Final UPDATE. PSA Guarantee on a doctored card - Actual good news this time

[Snowman]

I'm going to start making Tiffany stickers and putting them on my slabs. Then in my listing descriptions, I'll proudly disclose, "as seen in the Tiffany card database!"

I bet they'll even sell for a premium. If anyone else wants a sticker, let me know.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I'm going to start making Tiffany stickers and putting them on my slabs. Then in my listing descriptions, I'll proudly disclose, "as seen in the Tiffany card database!"

I bet they'll even sell for a premium. If anyone else wants a sticker, let me know.

How many do you have? Outed slabs, I mean, not stickers.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

How many do you have? Outed slabs, I mean, not stickers.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Currently, I don't have any. I plan on adding as many as I can find though. It'll be fun! I might even send her some before and after pictures myself to gain entry into her prestigious "database". Maybe we can get PSA to create the Tiffany Cards registry?

[Snowman]

PSA does not have a guarantee. They just have a marketing department that wants you to think they have one so they can justify their absurd upcharges.

People in this hobby still haven't even begun to understand the scale of this. Even if PSA were only forced to make good on a mere 1% of altered cards, it would still bankrupt them. Hell, even 0.1% would bankrupt them.

[perezfan]

I do not understand how they'd have a leg to stand on, if taken to court. The band on Mays' sleeve was clearly filled in and it could not be more obvious, given the "before and after".

PSA's vague statement did not cover any specifics whatsoever. Did you press them on it, or demand a specific explanation that goes beyond their vague bullshit?

I would either take them to court or hire an attorney who will threaten to do so. Just the threat of it could get you some restitution. And if it went to court, you could set a precedent for hundreds (if not thousands) of other collectors. You could make lemonade out of lemons not just for yourself, but for countless others.

You could be revered as a Hobby Legend. Think positive and make something good come of this blatant fraud.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by perezfan

I do not understand how they'd have a leg to stand on, if taken to court. The band on Mays' sleeve was clearly filled in and it could not be more obvious, given the "before and after".

PSA's vague statement did not cover any specifics whatsoever. Did you press them on it, or demand a specific explanation that goes beyond their vague bullshit?

I would either take them to court or hire an attorney who will threaten to do so. Just the threat of it could get you some restitution. And if it went to court, you could set a precedent for hundreds (if not thousands) of other collectors. You could make lemonade out of lemons not just for yourself, but for countless others.

You could be revered as a Hobby Legend. Think positive and make something good come of this blatant fraud.

Anyone want to represent me as my legal counsel?

Not sure I'm motivated to spend much, so you'd need to be willing to take the gamble that we could get PSA to pay for my legal fees.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by raulus

Anyone want to represent me as my legal counsel?

Not sure I'm motivated to spend much, so you'd need to be willing to take the gamble that we could get PSA to pay for my legal fees.

Have you decided on what you are going to do with this card?

[Fuddjcal]

BUT BUT BUT...The upcharges are for insurance for things like this..

What a scam. Sorry about this Nicolo. I know how much you enjoy their registry but I'd say F you to them for good and pull your shit off that stupid site too.

[aljurgela]

Please see the video that I posted about it on YT...

https://youtu.be/MAOe35gNd74?si=cYGMp-W8Ha6r_AFW

[raulus]

Originally Posted by aljurgela

Please see the video that I posted about it on YT...

https://youtu.be/MAOe35gNd74?si=cYGMp-W8Ha6r_AFW

Thanks for sharing. Glad to see that you ended up with a great result. At the same time, it just makes me a bit more irritated that they didn't seem willing to go there with my card.

I suppose there's always the possibility that the BODA investigator got it wrong, although the detail provided by BODA seems awfully convincing, so it's hard to feel real confident that PSA isn't just gaslighting me.

[Prince Hal]

What/Who is BODA?

[JustinD]

*double post

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Prince Hal

What/Who is BODA?

It's a group on Blowout dedicated to researching and identifying doctored and regraded cards. They do good work for the hobby in my perspective.

BODA - "Blowout Detective Agency"

Tiffany Cards posting on this thread (I assume this is the same person as the site) maintains a database of all identified doctored cards for purchasers.

https://www.tiffanycards.com/altered...abase/baseball

Again, an asset to buyers like myself who care...likely hated by doctors.

