A class action lawsuit sounds like a great idea. I just have four questions for you and I'll get right to work on it. Who should be our named plaintiff? How should we define the class? Who should we sue? And what should we sue them for?

are you an attorney?

kevin

With that avatar of his you dare to ask such a question? :)

Todd you crack me up. PS I would have chosen Mr. Rogers but it was taken.

Kangaroo Court is Peter's area of expertise.

Owch. LOL.

Yeah, I know a lot of attorney's looking for work, but let's not jump the gun on the filing the class action lawsuit just yet. Now, if PSA and SCG keep letting "Joe" submit altered cards and grading them...

OK I'll keep my day job for now. On a serious note, I think there are quite a few "Joe"s out there. And the problem is even if they banned Joe, he would just submit through somebody else.

im still waiting for the giant hammer i hear is coming.

kevin

Assuming the grading companies are now, or will shortly be made, aware that Joe might be the one messing with the cards and he is submitting under his own name and the grading companies want to stop Joe, they should let him continue to submit so they can look more closely at his submissions. If they cut him off then he will just submit through someone else and they will have to go to greater lengths, which they will not do, to track him down. If they do start rejecting his stuff he will simply start submitting through someone else.

By the way, another great post by Dan Markel who seems to be the smartest guy on this board.

Good points. And, I agree, Dan Markel's posts are awesome...

Hello Dan,
good points! here is a thread from early this year making similar points
on the problem.
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...=161528&page=2

Greg,

Thanks for the kind words, but I'm certain I'm not the smartest one here, but I've definitely been through the School of Hard Knocks on this topic.

Jose and Dan,

Thanks for the props.

That thread that Jose alluded to has been very typical of what many PSA collectors, including myself, came to realize. There really doesn't appear to be much accountability on PSA's part in all of this.

hmmm don't think any one said it yet, so I guess I have to, lol buy the card not the grade, lol.

Anyway just my 2 pennies below.....

I do buy graded cards BUT I buy the card and not its grade. I like buying graded cards because it at least authenticates the card for me. (that is if someone didn't fake the slab, or crack it and replace a fake card)

I am NO EXPERT, and I hope all the graded cards I buy are "REAL" cards. The eye appeal I can judge for my self.

Agree. However, the sad thing is, with the way cards are photoshopped and/or manipulated by some seller's nowadays, a buyer can't always tell by a scan exactly what a card truly looks like. Thus, unless a person buys every single card in person, they never know exactly what they're going to get until it arrives in the mail...

agreed, I recently bought a T205, that "looked like the red ink was missing, as the red was DEFF Orange. When I got the card it was RED. Seller took it back though.

Speaking of bumps...
 

This post is somewhat related to the topic at hand. I don't want to beat a dead horse, but felt this was worth mentioning and really didn't want to start another thread to do so, so I just posted it here. Take a look at this '34 Goudey. What once was a PSA 6.5 is now an SGC 8.5.

http://www.memorylaneinc.com/site/im...em_20470_1.jpg
http://www.memorylaneinc.com/site/im...em_20470_2.jpg

http://www.gregbussineau.com/scans/1293008010_f.jpg
http://www.gregbussineau.com/scans/1293008010_b.jpg

Here are the things to look for:
1.) Faint white "triangle" shape mark on stomach of the silhouette of the ballplayer (on right) in the yellow background.
2.) White dot on left player silhouette in background.
3.) Numerous stray marks between #37 and Lou Gehrig on back of card
4.) Marks below the "h" in Gehrig on the signature on back of card.
5.) Marks below the words "left-handed" on back of card.

I said it in the other thread and I'll say it again. I've had several bumps over the years and I realize cards get bumped every day, but nothing like this. I would love to sit down with the grader from PSA and the grader from SGC and ask each one of them what they saw that determined their opinion on the grade of this card. It sickens my stomach that we're paying these "professionals" to give us their opinion, when their opinion can make the difference of thousands of dollars on any given day.

