Blatantly Hacked and Kudos to Rob Lifson PSA should be ashamed!

[jhs5120]

These older labels are tricky. Whenever I see a problem with a PSA card it's always in these circa 2000-2004 slabs. I don't know if it was just one problem grader or a more relaxed mentality or they were just unaware, but it is almost always these older slabs.

It's a shame that REA accepted this consignment, I held them to the highest regard until now.

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

These older labels are tricky. Whenever I see a problem with a PSA card it's always in these circa 2000-2004 slabs. I don't know if it was just one problem grader or a more relaxed mentality or they were just unaware, but it is almost always these older slabs.

It's a shame that REA accepted this consignment, I held them to the highest regard until now.

Well said. I can only speak for myself, but if I ran an AH I would not put up cards I suspected were altered in slabs. I respect REA for calling it out like they did-- that should not go unnoticed-- but I would have gone one step farther and said we don't put up fugazi merchandise.

[calvindog]

How is it fake? REA described it exactly how it is: trimmed. You think Legendary would do that? They're altering the cards themselves and failing to disclose in their write ups. What else is REA to do? There actually is a market for trimmed, pristine cards. REA is blameless here and should be lauded for its honesty.

[MattyC]

Sorry, I shouldn't have said "fugazi." That implies fake. I should have said trimmed. To me trimming makes a card utterly undesirable-- but that's just me; if there is a market for such cards and REA wants to cater to that market then by all means, to each his own. I will say I applaud the step they did take. As someone who personally avoids trimmed cards like the plague, were it my AH I wouldn't put them up. But again just my opinion there.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by calvindog

REA is blameless here and should be lauded for its honesty.

I wholeheartedly disagree.

As it was pointed out before, the last PSA card that they described as trimmed sold for MORE than the card in the perscribed condition usually sells for. Obviously one of two things happened; the buyer didn't read the descripition carefully or the buyer has the intentions to resell the card without the disclaimer.

REA shouldn't play the middle man for releasing altered memorabilia into the market place. I am happy they mentioned it might be trimmed, but it is a horrible practice to knowingly sell altrered cards that were inappropriately labeled. REA should be ashamed.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Jason -- or (3) the buyer doesn't care.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

I wholeheartedly disagree.

As it was pointed out before, the last PSA card that they described as trimmed sold for MORE than the card in the perscribed condition usually sells for. Obviously one of two things happened; the buyer didn't read the descripition carefully or the buyer has the intentions to resell the card without the disclaimer.

REA shouldn't play the middle man for releasing altered memorabilia into the market place. I am happy they mentioned it might be trimmed, but it is a horrible practice to knowingly sell altrered cards that were inappropriately labeled. REA should be ashamed.

Is it reasonable to assume that the consignor and REA discussed this before the item was added to the catalog with its description as "possibly trimmed"? If so, then I don't see the problem - PSA slabs trimmed cards all the time, but PSA are the supposed experts on grading cards, not REA. REA simply gave their opinion on a product.

In my opinion, if REA were to begin a policy of deciding which slabbed items to auction, based on their own opinions (thus overruling the TPA's), possibly demanding that any questionable cards be cracked, then you would have a huge mess. Where would it lead? Would they then refuse to auction a '5' because they thought it should be a '4'? Basically, they would become a TPA of sorts, and that's not their business.

Before the following gets brought up (for those of you who don't have me on ignore), I believe TPA'd autographs are a different discussion.

[markf31]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

I wholeheartedly disagree.

As it was pointed out before, the last PSA card that they described as trimmed sold for MORE than the card in the perscribed condition usually sells for. Obviously one of two things happened; the buyer didn't read the descripition carefully or the buyer has the intentions to resell the card without the disclaimer.

REA shouldn't play the middle man for releasing altered memorabilia into the market place. I am happy they mentioned it might be trimmed, but it is a horrible practice to knowingly sell altrered cards that were inappropriately labeled. REA should be asham

So REA turns the consignor away and refuses to accept the card under the suspicion that the card is altered, what do you think the consignor will do next? Its entirely possible, and one could argue almost probably, that the consignor takes the card to another AH who is not as diligent, forthcoming and honest as REA where the card gets offered without any mention in the auction listing to the fact the card has possibly been trimmed.

[Jlighter]

Originally Posted by markf31

So REA turns the consignor away and refuses to accept the card under the suspicion that the card is altered, what do you think the consignor will do next? Its entirely possible, and one could argue almost probably, that the consignor takes the card to another AH who is not as diligent, forthcoming and honest as REA where the card gets offered without any mention in the auction listing to the fact the card has possibly been trimmed.

I believe that some people are upset about REA delaying the inevitable. It would not surprise me if in 6 Months we saw some of these cards for sale at another AH without a "trimmed" disclaimer.

I guess then the question is: What duty does a AH have in keeping the hobby clean?

[nolemmings]

Is it reasonable to assume that the consignor and REA discussed this before the item was added to the catalog with its description as "possibly trimmed"? If so, then I don't see the problem - PSA slabs trimmed cards all the time, but PSA are the supposed experts on grading cards, not REA. REA simply gave their opinion on a product.

Exactly. And I would bet that REA did discuss this first--they may have insisted on it--and that the consignor was given an option of going elsewhere.

Some may think that it is not enough--that apparently these cards should not be allowed to market or maybe the auction title should have all caps "BEWARE-TRIMMED, DANGER!!!! However at some point people need to take responsibility for reading the description. Moreover, as noted, right or wrong some people do not appear overly bothered by trimmed cards and are willing to pay large for them. So as far as REA's role here, I don't see how it can be viewed as anything other than a plus. People are told there's a chance the card is trimmed, which is tolerable to some but not others. Sure we can all think of nefarious plans of resale, but that's not REA's role, fault, or responsibility.

[Peter_Spaeth]

In my opinion, at the PSA 8 level for T206s, as many if not more buyers care more about the number on the flip than whether the card is trimmed. I expect these cards will sell for strong money, as high grade slabbed cards always do. I don't know what else REA could have done other than give its opinion.