[raulus]

There has been a new development.

On the advice of a friend and fellow collector, I contacted PSA to inquire about whether they could give me some more detail regarding their original quality assurance investigation. Based on the head grader's report, the focus of that investigation had been on scrutinizing the piece for trimming. Based on the original check, no evidence of trimming had been found.

Based on that feedback, I asked PSA to take another look, this time to specifically evaluate whether there had been color added to Mays' arm, and PSA graciously agreed to take another look.

So I sent it in last week, arriving last Thursday, and they expedited the turnaround. I received a call just this morning, with a report that the card is indeed Authentic Altered due to recoloring. Apparently my options are to get it reslabbed as AA, or for them to send it back as raw. Not sure that I have a strong preference either way, although I'm inclined to go with AA, just so there's a record of the new grade, should some enterprising future collector decide to crack it out and attempt to recirculate it as a high grade raw piece.

This is obviously just the first step. I will be working with the PSA team to figure out the correct amount of compensation. While values have come down in the last year or so, it's still a very valuable card. So I'm sure that we'll have good fun in working through those details together.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If they had graded it right the first time, you never would have bought it. Why should you take a hit if the value dropped since then?

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by raulus

There has been a new development.

On the advice of a friend and fellow collector, I contacted PSA to inquire about whether they could give me some more detail regarding their original quality assurance investigation. Based on the head grader's report, the focus of that investigation had been on scrutinizing the piece for trimming. Based on the original check, no evidence of trimming had been found.

Based on that feedback, I asked PSA to take another look, this time to specifically evaluate whether there had been color added to Mays' arm, and PSA graciously agreed to take another look.

So I sent it in last week, arriving last Thursday, and they expedited the turnaround. I received a call just this morning, with a report that the card is indeed Authentic Altered due to recoloring. Apparently my options are to get it reslabbed as AA, or for them to send it back as raw. Not sure that I have a strong preference either way, although I'm inclined to go with AA, just so there's a record of the new grade, should some enterprising future collector decide to crack it out and attempt to recirculate it as a high grade raw piece.

This is obviously just the first step. I will be working with the PSA team to figure out the correct amount of compensation. While values have come down in the last year or so, it's still a very valuable card. So I'm sure that we'll have good fun in working through those details together.

Nicolo, glad that this is progressing. I must say that I am floored that they changed their opinion. Please keep us posted on what you and they agree to.

[TiffanyCards]

Originally Posted by raulus

There has been a new development.

On the advice of a friend and fellow collector, I contacted PSA to inquire about whether they could give me some more detail regarding their original quality assurance investigation. Based on the head grader's report, the focus of that investigation had been on scrutinizing the piece for trimming. Based on the original check, no evidence of trimming had been found.

Based on that feedback, I asked PSA to take another look, this time to specifically evaluate whether there had been color added to Mays' arm, and PSA graciously agreed to take another look.

So I sent it in last week, arriving last Thursday, and they expedited the turnaround. I received a call just this morning, with a report that the card is indeed Authentic Altered due to recoloring. Apparently my options are to get it reslabbed as AA, or for them to send it back as raw. Not sure that I have a strong preference either way, although I'm inclined to go with AA, just so there's a record of the new grade, should some enterprising future collector decide to crack it out and attempt to recirculate it as a high grade raw piece.

This is obviously just the first step. I will be working with the PSA team to figure out the correct amount of compensation. While values have come down in the last year or so, it's still a very valuable card. So I'm sure that we'll have good fun in working through those details together.

Just another example of the excellent work done by BODA. It amazes me how some people will continue to dismiss their findings, tell people to never trust online image comparison, suggest they are slandering cards or attempt to silence or discredit their work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

PSA does not have a guarantee. They just have a marketing department that wants you to think they have one so they can justify their absurd upcharges.

People in this hobby still haven't even begun to understand the scale of this. Even if PSA were only forced to make good on a mere 1% of altered cards, it would still bankrupt them. Hell, even 0.1% would bankrupt them.

33 years of grading cards. It adds up.

