PWCC's 1936 Goudey World Wide Gum DiMaggio PSA 7

[Whodunit]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

Just so I don't have dig through 50 something pages. Is there real truth the fact offered that Brent encouraged a member to bid without the intention of winning. I'm a Brent supporter and have been defending him elsewhere, but that would make me look like quite the clown.

Yes, this is Cortney DeLorme, the one that started this spiral around page 30 or so. I provided a screenshot showing Brent asking me to bid on the card and assuring me that I would be outbid. On that auction, I think the account that I used was the one you guys will refer to as S***N.

A lot of people think this is a one time deal. When the dust settles on this, more is to come. Anyone supporting Brent, will absolutely look foolish. I'm not saying that they are less intelligent than anyone else, but in light of the new evidence that has been shown and what all else I have, he has no defense.

Have you noticed that Betsy has called me out on many occasion about a "very large unpaid debt" and that I've refuted it with screenshots and timestamps asking for an invoice prior to her post...............and, now she won't address it at all.

Then, to make it even more fun, she originally said I was blocked b/c of the debt, but when that was refuted, changed it to "Cortney DeLorme is the first person in the history of PWCC to be blocked as a person and not as a bidder". Every time I shoot em down, they reload and try to stick a dagger in me somewhere else. They'll eventually learn, I have 5 years of this stuff and I have no problem implicating whoever needs implicating to make my point.................and, again, my point is NOT that I lost 30K on the card when I sold it via Ken. It is the fact that Brent was my best friend (or so I thought), I was high biggest consignor with no close second, I trusted him wo reservation, he knew I wouldn't check behind what he told me..................and he used that against me to unload a card that he knew I'd have had no interest in had I known it's history.

Back to your original question, yes, there is proof of shill bidding requests by brent. Another quick screenshot can quickly alleviate that question.

Another question that keeps getting brought up is bid retractions. That account has 10 in the last 6 months (0 in last 30)...............when all of them were over a year ago . And of those 10 retractions, 9 were on ONE AUCTION where I had to manually retract each bid that i placed (t206 plank......therefor getting more retractions) to back out of the auction b/c of other shill bidding. So, Im absolutely positive that the "6 month" retraction goes away over MUCH LONGER time frame. I have another account that I use maybe once a month and haven't retracted since 2/16 but yet all of them are still there.

Cortney

[Whodunit]

Anger provokes responses. Those responses can sometimes be damaging to ones credibility and insulting to others. I have no intention of doing any of those to anyone or any business...........except to those who INTENTINALLY lie to me and steal from me. My previous comments about SGC and a "$20 Card Collector" (which from what I hear is the name of a new forum page) was directed at ONE PERSON for being an argumentative prick with no substantive argument............not people that collect cards in a range less than, say, $10K. The posts were unacceptable, and I sincerely apologize. SGC has graded with the toughest of them and aggravated the crap out of me on one particular instance..............but, garnered great respect from it. For example, I had 9 PSA 8 '57 Unitas 8's that I took to a show and wanted to have ONE crossed over to an SGC 8.5 or 9. I spent over 3K on crossovers for them to tell me that only 3 of those 8's even fit their 8 requirements. So, my respect of their grading techniques grew tremendously. However, the reason I don't buy SGC is b/c of their lack of qualifiers. When I buy a card, if it's been trimmed, altered, etc., (ahem.......cue, BRENT) I want to know so that I can STAY AWAY (AGAIN, CUE BRENT) from it. I don't buy that stuff. That's just my personal preference. The same goes for BVG. I prefer PSA b/c of their qualifiers. Are they perfect, no. Are any of us, absolutely not. But, PSA, in my humble opinion have garnered the respect of the hobby and hold the most stable prices of any of the companies. That's MY OPINION, nothing more; so please don't attack me over that. This post is simply an apology for those 2 comments that I made out of frustration and to otherwise defend SGC and their business practices, which I made a fool of myself earlier in the thread for saying the things that I did.

And quite a few of you brought it to my attn. ;-)

[PhillipAbbott79]

Please post the entire conversation history.

[Buythatcard]

Just spent an hour reading these posts. I have discovered one thing, there are a lot of hostile people out there. Stick to the subject instead of bullying one another. People seem to have a lot of guts when they are behind a keyboard in the safety of their homes.

Had to post since I wanted to reach my 800th post.

