Is it ethical to alter cards and sell them without disclosure?

G1911 · #1 03-20-2024, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raulus

Yep. I'm one of 3. Appreciate being outed, so thanks for that.

Full disclosure: I've never altered a card. Except for the one time when I bought a 71 Bazooka Numbered, which was hand cut. The cut job was bad, so I cleaned it up.

And I would argue that alteration is completely acceptable, without needing to be disclosed to a potential buyer. It's still in my PC, so I haven't sold it. But I will have no problem someday selling it without disclosing my hack job to the buyer.

You're welcome. I believe everyone can see who voted for what? The poll is not set to private, because I knew full well some people would plead ignorance but then vote yes to up those numbers without looking responsible for it.

raulus · #2 03-20-2024, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

You're welcome. I believe everyone can see who voted for what? The poll is not set to private, because I knew full well some people would plead ignorance but then vote yes to up those numbers without looking responsible for it.

That's exciting. Didn't realize that until now. I guess if you click on the hyperlinked number of votes for any given option, it will show the list of who voted for each option. And it looks like Snowman voted for option #2. I suspect because his definition of alterations is different than yours.

G1911 · #3 03-20-2024, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raulus

That's exciting. Didn't realize that until now. I guess if you click on the hyperlinked number of votes for any given option, it will show the list of who voted for each option. And it looks like Snowman voted for option #2. I suspect because his definition of alterations is different than yours.

Respect to those who have been honest. Honesty is always a virtue, whether I agree with them or not. I hold the Yes voters in higher regard than the people who pretend they have no idea what an altered card means.

Yes, Snowman's is that the word means the exact opposite of what the hobby has meant for 3 decades+, that a crease is alteration and not his work on a card. If I say I define a tree as a rhinoceros, that doesn't make the tree a rhinoceros. His definition is not the ignorance the others claim whenever convenient, but that it means the exact opposite.

raulus · #4 03-20-2024, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

Respect to those who have been honest. Honesty is always a virtue, whether I agree with them or not. I hold the Yes voters in higher regard than the people who pretend they have no idea what an altered card means.

I'm not sure if my vote was motivated by honesty. It was as much a function as a protest vote, due to my contrarian nature.

That and whenever people demand absolute answers based on ambiguous criteria, my contrarian streak tends to run amok even more violently than usual.

drcy · #5 03-20-2024, 04:21 PM

It not only obviously is unethical, it is illegal.

judsonhamlin · #6 03-20-2024, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drcy

It not only obviously is unethical, it is illegal.

This. Not that we don�t have enough attorneys weighing in, but it might be good to remember that there is criminal liability for, I don�t know, theft by deception (�a person is guilty of theft if he purposely obtains property of another by deception. A person deceived if he purposely� prevents another from acquiring information which would affect his judgment of a transaction �). That�s NJSA 2C:20-4B, from MPC 223.3. If the amount in question is more than $75K, theres a presumption of jail time with that.
And, also in NJ (but sourced from MPC 224.2), a person commits a crime of the fourth degree if, with a purpose to defraud anyone, or with knowledge that he is facilitating a fraud to be perpetrated by anyone, he makes, ALTERS or utters any object so that it appears to have value because of antiquity, rarity, source or authorship which it does not possess. That�s NJSA 2C:21-2.
Not sure how you dodge that if you�re not disclosing alterations that cause a buyer to pay more for a card than they would. And as to value, I think we can agree that, say a legitimate PSA 8 T206 Cobb or 33 Goudey Ruth isn�t a helluva lot more expensive and rare than an A graded card

Snowman · #7 03-20-2024, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judsonhamlin

This. Not that we don�t have enough attorneys weighing in, but it might be good to remember that there is criminal liability for, I don�t know, theft by deception (�a person is guilty of theft if he purposely obtains property of another by deception. A person deceived if he purposely� prevents another from acquiring information which would affect his judgment of a transaction �). That�s NJSA 2C:20-4B, from MPC 223.3. If the amount in question is more than $75K, theres a presumption of jail time with that.
And, also in NJ (but sourced from MPC 224.2), a person commits a crime of the fourth degree if, with a purpose to defraud anyone, or with knowledge that he is facilitating a fraud to be perpetrated by anyone, he makes, ALTERS or utters any object so that it appears to have value because of antiquity, rarity, source or authorship which it does not possess. That�s NJSA 2C:21-2.
Not sure how you dodge that if you�re not disclosing alterations that cause a buyer to pay more for a card than they would. And as to value, I think we can agree that, say a legitimate PSA 8 T206 Cobb or 33 Goudey Ruth isn�t a helluva lot more expensive and rare than an A graded card

Lol. Good luck with that argument in a court of law.

