$117K SGC 8.5 DiMaggio WWG trimmed heavily, previously an SGC 6

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by G1911

Telling from a scan is often tough because it doesn't show most of the edge of a card.

Unless of course it is a 47 Tip Top Spahn?

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by steve B

If I was being paid hundreds of dollars to be sure if it was trimmed or not among other things I'd darn sure know how to tell.

But the opinion sellers don't care like you do, and they have proven that they don't care time and time again.

It really is laughable.

[steve B]

A small sugestion, and to some extent BODA is already doing it.

Other hobbies have Censuses, which aren't simply population reports, but are a more and more a visual reference of each known example of a rare item.

I think we really need something like that for most fairly difficult expensive cards.

[perezfan]

Well that one left A LOT of cardboard on the cutting room floor. When will mistakes of this magnitude start to hurt the Opinion Sellers' business? I would have thought long ago.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Well that one left A LOT of cardboard on the cutting room floor. When will mistakes of this magnitude start to hurt the Opinion Sellers' business? I would have thought long ago.

On the twelfth of never.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Well that one left A LOT of cardboard on the cutting room floor. When will mistakes of this magnitude start to hurt the Opinion Sellers' business? I would have thought long ago.

Never, not a chance of it ever happening in any way shape or form.

[doug.goodman]

Peter and Ben are correct.

The business is bullet proof.

'Too big to fail' I believe is the term the kidz use these days.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

On the twelfth of never.

....... and that's a long long time!

[Bigdaddy]

Originally Posted by ejharrington

The problem is if the card meets minimum size requirements, I don't see how SGC could conclude it was altered.

Don't you find it strange that a company that is well paid to determine if a card was altered can't do it but someone who is not paid and doesn't even have the card in hand can detect the alteration?

I can only come up with three possible reasons why that would be the case (as it has been many times):

• Incompetence
• Laziness
• Corruption

Am I missing something?

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

Don't you find it strange that a company that is well paid to determine if a card was altered can't do it but someone who is not paid and doesn't even have the card in hand can detect the alteration?

I can only come up with three possible reasons why that would be the case (as it has been many times):

• Incompetence
• Laziness
• Corruption

Am I missing something?

You're missing "time!" It takes a lot of time to prove these trimmings...much more time than any tpg'er spends on any card.

[Misunderestimated]

I just want to note that it was probably expensive to have this card graded. It clearly behoves the TPG to spend time on it and (try to) get it right, That's always the case. But these are the obvious examples. Its not just some ultra high grade common that's sketchy its a 6 figure card (?) .... even as PSA 1 this one is big ticket item.
I wonder if the submitter went to SGC first (or PSA) after the card was "enhanced" .... likely PSA. We'll never know.
Sadly, I've always had a soft spot for SGC with the "real vintage" stuff (pre WWII) ... Most of my cards from this set which I've been slowly building for years are SGC... I still don't have DiMaggio or Gehrig and 3 or 4 others ...... I wouldn't be in the market for anything close to this grade anyway.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

I set-up at hundreds of shows in the 80's and into the early 90's, and truly vintage NM to Gem Mint cards, were very, very few...and far between...and most of those were also trimmed or flattened out in brick like lucite holders to make them look better then they actually were.

Even cards I pulled right out of packs, I had a hard time, in good conscience, calling them MINT. I'd always just call them NM to be on the safe side.

That they started to become more common, when these huge price fluctuations began to develop between mid-graded stuff and high graded stuff, has proven to be not such a coincidence I guess.

This was my experience also. Remember when American Beauty T206s stuck out like sore thumbs because they were so much narrower?

I just do not buy the idea that these cards were found in the wild in superb condition.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Unless of course it is a 47 Tip Top Spahn?

Yeah it’s pretty easy sometimes. Notice the use of the word often. Notice that the Spahn was trimmed to dwarf size. Pretty easy for anyone with eyes to see that one.

[Bigdaddy]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

You're missing "time!" It takes a lot of time to prove these trimmings...much more time than any tpg'er spends on any card.

According to SGC's pricing schedule, this card would cost about $4k to grade. How much time should that buy?

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

According to SGC's pricing schedule, this card would cost about $4k to grade. How much time should that buy?

from what i understand no more time than an 85 don mattingly.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

Don't you find it strange that a company that is well paid to determine if a card was altered can't do it but someone who is not paid and doesn't even have the card in hand can detect the alteration?

I can only come up with three possible reasons why that would be the case (as it has been many times):

• Incompetence
• Laziness
• Corruption

Am I missing something?

You're missing the part about the opinion sellers not caring about you or your card, they care only about your wallet.

