FS: 1948 Leaf Jackie Robinson PSA 4.5

[jp1216]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

I think I've already explained. Read thread from beginning (or just post #98)

Neither explains a "I'll take it at 55k on Net54" offer.

So if someone on Net54 had replied and agreed to the 55k offer - what would have happened....?

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

Hey Hey quick update! Just came in from Steve Sloan. Will update the thread with progress

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by jp1216

Neither explains a "I'll take it at 55k on Net54" offer.

So if someone on Net54 had replied and agreed to the 55k offer - what would have happened....?

No dog in the fight, but as he already turned down offers of 40K and 45K, I'm feeling comfortable saying he'd turn down 55K. Just my opinion.

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

Things moving now. Just got off phone with Jackie Curiel at PSA after getting an email from her. She has issued a pre-paid Fedex label to send the card in for a management review.

We talked about the process and what happens if they deem the card altered and my options after. She said they would figure out a fair market price based on the data tool on the PSA website.

I asked for management to come up with a market price in writing so we're on the same page before I send in the card. This is where my ebay offers and third party offers come into play. She's going to get that figure and circle back with me on Monday. No way I'm sending this card in before fair value is established. stay tuned...

edited to add: Has anyone gone through this process? What should I be thinking about?

[x2drich2000]

No dog in the fight, but whenever I see language like this in a guarantee I think you are 100% correct to get the amount in writing ahead of time. "The current market value is determined by PSA, based in part on Sports Market Report and SMR Online values and/or recent prices realized from the marketplace. PSA will be the sole determiner of the current market value." [emphasis added https://www.psacard.com/about/financialguarantee] If you don't agree with their determination of value, not sure what your options would be though.

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

Things moving now. Just got off phone with Jackie Curiel at PSA after getting an email from her. She has issued a pre-paid Fedex label to send the card in for a management review.

We talked about the process and what happens if they deem the card altered and my options after. She said they would figure out a fair market price based on the data tool on the PSA website.

I asked for management to come up with a market price in writing so we're on the same page before I send in the card. This is where my ebay offers and third party offers come into play. She's going to get that figure and circle back with me on Monday. No way I'm sending this card in before fair value is established. stay tuned...

edited to add: Has anyone gone through this process? What should I be thinking about?

I think getting a number in writing before shipping it off makes sense. As we saw in the reprint CJ in a PSA slab earlier this year, once you ship it off you no longer have much or any control of the situation and it's best to do the negotiations beforehand (and in writing).
And not that this would necessarily impact your decision process, but I do wonder what they would do with the card if returned to them and a refund is issued...

[Johnny630]

Side Note is there paper lose on top left of his hat?? Yellow Chunk?

That bugs the crap out of me, aside from being trimmed what is that? Curious what that is?

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

back and forth with Jackie at PSA over email. They are refusing to negotiate a market price before I send in the card. Reached out again directly to Steve to see if I can resolve. more to come...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

back and forth with Jackie at PSA over email. They are refusing to negotiate a market price before I send in the card. Reached out again directly to Steve to see if I can resolve. more to come...

Why do I get the feeling this isn't going to go smoothly?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Why do I get the feeling this isn't going to go smoothly?

Sounds like they are wanting to pay market price from last summer.

[Griffins]

Why not just drop it off, it's 45 minutes away.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Why do I get the feeling this isn't going to go smoothly?

right!

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

Originally Posted by Griffins

Why not just drop it off, it's 45 minutes away.

If they'd let me do that, I would be all for it. I'd still want to know what value they'd be placing on the card before they evaluate it. Once it's in their hands, I've lost all negotiating power.

[bigfish]

Wouldn’t you be happy be getting back what you paid or slightly more than you paid for the card originally to end all this drama?

Also, Jackie at Psa is fantastic.

[x2drich2000]

Originally Posted by bigfish

Wouldn’t you be happy be getting back what you paid or slightly more than you paid for the card originally to end all this drama?

Also, Jackie at Psa is fantastic.

You would be happy with that outcome? I know I wouldn't. He would never be able to replace that card in that grade in today's market with what he paid for it in July. I doubt he would even be able to get a PSA 3 for what he paid in July.

[irv]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

If they'd let me do that, I would be all for it. I'd still want to know what value they'd be placing on the card before they evaluate it. Once it's in their hands, I've lost all negotiating power.

Very true, and because of that, I don't blame you one bit for not wanting to do it.

[ngrow9]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

No dog in the fight, but as he already turned down offers of 40K and 45K, I'm feeling comfortable saying he'd turn down 55K. Just my opinion.

The difference is that by offering the card at $55K, he's created a legally binding offer which, if accepted, would create a legally binding contract. It would have been a better look to just post it asking for offers in this case, IMHO.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by ngrow9

The difference is that by offering the card at $55K, he's created a legally binding offer which, if accepted, would create a legally binding contract. It would have been a better look to just post it asking for offers in this case, IMHO.