All that said, I don't think this is a Joe P bump. Otherwise, he would have consigned it to Probstein (anything is possible I guess though). I would like to know if Bussineau is the owner of this card or just a consignor and would also love to know who owned it at the time it was bumped from a 6.5 to an 8.5.

It does appear to be the same card, especially when viewing all the tiny print flaws on the back. The upper right front corner (or upper left rear corner) appears to have gotten noticeably sharper and that same corner has that "batwing" look. Very bothersome indeed.

I believe the Gehrigs are the same card, but something happened to it between PSA and SGC. The back discoloration seen in the PSA holder is gone as seen in the SGC holder. It's possible that it is because of the scanner setting, but it looks like it has been cleaned.

How does this not reflect on the grading companies more than anything?

In April of this year I found at the bottom of a box twelve pieces of what once were a Louisville Slugger Poster from the 1939-1941. I put the pieces together and marveled at nice the poster once looked. I searched online for a person who restored Movie posters. There were many and I narrowed my search down and chose a man named Dario from Vancouver Canada. He said he could restore the piece and it would take eight to ten hours of work. When I got the poster back I took it to a reputable art dealer who dealt in prints to frame and preserve the Poster. You can see the result below. Up close you can see what appear to be folds along the lines he repaired. But from a foot or so away you judge. What was done to this poster can and is done to cards all the time. (Search on Dick Towle) Paper items can and I believe sometimes should be restored and preserved. If it is not it will deteriorate and your grandchildren will be left with dust instead of The history of baseball as it was recorded (In Paper form) for most of it's first 100 or so years. Now for me a baseball card collector for many years I will not even clean the gum or wax off of a card just never did so never will. But others do. In about 1975 I visited the Metropolitan Museum of art and they brought out the Burdick Album with T cards and in there was The Wagner displayed on a stamp hinge so that you could look at the back. I have seen that card later and there is no trace of the hinge. They can and did restore their card. People do and some very rare cards and posters would be lost if they were not restored. BUT ANY ETHICAL SELLER SHOULD ABSOLUTLY ALERT BUYERS TO THE RESTORATION. And any buyer should be aware that this could happen to ANY card and it would be very very difficult to detect. This has been the state of our hobby since the get. And I for one still love this stuff but find it hard to like many of the people who sell this stuff for a living. Alerting each other to folks who are looking to get over is necessary and thank you Vintagetopps guy for spending the time to help the rest of us on this message board.

MHO

Jonathan

good post

Not only should the seller make buyers aware, they should not allow shill bidding to take place on those (and really any) items.

Why am I not surprised Rick has not come on. He has defended himself before but now cannot be bothered. Too much evidence? Too much money involved?

Joshua

Why? I will tell you why. It may be because this is an "attack first, defend later" Board that refuses to be objective. Rick could have been in a coma for 2 months, wake up today, sue Pankiewicz for the excess profits, give them to the original sellers, and hire 2 more assistants to scour his auctions to look for potential shilling. But he would still be attacked for not having the foresight to hire the assistants before he went into his coma or not knowing that some of his clients are submitting under false names from another state.

Responding to this Board only increases the attacks and if I was Rick I would do the right thing but say nothing.

What's a bump from a 6.5 to an 8.5 worth?

Obviously it does not reflect well on them, but it also speaks more fundamentally to the problem of (likely) rampant card doctoring. To some extent, yes, the issue is inconsistent grading and the same cards -- without alteration -- can and do get different grades. I have seen some incredible journeys within a 3 grade range for the same card simply cracked out and resubmitted. But I think more often than not, what's going on with these bumps is that someone has improved the card.

Eric, I would agree with your assumption. However, there is enough info within this thread to say otherwise. It would be in Rick's best interest to address this issue of one individual. This link should open many eyes. He provides links to past auctions making it look like they're his auctions that lead to Probstein. Ok, let's assume Joe is the consignor, click on the 1961 Topps baseball set. The 3rd highest bidder with a fb of 9622, aka pank21 is Joe P. In older links at the bottom he even says "check out ebay seller pank21" What does this tell us??


https://www.facebook.com/pages/Josep...18125758251089

Agree. And, it could also become a bigger issue for Rick if he continues to willingly accept consignments from "Joe" knowing "Joe" has shill bid and submitted altered items in the past. A jury probably won't be kind to him. Then again, it's Rick's life and business, he can do whatever he wants with it...

