My exceptional PWCC pickup.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Throw my name in there too, Peter. I, too, have yet to see any evidence that Brent knew any cards were altered prior to going to auction.

From the Alteration vs. Conservation Defined thread: "you are innocent until proven guilty." Wouldn't that same statement apply to Brent too, or am I way off here?

You're a smart guy David. If I tell the world that from now on I won't rob any more banks, what does that convey about my past?

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You're a smart guy David. If I tell the world that from now on I won't rob any more banks, what does that convey about my past?

A more relevant analogy would be what if a bank said they'd stop accepting deposits from money launderers, drug dealers, etc. Maybe they knew where the money was coming from, maybe they suspected but didn't ask any questions, or maybe they had no idea. But enough people on the banking forums were complaining, so they put out a statement saying they will work to prevent such deposits in the future.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

A more relevant analogy would be what if a bank said they'd stop accepting deposits from money launderers, drug dealers, etc. Maybe they knew where the money was coming from, maybe they suspected but didn't ask any questions, or maybe they had no idea. But enough people on the banking forums were complaining, so they put out a statement saying they will work to prevent such deposits in the future.

Uh huh. So how does the bank know who to stop accepting deposits from in your example unless it knows they're money launderers and drug dealers? And why did it ever take their deposits? Anyhow, read Jeff's post about evidence he has seen.

PS read the words. It doesn't say suspected, it says proven track record. "PWCC will officially cease working with any individual who has a proven track record of consistently hurting trust in the marketplace, the brand of PWCC, or the reputations of the grading companies upon which our market is based."

PPS if they're clean, why not release the identity of all the cards from such people they have sold in the past, instead of leaving it to the collectors to figure it out.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Uh huh. So how does the bank know who to stop accepting deposits from in your example unless it knows they're money launderers and drug dealers? And why did it ever take their deposits? Anyhow, read Jeff's post about evidence he has seen.

PS read the words. It doesn't say suspected, it says proven track record . "PWCC will officially cease working with any individual who has a proven track record of consistently hurting trust in the marketplace, the brand of PWCC, or the reputations of the grading companies upon which our market is based."

Well some of these guys are suspected drug dealers or money launderers. So they haven't been convicted of anything. And accepting their deposits isn't a crime. What legal justification is there for the bank to turn away their deposit? What if a drug dealer's grandmother gives him 100 bucks for his birthday? Can he deposit that check but not the drug money? How do you determine which is which?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Well some of these guys are suspected drug dealers or money launderers. So they haven't been convicted of anything. And accepting their deposits isn't a crime. What legal justification is there for the bank to turn away their deposit? What if a drug dealer's grandmother gives him 100 bucks for his birthday? Can he deposit that check but not the drug money? How do you determine which is which?

I honestly don't follow the relevance of all this. Does a private company PWCC need a legal justification to turn away a consignment? I thought we were discussing the import of their decision to do just that with people they say have a proven track record. Unless that language was a BS smokescreen and they actually aren't stopping doing business with anyone because the track record hasn't been proven? Interesting angle, I hadn't considered that. But, I wouldn't put it past them I suppose.

[calvindog]

The Net 54 grand jury is neck and neck here. I wonder what will happen?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

The Net 54 grand jury is neck and neck here. I wonder what will happen?

Can you serve on a grand jury if you have a conflict?

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I honestly don't follow the relevance of all this. Does a private company PWCC need a legal justification to turn away a consignment? I thought we were discussing the import of their decision to do just that with people they say have a proven track record. Unless that language was a BS smokescreen and they actually aren't stopping doing business with anyone because the track record hasn't been proven? Interesting angle, I hadn't considered that. But, I wouldn't put it past them I suppose.

I'm not a lawyer, but what if they turn away a consignment and that person alleges discrimination? What if they were falsely accused of being a card doctor by an ex business partner determined to see them fail? Who is responsible for putting names on this can't submit list? Is there an appeal process? In theory it sounds great. Just don't accept submissions from known card doctors. In practice I don't think it's that simple.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

I'm not a lawyer, but what if they turn away a consignment and that person alleges discrimination? What if they were falsely accused of being a card doctor by an ex business partner determined to see them fail? Who is responsible for putting names on this can't submit list? Is there an appeal process? In theory it sounds great. Just don't accept submissions from known card doctors. In practice I don't think it's that simple.

Double post.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

I'm not a lawyer, but what if they turn away a consignment and that person alleges discrimination? What if they were falsely accused of being a card doctor by an ex business partner determined to see them fail? Who is responsible for putting names on this can't submit list? Is there an appeal process? In theory it sounds great. Just don't accept submissions from known card doctors. In practice I don't think it's that simple.

