Ashamed - Topps T206 Buy Back Fraud

Peter_Spaeth · #1 02-06-2018, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

No doubt. But what about trimmed cards that do reside in PSA, SGC, and BVG holders? Does the fact that they made it into the holder of a reputable TPG absolve the seller from disclosing that the card is trimmed/tampered with?

A while back I bought a very high end t206 HOFer with a rare back from a "well respected" broker. The card sat in a BVG flip. Once I received it, in person, it looked a bit short to me. I tried to to cross it to SGC and they would not give it the minimum requested grade of 80 (6) (a down grade), so it was returned to me in the BVG flip. I brought it to several shows and many t206 old timers and some auction houses all said the same thing - "it must stay in this holder", which I took as code that the card was trimmed (none directly said it was trimmed). I grew to despise the card but I could not bring myself to try to sell it without disclosing my experiences - even though it sat plain as day in a BVG flip- which would have resulted in me taking a massive loss. So I ended up contacting the broker who did accept my offer to repurchase it for $2500 less than I bought it from him for. I was happy to take the loss and glad to be rid of that card. All that said, I could have consigned it to an eBay or smaller auction house or sold it myself and merely advertised it as a BVG graded card.... Would that have been wrong? Caveat emptor?

We've debated this before. I think for the most part people think there is no affirmative obligation to disclose grading history.

drcy · #2 02-06-2018, 01:15 PM

If you know something is bad, you can't reoffer it as authentic or unaltered no matter what its 'pedigree.' However, I don't doubt that when a card is in a holder it's harder to see all the qualities and details and many sellers aren't experts and reasonably defer to graders and TPAs.

Though, in the long run, it's good for your business if people know you're the type of seller who will point out when TPAs and graders have made mistakes on items you are selling.

My belief is, even if an item is in a holder or comes with a LOA (such as with an autograph or piece of memorabilia), the seller is responsible to the buyer for the authenticity and correct identification. Other than obviously blatant errors, the condition grade on a holdered card is a different thing, as that's a matter of opinion and the seller can't properly grade a card when it's in a holder. Some alteration no doubt will be hidden in a holder too, so that can also be a different situation.

I remember a number of years ago, an eBay seller was offering a rare and desirable "Leaf 'Hermansk'" error card (Hermanski missing a letter)." It was more than obviously simply a label error, as anyone with more than zero eyes saw that the card said "Hermanski" not "Hermansk." But the seller, who had to know the card was not the error, was selling it as the error card because that's what the label said. This is a blatant example of where the seller has to say what the item really is and point out that the grader or authenticator is in error.

edhans · #3 02-06-2018, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drcy

If you know something is bad, you can't reoffer it as authentic or unaltered no matter what its 'pedigree.' However, I don't doubt that when a card is in a holder it's harder to see all the qualities and details and many sellers aren't experts and reasonably defer to graders and TPAs.

Though, in the long run, it's good for your business if people know you're the type of seller who will point out when TPAs and graders have made mistakes on items you are selling.

My belief is, even if an item is in a holder or comes with a LOA (such as with an autograph or piece of memorabilia), the seller is responsible to the buyer for the item being authenticity and correct identification. Other than obviously blatant errors that anyone can see in a scan, the condition grade on a holdered card is a different thing, as that's a matter of opinion and the seller can't properly grade a card when it's in a holder. Some alteration no doubt will be hidden in a holder too, so that can also be a different situation.

I remember a number of years ago, an eBay seller was offering a rare and desirable "Leaf 'Hermansk'" error card (Hermanski missing a letter)." It was more than obviously simply a label error, as anyone with more than zero eyes saw that the card said "Hermanski" not "Hermansk." But the seller, who had to know the card was not the error, was selling it as the error card because that's what the label said. This is a blatant example of where the seller has to say what the item really is and point out that the grader or authenticator is in error.

+1 again. Well said, David.

Peter_Spaeth · #4 02-06-2018, 04:22 PM

In which of these situations, if any, do I need to dislose?

1. I buy a raw card I suspect is trimmed. I think if I bury it within a submission I can get it through. A TPG grades it.

2. I buy a PSA 8. I don't like the looks of it, suspect strongly it's trimmed. I put it back out for sale.

3. I buy an SGC 92. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross, PSA rejects it for evidence of trimming. I put it back out for sale.

4. I buy an SGC 88. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross. PSA declines on min. grade grounds. I put it back out for sale. Someone then asks me, did you try to cross it.

DeanH3 · #5 02-06-2018, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In which of these situations, if any, do I need to dislose?

1. I buy a raw card I suspect is trimmed. I think if I bury it within a submission I can get it through. A TPG grades it.

2. I buy a PSA 8. I don't like the looks of it, suspect strongly it's trimmed. I put it back out for sale.

3. I buy an SGC 92. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross, PSA rejects it for evidence of trimming. I put it back out for sale.

4. I buy an SGC 88. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross. PSA declines on min. grade grounds. I put it back out for sale. Someone then asks me, did you try to cross it.

These are some initial thoughts I have after reading these questions. I'm not set on them and could change after some discussion.

