Even the so called good guys...ugly hobby?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by jmk59

I am really uncomfortable reading that someone would make even a casual threat like that.

Sadly, it wasn't a threat; it was an admission of something already done. And first it's an "inside joke" (btw, how can an inside joke be told from one person to another in the privacy of an email exchange?) and now it's angry venting -- two totally different things.

[mark927]

This thread is another disturbing topic....I don't know Kevin but after reading all this it's hard to rationalize his explanation. Think it's time to go watch the NBA playoffs.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I agree Kevin did not express himself very well but it seems highly unlikely he could, especially without selling them, place specific cards in specific people's collections. I give him the benefit of the doubt here. Real card doctors attempt to fly under the radar, Kevin has always been very upfront about his experiments etc.

[JK]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I agree Kevin did not express himself very well but it seems highly unlikely he could, especially without selling them, place specific cards in specific people's collections. I give him the benefit of the doubt here. Real card doctors attempt to fly under the radar, Kevin has always been very upfront about his experiments etc.

My assumption, after reading the email, was that Kevin may not have provided an honest response when asked to review cards for certain collectors (which he states he has done hundreds of times). In other words, upon reviewing an altered card, he simply failed to disclose his opinion that the card was indeed altered - thereby insuring that the particular card took its place in the "targets" collection.

Of course, there are a lot of assumptions in there.

[slidekellyslide]

I agree with Peter. I assumed bravado (or lying). Kevin I think if he wanted to could do a lot of damage to this hobby, but it's always been my view that he was trying to help the hobby.....things seemed to turn ugly towards him on Net54 when he gave Scott Elkins an opinion on the underprint/overprint Union Leader stamp that most here disagreed with. No excuse for saying that kind of stuff even if it was in confidence, but still it's a bit far-fetched to believe he placed altered cards into many of the Net54 posters collections.

[MikeU]

Originally Posted by JK

My assumption, after reading the email, was that Kevin may not have provided an honest response when asked to review cards for certain collectors (which he states he has done hundreds of times). In other words, upon reviewing an altered card, he simply failed to disclose his opinion that the card was indeed altered - thereby insuring that the particular card took its place in the "targets" collection.

Of course, there are a lot of assumptions in there.

Why would Kevin do this to Jim Crandel?

[JK]

Originally Posted by MikeU

Why would Kevin do this to Jim Crandel?

Good point

[smtjoy]

To me this is not even in the same league as the Chan stuff. I have never even seen kevin post cards for sale and certainly not thousand dollar cards. Kevin has been open about what he is doing and I found many of his post and test my insightful. In any case it seemed to me more like bragging, granted never a good thing to do.

I do think that JK made a good point that maybe he reviewed cards and didnt give the true feedback. This could happen for many reasons, some good and some not so much. I for one would hate to tell someone that their most prized card is altered, bleh. I hate telling friends that their 80's cards are worthless when they think they have a jackpot. Also I know he is close to Jim C and how much he prizes his collection and would not want to be the one to tell him one of his best cards might be altered and with 20,000 graded PSA 8's im sure more than a couple are altered.

That said even if kevin feels a card is altered do we really know? I have two cards that PSA and SGC disagree on, one thinks its trimmed and the other said its fine so how do we really know.

[wonkaticket]

"I do think that JK made a good point that maybe he reviewed cards and didnt give the true feedback. This could happen for many reasons, some good and some not so much. I for one would hate to tell someone that their most prized card is altered, bleh."

Scott understood but do you think I enjoyed telling the owners of the Hart card who I consider close friends their five figure card and pride of their T206 back collection was a fake?

The point is even that argument holds little water for me if you're out to make the hobby a better place you can't just do that for your pals or hold back info to protect your feelings or someone else’s IMO.

Besides I think the comments Kevin made were very telling to me regardless of how you dice it.

I never did considered Kevin quite the white knight a lot of folks did but I wasn't turned off to him either. I just always chalked Kevin up to be somewhat of a self promoting business man with an idea for a 4th party review service for big dollar cards. Not unlike the card pricing site business startups awhile back using the board as a platform etc.

Now after reading this I'm pretty clear and have come to the conclusion I would never send Kevin any $$$ cards and his creditability with me is way below that of any of the 3rd party grading companies.

Do I think Kevin is a master forger nope I think Kevin is his own biggest fan in that area.

I do feel that honest folks don’t say stuff like that or even allude to it joke or not that's what really bothers me.

I also thought the folks on here should know. I would feel pretty bad if Kevin did turn out bad later on and folks who were sending him cards got burned in someway.

With that said I do respect all of your opinions that's what is great about discussions like this.

Cheers,

John