[tjisonline]

Originally Posted by Snowman

PSA does not have a guarantee. They just have a marketing department that wants you to think they have one so they can justify their absurd upcharges.

People in this hobby still haven't even begun to understand the scale of this. Even if PSA were only forced to make good on a mere 1% of altered cards, it would still bankrupt them. Hell, even 0.1% would bankrupt them.

100% agreed. My guess (total guess by me just going by auction catalogs & social media), I think somewhere between 33% to 50% of medium to higher graded PSA encased cards have been altered. Getting harder to tell nowadays since scanned card images have photo settings boosted like brightness,, contrast, blur, etc…

That’s part of the reason why comparing before & after pics of cards in diff slabs are very difficult & that’s even before taking into account the diff source image resolutions. For people who don’t know, there’s a lot of coding & math behind images & PDF that get even more complicated / distorted when you resize & save as diff formats. That’s why simple animated gif comparisons don’t usually work

It’s like Kelso’s quote from the film Heat.

* Neil McCauley : how do you get this information?
* Kelso : It comes to you, this stuff just flies through the air, they send this information "beamed" out over the f’in place, you just got to know how to grab it, see, I know how to grab it.

In this case, knowing where to “grab it” is social media. Higher positioned people in the hobby post pics all the time of altered cards whether they unknowingly bought older cert PSA slabbed cards that way or not.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Snowman

PSA does not have a guarantee. They just have a marketing department that wants you to think they have one so they can justify their absurd upcharges.

People in this hobby still haven't even begun to understand the scale of this. Even if PSA were only forced to make good on a mere 1% of altered cards, it would still bankrupt them. Hell, even 0.1% would bankrupt them.

I said this 5 years ago and was laughed at...

"It's ALL a Billion Dollar Fraud". Pretty funny in retrospect, huh?

[TiffanyCards]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I'm going to start making Tiffany stickers and putting them on my slabs. Then in my listing descriptions, I'll proudly disclose, "as seen in the Tiffany card database!"

I bet they'll even sell for a premium. If anyone else wants a sticker, let me know.

I’ll take that bet that they won’t sell for a premium! I don’t think collectors will want to pay a premium for cards that have been suspected of being altered, soaked in an unknown chemical or tap water, mislabeled, stolen, or suspected of being doctored. However, I do believe that everyone would appreciate the disclosure on cards before they buy them.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by TiffanyCards

I’ll take that bet that they won’t sell for a premium! I don’t think collectors will want to pay a premium for cards that have been suspected of being altered, soaked in an unknown chemical or tap water, mislabeled, stolen, or suspected of being doctored. However, I do believe that everyone would appreciate the disclosure on cards before they buy them.

First, let's be clear. I don't alter cards. I use distilled water. I don't know what's in Kurt's card spray, but I don't use that or "unknown chemicals" to soak my cards.

Do I have your permission to use your logo to make some little stickers that I can apply to some slabs? Similar to the PWCC stickers. Should be a fun experiment. You can add them to your spreadsheet. I'll even send you the before vs after scans myself to save you some time.

[Exhibitman]

The guarantee is BS. Bill Mastro admitted in court that he trimmed the PSA 8 Wagner and went to jail for it, yet it is the crown jewel in the PSA crown. If that doesn't get a card de-certified, nothing will. When it was public, PSA had to disclose its reserves for bad grades and the numbers were laughably low as compared to the potential liability for just the one card. And it is so, so unbiased to have the person accused of missing the grade also be the one who reviews the work. Yeah, I wish I could get that deal for my work.

The thing PSA counts on is that challenging its decision requires a lawsuit and most cards are not worth paying a lawyer to fight over. Plus, if you were to sue, you'd need to present either eyewitness testimony from the card doctor or expert testimony to debunk PSA's opinion. As to the former, good luck with that. Mastro admitted what he'd done as part of an allocution designed to get him less time in the can. Otherwise, he'd never have said a word. As to the latter, you end up having what lawyers call a 'whore fight" between experts and the only certainty of that is expenses.

