get it going...Brent Mastro deserves a good horse whipping. it's the very least we can do to show Brent Mastro our appreciation for all the good he has done.

The time frame is just so quick in this one. I'm betting these are PWCCs cards, not consignments. Oh well records will show it all out in the open

Back to the Musial, this is why I am really suspicious of PSA's involvement. It seems to me incredibly unlikely that someone would take a PSA 9 of a vintage superstar and doctor it in "hopes" of a 10, thereby risking discovery of the alteration by the TPG and a tanking in value. And who knows if you get the 10 even if you're not caught, that grade being so subjective. IMO, the only way you take that chance is if you are cock-sure you are going to beat the grader or if you somehow know that you will.

Risk reward. When you are making that much money you can take risks here and there for huge upside. If it goes south, a few K down the drain, so what.

Sounds just like options trading when your winning.

Logic
 

I refuse to believe that someone would take the chance to have the card cracked out, found to be altered, and turn from a "9" to "authentic" with the corresponding loss in more than 90% of it's value. The poster is dead accurate here. This is the best sign I have seen yet that this was not just Moser/PWCC but that there had to be a third actor of some kind.

It's a 3K card or whatever it is. It's meaningless to a guy making the kind of money he makes from altering cards. Huge upside, trivial downside. I think you're way off the mark here implicating PSA. This isn't a collector to whom the card means something. It's a piece of paper to him. It's a risk reward calculation to him plain and simple. Nothing else to see here.

Yes. Coupled with the comment someone else made, that politics might be involved with getting 10s. Way too much downside to try this in a "normal" way....

But I wonder what the mechanics could be, to see a card like this shepherded through the system end to end. That part still seems implausible.

Downside only exists relative to upside. You guys are not seeing how this man operates. He risked 3K. He made 25K. 3K is a trivial risk to him. Context.

You are correct Peter.

I have thrown 3k at a trade that had two days until the option expired. A ticking time bomb. He clearly had asymmetric risk here. It appears more that he has confidence in his work and isn't concerned about getting rendered with the AUTH grade or it staying there.

He made 25K from a 3K purchase which he could afford easily to blow up. Even with a relatively low chance of success it's an obvious gamble to take. He has 20 years of experience and knows his chances. Nothing to see.

I'm going with the nobody risks a 9 to try and get a 10. I don't think there is a single collector/submitter who can even tell you what the difference is. To me the only way you get a 10 is if the grader feels like giving it a 10. I smell something fishy too.

You might risk a 5 to get a 6, or a 6 to get an 8, because each of those cards has a flaw that can be improved. But a 9 is flawless. If you had a 9 and a magic wand to change it, what would you even attempt to do to make it better?

Look what he DID do in this case, why speculate? There are before and after pics on BO. I give up, Dave and I seem to be the only ones posting who understand this in context.

1390 of these things have been graded, and until this one, zero achieved a 10. I can see risking $3k for a possible $25k - I understand the concept - but the odds would have to be a little better to make it a good play. Here we're talking about trying to achieve a grade that had never been given for this card in the history of PSA.

I generally agree, it looks like what appears to have happened, happened. But I base that on not being able to see how any grading manipulation could have taken this card through the process, not on the smartness of the play.

It seems like there are more white specs in the after pic on his sleeve right by his wrist.

Anyone else see that?

Peter, without question you are correct. Any loss is meaningless in this context and I’m sure he has lost plenty. He has such made up on many more.

If he had an inside grader at PSA, he could make an incredible fortune just doing reviews, he wouldn't have to alter cards at all. He obviously has a tremendous eye, and he is an expert at 52 Bowmans by reputation, he probably saw one he thought might finally be the one and went with the opportunity.

That's one explanation Peter, but I'm not buying it here. At most you’ve explained the submitter’s motivation, but it doesn’t eliminate or even reduce the likelihood of the TPG involvement, which is why I stay suspicious.

