I totally forgot PWCC had an auction ending tonight

[Rhotchkiss]

A buddy just texted me that “prices seemed soft”. I had no idea what he was talking about until he reminded me that a PWCC auction was ending tonight. I remembered that an auction had started a few days ago, but I did not follow a single lot and had no idea it was closing tonight. Anyone else take this one off?

[Throttlesteer]

I watched to see if there was any impact. I disagree with your buddy. Prices seemed just as silly as usual (e.g. $4k for a PSA 5 T206 Speaker). There are plenty who still want to buy from PWCC.

[scooter729]

I've been following some of the sales, and haven't seen too much softness in the ones I've been looking at. I may not be looking at all the cards, but the handful I wanted to watch were coming in close to, if not higher than, recent prior sales.

[Johnny630]

Business as usual the beat goes on....

[Rhotchkiss]

Well, soft or not, I didn’t bid. Hell, I totally forgot an auction was ending. Probably the first time in 3-4 years I didn’t bid on something. I have to imagine I am not the only one.

[PiratesWS1979]

Originally Posted by Throttlesteer

I watched to see if there was any impact. I disagree with your buddy. Prices seemed just as silly as usual (e.g. $4k for a PSA 5 T206 Speaker). There are plenty who still want to buy from PWCC.

But the Speaker had EXTREMELY LARGE borders. Hopefully PSA and SGC keeps a file on that card.

[Steve D]

Well, I was just finally able to pick up a T202 Wood/Speaker, Speaker Rounding Third, after years of searching and being outbid.


Steve

[Peter_Spaeth]

Never again.

[Throttlesteer]

Originally Posted by PiratesWS1979

But the Speaker had EXTREMELY LARGE borders. Hopefully PSA and SGC keeps a file on that card.

True and agree. It's a nice card that maybe should have grabbed $2-2500.

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Never again.

+1

[frankbmd]

I didn’t look.

I didn’t bid.

I didn’t forget.

No regrets.

[bounce]

there's some of everything. a few of the items mentioned were strong. the ruth and gehrig goudeys seemed pretty strong as well.

however, i'd say the matty portraits were definitely lower than they'd been and those cards were nice. johnson pitching was probably disappointing to the consignor, and the young portraits weren't crazy. even a couple of the cobbs seemed somewhat reasonable to me.

it's only one night, but so far it's not records across the board like had been going on for the past two years or more. will be interesting to see what happens as the auction continues.

[Bicem]

No thanks, too many better places to get stuff.

[irv]

I haven't bid in any of their auctions now for 2 years and have zero future plans of doing so.

[Vintageclout]

Soft? I Don’t think so....

SGC 4.5 Green Cobb - $15K
PSA 4.5 Cobb Bat Off - $6K
PSA 4.5 Red Cobb - $5.8K
SGC 5 #144 Goudey Ruth - $10.6K
PSA 5 Brunner’s Young - Nearly $6K
PSA 4 M116 Wagner - $4.7K
PSA 5 T206 Speaker - Nearly $4K
PSA 5 US Caramel Gehrig - $6.1K

Just a few examples of strong pricing.

[Peter_Spaeth]

To my eye the Caramel Gehrig was really white.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1932-U-S-Ca...p2047675.l2557

This natural beauty boasts an overall cleanliness not normally seen on the issue with virtually zero product toning present.

Maybe.

Why are we seeing all these super bright cards slabbed by S_C recently?

[chalupacollects]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Well, soft or not, I didn’t bid. Hell, I totally forgot an auction was ending. Probably the first time in 3-4 years I didn’t bid on something. I have to imagine I am not the only one.

The therapy is working?

[Kingcobb]

Prices were pretty strong PSA 4 commons averaging 120 5's close to 200 +. HOFer's were ridiculous.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Business as usual the beat goes on....

yep dont know why poeple say they arent bidding...when prices speak for themselves...