The more interesting question, unfortunately, is what to do, assuming that the card no longer is desired. PSA says the card is good. Do you accept that decision and sell it as is? Sell it with a recitation of what happened? Not sell it? I don't know the answer, fortunately.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

First, let's be clear. I don't alter cards. I use distilled water. I don't know what's in Kurt's card spray, but I don't use that or "unknown chemicals" to soak my cards.

Do I have your permission to use your logo to make some little stickers that I can apply to some slabs? Similar to the PWCC stickers. Should be a fun experiment. You can add them to your spreadsheet. I'll even send you the before vs after scans myself to save you some time.

You need to buy this 1954 Topps Mays PSA 8.5 and put your sticker on it. Like they say go big or go home. PSA had the Wagner and you could have the Mays.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by bnorth

You need to buy this 1954 Topps Mays PSA 8.5 and put your sticker on it. Like they say go big or go home. PSA had the Wagner and you could have the Mays.

If he wants to sell it at a discount because he's no longer happy with it, I'll gladly buy it and consign it for a profit if it makes him sleep better at night.

I get that this stuff is disheartening to learn about at first, but once you realize that it's not just that one card in your collection or that handful of cards, or even that long list of cards posted to the BODA threads but rather it's the overwhelming majority of the entire sum total value of cards in this hobby, then it changes your perspective. Tens of millions of cards have been cleaned or altered in this hobby. We all have them. There's just no escaping it. It is what it is. If you're not OK with that, then this isn't the hobby for you.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Snowman

If he wants to sell it at a discount because he's no longer happy with it, I'll gladly buy it and consign it for a profit if it makes him sleep better at night.

I get that this stuff is disheartening to learn about at first, but once you realize that it's not just that one card in your collection or that handful of cards, or even that long list of cards posted to the BODA threads but rather it's the overwhelming majority of the entire sum total value of cards in this hobby, then it changes your perspective. Tens of millions of cards have been cleaned or altered in this hobby. We all have them. There's just no escaping it. It is what it is. If you're not OK with that, then this isn't the hobby for you.

Granted there are oodles of altered cards residing in numbered slabs. But I think you are overstating the number just a bit. Why even have an "altered" disclaimer if the numbers you state are somewhat close to reality?

And the Mays in question is particularly unnerving because it's had a fake substance added to the card. It's not just a cleaning, soaking or other attempt to get the card back to a normal state. The nefarious addition of color is a permanent "scar" that is irreversibly intrusive (and in no way acceptable to even the most ardent TPG apologists).

[TiffanyCards]

Originally Posted by Snowman

First, let's be clear. I don't alter cards. I use distilled water. I don't know what's in Kurt's card spray, but I don't use that or "unknown chemicals" to soak my cards.

Do I have your permission to use your logo to make some little stickers that I can apply to some slabs? Similar to the PWCC stickers. Should be a fun experiment. You can add them to your spreadsheet. I'll even send you the before vs after scans myself to save you some time.

Just to be clear, your Instagram is jackies_and_jordans?

Is removing stains altering cards?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tjisonline]

Originally Posted by TiffanyCards

Just to be clear, your Instagram is jackies_and_jordans?

Is removing stains altering cards?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I get snowman is an easy target. He puts himself out there but going after him is like the police arresting the corner guy instead of the boss. Didn’t you read my post above? You’re not looking at the big picture. There are well-known people in the hobby who keep displaying altered cards & images going by your definition.

Additionally, you haven’t addressed the scanned image debacle.

[TiffanyCards]

Originally Posted by tjisonline

I get snowman is an easy target. He puts himself out there but going after him is like the police arresting the corner guy instead of the boss. Didn’t you read my post above? You’re not looking at the big picture. There are well-known people in the hobby who keep displaying altered cards & images going by your definition.

Additionally, you haven’t addressed the scanned image debacle.

I’m not targeting snowman/jackie_and_jordans. He comments on my posts and mentioned me here. He even direct messaged me.

If you see someone post an altered card, then tag, email, or message me and I will add it to the altered card database.

I’m not qualified to address scanner settings, as I have no experience in the field or know much about them. You have stated that you do. Therefore, you should be pointing out it out and trying to educate people about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by TiffanyCards

Is removing stains altering cards?

No, of course not. That's a stupid question. And every grading company agrees, as evidenced by their actions, despite what you may think their policies are based on some PR social media response they might put out to assuage you and others of your ilk.