This card is the subject of a thread over on CU (I wonder how long that thread will last). Not one corner is deserving of an 8 (especially the bottom two - left in particular) and this card probably should have been a 6. Somebody will buy it though because of that "8" on the flip, not really caring what the card itself looks like.

Hey, Panky, I know you read the boards. You ought to buy this one and turn it into a 9. :D

http://i.ebayimg.com/t/1959-TOPPS-BA...NVQ~~60_57.JPG

/

Nice profit for pank...hey buys the 7, resubmits and receives an 8. Same card for sure!


http://tinyurl.com/mqoyxfg

nice comparo Chris!!!!!

the rt border is dramatically thinner!

I get nervous enough cracking out a card to resubmit for the fear of it coming back a lower grade (or even trimmed). Who would crack out a card worth several hundred dollars, altar it and then try to resubmit it, unless that person already knew that they didn't have anything to worry about - that it would receive a numeric grade? There’s a lot of risk involved there – unless there really is no risk at all.

In my professional opinion this thread gives a whole new meaning to the definition of "Plastic Surgery".

Indeed so..and the bottom border too. Assuming they are the same cards either someone has the ability to mimic factory cuts or SGC missed the boat. With that much of the card gone I cannot imagine it measures properly. Either way it is way too expensive a card to be in anyone's holder.

I understand the FBI is sitting on bidder records from many of the auction houses. Seems like a fairly easy job for someone to start identifying purchases and consignments and matching up before and after pics. One 40K card does not warrant an investigation but it is pretty easy to see how you can get up in to the millions of dollars of fraud. It has always been my opinion that the amount of money taken from collectors in this manner far exceeds what has been taken via shill bidding.

Here is a side by side pic of the two cards...

I'd say somewhere in the $15k range, maybe more. A good day at the office, that's for sure.

So David, do you still say that "anybody that can look at a thread like this and still submit cards to PSA has absolutely no moral conscience"? Or do you now see that SGC is also capable of making mistakes. Good fraudsters seem to be able to take advantage of both companies.

I'm just wondering if this Joey P...who supposedly "used" to work for SGC...has an inside connection there...who is upgrading these submissions. So mistakes weren't/arent bring made...maybe this is intentional?

It does beg the question, why the crossover if PSA brings consistently higher sale prices? Assuming this card had an equal chance of making it past either company, why go to SGC and not back to PSA?

How could you have no risk? Unless you owned the grading service or had an in, I suppose.

Daryl,

I'm not so sure they're mistakes. To answer your question very honestly, I will have to strongly consider if I ever submit another card to any grading company. My last SGC submission consisted of about 15 E92 Dockmans. 2 came back as EOT (which I'm pretty they're not), one came back as minimum size requirement not met and another was a PSA 4 that would not cross over. So, I'm led to believe they can detect trimming on $50 E92 common, but they can't detect trimming on a $25K+ Gehrig? Horse crap! Those two Gehrigs are definitely the same card and it has definitely been trimmed.

David

Edited to add a side-by-side scan of the back of the Gehrigs. I circled all the print marks on the PSA card and they are the same on the SGC card. The SGC was scanned with brighter settings, but still the same card, only TRIMMED.

This thread finally convinced me to become a member of the Forum.

Thanks for posting. Keep up the good work.

Robert L Rumcik
o.c.trading

A well-centered 6 (or raw EX MT) card is the ideal purchase for a card doctor.

Stamp hinges are designed to be removable. The adhesive is water activated, so it damages the gum on unused stamps, but the adhesive will usually come off a used stamp without leaving any trace it was there. Some are better than others, and the Met would have known which were the best.

Steve B

That's a terrific before and after comparison! Thanks for posting that.

