opinions- is taking a crease out really altering?

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

Is it a fart if a bear farts in the woods and nobody hears it? If you follow the logic then NO it wouldn't be a problem because you wouldn't know the crease was there to begin with. On the other hand, I wouldn't like to purchase a card where a crease was removed only to have it come back again.

I wouldn't do it because I'd be afraid of damaging the card. There are people that can do it. I've seen it done but I don't subscribe to doing it myself.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Koteles

If you murder somebody and get it away with it, isnt it still
murder ?

excluding all OJ cards !

[Archive]

Posted By: Harry Wallace (HW)

But, to compare taking a crease out of a card to murder....

I know that you were just trying to make a point, but this is a piece of cardboard that we are talking about.

My humble point of view is that if you can take something off of a card that it was not supposed to be there at the time that it was manufactured and are not harming the card in any way, then why not?

If I pulled out my 1952 Topps set and my kid slopped some pizza sauce on it, you had better bet that I am going to wipe it off. Is this "fixing" or "altering" it from its current appearance? Absolutley.

If my kid took out a pencil and wrote on on of my 1952 Topps cards then I am going to erase it. Yes, this is still altering its current appearance.

If my kid accidentally creased my card and if I knew how to get the crease out, I would do that also.

As long as you are not adding something that is not supposed to be there (color, buld up a corner) or taking something away that is supposed to be there (trimming, bleaching color) then it really does not matter to me.

Just my two cents.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

As long as you are not adding something that is not supposed to be there (color, buld up a corner) or taking something away that is supposed to be there (trimming, bleaching color) then it really does not matter to me.

By this rationale, then rebuilding a corner or recoloring a card should be OK since you aren't adding anything that wasn't supposed to be there in the first place, i.e. sharp corners (if that's how it was issued) or proper coloring? How about CJs with caramel stains? Those weren't intended to part of the card, so why not bleach them or what ever it takes to remove the stain. How about a card that has yellowed due to exposure to too much sunlight? Why not bleach it? It's supposed to be white, not yellow.

It's a slippery slope when you start justifying why some alterations are OK and others are not, becuase those same atguments to justify supposed innocuous things can also be used to justify much more radical altrations.


Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

One practical thing of being on the look out for altered cards, and checking
past sales, is that more cards will be being returned for refund from unhappy
buyers. Another thing is that when a seller is discovered to have had a card
professionally restored for the purpose of defrauding collectors, his reputation
will be ruined. Remember, while autograph forgeries can appear out of thin air,
most unrestored 1933 Goudey Lajoies and 1914 Cracker Jacks have been sold once
or more in major auctions that thousands of collectors own catalogs from. If someone's
fraudulantly restoring major cards purchased from the big auction houses, it will
only be time before he's exposed. I bet there is a collector on this board, the
lost soul that he is, that can recite all the sellers of 1914 CJ Mathewsons from
the last three years. And I bet there are collectors who keep record in notebook
or on computer each time a Goudey Lajoie sells and the who/how much/when.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dylan

Can anyone explain how you can take a crease out of a card anyways? I hear people say that some peope "wash" cards, couldnt this potentially worsen the card, and warp it? It seems like a lot to risk, but i guess there are experts at it just like with painting restoration.

[Archive]

Posted By: MikeU

Yes

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve M.

Yes

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

Unless and until it can be proven that a card with a crease removed has the same structural integrity than the card before it received the crease, thus not making it more prone to future creasing, removing the crease is an alteration of the card that in my view must be disclosed to a perspective buyer and that should either lower the grade the card would receive or result in a qualifier being put on the unchanged grade. The rationale behind this response is that with impaired structural intergrity, the card is not its original state. Having said that, even if it could be proven that the structural integrity was not impaired, it is still possible that the removal still altered the card, but for other reasons. For example, if the removal changes the texture of the card or flattens it, then because the card has not been returned to its original state I would still regard the card as having been altered.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Corey, as long as we all realize how prevelent the taking out of creases is then I think we are not being naive. From my last 2 days of speaking with folks my guess is that about 85% of the dealers are taking creases/wrinkles out. One of them asked me if I cared if one was taken out and I couldn't tell. I told them "no".....So far Griffins is the only one I have ever heard say a crease has come back. That's not very many....

