Brent/PWCC interview on recent controversies

[swarmee]

My thoughts:
1) (3 minutes in) He is confirming that his standards are not industry accepted and that the card industry needs to "mature" into accepting HIS definition of conservation. We see in the various responses to PWCC's posts on many message boards that very few people agree with him. He also claims that there are no grading company rules about what is/is not acceptable. This is a flat out lie, since PSA's grading page specifically lays out what they consider ungradeable alterations. He also fails to mention the importance of informing buyers of alterations/"conservations" that have occurred, something that is industry standard in many other collectible/investment fields.

2) (6:30 in) Tenets "are what we hold the grading company accountable for." "We will refine this to be in everbody's best interest." In the case of spooning out a crease, is it initially conserved because you can't spot it, but later becomes altered as it reappears? This is why nobody trusts what Brent has to say on this subject. PSA disagrees on removing pencil marks from a card; it's there in their list of alterations. He claims that his stance lines up with PSA's, but it's absolutely wrong.

3) As manufactured state: as long as it can't be detected, it isn't altered. Again, BS. If the intent is to hide flaws with an item, that is alteration. If it can't be detected by the grading companies, and they're claiming they can detect it, they need to come clean. Because more and more of these cards will end up getting reimbursed by their Grade Guarantee funds and continue to disgust their customers. Good alteration = Good conservation. No wonder he's such good friends with guys like Dick Towle. He's drank his solvent Kool-aid.

4) Take the 1951 Bowman Willie Mays RC that was recently found to have the embedded gum/wax stains on the reverse removed. If you didn't have the before picture, it's "conservation"; once you've been provided the before picture, is it now "alteration?" Or are you still going to call it conservation?

5) Take a shot every time he says "mature" or "asset". Let me know how drunk you are. At 9:45, he basically says that spooning out creases or pressing/flattening cards/corners IS CONSERVATION.

So there's my thoughts for the first 10 minutes. I'll keep watching.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Why on earth would you keep watching?

[swarmee]

[swarmee]

Wow, it took until 10:33 to hear "We're not a professional grading company."
"We have to accept the grading companies and their assessment of it." Just like the Green PMG Jordan, huh?

So yes, he clarifies that bad erasures are alterations, but good erasures are not.
"That's generally how people feel about it." I have not seen that to be the case with people who are willing to give their opinions on message boards, Leon's preference notwithstanding. Again, if the card is found with writing on the card after it is sold, it's now altered. If there was no evidence of the card with writing on it, it's conserved. Geesh.

"I have never seen the N-7 alteration applied to a single card in 20 years. So PSA has it; I've never seen it used, ever." He agrees that if there was evidence a stain was removed, it should be considered altered. So again, how does the 1951 Bowman Willie Mays apply? How about the alterations that reappear over time because of using solvents to remove stains from cards? "This language [PSA's standards] is 30 years old." How about the WWG DiMaggio that PSA decertified?

Interviewer is definitely giving Brent the home court advantage. Barely talks, lines up softballs.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If it ever came to it, Brent would not do well on cross-examination, IMO.

Personally, as much as I hate most forms of alteration, I really don't care about erasing a light pencil mark with a high quality eraser. There, I gave my opinion.

[steve B]

Erasures are to me, one of those in between things. done properly, I don't see much problem, but do wish they were noted somehow. Done poorly, well, like anything done poorly it's a problem.

This card was one of two I asked SGC about the grade a few years ago when they were at the local show. It seemed nicer than the average 40 to me.

What the guy there spotted pretty quickly was an erased number on the back.
I've owned the card at least since 1980, it was the first nice T206 I bought. Since then, I've moved it between pages, different holders etc probably 5-6 times, looked at it a fair amount, and never noticed the erasure.
SGC did, and apparently didn't consider it anything that would prevent a number grade. It just didn't get a higher number grade because of the erasure.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

How can you redefine a word? Conserve means prevent further damage. It in no way has EVER meant in any hobby, collectible field or dictionary - improving appearance for appearance's sake. Even cleaning an old master isn't solely to make it look better, the accumulated grime can destroy the painting.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

How can you redefine a word? Conserve means prevent further damage. It in no way has EVER meant in any hobby, collectible field or dictionary - improving appearance for appearance's sake. Even cleaning an old master isn't solely to make it look better, the accumulated grime can destroy the painting.