The grading companies know that the majority of collectors think cleaning cards is perfectly acceptable. They also know that a significant faction of the hobby is comprised of people like yourself who are vehemently opposed to it, because some people just fear the boogeyman. They know the hobby is divided. Their goal is to play the middle. They don't want to pick sides. They don't want to alienate a significant proportion of their customers. That's why they put out all the double-speak. One minute you have Peter from SGC saying, "as long as there is nothing physical remaining on the card that we can detect, then it's OK" and Ryan Hoge effectively endorsing Kurt's Card Care one week by saying, "we know that Kurt's Card Care was used on the Wemby 1 of 1 but we're going to stand by our assessment of the card" and then decertifying one of Kurt's submissions the next week and Ryan saying he doesn't like people "manipulating" cards in his interview with Geoff Wilson. They're trying to appease everyone. They're trying to play the middle, and apparently they're doing it well.

But at the end of the day, their true policy is only measurable by their outcomes. They know the Gretzky Wagner was trimmed because Mastro testified to it under oath, and yet they haven't decertified it. They also know that every single 1986 Fleer sticker card that has ever been submitted to them without wax on back has had that wax removed, because ALL 86 Fleer stickers come with wax on them. Not some. ALL. They also know that all these old 1914 cracker jack cards that don't have stains on them have been cleaned, yet they still grade them as numeric. The same with all the old hot dog cards without the hot dog water stains. They know they were cleaned, yet they still grade them. The same with all the 48 Leaf cards with non-foxed borders. They know how acidic that card stock is and how that affects foxing over time, yet they give numeric grades to those cards every time knowing they've been conserved (and the same is true with other sets printed on high wood pulp fiber card stock). They also know when a card was soaked to remove it from a scrapbook every time a vintage card gets submitted with glue residue and surface abrasions on the back. Yet they allow that as well. Numeric grade every time. Sometimes even relatively high grades like with Orlando's now infamous pre-war boxing card (which most definitely did show evidence of having been removed from a scrapbook at the time of submission yet still received a 6). I could give endless examples of cards that you and your friends should all take issue with (if you're being consistent with your criticisms) but that are completely standard practice in this hobby and always have been.

At the end of the day, the fact of the matter remains, whether you like it or not, that it is acceptable to clean and soak cards in this hobby, as long as you're not using some harsh chemicals that alter them in some way (like soaking cards in a bucket of bleach, leaving them brittle and faded).

There are perfectly safe ways to clean and restore a card that do not damage them at all and that do not leave anything behind on the card, and that do not affect the integrity of the card stock. Just because you don't know how it can be done doesn't mean it can't be. And furthermore, when done properly, it even preserves and prolongs the lifespans of those cards.

You can try to change the discussion back to, "that's fine, but what I'm demanding is just disclosure", but we all know that's a bullshit red herring. What you really want is anyone who views this topic differently from you to be kicked out of the hobby. You want them publicly tarred and feathered. You want them all to be "canceled". But if cleaning cards, removing wax, and soaking cards to remove them from scrapbooks are acceptable practices in this hobby, then there is nothing to disclose when doing so because these acts do not have a material effect on the value of the cards. And you can't just say that it's OK to remove wax from this card but not from that one, or that it's OK to soak this card on water but not that one, or that it's OK for cards manufacturers to remove stray ink marks from the backs of player signed cards caused by athletes stacking them before they dry while signing (and yes, they ALL do this using rubbing alcohol) but it's not OK for a collector to do it. You have to be consistent.

[Exhibitman]

I rarely agree with Travis but he is right on this issue. Proper conservation and cleaning of cards is just as important and as valid as it is with any other paper work of art. As long as it does not harm the card, it is fine. In some cases, it may become critical to the preservation of the item.

[TiffanyCards]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I rarely agree with Travis but he is right on this issue. Proper conservation and cleaning of cards is just as important and as valid as it is with any other paper work of art. As long as it does not harm the card, it is fine. In some cases, it may become critical to the preservation of the item.

Do you think museums are going to restore paper works of art using unknown substances and chemicals, made in some guys basement, bought and used by someone on the internet with no knowledge about the type of paper or training on what to do other than watch a YouTube video??? lol.