PSA knows, or with an eye-blink's worth of investigation can learn that there are no graded tens of this 67 year old card depicting one of the most popular players collected. Now it comes to the grader in the course of his mundane, look at hundreds of cards for for a few seconds each day, and he says, hey neat, we got ourselves a 10. Strange that we only hand out that highest grade to about a 10th of one percent of the cards submitted from that set, but wow, somehow this card just pops. No need for extra scrutiny just because this is one of the keys to the set, and I live in a bubble so I have no idea what my grade might mean to the owner financially, so let's just slap a 10 on this bad boy.

Now of course it could be that several graders and even an upper mgmt type look at cards this valuable before they get slabbed, if only because of potential liability in the event of a mistake. In that case, they are not necessarily a knowing participant in fraud, just grossly incompetent. But I believe it is folly to dismiss their potential involvement just because you’ve concluded the submitter has money or cards to burn and would of course take the risk of eating a few thousand here and there.

I leave it to you to prove your conspiracy theory, Todd. I'll stick with common sense. If he had an inside grader, as I just said, he wouldn't even have to alter cards he could just do reviews and crackouts of legit cards.

not looking so good for the purchaser of this musial if I do say so.

Peter, would you mind writing this question down so when he’s under oath we don’t forget to ask him?

I just looked at the pictures on BO again, and the before and after look identical. Can anybody discern what was done to the 9 to improve it? My eyes aren't perfect, but they look the same to me.

Yes, they analyzed the recoloring over there.

Colored print dot on front left border white.
Colored some of the red line on shoulder red to fill gaps.
Colored the whitish spot on the sleeve blue to match.
Colored the gap in the bottom right of the A on back in black to hide.

As well as, the PSA 9 might have also been altered prior to because it doesn't have either left or right edge with a rough cut, which would seem to indicate it was trimmed or sheet cut.

If it was trimmed or sheet cut, he wouldn't have cracked it. He's too damn knowledgeable.

The personal insults and piling on the guy who spent close to 30k on what appears to be an altered card should have no place on this site.

The lack of understanding on why someone would gamble to turn a 3k card into a 25 to 30k card if he knows how to do so is hard for me to believe. Have you guys never placed a bet before? He only has to make it work 1 time in 8 for this to pay off.

Is it certain the card was recolored? It's hard for me to tell from the scans but perhaps the spots in question were simply removed.

That turns a 3K card into a 25K card? Absolutely f**king nuts!

The marks that were supposedly removed are actually common attributes of the ’52 Bowman Musial.
Has anybody ever thought that it may have actually bumped to a “10” and was photoshopped when auctioned?

The buyer was on here so maybe he can shed some more light on this.

Hopefully this is the case and there are far less trimmed/altered cards then thought and is just a “camera trick”.

sorry for the poor images

http://www.net54baseball.com/picture...ictureid=27005
http://www.net54baseball.com/picture...ictureid=27004

I am also surprised at how many people are disbelieving that Moser would alter a "9" in an attempt to try for a "10." Three grand is a small amount to risk, considering how much Moser has already been shown to have profited from his alterations.

If it bumped cert would be the same, no?

Yes

That's right. Hopefully it was cracked out and not altered.

I'm just trying to be a little hopeful in this mess.

Not if cracked out and resubmitted. I would be too risk adverse to try that myself but for someone with a higher net worth I could see it happening.

A lot of assumptions are being made in these threads from a before and after picture that in some of these cases may not even be the same card.

+1. Who the hell has balls big enough to take a 9 of a fairly big time card/player and alter it hoping for a 10. Even if he knew for sure that you could successfully make all the alterations without detection, what makes him think he wood get a 10 when there none previous. HUGE balls or the fix was in from the getgo. This one seems to indicate the latter

Edited - I just read all the posts after the quote. I do believe the Doctor could make a business risk-reward proposition on $3k - the ups are worth the downs. The problem is there were NO/ZERO 10’s previously. Risking $3k to get an 8x multiple return makes sense. But not when the historical odds of achieving that goal is nil. I guess there always could be a first, but shouldn’t that have alerted psa? All these 52 Musials graded and never a 10 and then one just comes out of nowhere?

It takes no balls at all for someone with hundreds of thousands of dollars in cards and probably millions in the bank to take a gamble on a 3K card, with a huge upside. You can't see that?

