Moral of story: don't sell an altered card. Sorry that I have to out a fellow member.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by markf31

So If I purchase a PSA 5 (EX) graded card but I feel that card is in fact EX-MT and should have been graded a 6 (EX-MT) don't I have every right to crack the case and list the card as being in an EX-MT condition and price it according to a EX-MT grade? Would you expect me to detail and disclose in my auction that the card was originally graded a 5 by PSA?

My only point is that if the card has been submitted and returned with an "Altered" assessment and the seller received both of these from me, both should be listed. At the very least the word "altered" with an explanation of the PSA judgment should be included in the listing.

[Bosox Blair]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

My only point is that if the card has been submitted and returned with an "Altered" assessment and the seller received both of these from me, both should be listed. At the very least the word "altered" with an explanation of the PSA judgment should be included in the listing.

I agree with you, Brian.

Simply put, if I bought that card from Jim and then discovered the history you posted, I'd be very mad and I'd be looking to return the card...at the very least.

Yes, grades are opinions. And yes, PSA makes lots of mistakes. But they don't just reject cards willy-nilly. The card came back with the opinion that there was evidence of alteration. That is a very material fact that ought to be disclosed by any ethical seller.

Cheers,
Blair

[4815162342]

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=145241

[wonkaticket]

This kind of stuff is all over the place. It seems everybody has his or her way of spinning the facts or leaving them out in this case to make a sale. I agree 100% true and direct honesty would be super but it’s not going to happen sort of like wanting world peace.

Example below not picking on these guys alone but here’s one that stuck out as a scratch head moment…

“we are totally mystified as to why this card did not receive a mid-grade assessment? Steadfastly scouring the card for any possible paper loss or diminutive damage to the surface, we cannot locate any such blemishes, leaving us to only assume there is some microscopic like flaw(s) only evident via a high-powered lens. Yet, if a virtually undetectable flaw is the issue relating to the assigned grade, we would think the card should merit “at least” a VG assessment. Unquestionably, the overall aesthetics are consistent with a VG/EX to EX grade, and one can only ponder the nature of the current grade.”

http://www.goodwinandco.com/LotDetail.aspx?lotid=22332

Really totally mystified? It’s a mystery of the greater universe that Hawking himself could lend no rhyme or reason to as to why this card is a 1. There was no way to contact PSA and ask how did this happen…why has this anomaly occurred? There was no powered lens or equipment budget within reach of Goodwin & Company review this card….oh the humanity.

All in all just busting balls here can’t fault them for trying to sell a card it’s their job. However one could easily say also they weren’t too forthcoming or as forthcoming as they could have been either on a card for sale.

Translation of the above original write up. Card has an obvious flaw somewhere but is super nice for the grade and we would like to leave a little room for romance for our bidders so that we can maximize the sale.

Something to consider IMO when getting upset on this Mano’s deal.

Cheers,

John

[HRBAKER]

Good point(s) John.
There is a difference btw disagreeing or romancing away an assessment and failing to mention one.

[glynparson]

of the current seller. Dont know the op.

[RGold]

This thread has now surpassed the Ethical Question/How to Cheat Paypal thread.

[wonkaticket]

Jeff,

Agree 100% that’s why I say the term “left out" above and you’re right no argument here.

Sadly in the end both practices are at the core dishonest and ultimately put collectors at risk of being ripped off or taken advantage of, regardless of the fact that it’s a $99 Mano’s super flip special or a multi-thousand dollar card.

100% disclosure when it comes to this stuff is just pie in the sky thinking IMO. It’s a wonderful dream but I just don’t see it going down anytime soon.

All we can do is do what we can point it out to each other and buyer beware....

Cheers,

John

[glchen]

I think you MUST disclose that this card came back from PSA as Altered. Look at this thread here: Link. In this thread, the seller cracked a card out of a SGC 30/2 holder, and then advertised the raw card as EX/EX+. Now are people saying that doing this is perfectly legitimate? After all, it is only a TPG's OPINION that the card is a 2 (Good). Grading is subjective, so if the seller wants to crack it out and advertise the card as Excellent, this is perfectly okay? I say this is dishonest, exactly like the case in this thread.

The case where someone cracked out a card 15 times before finally getting the grade he wanted is different. In that case, a disinterested third party gave their professional opinion on that grade. Sure, they gave a different opinion the 15 times before. However, they don't have a dog in this fight. In this case, the seller has an obvious conflict of interest because he will directly profit from the own grading that he is giving, especially when he knows a TPG gave a different assessment. He should say something along the lines that "PSA gave this card an Authentic/Altered grade. However, I believe the card is not trimmed. Look at the bottom edge closely, and you as the buyer be the judge."

I would add that if you KNOW the TPG is wrong, then you should disclose that. For example, if there is a mark on the card that the TPG misses, you should disclose it.