The same way he can call a baseball card an asset. Clueless. Apparently he needs to consult not only with better lawyers, but with a PR firm that can speak English.

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The same way he can call a baseball card an asset. Clueless. Apparently he needs to consult not only with better lawyers, but with a PR firm that can speak English.

Peter-Not sure why you have a problem with cards being called assets. An asset is defined as a useful or valuable thing. Certainly most cards have value and as such they can be considered assets. I understand that to some it is more palatable to spend money on assets than on cards, but at the end of the day it’s a distinction without a difference. There are things that Brent says that I disagree with, but I have no problem with this choice of words.

[swarmee]

New information for once: "All the grading card companies have seen our Marketplace Tenets. They have read our stance on conservation vs. alteration. And all that was done in the weeks to months before us actually posting it." He doesn't say that any of them have ratified those or even given their opinions on it. Radio silence sure is saying something to me; not to him I guess.

1952 Mantle discussion (18 min): "I've only seen it [the before picture] once." "Before and after pictures are not evidence." Hah. WTTE of "Physical evidence has to be on the card, or first hand statement from the submitter has to occur in order to disclose the conservation." Well, this is not really true.

"Conservation is not something that has to be disclosed." They will not stop an auction if a card for sale shows "conservation" in a before picture. Just keep digging, Brent.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by swarmee

New information for once: "All the grading card companies have seen our Marketplace Tenets. They have read our stance on conservation vs. alteration. And all that was done in the weeks to months before us actually posting it." He doesn't say that any of them have ratified those or even given their opinions on it. Radio silence sure is saying something to me; not to him I guess.

1952 Mantle discussion (18 min): "I've only seen it [the before picture] once." "Before and after pictures are not evidence." Hah. WTTE of "Physical evidence has to be on the card, or first hand statement from the submitter has to occur in order to disclose the conservation." Well, this is not really true.

"Conservation is not something that has to be disclosed." They will not stop an auction if a card for sale shows "conservation" in a before picture. Just keep digging, Brent.

It's like the old joke of how do you know a lawyer is lying.

Man, people here used to defend him by the droves, where are they?

[CobbSpikedMe]

Originally Posted by swarmee

1952 Mantle discussion (18 min): "Before and after pictures are not evidence."

What?! Did he really say that? I didn't get that far into the video.

ETA: So I guess all those autographed T206s that were shown with before and after pictures would still be good in his world then?

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe

What?! Did he really say that? I didn't get that far into the video.

ETA: So I guess all those autographed T206s that were shown with before and after pictures would still be good in his world then?

Right, as long as his clinic of doctors don't get caught by PSA, it would be considered Conserved.

[chalupacollects]

[QUOTE=swarmee;1879322]New information for once: "All the grading card companies have seen our Marketplace Tenets. They have read our stance on conservation vs. alteration. And all that was done in the weeks to months before us actually posting it." He doesn't say that any of them have ratified those or even given their opinions on it. Radio silence sure is saying something to me; not to him I guess.

So maybe the TPG's have read his "Tenets." Sounds like he has the gall to consider himself "the authority" that his word shall be beholden as sportscard gospel and how "assets" should be sold.

Who gave him the title? Is he the new "Lord of Sportscards?" In my opinion he seems to have a high opinion of himself...

[frankbmd]

[QUOTE=chalupacollects;1879434]

Originally Posted by swarmee

New information for once: "All the grading card companies have seen our Marketplace Tenets. They have read our stance on conservation vs. alteration. And all that was done in the weeks to months before us actually posting it." He doesn't say that any of them have ratified those or even given their opinions on it. Radio silence sure is saying something to me; not to him I guess.

Originally Posted by swarmee

So maybe the TPG's have read his "Tenets." Sounds like he has the gall to consider himself "the authority" that his word shall be beholden as sportscard gospel and how "assets" should be sold.

