I don't think the TPGs grading under a "restored" flip is the subject that is bothering so many here. The fact that PWCC is selling an absurd number of altered cards in regular slabs with number grades is the problem. And the fact that they are working with known card doctors to do so. So the TPG using a "restored" flip won't put anything to rest.

You're talking about figuring out where the line is right? You're saying folks have different tolerances for what's acceptable when it comes to changing or preserving the condition of a card. And we should be open-minded about where the line is because building a new consensus is good for the hobby. Regardless of whether that argument is being used as a smokescreen by PWCC - and I think most feel that it is - the idea probably has merit in a vacuum.

But the most inflammatory examples are those trimmed cards. Trimmed cards aren't the "restored cards..going undetected by TPGs" you're talking about, right? You acknowledge that trimmed cards have no place in our hobby, I assume? They are not restoration. They are not conservation. Trimming destroys a card. I assume you're not drawing your line anywhere near this, but I can't tell.

And if you agree with that, do you think it's a truly productive conversation to talk about what PWCC has gotten philosophically right before we know what they got wrong? The amount of known, blatantly trimmed cards they've sold is staggering. The amount of entanglements they have with named perpetrators is staggering. We don't even reach the fuzzy line you're talking about, where conservation verges into restoration/alteration.

If you're talking about transparency and dialogue, don't you think the onus is on them first to lift the veil on the entirety of the problem before we trust them to tell everyone how it should be cleaned up? You would trust an organization that didn't "get something to happen" on this front until their very survival was threatened by an external whistleblower to lead the way to a better system?

Finally, why do you care about putting this subject to rest? The reckoning hasn't yet even happened. PWCC has said this rolling crisis is nowhere near closure, so I'm wondering why you seem to be pushing for it.

I have no problem with a restored card, but there's a gray line that goes with such a card. Normally this is done to a card that is exceedingly rare and expensive. These cards should always have a flip saying so by the graders, otherwise, it can lead to potential fraud.

Consumers have the right to know if this is done and act accordingly to that information, and as a side, Auction Houses and grading companies go through way too many cards not to know what to look for when inspecting a card so they can no longer pull the old dummy routine when confronted.

What I got out of the PWCC interview a lawyer would have an easy time breaking down piece by piece. Honestly, I was annoyed because for one thing, there are a lot of really smart people who do understand the distinctions between restoration and doctoring and there are clear set of standards already set in place so there isnt going to be any reinventing the wheel by PWCC.

The other thing is why is this guy telling the Hobby that it needs to grow up and mature? While I agree that the more knowledge you have the better off you'll be, but this is up to the individual whether or not he or she have the time and resources to do so.

What it sounds like is that this guy Brent is telling us that "we're a business, and therefore don't have the time or resources necessary to make sure what we're selling is on the level. Just because you're a business dosent mean that you throw your ethics out the window. When you get busted, own up to it and make the necessary precautions to make sure you dont do it again and learn from your mistakes. Finally, "before and after photos" are proof and can be submitted as evidence in a court, same with emails and recordings such as the one of PWCC attempting to explain why altered cards wont be mentioned as such prior to auction.

None of the PWCC examples I have seen are examples of restoration or conservation. They are examples of cards being altered to scam collectors out of their money. Well, more than half of the cards have been trimmed.

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I will humbly say that I have no opinion on what tolerances should be acceptable. I'm not going to be the card gatekeeper when it comes to conservation/restoration topics. I'm just a consumer like 99% of us are.

I leave this matter to the TPG's. I've seen the other threads kind of evolve over the last few days and it's refreshing to see people seeing the light that this at it's core is a problem with our TPG system and reliability.

I've said it numerous times. TPG's need to step it up and update their stance on the topic. Either do what CGC does and start a service for grading restored examples and clearly define the difference. Have a stance.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0H5j0mQYpy8" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I appreciate your reply, but it’s nonsensical. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t defer to TPGs on what constitutes unacceptable alteration and then criticize them for their outdated stance. They have a stance, you just don’t agree with it.

It’s obvious that you do have an opinion about what should be tolerated. After all, you started an entire thread about it. You sketched out the contours of what you think their stance should be - PWCC’s newly articulated one, as far as I can tell.

And to take a step back, I also find it difficult to believe that you think so little of us collectors (or consumers as you put it), that we lack the agency to help set where the red line is in our own hobby. These “gatekeeper” companies exist at our pleasure, as I hope they’re all soon finding out. In fact, I thought you were calling on everyone to have an opinion and make it known so we can achieve a new, better understanding.

I find it impossible to believe that you, as a person who collects baseball cards, have absolutely no opinion on whether trimming a baseball card constitutes acceptable behavior. That seems disingenuous.

Thanks again!

DNFTT comes to mind at this point.

Thanks,:D I was thinking of coming too...I was taught by a guy named Don Rickles.

Beating a dead horse? You must have been kicked in the head by a mule as a small child. Other people are saying it too, so you may what to check into it.

See response in red text

I have no idea what you are saying Chuck. I tend to skip over your comments as I find them the least helpful and rudimentary.
I attended an Ivy League school and so did my siblings. There’s no mule kicking incidents in our family.