[swarmee]

The way I read your last post Cortney, is that you believe SGC will holder a known trimmed/altered card with a number grade instead of Authentic. I am not sure that is the case. PSA will not either, since there are no qualifiers for trimmed or skinned or recolored. Those are Authentic - Altered at PSA as well. Yes, a card with writing on it could be a PSA 8(MK) or an SGC 1.5, and those are drastically different things. But if SGC is grading trimmed cards with a number and you have proof of that, that would hurt them as well.

[Whodunit]

Originally Posted by swarmee

The way I read your last post Cortney, is that you believe SGC will holder a known trimmed/altered card with a number grade instead of Authentic. I am not sure that is the case. PSA will not either, since there are no qualifiers for trimmed or skinned or recolored. Those are Authentic - Altered at PSA as well. Yes, a card with writing on it could be a PSA 8(MK) or an SGC 1.5, and those are drastically different things. But if SGC is grading trimmed cards with a number and you have proof of that, that would hurt them as well.

I don't have anything on SGC other than respect for their grading practices. I don't own SGC holders, but again, that's just personal preference. I guess I'm one of the ones that people on here like to call the "PSA Sheeple". SGC is extremely hard on some things. As for their q's, I just know that it's either A or a #. I'm not an SGC expert by any stretch of the imagination, so I may have been off base on that one. If so, please forgive me.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Whodunit

I'm not an SGC expert by any stretch of the imagination, so I may have been off base on that one. If so, please forgive me.

Thanks for the clarification.

[Bicem]

Originally Posted by swarmee

The way I read your last post Cortney, is that you believe SGC will holder a known trimmed/altered card with a number grade instead of Authentic. I am not sure that is the case. PSA will not either, since there are no qualifiers for trimmed or skinned or recolored. Those are Authentic - Altered at PSA as well. Yes, a card with writing on it could be a PSA 8(MK) or an SGC 1.5, and those are drastically different things. But if SGC is grading trimmed cards with a number and you have proof of that, that would hurt them as well.

SGC will grade altered cards with numeric grades. I owned this Flick and it was clearly trimmed.... (as mentioned by REA)

http://bid.robertedwardauctions.com/...e?itemid=41097

The concept and idea of grading is a good one, what it has become is ludicrous in my opinion. The price differences people will pay between grades when the entire system is severely flawed is absurd.

[MW1]

Originally Posted by Bicem

SGC will grade altered cards with numeric grades. I owned this Flick and it was clearly trimmed.... (as mentioned by REA)

http://bid.robertedwardauctions.com/...e?itemid=41097

The concept and idea of grading is a good one, what it has become is ludicrous in my opinion. The price differences people will pay between grades when the entire system is severely flawed is absurd.

Jeff,

First, Cortney was arguing that he collects PSA because SGC doesn't use qualifiers, not because SGC grades altered cards. Second, the example you give is a statistical outlier. To the best of my knowledge, there were some issued 1908 PC770s that have normal postcard cuts and some that were unissued and have somewhat haphazard hand cuts--they would be similar in nature to Wheaties or Post Cereal cards cut off of boxes. Certainly, these types of cuts were not meant to be deceptive or to artificially improve the condition of the postcard in question.

[nrm1977]

Originally Posted by Whodunit

Yes, this is Cortney DeLorme, the one that started this spiral around page 30 or so. I provided a screenshot showing Brent asking me to bid on the card and assuring me that I would be outbid. On that auction, I think the account that I used was the one you guys will refer to as S***N.

A lot of people think this is a one time deal. When the dust settles on this, more is to come. Anyone supporting Brent, will absolutely look foolish. I'm not saying that they are less intelligent than anyone else, but in light of the new evidence that has been shown and what all else I have, he has no defense.

Have you noticed that Betsy has called me out on many occasion about a "very large unpaid debt" and that I've refuted it with screenshots and timestamps asking for an invoice prior to her post...............and, now she won't address it at all.

Then, to make it even more fun, she originally said I was blocked b/c of the debt, but when that was refuted, changed it to "Cortney DeLorme is the first person in the history of PWCC to be blocked as a person and not as a bidder". Every time I shoot em down, they reload and try to stick a dagger in me somewhere else. They'll eventually learn, I have 5 years of this stuff and I have no problem implicating whoever needs implicating to make my point.................and, again, my point is NOT that I lost 30K on the card when I sold it via Ken. It is the fact that Brent was my best friend (or so I thought), I was high biggest consignor with no close second, I trusted him wo reservation, he knew I wouldn't check behind what he told me..................and he used that against me to unload a card that he knew I'd have had no interest in had I known it's history.