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

Not sure what your main point is. The fact that the practice might be so prevalent and perhaps undetectable doesn't mean it should not be disclosed. Disclosing something to a perspective buyer doesn't mean the buyer will or even be expected to care about what was done. It simply recognizes that some buyers might reasonably regard such disclosure as material in deciding whether to make the purchase and at what price. However, having said this, I am not so naive as to believe even a small fraction of the dealers/collectors who remove the creases/wrinkles will make the disclosure. And why won't they? Probably because they are afraid a number of buyers will regard the removal as being an alteration of the card thus lowering its value!

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

Like it or not, "condition" is a factor that helps determine a card's value. The implication is that a card in "near mint" condition HAS SURVIVED FOR X NUMBER OF YEARS IN THAT CONDITION, and because of that, has a greater value that another example of the same card that has wrinkles and creases.

That's the way the hobby has always been.

If you're taking wrinkles and creases out of cards, YOU ARE DECEIVING YOUR BUYER into thinking that you have a card that has survived in better condition than it has. And you are doing it intentionally. And anyone trying to use the rationale that taking out a wrinkle is no different than erasing pencil marks, because you are removing something that's not supposed to be there is stretching REALLY far.

Using that logic, it would be okay to remove stains, replace paper loss, re-shape corners, add gloss, add color, fill in holes. None of that stuff is "supposed" to be there.

The problem with this hobby, unfortunately, is that there is value that appreciates. Who the hell is going to be the first guy to admit "half my collection's value lies in the false idea that the cards surrvived in pristine condition for 60 years?" Who's the first guy who's going to say "My (insert scarce and valuable card here) in a NM-MT holder is actually trimmed?" Who's going to be the first guy that says "I do major surgery in my basement lab, and churn out pristine Goudey Ruths by the boatload?"

So instead people just point fingers and speculate.

My opinion:

1) Doing anything to change the way a card looks after you bought it is "altering".
2) Some of it is okay and some of it is not.
3) Anyone who has a reputation for being a card doctor is not a very good one.
4) There are WAY more altered cards out there than most people want to think there are.

and yes, taking out a crease is "altering", and wrong, and I'll bet I have a ton of them in my collection. It bothers me that I can be deceived into spending more money (which is stealing), but it's not going to prevent me from enjoying my hobby.

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

there are creases in cards that can only be seen under magnification and would not be noticed under eye inspection. i believe these are being removed (as leon stated 85%)by collectors/dealers and are getting past the slabbers. IT IS ALTERING but is never going to be detected,and the crese will never come back. then there is an obvious creased card. it is forever a creased card and alteration will be obvious to all. to improve it is alteration and i think we have all seen a few of these.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tony Andrea

Leon-
Just my opinion again, but. If what you say is true and 85% of dealers are taking creases & wrinkles out of their cards, dont you think by giving them the go ahead or thumbs up to think this practice of altering (crease & wrinkle removing) is okay, just adds to the problem and could possibly make the situation worse.
If we as collectors support this, it tell's dealers that can possibly increase their income by altering a card in this manner, hhhmmmmm. What else might I be able to do. Ever hear of Pandora's Box???

Regards, Tony Andrea

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

If what you say is true, Leon, and I suspect that it is, 15% of dealers do not alter cards and probably disclose the assessment that a card which they have available for sale may have been altered!

This is time to name names.

Come foward, honest dealers and reassure us of your identity.



Heck, I will start it off:
Luckeycards.com is a site which the proprietor discloses the condition of the card accurately and volunteers to point out alterations and suspicions of alterations. I have examples from purchases I have made there.

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

"So far Griffins is the only one I have ever heard say a crease has come back. That's not very many...."

I've seen two cards in holders where it looks like a crease came back. But it is one of those things I'm not 100% sure of. It is possible the crease was there pre-grade and the grading company overgraded the card. It is possible when I bought the card in the holder that the card had the crease and I missed it. It is possible the crease came back afterwards. I guess I'd say I'm 90% sure I saw two cards where the crease came back.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I differentiate between major and minor restoration for the purposes of deception.
Major would include trimming, recoloring to get it to look Mint, having a professional
work it over. Someone spooning out a 3mm micro-wrinkle on a low grade card is minor
in my eyes.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

How important is the motivation? Is it better that a card is trimmed for the convenience of it fitting into something, rather than to decieve others?