Has the SGC Gehrig been sold? If so, that promises be a rather stiff buy-back if the buyer is aware of the problem and pursues that route. One would think that losing $10K or $15K on a card should hopefully change the way the grading company screens cards and screens submitters.

Dan, yours for the asking.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=321179871436

If the Gherig had simply been cleaned I think that would have been ok. A light surface cleaning is acceptable in nearly every field, as the dirt will eventually cause damage.

At first I had a few doubts that the two were the same. The various marks are all from the production process, and I wouldn't be surprised to see two nearly identical cards. But thinking about it, the circumstances that would lead to there being two nearly identical Goudeys in that condition would be unlikely.

One of the things that made me think they were the same was the slight diamond cut, especially of the lower border.
It's odd that someone would retain that diamond cut while trimming.

But if it was done on a factory type cutter, The edges would remaim paralell, so the diamond cut would remain. And the cuts would be almost impossible to tell from factory.

Perhaps this is what will get TPG to look at things in more detail and for a bit longer.

Steve B

I am starting to more understand why some companies might not want to advertise where many of their customers are (here).

Has anyone contacted the seller gregbussineau about the SGC version being offered?

Much more concerned about a clearly trimmed card receiving a numeric grade than the light surface cleaning not being detected as I'm sure most, yourself included, probably are.

Also, does anyone know who the original purchaser of the PSA card was???

Last I checked auction houses don't tell who won their cards.

Greg has been in the card business since the 80s, I believe. I am sure he can form his own judgments.

Yes.

Makes me re-think this guy. ;)

http://i.imgur.com/YhFgIyj.jpg

I was able to figure out who won the other altered Gehrigs...

I guess now would be a good time for Greg to accept a low-ball offer on the card...I mean, I hope he wouldn't knowlingly sell an altered item on ebay...

40K for a trimmed iron horse........2.8 mil for a trimmed wagz.....I just can't believe the tpg's don't KNOW these cards are trimmed! There is something fishy in Denmark! Dave. ps The silence of the tpg's and of certain members here is deafening, and speaks volumes.

Why does the card look more heavily cut on the back of the "flashing" Gehrigs than the front? It's because the back scan of the SGC version is slightly smaller than the back scan of the PSA version. That's why the lettering moves a little, too.

While I find all of the evidence of cleaning/brightening persuasive, let's be a little cautious about relying on two scans of purportedly the same card under different conditions.

My guess is that SGC did not miss an obvious trim on the Gehrig. For instance, the SGC insert appears to fit snugly -- more so than the PSA holder does.

I took the same back scan of the SGC Gehrig, and then magnified one slightly below. Note how the eye picks up the difference in the bottom border much more easily than anything else.

Bring on the hammer.

kevin

I am guessing that you are saying the only thing changing are the borders, but the letters also change in size/shape, particularly as you get closer to the bottom of the card. This is the same card, but they are not the same size scan, obviously; not the same scanner.

I'm going to stick with my vote that SGC didn't miss a trim. Again, why is the PSA version loose in the slab, but the SGC version is snug? Did SGC miss a two-border trim so badly that they decided to also manufacture a smaller insert for this 1934 Goudey?

i think the text changes you are seeing is an optical illusion where the color changing from lighter to darker actually makes the illusion that the text inside of the color change appear to change in size. you can hover your mouse of the image at singular point and compare whether that point moves from your mouse image or not....it doesn't. the only thing that does is the left edge and bottom edge of the card. they move dispropritiantly to each other.

for instance...choose the words big league and put your mouse right on the bottom of a letter.notice how the letters don't go behind your mouse. then notice how much the edge of the card changes at the bottom of the card....

another example is the circle in the bottom right corner, that doesn't move but the edge moves dramatically. that is not possible when dealing with a scaling issue.


someone should be able to take the scans, use a measuremeant of a letter word or what have you, on the card to do a determination of the exact size of each card in comparison to that in number of pixels.

kevin

This is Greg's side by side scan of the two cards. The right and bottom border on the SGC card are definitely thinner than the PSA card. It's easy to tell that they're the same card and also easy to tell that it was trimmed before it found it's way into the SGC holder.

