Blatantly Hacked and Kudos to Rob Lifson PSA should be ashamed!

jhs5120 · #1 04-15-2013, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lharri3600

Rob did not one thing wrong here, it's clearly stated at REA's web site about these issues.

I'm glad the issues are stated, but the fact that he is allowing these into enter the marketplace is kind of astonishing.

What if Pepis decided to consign his massive collection of fraudulent packs?

This is no different.

What if REA took the consignment and wrote, "In our opinion these packs might be tampered, but that's just our opinion, others might disagree." It would be gross negligence on their part. Yes, they wrote a little disclaimer and won't be held liable, but it is extremely unethical.

These cards are like currency to fraudulent sellers. They are trimmed cards that got past PSA. Everyone here KNOWS that these cards will exchange hands more than 2 or 3 more times within the next decade, will they always carry a disclaimer? No. Will potential buyers know that these are trimmed? Probably not. And will it eventually end up in a collection of someone who cares about the integrity of the card... Yes, of course it will.

REA is acting as the middle man for compromised cards, they are doing the hobby a disservice by allowing these cards to enter into the market.

Kudos to them for going above and beyond the typical AH by including a disclaimer, but that SHOULDN'T be the highest standard of integrity in this hobby.. everyone here loves REA (I do too), but everyone here KNOWS they could have (and should have) done more.

Jason

Leon · #2 04-15-2013, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

. ... but everyone here KNOWS they could have (and should have) done more.

Jason

From the responses given, no they don't.

jhs5120 · #3 04-15-2013, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leon

From the responses given, no they don't.

So no one has a problem with these cards entering the market as is? Wow.

vintagetoppsguy · #4 04-15-2013, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

I'm glad the issues are stated, but the fact that he is allowing these into enter the marketplace is kind of astonishing.

"He" didn't allow anything to enter the marketplace. PSA did that when they graded them.

Jason, what we have here is differences of opinion between PSA and REA/consignor (whom I tend to agree with). What do you expect to happen here? Do you believe the consignor should send them back to PSA for re-evaluation? Ok, but what if PSA sticks by their opinion? What if they say the cards are fine? Then what is the consignor supposed to do? And who's to say that wasn't already done?

markf31 · #5 04-15-2013, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Ok, but what if PSA sticks by their opinion? What if they say the cards are fine? Then what is the consignor supposed to do? And who's to say that wasn't already done?

While I agree with the majority opinion here, I would also hope that if this was done, if the consignor and/or REA resubmitted the card to PSA for a second look and clarification, that these facts would also have been disclosed and stated as such in the auction listing. The fact they are not leads me to believe these steps were not taken by either the consignor or REA in order to put REA's concerns to rest.

I'm sure some discussion between the consignor and REA did take place though.

markf31 · #6 04-15-2013, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

So no one has a problem with these cards entering the market as is? Wow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

So honestly, no one here has a problem with 14 trimmed cards in PSA 8 holders entering the market?

Maybe if you ask a third time you'll get the answer you're looking for?

autograf · #7 04-15-2013, 01:22 PM

@ Scott F who asked the question, "Is it reasonable to assume that the consignor and REA discussed this before the item was added to the catalog with its description as "possibly trimmed?"

I sold my T206 near set with Rob about 4-5 years ago. It was 475 or so cards to the set. He noted to me after looking at the set that he felt there were a few cards (I think 8-10 or so) that he felt were trimmed. It was 99% ungraded. He graded maybe 15-20 cards in the process. In his auction description, he noted the cards he felt were trimmed. So, the current disclosure of trimmed cards is not a new development for REA.

And I think Rob and his folks are doing all the right things with these cards. There is, however, NO GUARANTEE that the next person that sells them will do the same thing. The buyers could turn around and sell them on ebay the next day without that disclosure. I'd say the PSA8 T206 set collectors out there could probably be counted on a couple hands, so they are probably pretty good at keeping up with cards/certs/etc but someone could miss it. Who knows.

Regardless, PSA should make good on the deal and note them as 'A' and re-enter them into circulation. Some of the group are way worse than the others too.........

kcohen · #8 04-15-2013, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

So no one has a problem with these cards entering the market as is? Wow.

Expecting him or anyone else to be the gatekeeper of the market, especially when he has made full disclosure, is beyond absurd. If you are so concerned, I suggest that you buy it yourself and destroy it.

tschock · #9 04-15-2013, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcohen

Expecting him or anyone else to be the gatekeeper of the market, especially when he has made full disclosure, is beyond absurd. If you are so concerned, I suggest that you buy it yourself and destroy it.

I have a better proposal. Please send me all your cards directly to me so I can re-evaluate them. I will review them and return the ones that I don't believe to be trimmed. On the ones I believe to be trimmed, I will stamp "TRIMMED" on the back of the cards and keep them so that they can never deceive anyone again. I promise to send the non-trimmed ones back. Remember, your mileage may vary.

CMIZ5290 · #10 04-15-2013, 06:56 PM

First of all, I acknowledge REA for disclosure on cards they had concerns with. Would most auction houses do that? I sincerely doubt it. Secondly, if you have concerns with the card, simply don't bid, period. There are a couple of cards that I had a concern with, but they are not any of the 14 disclosed. REA vs. PSA? It's your opinion, but nobody has a gun to their heads...

CMIZ5290 · #11 04-15-2013, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leon

From the responses given, no they don't.

