Quote:
Originally Posted by gunboat82
Everyone's heard the "no harm, no foul" argument, just as you've heard the "there may be unknown long-term risks" argument. The line is drawn, and few people are going to switch sides on that point.
The more important question is where do you stand on disclosing what's been done to the card? That's the real heart of the argument. Should the Travises of the world be allowed to sell doctored cards without disclosing that they're doctored because, as you put it, 99.44% of potential buyers will never know the difference?
|
I always disclose what I know on raw cards. I'm sure many don't.
Now, If I had a vintage 60's Topps card that I took and removed a crease from using Kurt's methods, and cleaned some wax up off the back via the same, and sent that in to SGC and it gets a 6 because they can't tell (this is what happens every day...) and I get that back - do I say anything other than this card is an SGC 6? I don't know that I would do that but not sure I can find fault with those who do.
The whole point of slabbing cards up to sell is to be able to let the grade speak for the card and not to necessarily go over every single detail about the physical card - which the large majority of ebay sellers anymore don't anyway.
Herein of course lies the conundrum. If / when creases start returning en masse on "fixed" cards that have been slabbed, there is of course going to be a problem. But how will it be addressed in reality? My guess is the grading companies will take the hit over and above "bad actors" in the hobby who will of course largely remain anonymous. Kurt's customers are becoming so widespread it's not as if there are going to be singular villains like a Gary Moser or PWCC to point to. IMO anyway.