But if he is transparent about it then no one is going to pay 4.5 market for a trimmed card. And if he isn't then that isn't a good look either. (as we have seen). I would never give any TPG the card without a negotiated price up front. Once they have it, as stated, there is no control. Hold your hand tightly imo....

.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bigfish

Wouldn’t you be happy be getting back what you paid or slightly more than you paid for the card originally to end all this drama?

Also, Jackie at Psa is fantastic.

Rhetorical question I assume, obviously AJ would not be happy with that at all.

[Johnny630]

Let’s face it guys would he have bought this card if it wasn’t in a PSA holder? I would guess no he bought it because it was in a PSA holder we all know the market resale value of a PSA holder slabbed card. To me PSA hast to back this up and pay you a fair market value, I believe they will. Keep the faith and let’s see if PSA makes this right I think that they will.


One thing is troubling...If this card was trying to be sold and the seller knew that it had issues I don’t really care for that again though I have no idea what anyone knew what anyone didn’t know but if the card is deemed altered PSA has to make you right.

The argument I would pound home If you have to battle this out would be I bought the card because it was in a PSA holder the market knows it’s strong resale value growth and appreciation when you buy a card graded in there slab you buy it with that assurance that the card is authentic unaltered and proper.

I believe the real battle is going to be what is a fair market value for this card? May go to an arbiter I don’t know ��*♂️

It always comes down to the money, on both ends is the juice worth the squeeze ?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rats60

Sounds like they are wanting to pay market price from last summer.

If the card could have been returned last summer, maybe that has some logic to it? Or can you just sit on an altered card, hope it goes up, then expect PSA to pay for the appreciation?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If the card could have been returned last summer, maybe that has some logic to it? Or can you just sit on an altered card, hope it goes up, then expect PSA to pay for the appreciation?

Had the card gone down in value it would've been to the advantage of PSA.

If he'd been compensated last summer he could've then gotten an unaltered Jackie and realized the same profit.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Had the card gone down in value it would've been to the advantage of PSA.

If he'd been compensated last summer he could've then gotten an unaltered Jackie and realized the same profit.

But PSA wouldn't have funded it. A buyer would have.

[samosa4u]

Reading this thread just makes me feel so happy that I picked up my PSA 4 Leaf Jackie RIGHT BEFORE the pandemic. I remember the seller wanted like five to a thousand dollars more, and instead of arguing with him, I just gave him the money. I remember him telling me "listen, this card is going to be worth ten grand one day - you hear me?" I thought to myself "yeah ... and that will probably be in ten years!" Instead, it happened in like ten weeks! LOL!

Anyhow, anyone who chops up a Leaf Jackie should have his d*ck chopped off instead!

[jad22]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

Reading this thread just makes me feel so happy that I picked up my PSA 4 Leaf Jackie RIGHT BEFORE the pandemic. I remember the seller wanted like five to a thousand dollars more, and instead of arguing with him, I just gave him the money. I remember him telling me "listen, this card is going to be worth ten grand one day - you hear me?" I thought to myself "yeah ... and that will probably be in ten years!" Instead, it happened in like ten weeks! LOL!

Anyhow, anyone who chops up a Leaf Jackie should have his d*ck chopped off instead!

With all the money they have made they could buy a gold one to replace it.

[samosa4u]

Originally Posted by jad22

with all the money they have made they could buy a gold one to replace it.

lmao!!!!!!!!!!!

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by jad22

With all the money they have made they could buy a gold one to replace it.

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

.............

Anyhow, anyone who chops up a Leaf Jackie should have his d*ck chopped off instead!

I know everyone always assumes that the chop happens for the purpose of deceiving a grader and getting a higher number flip, but that's NOT always the case. In fact, I think it's why some of the trimmed cards make it into a holder.
They juuuust make it inside size tolerances and the edges aren't 'fresh'.
Someone long ago, a kid, a collector looking for it to fit inside a display, made a decision to slice and dice but age has since hidden some of that obvious alteration.

It's kind of like the new video replay rules we see in sports.
If you can't be sure it's been trimmed, then it's unfair to guess that it was in all likelihood but not without doubt.

Of course this doesn't apply necessarily to the Jackie or some other obvious trimmed cards like below, but sometimes what's posted and postulated to be trimmed may pass the standard inspections TPG's use to make their call.

[samosa4u]

Originally Posted by 68Hawk

I know everyone always assumes that the chop happens for the purpose of deceiving a grader and getting a higher number flip, but that's NOT always the case. In fact, I think it's why some of the trimmed cards make it into a holder.
They juuuust make it inside size tolerances and the edges aren't 'fresh'.
Someone long ago, a kid, a collector looking for it to fit inside a display, made a decision to slice and dice but age has since hidden some of that obvious alteration.