Peter_Spaeth · #8 03-20-2024, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judsonhamlin

This. Not that we don�t have enough attorneys weighing in, but it might be good to remember that there is criminal liability for, I don�t know, theft by deception (�a person is guilty of theft if he purposely obtains property of another by deception. A person deceived if he purposely� prevents another from acquiring information which would affect his judgment of a transaction �). That�s NJSA 2C:20-4B, from MPC 223.3. If the amount in question is more than $75K, theres a presumption of jail time with that.
And, also in NJ (but sourced from MPC 224.2), a person commits a crime of the fourth degree if, with a purpose to defraud anyone, or with knowledge that he is facilitating a fraud to be perpetrated by anyone, he makes, ALTERS or utters any object so that it appears to have value because of antiquity, rarity, source or authorship which it does not possess. That�s NJSA 2C:21-2.
Not sure how you dodge that if you�re not disclosing alterations that cause a buyer to pay more for a card than they would. And as to value, I think we can agree that, say a legitimate PSA 8 T206 Cobb or 33 Goudey Ruth isn�t a helluva lot more expensive and rare than an A graded card

Objection, lack of foundation. I doubt there is any such thing as a legitimate PSA 8 T206 Cobb or Goudey Ruth.

Peter_Spaeth · #9 03-20-2024, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raulus

I'm not sure if my vote was motivated by honesty. It was as much a function as a protest vote, due to my contrarian nature.

That and whenever people demand absolute answers based on ambiguous criteria, my contrarian streak tends to run amok even more violently than usual.

I'm probably very aligned with Greg on the ethics of all this, but I agree a poll based on a loaded term does not work.

G1911 · #10 03-20-2024, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raulus

I'm not sure if my vote was motivated by honesty. It was as much a function as a protest vote, due to my contrarian nature.

That and whenever people demand absolute answers based on ambiguous criteria, my contrarian streak tends to run amok even more violently than usual.

Oh I wasn't counting you among the honest, as you said one thing and voted another, when you apparently did not realize the contradiction could be seen.

raulus · #11 03-20-2024, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

Oh I wasn't counting you among the honest, as you said one thing and voted another, when you apparently did not realize the contradiction could be seen.

Thanks for clarifying. I would argue that I haven't been inconsistent on this matter. But rather, the poll is poorly constructed. But I suppose we can agree to disagree on that score.

Snowman · #12 03-20-2024, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raulus

Thanks for clarifying. I would argue that I haven't been inconsistent on this matter. But rather, the poll is poorly constructed. But I suppose we can agree to disagree on that score.

The poll was worded precisely as I would have predicted, given its author.

CardPadre · #13 03-20-2024, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Facilitypro

If you define "altering" as trimming/pressing/recoloring, then I think that is not acceptable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glchen

As other have said, there are many definitions of alterations in the hobby. Here are a few that I can think of:

Soaking a card glued onto something else like a scrapbook: Acceptable
Soaking and pressing a card to remove wrinkles: Not Acceptable

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

Yeah, I agree with soaking. I don't see the alteration aspect of soaking a card.

If you've soaked a card....then you've pressed a card. Once you've soaked it, it almost never wants to be perfectly flat anymore. You have to press it into and continue to hold the shape you desire with pressure while it dries.

Snowman · #14 03-20-2024, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CardPadre

If you've soaked a card....then you've pressed a card. Once you've soaked it, it almost never wants to be perfectly flat anymore. You have to press it into and continue to hold the shape you desire with pressure while it dries.

This is not when people mean when they talk about someone "pressing" a card. There are people here who think that there's an army of card doctors that run around soaking cards and then squishing the hell out of them with a mechanical press in an effort to expand their size so that they can then trim them down.

Personally, I think this is pretty funny. Believe it or not, this is actually a myth. It's not a thing.

Another thing people refer to as pressing is smashing out creases with a spoon. This actually is a thing and it damages cards. This IS an alteration, and it's something I won't do. It is perhaps worth mentioning that this is also something Kurt does not do either. This will get your cards flagged as altered stock by PSA and SGC. Don't do it.