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To my eye the Caramel Gehrig was really white.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1932-U-S-Ca...p2047675.l2557

This natural beauty boasts an overall cleanliness not normally seen on the issue with virtually zero product toning present.

Maybe.

Why are we seeing all these super bright cards slabbed by S_C recently?

I don't think there's any question that gehrig's been chemically bathed/bleached!

[Rhotchkiss]

I have not looked at the prices/checked the auction, but it sounds like I got some bad info that prices were soft (the Speaker sounds silly). That said, I watched True Romance (great movie - classic) with my wife last night and was not checking the phone every 3 minutes like I had done many times over in the past. And it was great! Yes, the therapy is working.

Between Heritage, REA, Memory Lane (sick auction coming up BTW), LOTG, Mile High, Brockelman, Sterling, Goldin, SCP, Baggers, etc etc., not to mention regular shows in Chantilly and Philly and maybe the national (or white plains), I have plenty of options and opportunities.

So, for the foreseeable future, PWCC is not an option for me. And, for now, I will ignore their sales on VCP as comps.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

I don't think there's any question that gehrig's been chemically bathed/bleached!

so if someone bought this card thinking it was bleached (bought the card not the holder) and was very confidant that it was like you, are they a future victim if there is more evidence of it..

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

so if someone bought this card thinking it was bleached (bought the card not the holder) and was very confidant that it was like you, are they a future victim if there is more evidence of it..

im not following your "thought" process?

[1952boyntoncollector]

If someone stated on net54, i bought that card, and i KNOW it was bleached but i bought it anyway, and 2 months later there is a photo of the card 3 grades lower that sold 2 months prior to the purchaser that bought the card

are they avictim even though they KNOW it was bleached/altered when they bought (and posted admission of such on net54) the card and now want to use the PSA guarantee or whatever its called or ask for money back for PWCC...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

I don't think there's any question that gehrig's been chemically bathed/bleached!

This is the third or fourth such card we've seen recently in an S_C holder that looked (to my eye) way too white. I don't know what's going on. A card that white, or as white as that Leaf Jackie was, should raise red flags.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To my eye the Caramel Gehrig was really white.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1932-U-S-Ca...p2047675.l2557

This natural beauty boasts an overall cleanliness not normally seen on the issue with virtually zero product toning present.

Maybe.

Why are we seeing all these super bright cards slabbed by S_C recently?

I see what you did there, no more G in SGC

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by PiratesWS1979

But the Speaker had EXTREMELY LARGE borders. Hopefully PSA and SGC keeps a file on that card.

Before Moser takes a file to it

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This is the third or fourth such card we've seen recently in an S_C holder that looked (to my eye) way too white. I don't know what's going on. A card that white, or as white as that Leaf Jackie was, should raise red flags.

Sadly I think the reality is that some alterations are not detectable...atleast not with current techniques used by SGC/PSA/Beckett.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Sadly I think the reality is that some alterations are not detectable...atleast not with current techniques used by SGC/PSA/Beckett.

How is it not detectable, you and I see it plain as day.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

How is it not detectable, you and I see it plain as day.

I dunno how to answer that, Pete????? Borders on 85 year old cardboard just aren't that white in nature...only after treated not to mention the white speckles throughout the background.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

How is it not detectable, you and I see it plain as day.

Are you being paid not to see it?

[Snapolit1]

Peter - please cease from being so cynical. This card looks exactly what I'd imagine a card that was sitting in the bottom of a candy box many decades ago would look like. Pristine blinding white. Snow white. White as the rice I am enjoyng for lunch.

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To my eye the Caramel Gehrig was really white.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1932-U-S-Ca...p2047675.l2557

This natural beauty boasts an overall cleanliness not normally seen on the issue with virtually zero product toning present.

Maybe.

Why are we seeing all these super bright cards slabbed by S_C recently?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

I dunno how to answer that, Pete????? Borders on 85 year old cardboard just aren't that white in nature...only after treated not to mention the white speckles throughout the background.