Hawk,

I think that ninety-nine percent of trimmed cards were done for the purpose of deceiving a grader and to get a higher grade. I also think that majority of these Leafs were chopped up by the same person. He also chopped up majority of the 51' and 53' Parkhurst hockey cards as well. He has been doing this for a long time.

Nice Satch.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

Hawk,

I think that ninety-nine percent of trimmed cards were done for the purpose of deceiving a grader and to get a higher grade. I also think that majority of these Leafs were chopped up by the same person. He also chopped up majority of the 51' and 53' Parkhurst hockey cards as well. He has been doing this for a long time.

Nice Satch.

Don't forget 55 Bowman, 39 Play Ball, and 52 Bowman and Look N See.

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

Hawk,

I think that ninety-nine percent of trimmed cards were done for the purpose of deceiving a grader and to get a higher grade. I also think that majority of these Leafs were chopped up by the same person. He also chopped up majority of the 51' and 53' Parkhurst hockey cards as well. He has been doing this for a long time.

Nice Satch.

That's super sad to hear re consistent fraudster choppers.
Ok, I'll get back on the pecker re-sizing bandwagon.

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

Don't forget T206. Every time I see a skinny sharp cornered T206 I wonder. All in how many altered cards in holders? Tens of thousands? Hundreds of Thousands?

[samosa4u]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Don't forget 55 Bowman, 39 Play Ball, and 52 Bowman and Look N See.

And this guy is still sitting at home chilling, eh?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

And this guy is still sitting at home chilling, eh?

He has made millions in this hobby. I am sure he is chilling just fine.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

Don't forget T206. Every time I see a skinny sharp cornered T206 I wonder. All in how many altered cards in holders? Tens of thousands? Hundreds of Thousands?

Not a specialty of the clinician under discussion, to my knowledge. But he has many colleagues. You've even heard of some of them.

[vthobby]

Except for tape! lol

Yes Virginia, there is a non trimming Santa Clause out there! Especially like how the tape bleeds into and right up to the right edge.

Peace, Mike

IMG_9108.jpg

PS If this was missing the tape, I could retire.......but I kinda like it!

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by vtgmsc

Except for tape! lol

Yes Virginia, there is a non trimming Santa Clause out there! Especially like how the tape bleeds into and right up to the right edge.

Peace, Mike

Attachment 444663

PS If this was missing the tape, I could retire.......but I kinda like it!

Mine doesn't have the tape, wanna swap?
Seriously, that is one buldgingly full bordered Leaf card!!!
Colors are also super nice and such good registration.
I can't see ever wanting to let it go either.

[bounce]

well I hope this works out, but I think there is zero chance of payout on this card.

management review is going to conclude the grade is accurate with no alteration, and that will close the book on it.

if they pay out on this one, they are opening the door to every single other card the BO team has discovered, which would bankrupt the company.

Nat and the investment team aren't stupid, they knew this liability was out there and I'm sure there were dozens of lawyers that convinced everyone there was plenty of leeway to never pay on the promise.

I really do hope I'm wrong, because AJ has some great cards and has always been a good guy in dealing with me. but alas, this "guarantee" has proven to not be worth much historically.

don't get cheated...

[vthobby]

Originally Posted by 68Hawk

Mine doesn't have the tape, wanna swap?
Seriously, that is one buldgingly full bordered Leaf card!!!
Colors are also super nice and such good registration.
I can't see ever wanting to let it go either.

I'll sleep on the offer! lol

Your is super cool too! Not many of this card even exist.

I do love the centering, registration, borders, colors, rarity, and yes, I do love that tape! I feel strongly that if this card was not originally taped to something that the conditon would be far from what it is now! Thanks! Mike

[Bram99]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Ted - I am in awe of you holding on to cards for this long. Now, that's discipline!

.

Like Warren Buffett

[chadeast]

Originally Posted by Leon

But if he is transparent about it then no one is going to pay 4.5 market for a trimmed card. And if he isn't then that isn't a good look either. (as we have seen). I would never give any TPG the card without a negotiated price up front. Once they have it, as stated, there is no control. Hold your hand tightly imo....

.

I just want to echo Leon's sentiment. If PSA has the card with no deal in place, you'll very likely not be happy with the results. If it was me, even if a price was agreed upon, I would insist upon a legally binding contract to ensure that the terms of the deal were met by all parties.

[Johnny630]

Cutting you a check plus returning the card to you in an Authentic Altered Slab seems like the easy thing to do.

I think they will.

Are you ready to battle it out with attorney ? Or just Take what they offer you?