My head may explode from all these hypotheticals. Look, the bottom line is that for the most part the major card doctors are well known to the major sellers in the hobby and the grading services and many of the collectors. And to the FBI, I would add. It's a close-knit community going back to the pre-internet show days and insiders know. There may be some who have flown under the radar but for the most part, they haven't.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Uh huh. So how does the bank know who to stop accepting deposits from in your example unless it knows they're money launderers and drug dealers? And why did it ever take their deposits? Anyhow, read Jeff's post about evidence he has seen.

PS read the words. It doesn't say suspected, it says proven track record. "PWCC will officially cease working with any individual who has a proven track record of consistently hurting trust in the marketplace, the brand of PWCC, or the reputations of the grading companies upon which our market is based."

PPS if they're clean, why not release the identity of all the cards from such people they have sold in the past, instead of leaving it to the collectors to figure it out.

Because Peter, there are way too many cards to identify. Did you see the work on PSA 1 to a PSA 4- 48 leaf Dimaggio just posted in BO ? And the 93 basketball trim jobs yesterday? It is a beautiful conservation job! PWCC is so intertwined by turning a blind eye to known card doctors especially guys like Gary Moser. This has been happening for decades. Some just don't want to see it, that's OK And there is no proof right now against PSA other than being blithering idiots. That wouldn't surprise me if they are in on the gag?

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

Because Peter, there are way too many cards to identify. Did you see the work on PSA 1 to a PSA 4- 48 leaf Dimaggio just posted in BO ? And the 93 basketball trim jobs yesterday? It is a beautiful conservation job! PWCC is so enter twined by turning a blind eye to known card doctors especially guys like Gary Moser. This has been happening for decades. Some just don't want to see it, that's OK And there is no proof right now against PSA other than being blithering idiots. That wouldn't surprise me if they are in on the gag?

Using the phrase enter twined and calling another a blithering idiot says more about your intelligence than it does about theirs.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Using the phrase enter twined and calling another a blithering idiot says more about your intelligence than it does about theirs.

for once we agree, lol

[Republicaninmass]

Dont forget you just so happen to be from Oregon.

Let the conspiracies build!


Sure PSA graders on the take, Mosers cards must go to that grader every time out of thousands of cards. Maybe puts a smiley face on the box, or slides a ben Franklin in the card saver.


This is one of the most ridiculous conspiracies I've seen posted a bit PSA. Multi million dollar public company, not noticing an hourly employee pass one guys bad cards

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

And there is no proof right now against PSA other than being blithering idiots. That wouldn't surprise me if they are in on the gag?

I've said that for years. I'll even say it once more for record. There are "dirty" graders at PSA that knowingly grade altered cards in exchange for money under the table. And if PSA wants to go after me for saying that, that's fine. But part of the discovery process (correct me, Peter, if I'm not using that term correctly ) would include finding out who the grader(s) is by the serial numbers of the known doctored cards. I'm pretty sure PSA wants to keep that hush hush.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I've said that for years. I'll even say it once more for record. There are "dirty" graders at PSA that knowingly grade altered cards in exchange for money under the table. And if PSA wants to go after me for saying that, that's fine. But part of the discovery process (correct me, Peter, if I'm not using that term correctly ) would include finding out who the grader(s) is by the serial numbers of the known doctored cards. I'm pretty sure PSA wants to keep that hush hush.

If you're right about that -- and I don't believe it but I get why people would -- THAT would be a game changer. I think of the Fitzgerald line about Arnold Rothstein (the gambler who fixed the 1919 WS) playing with the faith of 50 million people or something like that.

[frankbmd]

If anybody gets a ruptured spleen as a result of this ongoing controversy, I accept most insurance or clean cold cash.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You're a smart guy David. If I tell the world that from now on I won't rob any more banks, what does that convey about my past?

Peter, you're a smart guy, too. And you have the legal background that I don't. The statement to which you are referring to is not an admission to any previous guilt.

"PWCC will officially cease working with any individual who has a proven track record of consistently hurting trust in the marketplace, the brand of PWCC, or the reputations of the grading companies upon which our market is based."

It's simply an admission to "working with" which could mean a lot of things. If I told you "I'm going to stop working with drug dealers, money launderers, and human traffickers" would that imply that I was involved in any of that? It would sure sound like it, huh? But then what if I told you I was a parole officer? That would change the context of my statement, right? Do you see where I'm going here?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Peter, you're a smart guy, too. And you have the legal background that I don't. The statement to which you are referring to is not an admission to any previous guilt.

"PWCC will officially cease working with any individual who has a proven track record of consistently hurting trust in the marketplace, the brand of PWCC, or the reputations of the grading companies upon which our market is based."

