PWCC Statement on Recent Card Trimming Concerns

[70ToppsFanatic]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

While what they're doing is unethical, Im not so sure it's against the law. They're representing it as it is certified to be. If (insert any TPG here) says it's a (insert grade here) and they're selling it as such, not sure they're breaking any law. Let me be clear for all. I'm not justifying it, I just don't see how they're legally (key word) misrepresenting it. Wouldn't their defense in court be that they paid for a 3rd party opinion and that third party is supposed to label altered cards as such? That they were expecting the TPG to label it as such?

That may be a successful defense as long as it cannot be shown that they had knowledge of any alterations. If it can be shown they knew the doctoring was occurring then this line of defense will not save them.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by 70ToppsFanatic

That may be a successful defense as long as it cannot be shown that they had knowledge of any alterations. If it can be shown they knew the doctoring was occurring then this line if defense will not save them.

But here is the problem. There are differences of opinion of alterations. Some believe, and have even stated such, that the alteration improved the condition of the card (as if it's a good thing). A small percentage of the collecting world believes that. So, if it's a matter of opinion, how can you say you have to disclose something that's some consider as an improvement?

FWIW, I don't think any alteration is an improvement.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

So, if it's a matter of opinion, how can you say you have to disclose something that's some consider as an improvement?

So if some think altering a card is a good thing and improves the card, why would you need to disclose something that is beneficial? Again, I'm not saying it is, just trying to approach this others points of view.

If I'm a house flipper and I buy a house with old aluminum wiring and have it rewired to bring it up to date, do I have to disclose it? It would obviously be a good selling point, but do I have to legally disclose it?

[70ToppsFanatic]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

But here is the problem. There are differences of opinion of alterations. Some believe, and have even stated such, that the alteration improved the condition of the card (as if it's a good thing). A small percentage of the collecting world believes that. So, if it's a matter of opinion, how can you say you have to disclose something that's some consider as an improvement?

FWIW, I don't think any alteration is an improvement.

That’s kind of what started this whole crisis.

The hobby basically looks at this along the following lines:

Anything done to hide, disguise or remove degradation and/or deterioration that already occurred to a card is alteration and is not acceptable.

Brent tried to push a narrative that if such action can be detected then it’s ok and labeled it conservation.

Based on the response I’d say the vast majority of the hobby stakeholders felt he was full of it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by 70ToppsFanatic

That’s kind of what started this whole crisis.

The hobby basically looks at this along the following lines:

Anything done to hide, disguise or remove degradation and/or deterioration that already occurred to a card is alteration and is not acceptable.

Brent tried to push a narrative that if such action can be detected then it’s ok and labeled it conservation.

Based on the response I’d say the vast majority of the hobby stakeholders felt he was full of it.

And what is a material fact in the context of fraud here would be determined by what a majority or even a substantial minority of people would deem important. Anyhow, lots of these cards are trimmed, so it's really a moot discussion.