[Exhibitman]

California Business & Professions Code section 17500: "It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or association, or any employee thereof with intent directly or indirectly to ... perform services ... or to induce the public to enter into any obligation relating thereto, to make or disseminate ...over the Internet, any statement, ... those services ... which is untrue or misleading, and which is known, or which by the exercise of reasonable care should be known, to be untrue or misleading... Any violation of the provisions of this section is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by both that imprisonment and fine."

Seems to me that a guarantee that the company never fulfills because it says "nu-uh" to every request to fulfill it is ripe for legal action.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

California Business & Professions Code section 17500: "It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or association, or any employee thereof with intent directly or indirectly to ... perform services ... or to induce the public to enter into any obligation relating thereto, to make or disseminate ...over the Internet, any statement, ... those services ... which is untrue or misleading, and which is known, or which by the exercise of reasonable care should be known, to be untrue or misleading... Any violation of the provisions of this section is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by both that imprisonment and fine."

Seems to me that a guarantee that the company never fulfills because it says "nu-uh" to every request to fulfill it is ripe for legal action.

They do fulfill it sometimes though, and didn't their financials when they were public show how much they paid out each year, or did it just show the reserve?

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Leon

But if he is transparent about it then no one is going to pay 4.5 market for a trimmed card. And if he isn't then that isn't a good look either. (as we have seen). I would never give any TPG the card without a negotiated price up front. Once they have it, as stated, there is no control. Hold your hand tightly imo....

.

Sad as it is, PSA is completely in the driver's seat here. We all seem to have to play by their rules. Maintaining possession of the card only puts you in possession of the card but not control of the disposition.

PSA could determine without having the card that it might be altered and if AJ refuses to send it in because he cannot get them to commit to it being trimmed or a buy back price, PSA will deactivate the cert pending a review of the card.

AJ has already said he would not sell the card to anyone given the card's history but having a card with a deactivated cert would certainly add another layer of complexity to the situation.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It's not objectively unreasonable for PSA to want the card back in its possession before making a determination. You're going to lose that one. IMO you're already in not so great a position on account of waiting months after the card was outed and you knew it before taking action. What leverage do you think holding onto the card gives you anyhow if you aren't going to sell it under any circumstances because it's hacked, I am not seeing it.

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Sad as it is, PSA is completely in the driver's seat here. We all seem to have to play by their rules. Maintaining possession of the card only puts you in possession of the card but not control of the disposition.

PSA could determine without having the card that it might be altered and if AJ refuses to send it in because he cannot get them to commit to it being trimmed or a buy back price, PSA will deactivate the cert pending a review of the card.

AJ has already said he would not sell the card to anyone given the card's history but having a card with a deactivated cert would certainly add another layer of complexity to the situation.

I could be wrong, but I don't thing PSA will deactivate the cert without first reviewing the card in hand. I've emailed them all the info from the blowout thread including the pics and evidence and they've said they need the card in hand to do a review and that pics and scans aren't enough proof.

I'm holding out hope that my email to Steve will allow us a dialogue to put a fair market price on the card that gives me confidence to send it in. I really don't want to get lawyers involved at this point and think we can work it out before it gets to that point.

If I don't hear from Steve, I'll reach out to Nat and see if that gets me further. I'm assuming Nat (and Steve for that matter) will want to resolve fairly and amicably. All I know is the longer they wait, the potentially more expensive it gets. A PSA 7 just sold last night for $400,000+

[jad22]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

I could be wrong, but I don't thing PSA will deactivate the cert without first reviewing the card in hand. I've emailed them all the info from the blowout thread including the pics and evidence and they've said they need the card in hand to do a review and that pics and scans aren't enough proof.

I'm holding out hope that my email to Steve will allow us a dialogue to put a fair market price on the card that gives me confidence to send it in. I really don't want to get lawyers involved at this point and think we can work it out before it gets to that point.

If I don't hear from Steve, I'll reach out to Nat and see if that gets me further. I'm assuming Nat (and Steve for that matter) will want to resolve fairly and amicably. All I know is the longer they wait, the potentially more expensive it gets. A PSA 7 just sold last night for $400,000+

A psa 7 With paper loss right? So scans and pics aren’t evidence?

[swarmee]

PSA has and will deactivate cert numbers for cards they don't have in hand. They will modify set info on cards they've logged incorrectly in their database without the card in hand (the flip stays wrong in those instances until an owner sends it in). PSA is also quick on the trigger to ban people who make demands of them, so if you're a submitter or have an account to track your collection, don't be surprised if either get deleted once this one is "cleared."

The fact that you're making your case in the open makes it very likely they eliminate you from their customer pool, IMO.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by jad22

A psa 7 With paper loss right? So scans and pics aren’t evidence?

Have you been following along all these three years? They and BGS have stood behind numerous cards outed for trimming. BGS doesn't even have a monetary liability/guarantee, just don't want to get egg on their face publicized for agreeing their graded cards are trimmed. Read more threads, especially on Blowout.