Is it better that the recoloring is done for spite, such as spray painting Marichal's face rather than to decieve a potential buyer?

To me, the motive is meaningless, only the status has merit.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Not so sure that creases come back once the cards are placed in graded holders. They are either gone completely or they are not. Unless you watch the card on day 1 of owning it and compare it to day 256 and see a change in the card, then what you are probably seeing is a card that someone attempted to remove the crease and they did a poor job.

Saying that you notice a crease is coming back would mean you would really have to have been there for the removal of the crease and to witness it coming back as the card sits prior to being sent in for grading.

I am not a paper specialist but once a card is creased the fibers are compromised. Not sure how much more damage, if any, is being done to the card when a crease is "removed".

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Ever hear of an ostrich sticking his head in the sand? It's happening regardless of what we say...why not bring it out of the dark, back room and open it up? For the record I have never tried to get a crease or wrinkle out of a card...I just don't think it's the end of the world.

CMOKING- you are presuming and have no definitive evidence that a crease came back....

[Archive]

Posted By: martindl

I'm one of what now appears to be a declining number of people who thinks that anything done to a card is altering and I believe the value should be lower because of it. The argument of it shouldn't matter if you can't see it holds no water with me.

As has been said here already, if the people erasing marks and spooning out creases truly believe that both are o.k. practices then go ahead and fully disclose such in your auctions. Will you? Of course you won't, because you know that the cards will sell for less. By not disclosing your practices you are deceiving people. It's wanton deception and lets not try to call it anything other than what it really is.

[Archive]

Posted By: John

I think it says a lot for someone’s character who either (A) supports the practice or (B) turns a blind eye and doesn’t really care or bother them.

It’s stealing; the reason no single person is ever going to come forward with full disclosure on a doctored card upon re-sale is simple. It would raise hundreds of questions about the person’s integrity as a seller, and it would ultimately result in a lost customer and or a lowered value for the card in question. Its for these reasons we will never see an auction description in our lifetime that reads…”this card was VG at best before we got our hands on it! With our in house team spending hours, using our top secret methods for card restoration, we now with pride present this beautiful near mint example of…!”

Is it happening while we speak sure is, no doubt in my mind. In fact even a few board members partake in this practice and have openly admitted so.

Does it mean I should accept it, I don’t think so.

Would any of you guys tell your kids stealing is ok as long as you don’t get caught, or no one knows about it? I guess your wife really isn’t banging the mailman until you catch her, and that makes it ok?? Illegal and crooked stuff goes on all the time around the world all of which many of us never will know about, doesn’t mean we should join them and or tolerate it either. IMO.

Outing the “Card Doctors” still wouldn’t stop them sad to say, the only thing it would do is give me a list of people to avoid doing business with, and if forced to do business with regardless of the card, always value the card lower because of the seller at hand.

The unfortunate thing is, its here to stay, like any big business there are always a handful of people who will take the shortcut to make a buck at some other suckers expense. But to take the stance just because I got taken and did notice, I should be happy and accept the fact that I was ripped off. I’m calling bull**** on that one!

[Archive]

Posted By: Harry Wallace (HW)

I also agree that doing anything to a card is altering its present state. But, what is OK and what is not?

I am OK with:

Remove surface grime (wax stain, pizza sauce, etc.)
Erase a super light pencil mark
Remove a tiny surface wrinkle that does not affect the "structural integrity" of the card

To me, all of these are OK. If a light crease (wrinkle) can be taken out and it is impossible to tell, then I do not have a huge problem with it. If the "structural integrity" of the card, as Corey Shanus puts it, is changed then I guess that it could create problems.

Here is what I do not think is OK:

Taking out a crease where the card's "structural integrity" is compromised.
Adding anything: color, paper, gloss, etc.
Cleaning a card with anything that may damage the card (bleach, etc.)
Removing a part of the card (trimming, power erasing borders, etc.)

