Update: What would you do...

jp1216 · #1 06-04-2019, 10:18 AM

Link:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/401739877633

packs · #2 06-04-2019, 10:22 AM

I'd keep it. Looks accurately graded assuming it's not altered and has nice eye appeal for the grade.

obcmac · #3 06-04-2019, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

assuming it's not altered

Huh? Did he buy this one and not alter it. That would be interesting.

T_Hamilton · #4 06-04-2019, 10:30 AM

It displays very nice for a 1.5 grade. I think the altering could have been soaking perhaps.

I am so bamboozled on what to do with the card... and so angry that someone has ruined the hobby i love.

packs · #5 06-04-2019, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by obcmac

Huh? Did he buy this one and not alter it. That would be interesting.

I guess I should have said trimmed and not altered. Not really seeing an issue with a possible soak. How many times have members posted threads on the board asking for help on how to soak?

T206Collector · #6 06-04-2019, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

I guess I should have said trimmed and not altered. Not really seeing an issue with a possible soak. How many times have members posted threads on the board asking for help on how to soak?

He apparently uses a chemical bath -- not water -- and it affects the integrity of the cardboard and often seems to lighten the ink on the back. Would be nice to see the before, but I'm sure the guys over at BO would've found it when they were able to find the other two. Maybe it's still on its way...

samosa4u · #7 06-04-2019, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T206Collector

He apparently uses a chemical bath -- not water -- and it affects the integrity of the cardboard and often seems to lighten the ink on the back.

Using anything other than water to soak a card is VERY bad. The paper can turn brittle down the line and start breaking. I would send it back.

Bram99 · #8 06-04-2019, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

I'd keep it. Looks accurately graded assuming it's not altered and has nice eye appeal for the grade.

Also to be considered: if it really has the Moser provenance and is not altered, doesn't that raise the scarcity to new levels? Could this be a 1 of 1 un-altered Moser T227 Cobb. If all other examples are proven to be altered or conserved, then this one could really be a unique item.

Maybe PSA would assign this a "Pedigree flip" like the Lionel Carter Collection ones, but this one could say "Gary Moser Un-altered".

Peter_Spaeth · #9 06-04-2019, 11:29 PM

Between how short the 3 is and the fact SGC only gave it an A, I would look to review it if you can't return it. And I would look to SGC. The problem with PSA review is that if they missed something once it's likely to happen twice, and they have financial incentive to bless it again.

Leon · #10 06-04-2019, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jp1216

Link:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/401739877633

That is a great looking card I doubt has been tampered with from the scan. They would have cleaned up the creases if it was messed with, imo. Of course, I would have a double good look at it and put it under a blacklight and loupe too. The corners still look a little frayed too (a good thing nowadays). It's a keeper if you ask me.
Also, you would need a before picture, I think, to know if it has been messed with. The stain removals on cards don't upset me as much as the other things, but that is just me. And many, if not most vintage collectors, don't consider soaking in water to be a nefarious act. It should be counted off as anything else but to me, it wouldn't mean a non-numeric grade.

I should also add, if it will make the OP always nervous, then it is an easy decision to sell it.

T206Collector · #11 06-04-2019, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leon

That is a great looking card I doubt has been tampered with from the scan.

Moser loves the T227 Cobb. There are two other T227 Cobbs that have already been outed as tampered with:

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=1642

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=2408

I am sure it has been cleaned, and given the amount of text fading on the reverse, not likely with water. The creases have also been pressed to make the card not look so rough. Soaked, cleaned and pressed. No doubt.

perezfan · #12 06-04-2019, 10:58 AM

Agree with T206 Collector...

Though it appears nice for the grade, odds are it has had some problems "lessened" by means of alteration. Does not looked trimmed, but may have had some color added. Near-impossible to tell without having it in-hand.

For your own peace of mind, I'd suggest returning it. You'll probably NEVER be at peace with the card now, and will look more at the treated flaws than the card itself.

What a shame.

steve B · #13 06-04-2019, 11:12 AM

I believe this is the before.

The scan here is overly bright, but the creases don't look much different.

Maybe just moved from SGC to PSA?