Originally Posted by Misunderestimated

It clearly behooves the TPG to spend time on it and (try to) get it right, That's always the case.

Does it really behoove them? Or does it behoove them to pump out as many opinions as possible in the least amount of time for the deepest dive into your wallet?

There have been threads in the past that explored the mathematics of time divided by opinion givers divided opinions given. Hint - the answer is smaller than you want it to be.


What's your recourse when you get bad service? They have your money.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by G1911

Yeah it’s pretty easy sometimes. Notice the use of the word often. Notice that the Spahn was trimmed to dwarf size. Pretty easy for anyone with eyes to see that one.

Don't ever lose your sense of humor, Greg....oh wait.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Don't ever lose your sense of humor, Greg....oh wait.

Sick burn.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

They wouldn't?

Guess what check the Pop this has now been bumped the Wagner that’s right to a PSA 10

Check the Pop WOW SO COOL WHAT A GREAT CARD THIS IS THE GRAIL now a 10 WOW

The card deserves it!!

Does anyone think this was done in error??

[Leon]

The person who originally graded it told me he couldn't see any trimming, and had no other evidence of alterations, so he graded it correctly at an 8. No conspiracy, no nothing. Now, after the fact and with other evidence, it's a different story. Trimming will never be an exact science and many are hard to tell, at best. .

As far as it being a 10...just some kind of gamesmanship or joke.

Concerning the original DiMaggio card, whomever graded it should have measured it first. Big mistake. The BODA group does a fantastic job. Kudos to them and I hope they keep going forever and a day!!

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Guess what check the Pop this has now been bumped the Wagner that’s right to a PSA 10

Check the Pop WOW SO COOL WHAT A GREAT CARD THIS IS THE GRAIL now a 10 WOW

The card deserves it!!

Does anyone think this was done in error??

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Leon

The person who originally graded it told me he couldn't see any trimming, and had no other evidence of alterations, so he graded it correctly at an 8. No conspiracy, no nothing. Now, after the fact and with other evidence, it's a different story. Trimming will never be an exact science and many are hard to tell, at best. .

Begs the question of expertise. If the supposed experts cannot tell the difference, doesn't say a lot for their services: if you can't catch stuff like this, why would I spend thousands of dollars for your blessing? Oh, and when the TPG pulls the cert out from under a trimmed card because the grade was wrong and they now look stupid and have to "do something", the one holding the hot potato at the time gets burned. "Hey, man, it's just an opinion and we decided to change it. You can't rely on our opinion." I've had this case brought to me several times and the end result is the same with the TPGs. They all say the same thing: "We don't owe you compensation. Look at our disclaimer." Here is SGC's:

9. Customer acknowledges and agrees the grading and/or authentication of items requires the exercise of individual judgment and professional opinion, which is subjective in nature, and can change from time to time. Therefore, SGC makes no warranty or representation and shall have no liability whatsoever to Customer for the grade or determination of authenticity assigned by SGC to any item.

20. Except as expressly set forth herein to the contrary, SGC DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, REGARDING SGC’S GOODS AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

22. SGC OR ANY OF ITS AFFILIATES, OR ANY OF ITS OR THEIR RESPECTIVE EMPLOYEES, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS OR AGENTS SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES, NOR SHALL SGC OR ANY OF ITS AFFILIATES, OR ANY OF ITS OR THEIR RESPECTIVE EMPLOYEES, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS OR AGENTS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES WHICH ARE BASED UPON ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE, BREACH OF WARRANTY, STRICT LIABILITY, OR ANY THEORY OTHER THAN THE LIMITED LIABILITY STATED HEREIN, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SAME.

Oh, and the final kick in the nuts for the customer who trusted SGC:

"25. Customer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold SGC and (as applicable) its parent, subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors, agents, and employees, harmless from any loss, claim or demand, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, made by any third party due to or arising out of or related to the submission of an item to SGC, related to the grade and/or determination of authenticity assigned by SGC, any services or products provided by SGC to Customer, Customer’s breach of this Agreement or the documents it incorporates by reference, or customer’s violation of any law or the rights of a third party. This indemnification will survive termination."

Yep, you read it right. If SGC messes up and the hapless buyer of the card comes a knockin', SGC will not only refuse to pay for its mistake, SGC will make its customer pay for its mistake. I wish I could write that sort of crap into my retainer. It would save me a fortune in malpractice insurance if i could just disclaim liability for any mistakes I might make. Hell, if i could do that I'd probably lose 40# of stress weight and not have gastritis every other day at work.