Putting a book on top of a card while it dries to ensure it dries flat is not what is meant by "pressing" a card.

philliesfan · #15 03-20-2024, 05:10 PM

As other have said, there are many definitions of alterations in the hobby. Here are a few that I can think of:

Soaking a card glued onto something else like a scrapbook: Acceptable
Soaking and pressing a card to remove wrinkles: Not Acceptable
Trimming a hand cut card such as a strip card: Acceptable
Trimming an oversized factory cut card: Not Acceptable
Erasing a pencil mark from a card using a standard eraser: Maybe?
Erasing a pen/ink mark from a card using chemicals: Not Acceptable
Adding color to a card: Not Acceptable
Rebuilding corners: Not Acceptable
Re-backing a skinned card: Not Acceptable

Glchen, You forgot a common one.......Wiping off an wax/gum stain.

BabyRuth · #16 03-20-2024, 04:33 PM

I wonder if it would be acceptable to "alter" the options as follows:

Option 1)
Yes, it is perfectly acceptable and ethical to sell an altered card without disclosing this to the buyer

Option 2)
No, it is unethical to not disclose the alterations

glchen · #17 03-20-2024, 04:06 PM

As other have said, there are many definitions of alterations in the hobby. Here are a few that I can think of:

Soaking a card glued onto something else like a scrapbook: Acceptable
Soaking and pressing a card to remove wrinkles: Not Acceptable
Trimming a hand cut card such as a strip card: Acceptable
Trimming an oversized factory cut card: Not Acceptable
Erasing a pencil mark from a card using a standard eraser: Maybe?
Erasing a pen/ink mark from a card using chemicals: Not Acceptable
Adding color to a card: Not Acceptable
Rebuilding corners: Not Acceptable
Re-backing a skinned card: Not Acceptable

packs · #18 03-20-2024, 04:08 PM

Yeah, I agree with soaking. I don't see the alteration aspect of soaking a card. The card wasn't glued to anything when it was issued, so to me the alteration was gluing it to something. If you're able to soak it apart from what it was glued to, the card is in its original form and I don't see how it's been altered.

FrankWakefield · #19 03-20-2024, 10:50 PM

Soaking a T206.... I understand that some folks here think that soaking a T206 is altering a T206. I think that folks that have more than just a few T206s, graded and or not graded, have cards that have been soaked. Almost all of them have been soaked. ESPECIALLY if the card had great corners (which to me indicates a higher likelihood that the card was flour pasted into a scrapbook 115 years ago, and that is why the corners survived. A bunch of folks seem to be sanctimoniously in denial about that.

Slabs... When I buy a slabbed card ( think a T206 in a PSA 3 holder ), if I then break it out and put the card in with my other T206s, have I then altered that card? Haven't I altered it from graded to raw? Don't some folks buy the grade, not the card? If I sell a breakout card, should I disclose that it was graded? If I don't, is that fraud?

Where's that beating a dead horse video?

FrankWakefield · #20 03-20-2024, 11:03 PM

I have a T206 that I asked Ted Zanidakis to sign on the back. He did sign, and sent it back to me. So... Ted altered the card??? I'm complicit to that??? If I sell that card to someone, it's pretty obvious that Ted Z signed the back. I need to disclose that to a buyer anyway??? IF, in the process of taking scissors to a over-taped mailing package that I get one day, in the process of using the scissors, I cut a T206 in half, if I then sell that card, am I committing fraud if I don't tell the buyer that I cut that card in half???

View Poll Results: Is it ethical to alter and sell cards without disclosing that they were altered?
Yes, it is perfectly acceptable and ethical to sell an altered without disclosing this to the buyer	5	4.24%
No, it is unethical to not disclose alterations the alterations	34	28.81%
No, it is unethical to not disclose the alterations, and it is fraud to do so	79	66.95%
Voters: 118. You may not vote on this poll

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ethical to sell 1952 Mantle PSA 8 uncracked case	1952boyntoncollector	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	96	02-23-2015 12:04 PM
So much for REA disclosure on T206s...	CMIZ5290	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	82	04-30-2014 01:44 PM
Photo cleaning disclosure	71buc	Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used	6	12-18-2012 09:40 AM
B&L Auction Disclosure	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	77	05-21-2008 10:08 PM
disclosure issues	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	13	05-31-2007 07:45 PM