceptibly (impossible or difficult to perceive by the mind or senses) IMO meets the requirements of four sharp corners. If you can't perceive it, how can the corners be imperfect then?

And PSA's own granding standards details that while a card to meet PSA 10 must be free of staining "an allowance may be made for a slight printing imperfection, if it doesn't impair the overall appeal of the card." I tend to agree with Leon that it's a weak 10, I don't think the printing imperfection imparied the appeal of the card. There are many other PSA 10's from the 1970s and 1980s that exhibit similar printing imperfections, but as their own grading standard says, it can be allowed even on a PSA 10.

That said, I think the Shell is an 8.5, or a weak 9. It's not a 10. You may feel free to disagree.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by BigRedOne

...I was never caught up in the Registry Ego or "Bragging" rights as you put it. Most of the cards were self submitted from my own personal set, And it just so happened it landed high in the registry. Whether it was raw or graded I was proud of that set indeed.

Thanks for setting me straight Doug! I now have seen the light!

While this thread devolves into a debate about an Art Shell card, I will point out that my initial point is valid.

Also, I never said there was anything wrong with bragging about your cards, I do it all the time. But don't be embarrassed to admit to it.

I don't know exactly how the registry system works, but I find it slightly alarming that after paying for 351 opinions (assuming google is correct about the number of cards in the set) the people who get paid for opinions took it upon themselves to add you to their list of sets that they liked without your permission, since you say "it just so happened".

I dedicate my new nickname to Barry...

Doug "I try to use the correct words and spell check in both my posts and my quotes" Goodman

[insidethewrapper]

I can't tell the difference between a 9 and a 10. I've never received a "10" on a grade, but many modern cards I have received "9's". Big difference in $$$$$$. I'm not sending in anymore modern cards hoping for a "10".

Also on vintage cards, why do some come back "1" or "2" and others come back "Authentic " and they look the same ? What is the difference between a "1" which is beat up and another that is "A" ?

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

That said, I think the Shell is an 8.5, or a weak 9. It's not a 10. You may feel free to disagree.

I agree with you Barry and to me it's hard to argue it any other way. If PSA now concedes that there's that much subjectivity in which a card grade can vary as much as 2 points, then there was no legitimate reason (other than money) of going to half grades.

[barrysloate]

Thanks Dan, and to put it another way: if the card genuinely was a 10, what was going on in the grader's head when he gave it an 8? You mean to say a professional grader can be off by two whole grades? Not very professional at all.

[smtjoy]

No way the Shell is a 10 much less a 9, I agree with Barry. The issue I had was this was one of about 7 cards (that we know of) that were all bumped at the national that were very suspect by the same submitter. I am a submitter to PSA and I do feel Joe O is working hard to make sure all cards get the correct grades but my bigger concern is the possibility of a grader maybe getting a kickback or a deal with a friend to bump cards with so much money on the line (ie turning a $50 card into a $3000). It happens in the oil industry I work in and well I hate to think it might be happening in my hobby, that's my concern and wish PSA was making it clear that this does not happen and taking steps to make sure it doesn't.

[oldjudge]

Barry--what has your life come to when you are on a chat board arguing whether a modern football card is an 9 or a 10?

[barrysloate]

Hi Jay- I think the argument is about what may or may not have gone on behind the scenes for this card to have been bumped from an 8 to a 10. It's really not about whether the card is accurately graded. Either you are joking with me, or you missed the point of this discussion. I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in football cards.

[buymycards]

Hi Barry,
I agree with you on the spelling and grammar on some of the posts on the board.

Have you noticed how many of the high profile news people on the major networks are saying alection instead of election? It drives me nuts! How about a hunert instead of one hundred? Plus the old standby - interchanging affect and effect. How about affective in place of effective. Seems like the news people have forgotten how to say the letter e.

Rick

[rainier2004]

Originally Posted by buymycards

Hi Barry,
I agree with you on the spelling and grammar on some of the posts on the board.

Have you noticed how many of the high profile news people on the major networks are saying alection instead of election? It drives me nuts! How about a hunert instead of one hundred? Plus the old standby - interchanging affect and effect. How about affective in place of effective. Seems like the news people have forgotten how to say the letter e.

Rick

My favorite is You-ston instaed on Houston...

[danmckee]

Originally Posted by Leon

That's not true concerning libel. The truth is an absolute defense. That being said it can (and usually is) expensive to defend oneself even if you have done nothing wrong. And one other thing I should mention, after thinking a bit, I guess there could be a situation where someone bringing a false claim could be liable for legal fees of the other party? I ain't know lawyer (sic).

I have trashed Joe Orlando on here many times and it is no secret that I hate his guts for making 6 months of my life miserable. Reference Mckee vs PSA.

But this thread is comical to me. All I can say is:

Welcome to 3rd party grading!

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by danmckee

...this thread is comical to me. All I can say is:

Welcome to 3rd party grading!

As has been mentioned to me recently, Dan and myself are "kindred spirits" when it comes to this issue. And this thread.

Doug

[brickyardkennedy]

Originally Posted by buymycards

Hi Barry,
I agree with you on the spelling and grammar on some of the posts on the board.

Have you noticed how many of the high profile news people on the major networks are saying alection instead of election? It drives me nuts! How about a hunert instead of one hundred? Plus the old standby - interchanging affect and effect. How about affective in place of effective. Seems like the news people have forgotten how to say the letter e.

Rick

Literacy is out of fashion - weather you like it or not.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by brickyardkennedy

Literacy is out of fashion - weather you like it or not.

Literacy is out of fashion....even mocked by a large segment of the population...but I digress.

[RGold]

The farmer wondered whether the adverse weather had affected his wether.