[Johnny630]

POP IS CORRECTED NOW IT’S back to a 8

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

The person who originally graded it told me he couldn't see any trimming, and had no other evidence of alterations, so he graded it correctly at an 8. No conspiracy, no nothing. Now, after the fact and with other evidence, it's a different story. Trimming will never be an exact science and many are hard to tell, at best. .

As far as it being a 10...just some kind of gamesmanship or joke.

Concerning the original DiMaggio card, whomever graded it should have measured it first. Big mistake. The BODA group does a fantastic job. Kudos to them and I hope they keep going forever and a day!!

At least according to O'Keeffe, the grader told him a different story, yes?

In any event does anyone claim it was pack issued as opposed to being sheet cut?

[MantleMarisFordBerra]

It's a sin to destroy a beautiful card like that.

One phrase I've noticed a couple times is "full boarders". For example when people are talking about the condition of a card they'll say "Great centering, strong color & full boarders". I suspect this phrase will become more & more common in the coming years.

Shout out to BODA (BlowOut Detective Agency) for all their amazing work.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

At least according to O'Keeffe, the grader told him a different story, yes?

In any event does anyone claim it was pack issued as opposed to being sheet cut?

O'keefe has 100% taken things out of context when he quoted an *auction house, concerning an item of mine, in at least one instance. I would take that into consideration when evaluating what he says.
The PSA grader, Bill Hughes, runs a baseball card and comic shop currently. He is super nice and seems as honest as the day is long. He also sets up at local shows. I have no reason not to believe him.

Also, I have not seen anyone say this was a pack issued card BUT, when graded, I am pretty sure the origin wasn't known, otherwise I don't think Bill would have graded it.

* I corrected my statement as it was an AH that was taken out of context, concerning one of my items. It was not me that was quoted.
.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Just a general observation, when you meet many of the criminals in this hobby, they can seem as honest as the day is long. There isn't much room for context or nuance here, either O'Keeffe misquoted Bill, or Bill has changed his story.

[jbsports33]

I have a feeling with the DiMaggio card, SGC just had some non-experience grader and sense it was already in an older holder - issues and problems with just getting this evaluated again could have been avoided with better eyes.
Not defending them, just saying things are happening with non-experienced graders more often now. This discussion is good to have either way and enjoyed the comments.
Also, this issue could be hard to identify the way these cards had been cut - really, we only have the standard catalog to tell us the size. Would be interesting to look more into these WWG cards - do we really know 100% it was the same card

Jimmy

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jbsports33

I have a feeling with the DiMaggio card, SGC just had some non-experience grader and sense it was already in an older holder - issues and problems with just getting this evaluated again could have been avoided with better eyes.
Not defending them, just saying things are happening with non-experienced graders more often now. This discussion is good to have either way and enjoyed the comments.
Also, this issue could be hard to identify the way these cards had been cut - really, we only have the standard catalog to tell us the size. Would be interesting to look more into these WWG cards - do we really know 100% it was the same card

Jimmy

No way an inexperienced grader was given a card of this magnitude without someone reviewing it.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

No way an inexperienced grader was given a card of this magnitude without someone reviewing it.

again...so much for random, anonymous grading.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Yeah, if they start convincingly 3D printing 1934 Goudey Lou Gehrig cards with ground up bits of 1934 Goudey Mark Koenig cards, then the high rollers are really gonna be in trouble.

That is essentially (minus the grinding up perhaps) how this and the other collectibles hobbies will die. The question is whether, in the case of baseball cards, that quality of 3D printing and exact chemical replication of the constituent materials is still a few months away or a few decades away. I'm risk tolerant enough that I'm still buying, but I don't delude myself into thinking that this couldn't happen in my lifetime.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

That is essentially (minus the grinding up perhaps) how this and the other collectibles hobbies will die. The question is whether, in the case of baseball cards, that quality of 3D printing and exact chemical replication of the constituent materials is still a few months away or a few decades away. I'm risk tolerant enough that I'm still buying, but I don't delude myself into thinking that this couldn't happen in my lifetime.