That issue is notorious for toning. Even Brent notes, without a trace of irony, how unusually white it is. LOL.

[topcat61]

Originally Posted by scooter729

I've been following some of the sales, and haven't seen too much softness in the ones I've been looking at. I may not be looking at all the cards, but the handful I wanted to watch were coming in close to, if not higher than, recent prior sales.

Why would anyone want to continue doing business with this company? Certainly not on the level in any way, shape or form. I check the bids of PWCC's cards and check the % the bidder has had with them.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

That issue is notorious for toning. Even Brent notes, without a trace of irony, how unusually white it is. LOL.

Just snowballing here, maybe he uses those type of descriptions as a code. His "real" friends know that means STAY FAR AWAY.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by topcat61

Why would anyone want to continue doing business with this company? Certainly not on the level in any way, shape or form. I check the bids of PWCC's cards and check the % the bidder has had with them.

Because they are selling cards people want.

[BeanTown]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Never again.

+1

They will slowly lose legit buyers and consignors. They will be forced to stop doing unethical money making practices. The once all mighty eBay seller known as PWCC, will become an after thought within two years.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by BeanTown

+1

They will slowly lose legit buyers and consignors. They will be forced to stop doing unethical money making practices. The once all mighty eBay seller known as PWCC, will become an after thought within two years.

Same thing happened to GlacierBayDVD. And JayandMarie1centCDs. They were both considered too big to fail. They both crumbled.

[RedsFan1941]

Originally Posted by topcat61

Why would anyone want to continue doing business with this company? Certainly not on the level in any way, shape or form. I check the bids of PWCC's cards and check the % the bidder has had with them.

where else are you going to get a brown lenox?

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by BeanTown

+1

They will slowly lose legit buyers and consignors. They will be forced to stop doing unethical money making practices. The once all mighty eBay seller known as PWCC, will become an after thought within two years.

Hopefully this will be the case. But the fact that prices are still very strong indicates that word of the scandal has not spread beyond Net54 and BO. It really demonstrates how many collectors there are who do not frequent these forums.

I know that many (less vocal) people here are probably still buying from PWCC because they want "the stuff"... but a big chunk here is not. And the boycotters are barely impacting prices realized (if at all). So until the word somehow reaches a larger audience, we might not see PWCC's demise anytime soon.

The best short-term opportunity for increasing exposure is obviously at The National. Hopefully, something will happen in Chicago, which will reveal their corruption to a greater audience. Otherwise we're likely in for more of the same deception.

[irv]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

I don't think there's any question that gehrig's been chemically bathed/bleached!

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This is the third or fourth such card we've seen recently in an S_C holder that looked (to my eye) way too white. I don't know what's going on. A card that white, or as white as that Leaf Jackie was, should raise red flags.

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Sadly I think the reality is that some alterations are not detectable...atleast not with current techniques used by SGC/PSA/Beckett.

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

How is it not detectable, you and I see it plain as day.

Like I mentioned to Swarmee in another thread, if there is no way to detect the bleach/chemicals, how can they reject it?

I agree it is definitely suspect but if there is no, 100% proof, that it has seen a chemical bath, then their hands are tied.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by irv

Like I mentioned to Swarmee in another thread, if there is no way to detect the bleach/chemicals, how can they reject it?

I agree it is definitely suspect but if there is no, 100% proof, that it has seen a chemical bath, then their hands are tied.

Cards get rejected for EVIDENCE of trimming, etc., there is no 100 percent proof standard, don't know where you are coming up with that. The human eye is probably the best evidence in any event. That's how most alterations are detected. Do you think they're putting cards through lab tests?

[packs]

Lets say a card is bleached, will it disintegrate over time? What are you left with in 20 years?

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Cards get rejected for EVIDENCE of trimming, etc., there is no 100 percent proof standard, don't know where you are coming up with that. The human eye is probably the best evidence in any event. That's how most alterations are detected. Do you think they're putting cards through lab tests?

