THE MARKEL REPORT: Are Graded Baseball Cards Being �Juiced� (Aesthetically Enhanced)?

WhenItWasAHobby · #1 08-23-2009, 12:38 AM

There were several topics up for discussion since I last posted.

Leon wondered about several things. This may help:

1. Yes, the postal inspectors office in Dallas and Houston are both aware of what's been going on and in Dallas for quite awhile. An agent at the Houston office said they are backed up but have an interest in this case and may get to it in the near future.

2. Besides the postal inspectors, a criminal complaint was filed through the F.B.I.'s website to the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) on July 31st. The Complaint Id is I0907311626469362.

3. Michael O'Keefe was contacted by one of the team members several months ago and was asked if he would publicize a civil case related to this issue and he said he would. As far as I know he hasn't seen this thread.

The other topic was PSA.

I'm not going to say anything good or bad about them right now. This is what I know. Susor had a long history of having a significant portion of his invoices rejected for trimming. We know this by checking his cert runs. By the way, a very invaluable thanks to the Network54 member who designed that program on Card Target. That saved us a lot of time. Someone did a calculation of his rejected for evidence of trimmings in 2007 and it was 38%. So in short, I don't have any reason to believe PSA was in bed with him.

One other thing. I talked to a PSA Customer Rep named Shane at the January 2008 Tri-Star in Houston for about 20 minutes. Shane was very nice and I warned him that I was convinced that someone was intentionally submitting altered cards to PSA. I explained Susor's MO to a tee without mentioning his name and give him a lot of circumstantial evidence. His response was in essence: "We always catch the bad cards, so if someone wants to throw his money away and try getting altered cards past us - go ahead." He also said that when an invoice goes over a certain percentage of trimmed cards, something like 30%, they call the submitter. I walked away shaking my head thinking they must have Susor's number on speed dial.

One other thing, shortly after that conversation, the PSA website would no longer show if a cert number was rejected for evidence of trimming to the public.

slidekellyslide · #2 08-23-2009, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

There were several topics up for discussion since I last posted.

Leon wondered about several things. This may help:

1. Yes, the postal inspectors office in Dallas and Houston are both aware of what's been going on and in Dallas for quite awhile. An agent at the Houston office said they are backed up but have an interest in this case and may get to it in the near future.

2. Besides the postal inspectors, a criminal complaint was filed through the F.B.I.'s website to the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) on July 31st. The Complaint Id is I0907311626469362.

3. Michael O'Keefe was contacted by one of the team members several months ago and was asked if he would publicize a civil case related to this issue and he said he would. As far as I know he hasn't seen this thread.

The other topic was PSA.

I'm not going to say anything good or bad about them right now. This is what I know. Susor had a long history of having a significant portion of his invoices rejected for trimming. We know this by checking his cert runs. By the way, a very invaluable thanks to the Network54 member who designed that program on Card Target. That saved us a lot of time. Someone did a calculation of his rejected for evidence of trimmings in 2007 and it was 38%. So in short, I don't have any reason to believe PSA was in bed with him.

One other thing. I talked to a PSA Customer Rep named Shane at the January 2008 Tri-Star in Houston for about 20 minutes. Shane was very nice and I warned him that I was convinced that someone was intentionally submitting altered cards to PSA. I explained Susor's MO to a tee without mentioning his name and give him a lot of circumstantial evidence. His response was in essense: "We always catch the bad cards, so if someone wants to throw his money away and try getting altered cards past us - go ahead." He also said that when an invoice goes over a certain percentage of trimmed cards, something like 30%, they call the submitter. I walked away shaking my head thinking they must have Susor's number on speed dial.

One other thing, shortly after that conversation, the PSA website would no longer show if a cert number was rejected for evidence of tirmming to the public.

Hmmm...PSA may not be in bed with him, but they are obviously aware of what he is doing. I sure hope they've reported this suspicious activity to the FBI.

Peter_Spaeth · #3 08-23-2009, 10:00 AM

There are, as most of us know, any number of people with reputations as card doctors. Obviously they continue to submit to the grading companies. It will be interesting to find out, some day through litigation, what the grading companies know about these people and how they deal with them.

WhenItWasAHobby · #4 08-23-2009, 08:53 PM

The term "microtrimming" has been tossed around on this thread.
This next example by eBay seller "scottsusor" is worth a look.
The raw card was sold to scottsusor by a member of our investigation
group.