When it does, hopefully cards that were graded previously will retain their value as one could be relatively confident in them.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by jbsports33

I have a feeling with the DiMaggio card, SGC just had some non-experience grader and sense it was already in an older holder - issues and problems with just getting this evaluated again could have been avoided with better eyes.
Not defending them, just saying things are happening with non-experienced graders more often now. This discussion is good to have either way and enjoyed the comments.
Also, this issue could be hard to identify the way these cards had been cut - really, we only have the standard catalog to tell us the size. Would be interesting to look more into these WWG cards - do we really know 100% it was the same card

Jimmy

The DiMaggio card was graded in 2013 as an SGC 92 (8.5). The team of graders in 2013 was very small and very experienced. This alteration on this issue could not have slipped past any of those graders. And once again...the size of the card does not determine if it is trimmed or not. Detecting trimming is much more sophisticated than pulling out your plastic ruler.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

The DiMaggio card was graded in 2013 as an SGC 92 (8.5). The team of graders in 2013 was very small and very experienced. This alteration on this issue could not have slipped past any of those graders. And once again...the size of the card does not determine if it is trimmed or not. Detecting trimming is much more sophisticated than pulling out your plastic ruler.

Agreed. Some claim this is so obvious and easy to see. It is not. Out of millions of submissions it seems nearly impossible to do. If this had been psa so many would be saying they’re done with it and will only do sgc.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

When it does, hopefully cards that were graded previously will retain their value as one could be relatively confident in them.

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

That is essentially (minus the grinding up perhaps) how this and the other collectibles hobbies will die. The question is whether, in the case of baseball cards, that quality of 3D printing and exact chemical replication of the constituent materials is still a few months away or a few decades away. I'm risk tolerant enough that I'm still buying, but I don't delude myself into thinking that this couldn't happen in my lifetime.

I wouldn't necessarily say that either projection is accurate. The art world has had its share of forgery scandals. I recently watched a documentary on Netflix about a master forger in NY who fooled everyone for years. The solution is provenance. If you can trace a card's ownership chain back before the years when counterfeiting was technically feasible, then you have something that may be valuable. What we need is a new kind of registry, something like a catalogue raisonné (a comprehensive, annotated listing of all the known works of an artist either in a particular medium or all media) for high profile vintage cards. If I have a T206 Wagner that I got in 1977 and have had all that time, I could register it with a high-def scan. If/when I sell it, I could notify the catalog of the transfer and the chain of title would be clean. if I consigned it to REA, it would show the auction sale and the new owner would be registered. You could even assign fictitious names to the owners with the actual owners' names kept private.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I wouldn't necessarily say that either projection is accurate. The art world has had its share of forgery scandals. I recently watched a documentary on Netflix about a master forger in NY who fooled everyone for years. The solution is provenance. If you can trace a card's ownership chain back before the years when counterfeiting was technically feasible, then you have something that may be valuable. What we need is a new kind of registry, something like a catalogue raisonné (a comprehensive, annotated listing of all the known works of an artist either in a particular medium or all media) for high profile vintage cards. If I have a T206 Wagner that I got in 1977 and have had all that time, I could register it with a high-def scan. If/when I sell it, I could notify the catalog of the transfer and the chain of title would be clean. if I consigned it to REA, it would show the auction sale and the new owner would be registered. You could even assign fictitious names to the owners with the actual owners' names kept private.

I think many of us who want to avoid altered cards have been doing exactly as you suggest--which is to look in VCP or other online resources to look and see who first sold the card we are interested in buying. It is not a perfect process but it does reduce the risk. Again this requires that the collector doing this has a detailed history of the bad apples in the hobby to make that research as accurate as possible.

[theshowandme]

SGC is aware


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by theshowandme

sgc is aware


sent from my iphone using tapatalk

lolololol

[Peter_Spaeth]

Is "we will be sure to take action if it is deemed necessary" a circular statement/tautology? Greg M., what say you?

[swarmee]

And with no guarantee in place, not sure what action they'd need to take in order to get the current owner to return it to be placed in an AUTH ALTERED slab without getting paid back.

[Fred]

If SGC does realize there is something "wrong" with the card based on all of the evidence provided, what is their next step? What's the difference in price between a 6 and 8.5? My guess it has to be a huge difference in price.

I wonder if TPGs have insurance for something like this. I would have to believe no insurance company would be so blind to the possible fraud that could result in payouts.

Do any of the TPGs provide a limited indemnity against such huge possible payouts? Or do the TPGs offer any type of protection for the hobbyist?

Hey, I see you lost about $100K on that, we'll give you lifetime free submissions.

Anybody want to guess on the response? It would be nice for them to examine all the evidence and do the right thing, but think about the potential backlash for doing the right thing.

Edited to add - oh crap, that's the difference between 8.5 and A... OMG

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

No way an inexperienced grader was given a card of this magnitude without someone reviewing it.

Come on Peter, you know that as much as you want to believe what you wrote, it's not guaranteed to be true.

Either an experienced or an inexperienced opinion giver, maybe the janitor, no matter how you 'slice it' (pun intended) the opinion selling company f'd up (I'm trying to cuss less) on that opinion.