Awful lot of cards BOUGHT by Moser with feedback left

"We know very well who Gary Moser is"


One the top buyers, conserver, and consignors that deals solely with PWCC

Martin, quit while you're behind.

I think Chuck is saying: Your thinking is completely the opposite of every one else.

I think he was also offering a explanation on why you think that way. This is just a wild guess.:D

And to take a step back, I also find it difficult to believe that you think so little of us collectors (or consumers as you put it), that we lack the agency to help set where the red line is in our own hobby. These “gatekeeper” companies exist at our pleasure, as I hope they’re all soon finding out. In fact, I thought you were calling on everyone to have an opinion and make it known so we can achieve a new, better understanding. we have no agency plain and simple. But people are quick to criticize when vocal companies like PWCC want to stir the pot and introduce change and discussion
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________

Thank God for companies that are looking out for us like PWCC...

You really don't see why that is what people focus on in your posts?

We all agree to one degree or another that there is a TPG problem. But you think the solution is to trust the company that appears to be actively ripping people off. A few of us beg to differ. Saying "The TPG's are bad." Doesn't excuse intentional fraudulent activity.

@Goudey77: “we have no agency plain and simple“

That’s so depressingly cynical if you believe that. It’s also factually wrong: have a look at corndog, 312, and superdan at BO. Three dudes sitting in their boxers living in their mom’s basement (metaphorically, probably) are poised to topple one, and if you have your way, maybe an additional two or three industry titans, in both the criminal and civil spheres.

You guys are wasting your time with Martin IMO. DNFTT.

If you think those BO studs are going to shake up the card world then show me the $ that's going to back them in court or the agency that will leverage their findings for a case. Do you think mom and dad will lend them the money? So they can finally make an impact in this world.

I'm sorry to say this is bigger than them. It's up to the big dogs to declare what's up if they decide to throw us a bone.

Sorry to sound cynical. I've had a busy work week. :D

I think my original message is starting to gain some traction based on the other threads. So I may quit while...

Martin, if you have any concern for Brent you should really stop. You’re not helping him.

I don't think the collaboration of industry leaders can change the definition of what an altered card is. They can say whatever they want on their websites but collectors who are buying the cards aren't just lemmings that are going to follow along with this. The TPGs can offer new flips for altered cards or what might be called conserved, that's fine. People will still consider spooning out a crease, or fixing corners, or trimming as alterations. And prices will reflect this. So, there will be card doctors who still try to get altered cards past the TPGs so they can make a profit and they will continue to use companies like PWCC to sell their crap because PWCC has stated that they don't agree that these things are alterations, but are rather conservation and are therefore ok. Stop trying to give PWCC a pass and deflect all blame on the TPGs.

While I agree with you. Wouldn’t it be comforting to know a TPG can work similarly to CGC? Be vocal subject matter experts. Give that video I linked a chance. If PSA came out with a open chat discussing their stance in detail it would be kind of a big deal.

Martin, until all three grading companies tell the people they are not wearing any clothes, aka incapable of detecting alterations, your point is useless.

Besides, with all the CGC mentions, I am unaware that comics don't have the same exact problems as trading cards

Wow. OK. i'm not sure that what school you went to makes a significant difference in this discussion. There are lawyers who went to one of the prestige schools whose ass I kick regularly. Others, not so much. It isn't about the school, its about the person. Particularly after you graduate and most people don't care where you went. I am having that very discussion with my youngest child right now.

I do not disagree that the TPGers have a significant degree of culpability in this debacle, whether due to ineptitude, intent, or whatever the reason may be. Yes, they made a promise that pretty clearly was sometimes not capable of being even close to fulfilled. To say the least, that is problematic.

But how does that give the fraudsters a pass? If you trim a card and submit it for a grade because you are pretty sure that your fraud is so advanced that the TPGers can't detect it, how and why is that OK? You still knowingly committed fraud. Period. The fact that the TPGers can't detect your fraud doesn't mean that you didn't commit it. Caveat emptor doesn't work so well anymore, nor should it when a huge percentage of cards are being sold over the internet based on scans. You can be an apologist for PSAA until you are blue in the face, but the evidence seems to be mounting (to say the least) that it knew what was going on, was complicit, and did its best to profit from it. In what universe is that OK?

Good point...there's plenty of guilt to go around!

Lake Oswego and environs, it would seem. :eek:

And...so what? Chuck may be rudimentary, you're condescending. Feels like a push. I thought you said you wanted a civil discussion, but your response to a silly insult is to try and impress everyone with you and your siblings Ivy League attendance? I literally did laugh out loud at this, so thanks for that.

Anyway, let's play this little game. While I didn't attend an Ivy League school, I do happen to have a Mensa card. Does that qualify me?


I think most people find out that the state governments and federal government are pretty well funded when it comes to lawsuits and investigations. The easy answer here is the FBI, but there are other choices if you want to look around.

If you just want to say you don't think it gets that far, that's fine - add another item to the list of things that certain people here don't agree with you on.

I don't believe for one second that you don't understand any of these arguments, you just choose not to directly address it and try to divert attention to a comic book video. Even though comic books and cards are actually really different, which you also don't seem to want to acknowledge, but that's fine.