+1..

tschock · #12 04-15-2013, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

REA is acting as the middle man for compromised cards, they are doing the hobby a disservice by allowing these cards to enter into the market.... but everyone here KNOWS they could have (and should have) done more.
Jason

Everyone doesn't "know" this. So, what SHOULD REA have done with the cards? Please explain what REA (legally) could have done to PROHIBIT these cards from entering the market.

jhs5120 · #13 04-15-2013, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

"He" didn't allow anything to enter the marketplace. PSA did that when they graded them.

I 100% agree with this, it is on PSA to fix this problem, I emailed Joe Orlando with a link to the auction lots in question. None-the-less, it is up to the consignor, consignee, bidders and us to help keep these bad cards off the market.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Jason, what we have here is differences of opinion between PSA and REA/consignor (whom I tend to agree with). What do you expect to happen here? Do you believe the consignor should send them back to PSA for re-evaluation? Ok, but what if PSA sticks by their opinion? What if they say the cards are fine? Then what is the consignor supposed to do? And who's to say that wasn't already done?

Personally, I don't think this is a simple "difference in opinion". I have been tracking a lot of these older flips for a while. There were several dozen (probably more) high grade, trimmed cards that got past PSA and entered the market. I haven't seen too many newer flips with this isue - I would like to believe that whatever was causing this (a problem grader, a lenient environment or lack of knowledge) was fixed. Hopefully if these cards were re-evaluated by PSA they would be slabbed "authentic".

Quote:

Originally Posted by tschock

Everyone doesn't "know" this. So, what SHOULD REA have done with the cards? Please explain what REA (legally) could have done to PROHIBIT these cards from entering the market.

I think they should have declined the consignment.

Or, I think they should have sent the cards in to be re-evaluated. I have consigned plenty of items to these auction houses and whenever I have a group of nicer raw cards they always foot the bill to have them graded for me. There is potentially $20,000+ in trimmed cards here - around $4,000 in buyer's premiums alone. I think that it is negligent to not have them checked out before listing. It would've cost them less than $200 and IF they came back okay from PSA, then include the disclaimer and tell people you had them reevaluated and viola! you bring in more money and you make back your $200.

vintagetoppsguy · #14 04-15-2013, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

I think they should have declined the consignment.

But don't you think the consignor would have found another auction house that would be willing to take them? At least this way, they are described accurately.

calvindog · #15 04-15-2013, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

I think they should have declined the consignment.

Or, I think they should have sent the cards in to be re-evaluated. I have consigned plenty of items to these auction houses and whenever I have a group of nicer raw cards they always foot the bill to have them graded for me. There is potentially $20,000+ in trimmed cards here - around $4,000 in buyer's premiums alone. I think that it is negligent to not have them checked out before listing. It would've cost them less than $200 and IF they came back okay from PSA, then include the disclaimer and tell people you had them reevaluated and viola! you bring in more money and you make back your $200.

This is getting painful to read. REA should have taken someone else's property and sent it back to PSA for a 're-evaluation?" Really? Do you train unicorns for a living?

CMIZ5290 · #16 04-15-2013, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calvindog

This is getting painful to read. REA should have taken someone else's property and sent it back to PSA for a 're-evaluation?" Really? Do you train unicorns for a living?

Priceless.....

jhs5120 · #17 04-15-2013, 01:10 PM

So honestly, no one here has a problem with 14 trimmed cards in PSA 8 holders entering the market?

Leon · #18 04-15-2013, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

So honestly, no one here has a problem with 14 trimmed cards in PSA 8 holders entering the market?

Of course no one likes trimmed cards, in numerical holders, on the market. Maybe you should buy them all and send them into PSA for a re-evaluation?

nolemmings · #19 04-15-2013, 01:23 PM

I'm surprised that more of our experienced T206 group or advanced collectors have not weighed in on this. I don't collect the T206 set but even I know that the Harris collection has raised eyebrows for years. Here is a card from that collection auctioned by REA back in 2009, in which the same language is used to advise of a possible trim. Why all the outrage now?
http://robertedwardauctions.com/auction/2009/248.html

vintagetoppsguy · #20 04-15-2013, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

So honestly, no one here has a problem with 14 trimmed cards in PSA 8 holders entering the market?

Let me ask you this. If the cards were not in PSA 8 holders and they were just selling 14 raw trimmed cards (that otherwise looked NM/MT) still describing them as trimmed, would you still have a problem?

Edited to clarify my question.

Runscott · #21 04-15-2013, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

So honestly, no one here has a problem with 14 trimmed cards in PSA 8 holders entering the market?

My brain hurts.

CW · #22 04-15-2013, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhs5120

So honestly, no one here has a problem with 14 trimmed cards in PSA 8 holders entering the market?

That's the thing... they are already in the marketplace.

I don't have a problem with REA auctioning off these cards with the disclaimer. I have a problem with PSA grading these cards as Nm-Mt in the first place. PSA should buy these cards back -- it is their responsibility to get them "out of the market". I would be curious to hear their reply, if you could, please. Thanks for contacting them about the cards.

�h��k W�l��

tschock · #23 04-15-2013, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calvindog

This is getting painful to read. REA should have taken someone else's property and sent it back to PSA for a 're-evaluation?" Really? Do you train unicorns for a living?

Glad I got busy at work and didn't reply sooner. Saved me from typing the same response (minus the unicorns, though). LOL

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Kudos to SGC	Spideyedm	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	2	12-12-2012 08:21 PM
Hacked account	tbob	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	1	06-21-2012 09:49 PM
Facebook Account Hacked	Jacklitsch	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	20	12-15-2010 12:37 PM
Paypal account hacked............	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	17	04-22-2009 10:45 AM
Is Ebay being hacked into ??	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	0	01-22-2007 07:57 AM