Back to your original question, yes, there is proof of shill bidding requests by brent. Another quick screenshot can quickly alleviate that question.

Another question that keeps getting brought up is bid retractions. That account has 10 in the last 6 months (0 in last 30)...............when all of them were over a year ago . And of those 10 retractions, 9 were on ONE AUCTION where I had to manually retract each bid that i placed (t206 plank......therefor getting more retractions) to back out of the auction b/c of other shill bidding. So, Im absolutely positive that the "6 month" retraction goes away over MUCH LONGER time frame. I have another account that I use maybe once a month and haven't retracted since 2/16 but yet all of them are still there.

Cortney

I admire you coming forward with this information. After reading that text message (just save the picture and you can enlarge the text) and what you said in the above statement, how can anyone have any faith you aren't being shilled when go after a card by PWCC?! I'm just scratching my head...

On another note, I really enjoy these forums, lots of great information and people. I'm not here to argue with anyone as most people have good points. I just believe in having integrity and it doesn't seem like PWCC has any. I always sensed some corruption.

Again, these forums are great for collectors discussing sports cards, lots of amazing information both good and bad.

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

It's kinda common sense when you have bidders with tons of bid retractions along with high percentages of bids with only PWCC that rampant shilling is taking place. But let's face it, bidders will keep bidding to get access to quality material and consigners will keep consigning to get top dollar.

I would hope that those that participate in PWCC auctions go in with a budgetary plan and a good sniping software.

As for the DiMaggio, If you have knowledge that a card has been fixed up to the degree that this one was you should include that information to your buyers even if you think some of them won't care about its history and it will hurt short term profits. Protecting your reputation is by far worth more in the long term.

[iowadoc77]

That is a great point AJ but we unfortunately live in a world where short term financial game too often supersedes long term reputation. Quick buck versus respect.

[PhillipAbbott79]

Seems like this thread is finally run its course, until Cortney posts more of the conversation, or preferably all of it.

[ezez420]

Removed

[PhillipAbbott79]

Hmm. The thread was just about to go off the front page and we still do not have the entire conversation that Cortney was hoping to give us.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by PhillipAbbott79

Hmm. The thread was just about to go off the front page and we still do not have the entire conversation that Cortney was hoping to give us.

right, perhaps he has been in talks with someone and has agreed not to show anything else. Someone that said has years of texts to only show 2 or 3 snippets really does not give fair context. Plus he kept saying he would show them and at the same time keeps saying that everything he says is the truth

[Leon]

Originally Posted by PhillipAbbott79

Seems like this thread is finally run its course, until Cortney posts more of the conversation, or preferably all of it.

This post above was 3 days ago. This thread has run it's course, imo, and it doesn't look like ole financier Courtney is coming back. If there is any luck he won't have a choice in answering some questions in the future. But this thread is not on the original topic anymore. Courtney, or anyone, can start another one if they want to. Personally, I have bid with both Goldin and PWCC recently (and consigned) and will continue. IF others don't that is always their prerogative. Of course they both advertise here but I don't think either one is doing anything wrong in today's environment. I think both have made mistakes in the past, as we all have, and probably regret them just like we do when we make them. Those companies, and all companies and people, will be just as open to scrutiny in the future as they are now. Happy collecting.

[jefferyepayne]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

It's kinda common sense when you have bidders with tons of bid retractions along with high percentages of bids with only PWCC that rampant shilling is taking place. But let's face it, bidders will keep bidding to get access to quality material and consigners will keep consigning to get top dollar.

I would hope that those that participate in PWCC auctions go in with a budgetary plan and a good sniping software.

As for the DiMaggio, If you have knowledge that a card has been fixed up to the degree that this one was you should include that information to your buyers even if you think some of them won't care about its history and it will hurt short term profits. Protecting your reputation is by far worth more in the long term.

I agree with A.J. Those that keep bidding on lots along with bidders who have tons of bid retractions or have hardly any feedback get what they deserve. As long as you're willing to overpay for something that a month later you can likely get cheaper, enjoy! I guess stuff does trump all ... including your hard earned $$$$.

For the rest of us, we will wait for these inflated prices to fall and buy something for what its really worth.

jeff