You've made your point and posted your video a number of times now. Good work.

Thanks, and happy collecting! How'd I do?

I for one am cynical enough to say I don't buy that. Whoever puts themselves out there as an industry leader can eventually change how people think.
In the past
"Beckett can't tell us what a rookie card is. "
"Nobody can tell us rookie cards are really worth more"
"We don't need anyone to tell us what condition a card is in" (Ok, that one is still going, but the grading companies have gotten a LOT of traction)
"No price guide can tell me what a card is worth"
"The grade should be about how well preserved a card is, not if it was printed right or cut so it was well centered" (Ok, that last one was probably just me.. )

The only instance I can think of where a big idea pushed by a company didn't really go in a hobby was PSE slabbing stamps. But then they were fighting 100+ years of putting them in albums, and nobody could figure out a good way of doing that with small slabs.

So did Trump and George Dubya...and Fred Dorfman


Hoover: Kent is a legacy, Otter. His brother was a ’59, Fred Dorfman.
Flounder: He said legacies usually get asked to pledge automatically.
Otter: Oh, well, usually. Unless the pledge in question turns out to be a real closet-case.
Otter, Boon: Like Fred.

Hi Steve,

You make good points, but I don't think collectors are going to accept a new definition of what an altered card is. We still debate what a rookie card is. And what a card is worth. How many times have you laughed when a dealer pulls out a Beckett at a show when you ask what a card costs?

You did great David. Thanks for chiming in!

He has been coming at you, that's fair.

I don't share your opinion that this stays out of a courtroom somewhere, or that some agency doesn't end up involved. It only takes one person who ended up with one of these things to decide they don't care about the refund and would rather stand on principle. There are plenty of angles and choices to pursue, including eBay (although that would probably be the toughest fight of all).

Also, not sure what the value tally has come to yet but it's increasing every day. $1m will get some media eyeballs, if a story or two goes out in the right places don't underestimate how quickly this thing could take off outside our little collector world.

Comic books makes sense that there would be more restoration, there's more pages, thinner stock, etc. I'm not opposed to restoration in cards, I just think it's already been pretty well defined. I also heavily object to PWCCs idea of what is and isn't restoration/conservation, if for no other reason than that definition appears to be motivated by what is best for business, not what's best for the hobby. I don't think anyone includes trimming as an acceptable technique, but if you can't tell by holding the card it didn't happen, even with photos of before and after? Sorry, not buying it. Get a ruler, and stop with all the tolerance garbage.

At a minimum, I think PSA has some explaining to do, a fair bit of refunding to do and some pretty extensive changing/improvement to do so they actually enforce their published rules. They also have some enforcement to do, which includes permanent bans of bad actors. If that includes people/companies who act as agents for those bad actors as well, so be it. If they don't, I don't know how that improves anything.

This is becoming an easier case for a prosecutor on a daily basis, and that's even before they investigate and compel people to turn over evidence. And I bet there are plenty of people who know things who would come forward. I would.

I just had to check. We weren’t classmates. ;):):D

And I’ve never used my educational pedigree as a means of intimidation.

What we do and what the majority of collectors do aren't necessarily the same.

I'd laugh at the Beckett thing now, but in the early 90's? Pretty much every dealer did that, even some of the better ones. Most of the guys I would go to either mostly did stuff that wasn't in Beckett, or used it as a very rough guide.
there were a lot of discussions then about what something was in Beckett for and whether the arrows were up or not.

And for most people, if you just go with the standard definition of the rookie card they go along. Nevermind if the player has 15 cards issued earlier, whatever the book or website says the rookie card is - that's the one. (Or 100 in the case of modern... )

If the claim that alterations are acceptable is consistent over several years, eventually what will happen is most of the people who object stop fighting as hard, or as vocally. (keeping up the current level for say 5-10 years would be difficult, some will most won't) And the handful of people who buy it becomes greater until the objectors are in the minority.

I was generally against grading, but as I get older, I graded a few cards. I figure someday my family will sell them, and the ease of sale and extra value added would make that easier. It was also nice to see some of my nicer old cards get decent grades, sort of recognition that the card was actually that nice and not altered.
Seeing some of the stuff all the companies have done the last few years, fixing problems they caused without changing the grade, refusing to admit having been wrong, and now this stuff where they are either grossly incompetent, or actively passing altered cards for a particular customer.. I'm against it again. I might go back to grading a handful every couple years if they get things together again, but that may be a long way in the future.

Sorry to digress for a moment - can someone give me a quick and dirty primer on how the Blowout forums are different from Net54? I was never on Blowout, but given all the discussion there recently that has been linked to here, I registered the other day (it has not been approved yet). Just curious as to what I will be wading into - I'm not sure I have anywhere near the time to be as active on that board as I am here - but I am interested. Thanks.

Focus mostly on modern. Lots of general sports discussion as well as cards. Younger crowd, lots of high tech dudes. Anonymous. No moderation, or very little.

And they are relentless if they sense wrongdoing.

da Vinci?
 

Recent discussions here reminded me of this case, at the outer limits of conceivably acceptable restoration.