What are you suggesting then? If a vintage card looks too clean it shouldn't be graded because it was probably bleached? I'm not sure how this could be detected without some kind of forensic test, and don't think a card should be rejected without some kind of evidence that it was, or probably was altered.

Looking too clean or white is not enough evidence in my opinion for a TPG to reject a card.

[trambo]

I bid on 2 t205's last night in the PWCC. I bid accordingly to what I thought they were worth and used a snipe program to do the bidding. I lost both auctions.

Auction 1 was the same card listed and sold by PWCC in February (same PSA cert on the card). Of the bids by the winning bidder in all auctions, 66% of their bids were for PWCC auctions.

Auction 2-new item. Of the bids by the winning bidder in all auctions, 41% of their bids were for PWCC auctions.

The above tells me that at least auction 1 was a shill bid but most likely both were.

I wasn't too broken up that I didn't win the cards (ok..not broken up at all) but it crystallized my opinion of the shady tactics PWCC employs. Nothing to do here really but stay away from PWCC auctions as many have said. I'm sure this sort of thing has been posted more than once but thought my first hand experience may help someone even if it's buried on this thread.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Peter - please cease from being so cynical. This card looks exactly what I'd imagine a card that was sitting in the bottom of a candy box many decades ago would look like. Pristine blinding white. Snow white. White as the rice I am enjoyng for lunch.

A rule of thumb is to avoid Pre-War baseball cards you can read in the dark by.

[irv]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Cards get rejected for EVIDENCE of trimming, etc., there is no 100 percent proof standard, don't know where you are coming up with that. The human eye is probably the best evidence in any event. That's how most alterations are detected. Do you think they're putting cards through lab tests?

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

What are you suggesting then? If a vintage card looks too clean it shouldn't be graded because it was probably bleached? I'm not sure how this could be detected without some kind of forensic test, and don't think a card should be rejected without some kind of evidence that it was, or probably was altered.

Looking too clean or white is not enough evidence in my opinion for a TPG to reject a card.

What Jesse says, Peter.
With trimming, one can compare to other cards or look for the telltale signs. Coloring is the same, tilt the card (if it's that easy?)

A clean card that was put away between pgs or out of the light altogether since new, I am sure would still be fairly clean, no?

Trust me, I'm as pissed as you are about this whole scandal and I am not trying to defend anyone here, but if the bleach and/or chemicals are not detectable how can a TPG reject the card based on them assuming the card is too clean looking?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by irv

What Jesse says, Peter.
With trimming, one can compare to other cards or look for the telltale signs. Coloring is the same, tilt the card (if it's that easy?)

A clean card that was put away between pgs or out of the light altogether since new, I am sure would still be fairly clean, no?

Trust me, I'm as pissed as you are about this whole scandal and I am not trying to defend anyone here, but if the bleach and/or chemicals are not detectable how can a TPG reject the card based on them assuming the card is too clean looking?

Do you need a lab test to tell you if someone is probably drunk, Dale?
And why is it these cleaned cards all seem to be S_C?

[Bugsy]

Originally Posted by irv

What Jesse says, Peter.
With trimming, one can compare to other cards or look for the telltale signs. Coloring is the same, tilt the card (if it's that easy?)

A clean card that was put away between pgs or out of the light altogether since new, I am sure would still be fairly clean, no?

Trust me, I'm as pissed as you are about this whole scandal and I am not trying to defend anyone here, but if the bleach and/or chemicals are not detectable how can a TPG reject the card based on them assuming the card is too clean looking?

Bleached cards will often illuminate under a black light.

[Steve D]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

What are you suggesting then? If a vintage card looks too clean it shouldn't be graded because it was probably bleached? I'm not sure how this could be detected without some kind of forensic test, and don't think a card should be rejected without some kind of evidence that it was, or probably was altered.

Looking too clean or white is not enough evidence in my opinion for a TPG to reject a card.

If that were the case (rejecting cards that are "too clean"), the Black Swamp find, for one, would have never been graded.

Steve