Proper conservation and cleaning of paper work of art needs to be done using proven chemicals and methods, done by trained professionals, and documented and disclosed on the provenance. If this was done with cards, then I don’t think most people in the hobby would have a problem with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I rarely agree with Travis but he is right on this issue. Proper conservation and cleaning of cards is just as important and as valid as it is with any other paper work of art. As long as it does not harm the card, it is fine. In some cases, it may become critical to the preservation of the item.

I agree to some extent. In one of my other hobbies alterations are very discouraged except in certain instances. In one of those part of the item is highly acidic and will destroy it eventually and has probably already done damage. It is expected, and nearly required that it will be altered.

I think some of our cards may already be doomed, specifically most of the strip cards which are printed on very rough stock that tends towards high acidity. many are already fragile, and will never get better. Being conserved by deacidification is the way to go, but that won't happen.

[TiffanyCards]

Originally Posted by Snowman

No, of course not. That's a stupid question. And every grading company agrees, as evidenced by their actions, despite what you may think their policies are based on some PR social media response they might put out to assuage you and others of your ilk.

The grading companies know that the majority of collectors think cleaning cards is perfectly acceptable. They also know that a significant faction of the hobby is comprised of people like yourself who are vehemently opposed to it, because some people just fear the boogeyman. They know the hobby is divided. Their goal is to play the middle. They don't want to pick sides. They don't want to alienate a significant proportion of their customers. That's why they put out all the double-speak. One minute you have Peter from SGC saying, "as long as there is nothing physical remaining on the card that we can detect, then it's OK" and Ryan Hoge effectively endorsing Kurt's Card Care one week by saying, "we know that Kurt's Card Care was used on the Wemby 1 of 1 but we're going to stand by our assessment of the card" and then decertifying one of Kurt's submissions the next week and Ryan saying he doesn't like people "manipulating" cards in his interview with Geoff Wilson. They're trying to appease everyone. They're trying to play the middle, and apparently they're doing it well.

But at the end of the day, their true policy is only measurable by their outcomes. They know the Gretzky Wagner was trimmed because Mastro testified to it under oath, and yet they haven't decertified it. They also know that every single 1986 Fleer sticker card that has ever been submitted to them without wax on back has had that wax removed, because ALL 86 Fleer stickers come with wax on them. Not some. ALL. They also know that all these old 1914 cracker jack cards that don't have stains on them have been cleaned, yet they still grade them as numeric. The same with all the old hot dog cards without the hot dog water stains. They know they were cleaned, yet they still grade them. The same with all the 48 Leaf cards with non-foxed borders. They know how acidic that card stock is and how that affects foxing over time, yet they give numeric grades to those cards every time knowing they've been conserved (and the same is true with other sets printed on high wood pulp fiber card stock). They also know when a card was soaked to remove it from a scrapbook every time a vintage card gets submitted with glue residue and surface abrasions on the back. Yet they allow that as well. Numeric grade every time. Sometimes even relatively high grades like with Orlando's now infamous pre-war boxing card (which most definitely did show evidence of having been removed from a scrapbook at the time of submission yet still received a 6). I could give endless examples of cards that you and your friends should all take issue with (if you're being consistent with your criticisms) but that are completely standard practice in this hobby and always have been.

At the end of the day, the fact of the matter remains, whether you like it or not, that it is acceptable to clean and soak cards in this hobby, as long as you're not using some harsh chemicals that alter them in some way (like soaking cards in a bucket of bleach, leaving them brittle and faded).

There are perfectly safe ways to clean and restore a card that do not damage them at all and that do not leave anything behind on the card, and that do not affect the integrity of the card stock. Just because you don't know how it can be done doesn't mean it can't be. And furthermore, when done properly, it even preserves and prolongs the lifespans of those cards.