The alteration on this edge of the card appears to about the
width of one or two razor blades. Here is the reserve upper right
corner before and after:

WhenItWasAHobby · #5 08-23-2009, 08:55 PM

Again a PSA 8.5 from eBay seller "scottsusor". The raw card sold
to scottsusor on eBay around March 2007

onlychild · #6 08-23-2009, 10:05 PM

Quote:

The term "microtrimming" has been tossed around on this thread.

From experience, to trim so thin in a specific area and with the side fibers smoothed (or removed), my guess is that this the result of delicate card sanding as opposed to the conventional blade job. Again, just an educated guess.

Great detective work Dan...and team!

Kevin

Flintboy · #7 08-23-2009, 11:22 PM

What should bother everyone is what this effect is having on everyones collection monetarily. For example, I find a 61 Jim Gentile raw, a very low pop and grade it. It comes back an "8." I sell my legitimate card on Ebay for "X." I check VCP and see that several cards have sold prior to this by someone who I suspect is altering cards. My card sells for a quite a few dollars less because "seller X" has sold 3 other Gentiles in an "8". Basically that guy just cost me good money. How much has your collection suffered cash wise because of this? Im bettin quite abit.......

WhenItWasAHobby · #8 08-24-2009, 11:21 PM

I guess this shouldn't come as a surprise, but I've been banned from the Collectors Universe Boards after being a member for 8 years plus 2 years prior when it was the PSA Board.

I have no regrets regarding the way I've handled this. I believed from the start of this investigation that I should distance myself from anyone or organization that would compromise the integrity of the findings or try to suppress the truth and I'll just leave it at that.

I do find it curious that Joe Orlando would do such a thing when he's in such a vulnerable position as he is right now. This isn't about a vendetta against PSA - I still own about 600 PSA graded cards. It's about stopping someone from systematically defauding the collecting community and hopefully the victims getting back what they lost.

There's actually one real good development in the making. It should become self-evident in the next several days.

daviddbreadman · #9 08-25-2009, 10:03 AM

I apologize if this had link had already been posted.. more on Scott Susor from several years ago including comments of him "scouring the net for raw cards.

http://forums.collectors.com/message...70&STARTPAGE=8

Also its noticeable that PSA seems to use Scott Susor in their articles at times. Not really proof of anything but I don't seem to have PSA calling me up for quotes for articles.

http://www.psacard.com/articles/arti...tml?artid=5122

http://www.psacard.com/articles/arti...tml?artid=5582

WhenItWasAHobby · #10 08-25-2009, 12:13 PM

After filing a complaint with eBay on Friday, I just received this response back:

Thank you for writing eBay in regard to item number 310156210162 (1961
TOPPS #494 TOM CHENEY Pirates PSA 8 NM-MT) that you purchased from
scottsusor. As you stated, the seller sold you a card which was altered
and you have already filed criminal charges with IC3 against him.
Because of the seller's activity, you would like us this seller be no
longer allowed to sell on the site. I know it's taken us a while to get
back to you and I'm sorry about the wait.

Rest assured that we thoroughly reviewed your report about the seller
and will take appropriate action. We may take a range of steps that
include giving a warning, canceling a listing, restricting or suspending
an account, or removing PowerSeller status.

We protect the privacy of our members, so we can't share the results of
our investigation with you. We appreciate you taking the time to file a
report and help make eBay a safe place to buy and sell.

At this time, to help you decide what would work best for you, I
recommend the following options (details below):

-- Contact us by phone --

As you're a valued member of eBay, we would like to help you resolve
your concern the soonest time possible.

Kindly call us at the number provided below and we'll be glad to assist
you.

eBay Customer Hotline Number for "Item Not Received or Significantly Not
as Described" disputes : 1-866-643-3720

So I did call eBay and talked to a very helpful person named Joe. It appears that is will only be a matter of time before these two two eBay accounts are shutdown.

Also, thanks Jeff, Peter, et al, for all of your supporting thoughts.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
1924-25 Dominion Chocolate. Baseball cards DO exist!	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	9	07-20-2012 09:15 PM
1966 Topps Baseball PSA graded	Archive	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	2	12-22-2008 02:48 PM
WTB: SGC GRADED 1958 Topps Baseball Cards	Archive	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	0	11-25-2008 10:08 AM
% of Graded Vintage Cards	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	44	10-09-2007 05:45 PM
Trimmed cards graded as Authentic: how are they priced?	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	14	08-16-2005 12:17 PM