It's simply an admission to "working with" which could mean a lot of things. If I told you "I'm going to stop working with drug dealers, money launderers, and human traffickers" would that imply that I was involved in any of that? It would sure sound like it, huh? But then what if I told you I was a parole officer? That would change the context of my statement, right? Do you see where I'm going here?

Context, David. Response to posts on Blowout showing numerous cards purchased by a certain individual with a certain reputation in one grade (in many cases from PWCC) and then consigned to and sold by PWCC in a higher grade. An individual who Brent has done business with for a decade or more (actually closer to two I think). Same individual who is the subject of the emails Jeff mentioned. Anyhow, I'm not going to convince you, so believe whatever you choose.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Context, David. Response to posts on Blowout showing numerous cards purchased by a certain individual with a certain reputation in one grade (in many cases from PWCC) and then consigned to and sold by PWCC in a higher grade. An individual who Brent has done business with for a decade or more (actually closer to two I think). Same individual who is the subject of the emails Jeff mentioned. Anyhow, I'm not going to convince you, so believe whatever you choose.

We can agree to disagree and move on. But let me say this. However you interpret the statement, at least he acknowledged he was working with individuals that are bad for this hobby. So hold him accountable for his words. If doctored cards still continue to show up in his auctions, I'm pretty sure the sleuths will bust him on it real quick. But at least he had the balls to say it. If Brent knows the name(s) of the consignor(s), don't you think PSA knows the name(s) of the submitter(s)? Do you think PSA would have the balls to make such a statement? To cease working with submitters of cards that have been proven to be doctored? No way!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

We can agree to disagree and move on. But let me say this. However you interpret the statement, at least he acknowledged he was working with individuals that are bad for this hobby. So hold him accountable for his words. If doctored cards still continue to show up in his auctions, I'm pretty sure the sleuths will bust him on it real quick. But at least he had the balls to say it. If Brent knows the name(s) of the consignor(s), don't you think PSA knows the name(s) of the submitter(s)? Do you think PSA would have the balls to make such a statement? To cease working with submitters of cards that have been proven to be doctored? No way!

I am sure PSA has a list of people it won't take submissions from. Brent even references it. That said, of course, there's an easy enough workaround.

[Goudey77]

Brent speaks on this matter that’s been hotly debated here.

https://youtu.be/_f3k5VSqVt4

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Brent speaks on this matter that’s been hotly debated here.

https://youtu.be/_f3k5VSqVt4

You "noticed" that pretty quickly. Must be because you are both from Oregon.

[Fuddjcal]

complete LIAR, IMHO. Body language tells the whole story, choking on his own words. I hope I'm wrong, but time will tell.

Rule of Engagement LOL. Enjoy your exceptional trimmed cards from PWCC. I'm betting half of everything PWCC sells is just regurgitated cards that spin around in cases after being DOCTORED.

I want to try and be fair and open but this is ridiculous. This is so much deeper than we know. I almost feel like paying someone on BO to check every one of their cards, just for fun.

You have done nothing but harm, IMHO

I have a 52 Mantle I would like you to spoon out the crease. Can you help?

[slipk1068]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

You "noticed" that pretty quickly. Must be because you are both from Oregon.

lol exactly what I was thinking, but worded differently in the other thread.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Brent speaks on this matter that’s been hotly debated here.

https://youtu.be/_f3k5VSqVt4

No debate, nobody with any hobby experience agrees with his nonsense.

Let's see a list of cards consigned by card doctors.

[Jim65]

Better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

[calvindog]

Brent obviously hasn’t hired a criminal lawyer because no competent one would have let him do that. Very similar to Doug Allen: is convinced he’s smarter than everyone he’s defrauding and refuses to keep his mouth shut, insisting upon trying to lie his way out of this. Which of course will come back to bite him. I’m guessing Brent’s very nervous body language had to do with his belief that law enforcement was watching.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Brent obviously hasn’t hired a criminal lawyer because no competent one would have let him do that. Very similar to Doug Allen: is convinced he’s smarter than everyone he’s defrauding and refuses to keep his mouth shut, insisting upon trying to lie his way out of this. Which of course will come back to bite him. I’m guessing Brent’s very nervous body language had to do with his belief that law enforcement was watching.

I admit I could not bring myself to watch it. Any good things for the hobby in there?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Brent obviously hasn’t hired a criminal lawyer because no competent one would have let him do that. Very similar to Doug Allen: is convinced he’s smarter than everyone he’s defrauding and refuses to keep his mouth shut, insisting upon trying to lie his way out of this. Which of course will come back to bite him. I’m guessing Brent’s very nervous body language had to do with his belief that law enforcement was watching.

can anyone save this video for posterior (I always liked that joke) as I have a feeling it might come down fairly quickly.