Mess up. See edited post above - it’s not the dollars, but the odds.

Regardless, it’s a shame what this a@@hole has done to amazing pieces of American history. I hope something very bad happens to Gary Moser.

Ryan Hotchkiss (and Gary, I will gladly meet you in person if you take exception to my post)

Exactly, plus if it comes back a 9 he's lost nothing.

Actually, at a 9, it probably still goes higher after the touchups. He's made a lot of profit on cards that stayed the same technical grade if you check the thread on Blowout, just by improving the centering or eye appeal.

True!! It did not occur to me it could come back something other than a 10 or altered (but I am not that smart to begin with!). And I guess if it comes back altered, or a 8 or 9, he cracks a resubmits, over and over until he gets the 10 or gives up. Perhaps that is what happened.

Ok Peter, I am convinced. It’s not PSA on this one; at least they were not knowingly involved.

When you're making money this easy, $3k ain't nothing to roll the dice on. My money is on PSA NOT being a knowing party to the fraud.

Zero chance it simply bumped. Those marks, while common, were removed and touched up. Card fibers on the reverse prove they are the same card.

I don't know the OP, though he seems like a good guy and I sincerely hope he gets the restitution he's looking for. That said, it's impossible to convince me that he and his ilk aren't the source of this entire problem. Of course not knowingly, but the happy willingness to spend $22k more on a 10 than a 9 is ultimately what is being taken advantage here. It wouldn't be entirely fair to put this squarely on the guys with deep pockets, as no one deserves to get ripped off, regardless of their financial standing. However, they do have a seat at the table which, like or not, is what money buys you in this country. I just wish enough of them would be willing to take their money off the table to make a difference.

Actually, there’s a good chance it bumped to a 10, and was photoshopped for resale and not altered.

Hasn’t anyone ever received a card that wasn’t quite the same as the scan? Even from PWCC?
Of course, doesn’t mean it’s trimmed/altered

Before I grab my pitchfork and torch I’d like to hear from the owner to see if the marks are there.

He has indicated he is attempting to return it. If it was just a bump, don't you think Brent would have told him that? And would have urged him to compare the card in hand with the 9 scan?

If it was an in the holder bump the cert would be the same. Out of the holder re grade for a bump is definitely possible.

I he's returning it, that's good enough.

I agree with you and would add his risk is much less then the 9 to altered value delta. If PSA kills it, it goes to SGC then BVG then back to PSA. Guy has altered thousands of cards and has enough data to know what his chance is of it slipping through, somewhere. He knows they consistently miss these types of alterations. I mean these guys are getting 52 mantles through, its incompetence at the TPG IMO

Regarding the '52 Musial:

Here's a picture of the card from Heritage Auctions (it is from their April 2009 Signature Auction, where it sold for $1,673):

https://dyn1.heritagestatic.com/lf?s...oduct.chain%5D

Now, here's the image of the card, apparently from September 2017:

https://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/3/9/...30283230_o.jpg

Finally, here's the image of the card as a PSA 10:

https://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/3/9/...30283221_o.jpg

So, if it was worked on before PSA graded it a 9, this work was done before April 2009, as that is when it was auctioned as a PSA 9 by Heritage.

Steve

Yes, his auction partner throws a HE sticker on it and rally’s his big time buyers to run up the price, with Moser playing shill. Even a 9 likely ends with big profit. Thats a big part of the racket, the auctioneer is not impartial. He is coaching buyers, would be fascinating to see the bid history on the cards Moser buys vs those he sells, and analyze for bid history / retractions etc

I just noticed something:

If you look at the scan of the PSA 9 from 10 years ago (Heritage), the white spot on Stan's left sleeve is NOT there. This matches with the PSA 10 scan.

So, on the scan from 2017 of the reholdered PSA 9, the visible white spot must simply be a speck of dust either on the slab, or on the scanner.

It would be interesting to know if the black dot in the left upper front border of the card is actually there on the PSA 10. Some scanners, depending on the setting, are known to automatically take out extraneous dots, due to their auto-correct functions.

Steve