I'd save the scans/auctions, print them and keep them with the card. If any work has been done, it wasn't much.

http://www.milehighcardco.com/1912_M...-LOT60474.aspx

perezfan · #14 06-04-2019, 11:18 AM

Yup... that's definitely the "before". Looks a bit more vibrant, but could just be the photography. Probably just a crossover, with little (if any) work done.

Nice job finding that!

steve B · #15 06-04-2019, 11:18 AM

While I was looking, I ran across this other T227 Cobb.

Oh the irony...

I usually think "well, maybe" for odd wear patterns. But this one looks rather suspect. And was sold through Heritage.

https://www.psacard.com/cardfacts/mu...aseball/560029

Rhotchkiss · #16 06-04-2019, 11:21 AM

The psa 3 t227 is mine. The guys on blowout expressly admit that they cannot find any alteration. I have looked at it under a loop and can�t find anything (but I am hardly an expert). Yes, the card used to reside in an an SGC A flip and now is in a psa 3, but that could be a difference of opinion. Do I like that it went from an SGC A to a psa 3 through a Moser submission, he�ll no. But that alone is not damning. Neither blowout nor myself can find evidence of tampering and even on blowout they suggest bc of this card that they limit posts only to those cards with evidence of tampering and not get into opinion differences between SGC and PSA.

I fear there will be a lot of collateral damage here. I suppose that�s the price we all pay, so be it, but I do fear many good cards will be taken down with the bad .

Exhibitman · #17 06-04-2019, 11:25 AM

I'd try and get a full refund while the getting is good. The card may be legit, but given its history it likely is not 100%. This is supposed to be fun, a not source of stress, so who needs to fret over the history of the card?

steve B · #18 06-04-2019, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

The psa 3 t227 is mine. The guys on blowout expressly admit that they cannot find any alteration. I have looked at it under a loop and can�t find anything (but I am hardly an expert). Yes, the card used to reside in an an SGC A flip and now is in a psa 3, but that could be a difference of opinion. Do I like that it went from an SGC A to a psa 3 through a Moser submission, he�ll no. But that alone is not damning. Neither blowout nor myself can find evidence of tampering and even on blowout they suggest bc of this card that they limit posts only to those cards with evidence of tampering and not get into opinion differences between SGC and PSA.

I fear there will be a lot of collateral damage here. I suppose that�s the price we all pay, so be it, but I do fear many good cards will be taken down with the bad .

First, apologies for what was probably a somewhat hasty assessment. That's exactly why I don't usually go straight to trimming when I see an odd wear pattern. I don't follow blowout, so I had no idea it had already been covered.

It's interesting that there isn't any obvious alteration despite how it looks.
I've had a couple cards that I knew were unaltered get rejected by SGC that would have been given an A if I hadn't checked the right box. And considering how I just made a snap judgement, I think they handled it right by not grading cards that would appear altered.

I think in some cases, he might just be moving cards to PSA believing that they will sell for more as well as sending through a bunch of altered ones.
The companies do grade differently, and with expensive cards picking up ones that SGC didn't like much but that PSA would give a better grade to might be profitable.

D. Bergin · #19 06-04-2019, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve B

I believe this is the before.

The scan here is overly bright, but the creases don't look much different.

Maybe just moved from SGC to PSA?

I'd save the scans/auctions, print them and keep them with the card. If any work has been done, it wasn't much.

http://www.milehighcardco.com/1912_M...-LOT60474.aspx

Yeah, looks like the same card. Looks like not much done other then a crossover and a popping of the colors by the scanner, unless there's some sort of a brightener that could be used on the card itself.

I mean, just the crossover and the phrase: "A world-class copy for the assessment and recommended by PWCC.", netted Moser an extra grand in bids.

Not a bad job if you can get it.

T_Hamilton · #20 06-04-2019, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve B

I believe this is the before.

The scan here is overly bright, but the creases don't look much different.

Maybe just moved from SGC to PSA?

I'd save the scans/auctions, print them and keep them with the card. If any work has been done, it wasn't much.

http://www.milehighcardco.com/1912_M...-LOT60474.aspx

Steve thank you for finding this. I cant see much difference between the SGC and PSA. Will be starring at the card under a loop, black light and other lights later this evening. I really appreciate all of the help from the stellar members at N54.

ejharrington · #21 06-04-2019, 12:29 PM

What about sending it to PSA for a re-evaluation after explaining the situation? Does anyone think that is a good (or bad) idea?