Who gave him the title? Is he the new "Lord of Sportscards?" In my opinion he seems to have a high opinion of himself...

Lake Oswego has always been the center of the sports card universe.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Why on earth would you keep watching?

It is fun watching a otherwise intelligent person go full short bus rider. It totally baffles me why Brent and Betsy keep making these amazingly stupid posts/videos that just make them look worse.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by bnorth

It is fun watching a otherwise intelligent person go full short bus rider. It totally baffles me why Brent and Betsy keep making these amazingly stupid posts/videos that just make them look worse.

I wonder if those curtains are in brents house...or maybe one of the oy gavaults!

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by swarmee

My thoughts:
1) (3 minutes in) He is confirming that his standards are not industry accepted and that the card industry needs to "mature" into accepting HIS definition of conservation. We see in the various responses to PWCC's posts on many message boards that very few people agree with him. He also claims that there are no grading company rules about what is/is not acceptable. This is a flat out lie, since PSA's grading page specifically lays out what they consider ungradeable alterations. He also fails to mention the importance of informing buyers of alterations/"conservations" that have occurred, something that is industry standard in many other collectible/investment fields.

2) (6:30 in) Tenets "are what we hold the grading company accountable for." "We will refine this to be in everbody's best interest." In the case of spooning out a crease, is it initially conserved because you can't spot it, but later becomes altered as it reappears? This is why nobody trusts what Brent has to say on this subject. PSA disagrees on removing pencil marks from a card; it's there in their list of alterations. He claims that his stance lines up with PSA's, but it's absolutely wrong.

3) As manufactured state: as long as it can't be detected, it isn't altered. Again, BS. If the intent is to hide flaws with an item, that is alteration. If it can't be detected by the grading companies, and they're claiming they can detect it, they need to come clean. Because more and more of these cards will end up getting reimbursed by their Grade Guarantee funds and continue to disgust their customers. Good alteration = Good conservation. No wonder he's such good friends with guys like Dick Towle. He's drank his solvent Kool-aid.

4) Take the 1951 Bowman Willie Mays RC that was recently found to have the embedded gum/wax stains on the reverse removed. If you didn't have the before picture, it's "conservation"; once you've been provided the before picture, is it now "alteration?" Or are you still going to call it conservation?

5) Take a shot every time he says "mature" or "asset". Let me know how drunk you are. At 9:45, he basically says that spooning out creases or pressing/flattening cards/corners IS CONSERVATION.

So there's my thoughts for the first 10 minutes. I'll keep watching.

These are good reasons why I consider him a very slithering shady individual on the surface of things. I am no longer a customer, that's for sure. Let's see how he starts getting $$$$ back from conservators like Towle, Burge, Moser, Et al. I have clear picture of that happening. Those kids have been spinning 1's into 3's, 3's into 5's and 7's into 9's for a really long time together. They are thick as theives, IMHO. They do more flips over there that Nadia Comaneci

[Peter_Spaeth]

In fairness I have never heard that Dick trims cards. He has admitted to doing things I would personally consider unacceptable alteration, but I have never heard trimming.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In fairness I have never heard that Dick trims cards. He has admitted to doing things I would personally consider unacceptable alteration, but I have never heard trimming.

I will edit my comment.

The Fake Jeters are to die laughing for...A long time in bed together...a long time. Great job tracing these fake cards sold for at least 100,000's of Thousands, that we know of. Probably Millions before this scam is completely uncovered.

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In fairness I have never heard that Dick trims cards. He has admitted to doing things I would personally consider unacceptable alteration, but I have never heard trimming.

I went to his web site and he lists what he does for cards and the general charges. Nothing is noted about trimming but a list of other changes are notes

http://www.gonewiththestain.com/price-list.html

Posted so we can see what they do to cards and what the cost is

Rich

[swarmee]

Looks like 2 of the 1993 SP Jeters sold for a combined $173K may be trimmed. Even more money PSA is on the hook for.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Looks like 2 of the 1993 SP Jeters sold for a combined $173K may be trimmed. Even more money PSA is on the hook for.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1294745