Altered high grade E93s in Mile High?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I assume one rationale for the distinction is that water is not generally believed to adversely affect the integrity of the underlying card whereas chemical solvents (using the term in its common sense) generally are believed to do so. But it's probably hard to articulate a distinction that one couldn't find some fault with.

Peter, if there were a chemical solvent that could remove any stain, tape residue, ink, etc and research proved that it was totally undetctable and had no long term effects, would that be acceptable to you?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Peter, if there were a chemical solvent that could remove any stain, tape residue, ink, etc and research proved that it was totally undetctable and had no long term effects, would that be acceptable to you?

Peter?

(Anybody else can answer the question as well)

[barrysloate]

David- if it were totally undectable, how would anybody even know it was used?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

David- if it were totally undectable, how would anybody even know it was used?

Exactly, Barry! That's the same statement Dick Towell makes about his service - that the TPGs (or anybody else for that matter) can't detect it. So why is DT taking so much crap!?!

[barrysloate]

Obviously the idea that some kind of restoration can be done to improve a card without detection does not sit well with collectors who spend a lot of money on high grade cards. I can't speak for everyone, but that certainly bothers people.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Obviously the idea that some kind of restoration can be done to improve a card without detection does not sit well with collectors who spend a lot of money on high grade cards. I can't speak for everyone, but that certainly bothers people.

Including YOU, I hope.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Exactly, Barry! That's the same statement Dick Towell makes about his service - that the TPGs (or anybody else for that matter) can't detect it. So why is DT taking so much crap!?!

Because he is enabling fraud. And i do not for a minute believe they could not detect it if they tried hard enough. Ask Steve B. and read his post from yesterday. Ask people who really know paper. Dick Towle does not have magic potions that defy the laws of nature. He and his clients are taking advantage of a flawed grading system and limited detection capabilities. David you are engaged in magical thinking.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Because he is enabling fraud. And i do not for a minute believe they could not detect it if they tried hard enough. Ask Steve B. and read his post from yesterday. Ask people who really know paper. Dick Towle does not have magic potions that defy the laws of nature. He and his clients are taking advantage of a flawed grading system and limited detection capabilities. David you are engaged in magical thinking.

If DT says that it can't be detected by a TPG, I take him at his word. Do you know of any cards a TPG has rejected as a result of DT's process? The cards seem to make it past PSA and SGC. If his process was being detected by TPGs, don't you think the word would get around and those that send him cards in hopes of better grades would stop doing so?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

If DT says that it can't be detected by a TPG, I take him at his word. Do you know of any cards a TPG has rejected as a result of DT's process? The cards seem to make it past PSA and SGC. If his process was being detected by TPGs, don't you think the word would get around and those that send him cards in hopes of better grades would stop doing so?

Are you serious? This is not an all or nothing endeavor. Suppose half the cards, or a quarter, make it through. Do you have any idea how much money is involved? David in your zeal to be contrarian you are not making good arguments here.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

If DT says that it can't be detected by a TPG, I take him at his word. Do you know of any cards a TPG has rejected as a result of DT's process? The cards seem to make it past PSA and SGC. If his process was being detected by TPGs, don't you think the word would get around and those that send him cards in hopes of better grades would stop doing so?

So you're saying then that if such work is undetectable, it is okay to do so without disclosure, even though a prospective buyer would regard such information to be material to his/her decision whether or not to purchase the card?

If the answer is yes, then I repeat what I said yesterday; the logical extension of this argument is that it is okay to create cards. I don't agree with you that that is something different. Both instances -- new creation and alteration of an existing card without disclosure -- involve withholding material information that a prospective buyer would reasonably want to know in deciding whether to purchase the item and how much to pay.

And, as to Peter's point that such an argument is analogous to saying what's wrong with robbing a bank if the crime is never detected, I agree.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Exactly, Barry! That's the same statement Dick Towell makes about his service - that the TPGs (or anybody else for that matter) can't detect it. So why is DT taking so much crap!?!

You said yesterday you did not approve of crease/wrinkle removal. Suppose someone could do it in a way that the TPGs could not detect. Happens all the time, actually. So do you now think that's fine?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You said yesterday you did not approve of crease/wrinkle removal. Suppose someone could do it in a way that the TPGs could not detect. Happens all the time, actually. So do you now think that's fine?

I'll answer your question as ridiculously as you answered mine: Peter, you are engaged in magical thinking.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I'll answer your question as ridiculously as you answered mine: Peter, you are engaged in magical thinking.

Only because you keep pushing this silly discussion.