You can try to change the discussion back to, "that's fine, but what I'm demanding is just disclosure", but we all know that's a bullshit red herring. What you really want is anyone who views this topic differently from you to be kicked out of the hobby. You want them publicly tarred and feathered. You want them all to be "canceled". But if cleaning cards, removing wax, and soaking cards to remove them from scrapbooks are acceptable practices in this hobby, then there is nothing to disclose when doing so because these acts do not have a material effect on the value of the cards. And you can't just say that it's OK to remove wax from this card but not from that one, or that it's OK to soak this card on water but not that one, or that it's OK for cards manufacturers to remove stray ink marks from the backs of player signed cards caused by athletes stacking them before they dry while signing (and yes, they ALL do this using rubbing alcohol) but it's not OK for a collector to do it. You have to be consistent.

So yes you are jackies_and_jordans and no you don’t think removing stains is altering if done your way, but if done the “wrong way” then it is altering. That’s what I got from your response.
Then you went on a long tantrum. Let’s focus back on what you claim is your acceptable cleaning method for removing stains from cards.

On here you just stated you use distilled water. Why on my Instagram post, that showed a stained removed on a card you sold, did you flip flop all over the place about how the stain was removed?

You first said it was soaked in kryptonite. Then said it was just the scanner settings. Then said you rinsed the dirt off with ordinary tap water and it was the scanner settings. Then blocked everyone that questioned the methods you said you used. Seems like a lot of unnecessary BS if you just soaked it in distilled water.

In fact, I even stated that if it was just distilled water then we wouldn’t even be having a debate about the card. In your repeated post you referenced water, but never once mentioned distilled water.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[G1911]

Originally Posted by TiffanyCards

So yes you are jackies_and_jordans and no you don’t think removing stains is altering if done your way, but if done the “wrong way” then it is altering. That’s what I got from your response.
Then you went on a long tantrum. Let’s focus back on what you claim is your acceptable cleaning method for removing stains from cards.

On here you just stated you use distilled water. Why on my Instagram post, that showed a stained removed on a card you sold, did you flip flop all over the place about how the stain was removed?

You first said it was soaked in kryptonite. Then said it was just the scanner settings. Then said you rinsed the dirt off with ordinary tap water and it was the scanner settings. Then blocked everyone that questioned the methods you said you used. Seems like a lot of unnecessary BS if you just soaked it in distilled water.

In fact, I even stated that if it was just distilled water then we wouldn’t even be having a debate about the card. In your repeated post you referenced water, but never once mentioned distilled water.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Snowman just came back from 'quitting the board' after he transparently made up a lie about another member during a tantrum and couldn't come up with a way to weasel out of it. You aren't going to get to get consistency or anything approaching honesty from him. His lies are so inconsistent and poorly done that even most of the other people who are against honesty and disclosure have to abandon him in these threads.

The altered card database is fantastic.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by TiffanyCards

So yes you are jackies_and_jordans and no you don’t think removing stains is altering if done your way, but if done the “wrong way” then it is altering. That’s what I got from your response.
Then you went on a long tantrum. Let’s focus back on what you claim is your acceptable cleaning method for removing stains from cards.

On here you just stated you use distilled water. Why on my Instagram post, that showed a stained removed on a card you sold, did you flip flop all over the place about how the stain was removed?

You first said it was soaked in kryptonite. Then said it was just the scanner settings. Then said you rinsed the dirt off with ordinary tap water and it was the scanner settings. Then blocked everyone that questioned the methods you said you used. Seems like a lot of unnecessary BS if you just soaked it in distilled water.

In fact, I even stated that if it was just distilled water then we wouldn’t even be having a debate about the card. In your repeated post you referenced water, but never once mentioned distilled water.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you want to discuss and make accusations against specific individuals (me) or companies, then you can abide by the rules in play here and post your name publicly like everyone else if you want to have a discussion. Otherwise you can kindly f off. I'm not going to entertain an anonymous troll who never answers my questions but always demands answers to hers, and who always conducts herself disingeuously.

And in the meantime, maybe go buy yourself a scanner and figure out how they work before making ignorant accusations against people based on differences between scans.

[TiffanyCards]

Originally Posted by TiffanyCards

You first said it was soaked in kryptonite. Then said it was just the scanner settings. Then said you rinsed the dirt off with ordinary tap water and it was the scanner settings. Then blocked everyone that questioned the methods you said you used.

I don't want to offend anyone or break any terms of services, so I changed the username and profile pic.