I guess that all of these things are forms of altering, but the definitely have different severity levels.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tony Andrea

Leon-
I agree with you. By no means is this subject the end of the world. My cards will never be prioritized over family, good friends, and the health of my loved ones.
As for the sticking of ones head in a hole as an ostrich might do, regarding this matter.
My belief is this. The people sticking their heads in the hole arent the ones who are opposed to crease & wrinkle removal. Its the ones that are saying it's okay that are burying their heads.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

If removing creases from cards is as prevelant as Leon says, then why don't all these dealers just fess up and admit it? Could it be because most people still feel that it's unethical? If most people think it's OK, then why not come forward?

Leon, you seem to be a big supporter of the people, give some insight as to why they won't come forward if you and so many others seem to think what they do is OK.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I am not a big supporter I just don't see that it's as big of a deal as some make it out to be. Maybe it is, I have been wrong before. I just know it goes on and would prefer it to come out in the open. Maybe there could be different color holders for altered cards and they could get graded, like comics. Personally I don't have that big of a problem with it. With that said I have never done it or asked anyone to do it for me. Until recently I held the same view as the last several folks. I guess there are degrees to everything. I haven't given much thought to the difference between wrinkles and creases but maybe there could be a line there....I guess I could have never said anything and we could all still be playing happily....never talking about it....

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

Leon- You said, "I haven't given much thought to the difference between wrinkles and creases but maybe THERE COULD BE A LINE THERE..." That's hilarious! Did you mean to say that?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I really meant it in the context of removing them.........since I have never thought about it I would need to give it some more thought...."structural integrity" has me thinking.....that's all

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

It is a big deal because it is being done to deceive people. It it wasn't done for that reason, then they should be more than willing to admit to the work they do. Hell, it would even get them more business from people that want to get their cards improved.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

Leon- Was referring to the [probably inadvertent] pun (or maybe play-on-words) in your post

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

woops...I am a bit defensive since getting slammed for talking about stuff that I don't do or knew too much about (until a few days ago)....at least to the extent it is being done.......but yes....I guess, had I thought to do it, it would have been pretty good....

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

Kinda figured that...Take in all in stride, it's nothing personal. Those of us who have dealt with you know you're 100% above-board.

On another note, if it's slabbed and graded, "what's the diff?" as Frank Burns would say? If people weren't so obsessed with cracking cards and re-submitting them, this issue would be less of a problem. Now, if I knew a graded card has been "altered," I suppose I might care (since I generally disapprove of any "altering,")--which is why I don't ask!

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

If you look at a card and can not tell it has been altered, and the grading companies can not tell either, then there is no evidence of the alteration.

Without evidence, the alteration does not exist.

In the rare situation that an auction house or others can trace a card's history reliably, then evidence may exist regarding an alteration. But that evidence is indirect. Examination of the card still does not provide indication of tampering with the card's condition.

So in most situations, if you can not detect an alteration, it does not exist.

And even if you donot want your cards trimmed or their creases removed, when there is a potential for profit in doing so, it will be done, until all cards are as restored as is cost effective to do.

I wish Joe would say this isn't so.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

As Leon pointed out, and I agree, the slabbers should be holdering everything they get and when they detect that the card is altered, then it get put in a colder with a different colored flip. They do it for comics, so why not baseball cards. Just as in comics, people are willing to pay for nice looking cards regardless whether or not the card has been altered. At least this way, we know what cards have been altered and can bid accordingly.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

Is a mark on the card (MK) considered an "alteration?" Knowing how PSA (and others) currently deal with this, this could become another inconsistent grading practice of theirs.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Technically, it is altering the card, but is an alteration that has a negative effect on the calue of the card. The only problem people would have with someone putting ink or pencil marks on a card is that most would be saddened that anyone would deface a card in a such a way today.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

[Archive]

Posted By: BcD

is this altered in any way????


http://cgi.ebay.com/Nice-Earthtone-Colored-Couch-92-Inches_W0QQitemZ220040582922QQihZ012QQcategoryZ496 0QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item22 0040582922


just wonderin?

BcD

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

"Is a mark on the card (MK) considered an "alteration?"