1. You are selling PSA's opinion. The buyer should determine if they agree or not. No need to disclose your suspicion.

2. Send it back to PSA for a review. If it comes back the same then again, you are selling PSA's opinion. No need to disclose. The buyer should determine if they are comfortable with the grade.

3. Again, your selling a TPG's opinion, SGC in this instance. Maybe the card is not trimmed and PSA was incorrect. No need to disclose.

4. PSA doesn't cross a lot of cards in other TPG holders so that doesn't mean the card isn't graded properly by SGC. However, if a potential buyer asks, then be upfront and tell the truth about your attempted results.

I would add though, I would disclose any of these if a potential buyer asked me.

bnorth · #6 02-06-2018, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In which of these situations, if any, do I need to dislose?

1. I buy a raw card I suspect is trimmed. I think if I bury it within a submission I can get it through. A TPG grades it.

2. I buy a PSA 8. I don't like the looks of it, suspect strongly it's trimmed. I put it back out for sale.

3. I buy an SGC 92. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross, PSA rejects it for evidence of trimming. I put it back out for sale.

4. I buy an SGC 88. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross. PSA declines on min. grade grounds. I put it back out for sale. Someone then asks me, did you try to cross it.

Pretty easy really, disclose everything no matter if the card is graded or not. This makes you a good person who cares about others.

Disclose nothing because it is the TPG's fault and hide behind their incompetence. This makes you a piece of garbage that only cares about yourself no matter how you rationalize it to yourself.

Just my honest opinion.

nolemmings · #7 02-06-2018, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In which of these situations, if any, do I need to dislose?

1. I buy a raw card I suspect is trimmed. I think if I bury it within a submission I can get it through. A TPG grades it.

2. I buy a PSA 8. I don't like the looks of it, suspect strongly it's trimmed. I put it back out for sale.

3. I buy an SGC 92. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross, PSA rejects it for evidence of trimming. I put it back out for sale.

4. I buy an SGC 88. I submit it to PSA in the holder to cross. PSA declines on min. grade grounds. I put it back out for sale. Someone then asks me, did you try to cross it.

I would disclose each of those scenarios. I wouldn't even wait to be asked if it had been the subject of a crossover attempt, although I cannot see myself trying to cross from SGC to PSA in the first instance.

Peter_Spaeth · #8 02-06-2018, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I would disclose each of those scenarios. I wouldn't even wait to be asked if it had been the subject of a crossover attempt, although I cannot see myself trying to cross from SGC to PSA in the first instance.

Careful you are on a slippery slope. Are you also going to say every time you think a card should have graded lower? Every time a card has been bumped?

nolemmings · #9 02-06-2018, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Careful you are on a slippery slope. Are you also going to say every time you think a card should have graded lower? Every time a card has been bumped?

I don't resubmit cards, but if I did, yes I would state that it had been bumped. As for the other, I would give my opinion on the grade if asked and might anyway. Sorry, but these are really not tough decisions for me.

rats60 · #10 02-06-2018, 07:28 PM

I agree to disclose, but I see the first 2 as more grey than
black and white. I guess I am jaded when it comes to TPGs and trimmed cards. I have had too many cards kicked. Many that I bought in the 60s and early 70s, either pulled from packs or bought mail order. I don't buy that those guys were trimming .05 to .25 cards when most people weren't really condition conscience. My experience with TPGs is that if they err on an opinion in trimmed or not, that 99% of the time they are not grading a good card and 1% missing a trimmed card.

Peter_Spaeth · #11 02-06-2018, 07:42 PM

I don't see a reason to disclose 2. I am not a market player, my personal opinion is not material. Grading history on the other hand is an objective fact. On the other hand, I've never seen anyone disclose unfavorable grading history, as far as I recall.

cardsnstuff · #12 02-06-2018, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60

I agree to disclose, but I see the first 2 as more grey than
black and white. I guess I am jaded when it comes to TPGs and trimmed cards. I have had too many cards kicked. Many that I bought in the 60s and early 70s, either pulled from packs or bought mail order. I don't buy that those guys were trimming .05 to .25 cards when most people weren't really condition conscience. My experience with TPGs is that if they err on an opinion in trimmed or not, that 99% of the time they are not grading a good card and 1% missing a trimmed card.

I agree, and herein lies the problem; how many of us had a card minizero or evid trim and resubmitted it and presto, like magic it has a number

rats60 · #13 02-06-2018, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardsnstuff

I agree, and herein lies the problem; how many of us had a card minizero or evid trim and resubmitted it and presto, like magic it has a number

All the time. I measure and examine cards. If I feel there is a problem, I don't send it in. If it gets kicked and slabbed the second time, I feel that they got it right. They were just looking to get additional revenue from grading. Same with cards that look under graded.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Perhaps the most unethical thing I've seen in our hobby. Topps should be ashamed	the 'stache	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	72	11-07-2014 11:45 AM
Blatantly Hacked and Kudos to Rob Lifson PSA should be ashamed!	danmckee	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	75	04-15-2013 07:12 PM