Not so. Put your mouse in the middle of the "I" in "BIG". The "I" grows and shrinks. In my view, the optical illusion is that you don't think the letters are moving.

Disagree. SGC holders are actually taller and wider than PSA holders. In your picture they look the same size.

This is a slightly smaller scan of the same card.

Thanks for the info Peter.

Actually someone just informed me that:

Sold at

Memorylane (id #20470) 5/6/11..

then sold Goodwinandco (id #23561) 6/21/12 for $7,299.46.

What's still not known is who was the buyer from Goodwin and submitter to SGC since it's possible that its currently a consignment item.

There's no way Greg is going to take the chance that the buyer of this altered card is going to come here and read this information after they have purchased the card...I mean, whoever buys this card from Greg is going to be notified they've bought an altered card, right???...........right...........

I have a feeling that when this is all said and done...if ever...there will be a lot of surprising names implicated...thereby showing that corruption is more the rule...than the exception in the hobby.

Oops...spoke too soon...Greg removed the card...Then again, do I win a dollar or a donut???...

+1 I couldn't agree more. Dave.

If you're right (no trim, only an optical illusion), then how do you explain the grade bump?

"Thank you very much for bringing this to my attention. My company purchased this card several months ago, already graded NM/MT+ 92 by SGC, in the holder in which it currently resides. I am sending the card back into SGC for them to review. Pending that review, we are removing the card from our inventory for sale listings.

Thanks again,

Greg"

well...
 

This reads better than reality television for sure. Will there be a "Card Detectives" series in our future? It would beat the heck out of the drivel I watch late at night!

Based on all of the evidence that has been presented here, I am persuaded that there is somebody cleaning cards with something other than bleach or another substance that would be detectable to SGC. Call it "super water" or what have you. That would certainly cause a bump in grade. A card does not have long to travel from a 6.5 to an 8.5. It's not like turning a 1 to a 3, or even a 3 to a 5. One of the reasons I don't care much for high grade cards is that once you've given me a 7, or even a 6, I'm pretty content that I'm holding a card that is, for me, mint (or at least mint enough).

My problems with the Gehrig trim theory are thus:

1. I do not think SGC would miss a trim that it is suggested here would have affected two or more of the borders, let alone on such a high dollar card. Nor do I believe SGC is involved in a conspiracy to overlook such a trim, particularly on such a high dollar card that is likely to draw some attention. So, I approach the accusation of this trim from a very suspicious perspective to begin with. If it was PSA, I would be more willing to buy into such ignorance or worse.

2. The SGC insert fits more snug than the PSA insert. While I appreciate that SGC has the ability to customize its inserts, my understanding is that they would not purposely make a smaller one here and, at the same time, miss a double-sided+ trim.

3. The side-by-side flashing scans are very persuasive until you realize that distortion is possible with just a slight difference in size. On the two back scans of the same card I posted above, one was 100% and the other was just 102% in my MSPaint Program. Also, it seems like all 4 corners get sharper in the move to the SGC holder - were 3+ borders trimmed? Finally, if a bottom and a side look more trimmed in one image than another, that can be explained by a smaller scan being dropped on top of a larger scan, where both are lined up at the top left corner.


Having said all of this, could I be persuaded that SGC got tricked on this one? Yes, I guess so. But I do not think the side-by-side scans get me there.

I'm sure we're all very curious to see what SGC thinks of this one!

That was kind of what I was getting at.

It's sad to see this crap. I hope the people behind this crap are fined and or jailed. It is ruining the hobby. Someone took a beautiful Gehrig card and ruined it for $$$$. Who knows what % of high grade cards out there are in the same boat. If we don't have people doing this amazing detective work no one would even know. Well, most will not know.
It truly saddens me to see this crap.
I am sure there are people on this board that can possibly bring this up to the proper authorities i hope.
Greed, greed and more greed :mad:

The authorities read this board. Some of these things are very difficult if not impossible to prosecute. It's too bad too.