Doug

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Fred

If SGC does realize there is something "wrong" with the card based on all of the evidence provided, what is their next step? What's the difference in price between a 6 and 8.5? My guess it has to be a huge difference in price.

SGC has no guarantee.

Therefore, SGC makes no warranty or representation and shall have no liability whatsoever to Customer for the grade or determination of authenticity assigned by SGC to any item.

https://www.gosgc.com/terms

I'll leave it up to the lawyers of the board as to whether they can actually fully disclaim liability in this fashion.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Is "we will be sure to take action if it is deemed necessary" a circular statement/tautology? Greg M., what say you?

It's more of tautology; as it is designed to say nothing but the conclusion isn't itself a premise. Empty statement constructed in such a way that it works whether the components are true or false - they either will or will not do something based on if they think they should or should not.

[2dueces]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

I know the pay-off is substantial, but I'm still shocked at the cajones of somebody to trim a card, that is already 20K+ card nowadays. They've gotta have a lot of confidence that it's gonna pass.

I don't even have the confidence to cut cards from sheets or strips that are meant to be cut, with my crappy Staples issued paper cutter . But I do understand that people with the right tools and skill-set, can make it seem imperceptible to most.

I've said this before, but I set-up at hundreds of shows in the 80's and into the early 90's, and truly vintage NM to Gem Mint cards, were very, very few...and far between...and most of those were also trimmed or flattened out in brick like lucite holders to make them look better then they actually were.

Even cards I pulled right out of packs, I had a hard time, in good conscience, calling them MINT. I'd always just call them NM to be on the safe side.

That they started to become more common, when these huge price fluctuations began to develop between mid-graded stuff and high graded stuff, has proven to be not such a coincidence I guess.

That Dimaggio "6" would have been the centerpiece of almost any dealers table, because that "8.5", would have never existed in the first place.

Altering cards is not NEW. Back in the 80's, dealers used to color in the borders of 71' Topps cards, to get an extra buck or two a card. Can you imagine what somebody would do for an extra 100K a card?

I know I sound like a broken record but in all the hundreds of T206’s at shows I never saw a Mint one in the 80’s. I’ve only seen a handful of near perfect ones that were found in books free from handling and yet they still would have had a hard time getting a 7 in today’s standards. I view every T206 above a 6 today with suspicion. Not saying all are tampered with just hard to believe thousands are that nice naturally

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

The DiMaggio card was graded in 2013 as an SGC 92 (8.5). The team of graders in 2013 was very small and very experienced. This alteration on this issue could not have slipped past any of those graders. And once again...the size of the card does not determine if it is trimmed or not. Detecting trimming is much more sophisticated than pulling out your plastic ruler.

I would disagree somewhat. Size is definitely one factor in determining trimming. It's not the only one though.
.

[Johnny630]

Have Their Chickens Come home to Roost? One would think so but many could care less at this point. For the Investor, not Collector, and let’s face it the people who can afford this caliber and price of a card are Mostly Investors. They have spoken, and they do not care once the card is in a holder with a number grade.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Have Their Chickens Come home to Roost? One would think so but many could care less at this point. For the Investor, not Collector, and let’s face it the people who can afford this caliber and price of a card are Mostly Investors. They have spoken, and they do not care once the card is in a holder with a number grade.

I suspect they will care if they can't find a buyer for it when they go to sell. Of course, that assumes that potential buyers realize that the opinion on the flip is spurious, and refuse to buy it in spite of the slab.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Leon

I would disagree somewhat. Size is definitely one factor in determining trimming. It's not the only one though.
.

My point was that you cannot simply go by the size of the card to determine if it has been trimmed. If only it were that easy.

[Fred]

Hobby reference material will provide the "standard" size of cards for the different card issues.

Would it be a surprise to anyone if the number of vintage cards in high grade with razor sharp corners did not meet the "standard" size criteria?

And if the above is the case, what could be deduced from that information?

You simply can't go by the size of the card, but it's not a bad starting point to wonder if the card is trimmed.

I collect T206s but I'm not an aficionado. However I can see the huge variance in sizes for the T206 offerings (for example - AB back cards are more narrow than other backs). I would still have to believe that if a majority of high grade (razor sharp corners) T206 cards are smaller than the standard size card, then it's going to be difficult to convince me the card wasn't doctored.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tabe

SGC has no guarantee.



https://www.gosgc.com/terms

I'll leave it up to the lawyers of the board as to whether they can actually fully disclaim liability in this fashion.

But there was one in place when they graded it years ago.