This is the "hanging chad" of grading. If PSA divines that the mark was made by some creative kid, it gets slabbed. If "KarnakPSA" decides it was made by someone trying to deceive, it get rejected. Stupid, indefensible distinction.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Drum

Plain and simply as stated before more eloquently than I; the fact that the people who are doing it do not advertise the fact in their listings or even advertise for "wrinkle-removing" business should tell you what even the "doctors" think about what they are doing. Even if they see no issue, it tells me that they feel (and rightfully so) that the majority of their potential customer base would have any issue with it and it would affect their business. I agree with the previous comments that PSA/SGC/GAI should all have slabs and different color labels for altered cards. Now will that prevent the crackers/reslabbers from plying their trade - No!

[Archive]

Posted By: Noel

Clearly yes. I think Jay has it spot on. It is unethical at best and stealing at worst. Why are these people who alter cards hiding in the backroom and not coming forward? They know, along with a large percentage of others it is deceptive and wrong. In the end, these people will make their money and the card collecting community will be left with an inferior product. Additionally, grading companies who overlook this should be held liable for the difference in the alteration. Probably would create a little more conscious awareness of the practice if it hits them right in the pocket book. The bottom line is it is not being done under the watchful eyes of card collecting community but rather under the guise that the card is something other than what it is being advertised.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

Wait, I think I get it!
The crease formerly was on the card, but now it is gone, because someone removed it, right?
So no one can see it - well, because it is gone.
So what? The grading companies must have different color holders to distinguish between creases that are gone and those that were never there?
Wait, I still don't get it!

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

Warshawlaw wrote: "This is the "hanging chad" of grading. If PSA divines that the mark was made by some creative kid, it gets slabbed. If "KarnakPSA" decides it was made by someone trying to deceive, it get rejected. Stupid, indefensible distinction. "

From my experience, PSA will grade any cards that has been written on as MK (assuming they see it and it wasn't erased). I was not aware they made any differentiation at all like what warshawlaw is talking about here. Edumacate me please.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

In this hobby, people generally have two major 'condition' critereon for pricing a card:
authenticity and condition grade.

If a genuine card is altered-- recolored, trimmed, wrinkle pressed out-- the card
will still be authentic.

Assigning a condition of grade is dependant on whether or not the card has been altered.
A recolored card can't be considered Mint no matter how nice it looks. In fact many will
consider the card Poor or ungradable. Whether you think it's dumb or smart or silly or
good, a 'Near Mint' card that is known to have had a crease pressed out will be valued
lower than a Near Mint card that has had no alteration. If these two cards are laid side
by side, I know of no collector who would pay the same about for each card knowing one has
had a wrinkle removed-- and everyone removing a wrinkle knows this.

Fraud is when you intentionally hide information that you know would lower the
value of the card. If you have a Mint card and don't disclose what you did to the
card because you know the buyer would pay less if you did disclose, that's fraud.

For defining fraud, don't be concerned about whether this or that counts as or 'alteration'
or if this type of alteration is good or bad, focus on whether or not the alteration
effects the market value of the card and wehther or not the seller is hiding it
specifically because he knows disclosure will lower the value.

If one person thinks recoloring a 1953 Topps Mickey Mantle is evil and another thinks
the recoloring enhances the card and is morally good, they both have to disclose the
recoloring at sale as they both know recoloring lowers the market value for the card.
For defining fraud, the question of whether restoration is morally good or
morally bad is irelevant.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

Sometimes, they grade a card "but for" the mark and qualify it with a "MK." Example, if a card would have gotten a "6" without the mark, it would get a "6 (MK)."

Sometimes, PSA grades a card with a mark as the grade it would have gotten, but for the mark, knock it down a grade AND qualify it with a "MK." I.e., if a card would have otherwise gotten a "6," it gets a "5 (MK)."

Sometimes, they just knock it down a grade (or not), without an "MK."

Somtimes, they give a "MK" to a card without a mark (as they just did to me).

By the same token, PSA (and others) generally give "AUT" or "A" to cards that have otherwise been altered. Sometimes they give beaters that are not altered, an "A" or "AUT."

Absolutely no consistency internally, nor across the various grading companies.

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

"Sometimes, they just knock it down a grade (or not), without an "MK.""

If this is true, it is news to me. I thought they labeled all cards with marks as MK. Of course, it is possible they made some mistakes and didn't see the MK.