Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I think it's obvious where yours are.

[Archive]

Posted By: BOTN

Scott, would you mind disclosing to the board the identities of the individuals who owned the card after you?

MW,
I am relieved that you do not mind my revealing the truth about you. Would you care to address the purchases you made under ebay id, buying_sgc_cards? It is one thing to be criticised by members who do not engage in the practice of altering cards but I do not have to take this from the likes of you.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Greg,

Despite what you continue to say about me, I wish you only the best. I'm sure this was only a benign mistake.

[Archive]

Posted By: gcalex

VERY refreshing to see. I commend you. Now I suppose there are folks out there who would say you should not have sold the card in the first place given your concerns, but what you did certainly appears more than sufficient.

[Archive]

Posted By: BOTN

Examples such as this were merely done in an effort to continue your long battle with PSA. The history of your anti-PSA campaign is only second to that of your history with embrassing card restoration services or performing the tasks yourself.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Greg,

I'm not here to start a fight with anyone and I willingly accept your salacious criticism. I think the words you speak reflect some of the anger and personal problems you have recently experienced so in no way do I fault you for them. The link I included was only meant as an illustration. I ran this auction on eBay approximately two years ago. Again, I wish you only the best.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

gcalex - this is not a matter of someone having a personal opinion that differs from that of three grading companies. When the card popped up on Greg's web-site, I recognized it and posted. Greg was shown the before and after pictures of both the front and back of the card - he "understood" at that point (despite what he currently claims) that the card had been altered prior to encapsulation. The grading companies did not have access to the "before" pictures at the time of grading, or they too would have realized that the card had been severely doctored. In fact, Greg returned the card to SGC and they took it out of the holder and sent it back at his request. So you see, this isn't a matter of personal opinion about alteration.

[Archive]

Posted By: gcalex

OK, I have no knowledge of the history of this card (never heard of it till I happened to read this thread) or the personal dealings involved, but it appeared to me that the criticism of Greg was ASSUMING his version of the facts, that is that he had an opinion that differed from PSA but no first hand knowledge that the card actually had been altered. I obviously can't speak as to what he knew or didn't know, I was just commenting generally on what seemed to me to be too high an ethical standard being suggested by folks, namely that one has to disclose one's own opinion when a card has been third party graded. That was my only point.

[Archive]

Posted By: BOTN

Scott

Get your facts straight dude! I owned this card since June 2003. It was on my page until it sold on ebay in March 2004. Your thread about the card was posted on March 3, 2004 after you saw the card listed on ebay. You never brought it to my attention. I happened to stumble upon the before scan while looking on this forum. SGC took the card out of the holder due to the beating they were taking here. Not because the card was altered.

What is your malfunction that you insist on changing the facts? Whay are you hiding the indentities of the guys who you know owned the card after you? Everything that you do is done in an effort to make me look like the creep that you are.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

If I were selling a graded card and was sent "before" scans showing that it had been altered, I would either modify my description to state that the card had been altered, or I would pull the auction and if possible get a refund from the person who sold it to me. I would expect similar behavior from anyone with ethics in this hobby. And I'm sure based on what MW says, that you are one of the good guys. (it's hot in here).

[Archive]

Posted By: gcalex

Yes I agree there is a difference between actual knowledge that a card has been altered and merely having an opinion based on the appearance of the card or whatever. I was speaking only to the second circumstance, which I thought was Greg's situation. The fact that grading companies do get it wrong sometimes is unfortunate, but I don't think each of us is obligated to second guess them when we sell one of their cards. Of course noone hesitates to express his view that PSA UNDERGRADED his cards (PSA 7++++++; PSA 7 (8???) etc.), but most buyers probably discount that I would guess.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Greg, okay since you've dropped the ravings about drunkenness, I'll respond to you...

You are right - I spotted the card on ebay and posted in this forum. You were a regular poster at the time and you got involved immediately and we had a rather heated discussion. You happened to "stumble" on the thread?! (where the heck is the laughing smiley?)

And SGC, after taking it out of the holder, could NOT tell that it had been altered?!?! (where's the incredulous, head-scratching smiley?)

No, I don't remember who I sold it to - I forwarded you a defunct ebay handle or address that I dredged up from my 'sent' folder, which didn't do any of us any good - I no longer have it, but perhaps you do? And no, oddly enough, I don't know who that person sold it to (the 'what, are you thick-headed?' smiley goes here) ...does this make me guilty of something? (I finally found a useful smiley)

Greg, I haven't done anything to make you look like the creep that anyone else is (insert the brain twisted in a knot smiley here)

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

MW discloses his opinions about slabbed cards he is selling, because he is very knowledgeable about the card issues he deals in. So he feels obligated to state his opinion, even though it will almost certainly have a negative impact on a sale.

Let's just say that someone like Greg has much less of a burden in that area.

[Archive]

Posted By: BOTN

Wentz "discloses" negative information about cards in PSA and GAI holders. Have you ever seen him do that with an SGC card or does SGC not make mistakes or overgrade anything? Additionally, why does his description of the N172 Kelly PSA 9 go into the history of that card? Shouldn't perspective buyers know the card was EXMT?

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Greg,

I describe cards based on how I grade them. Some grading companies grade differently than I do. Thus far, I have found that SGC grades cards closest to how I grade. There's a level of consistency that I don't see with every grading company.

As for the N172 Kelly, you're talking about the original PSA grade which was inaccurate and which Mastro and Steinbach also thought was inaccurate (they described it as the best condition N172 known). It doesn't happen often, but this was one case where I agreed with the catalog description of both the flaw on the reverse side (which is still there) and the overall assessment...independent of the grade on the holder. If you look back at the actual catalog description, Mastro and Steinbach also mention that everyone who viewed the card at that year's National also thought it was the best Old Judge they had ever seen. That's no small coincidence.


No one ever characterized the card as EM after it was initially graded. Mastro didn't. Steinbach didn't. PSA didn't. BMW Sportscards didn't. SGC didn't. And many forum members who have seen this card in person at the last two Nationals didn't. Combined, those individuals and entities know considerably more about grading than you do. I say this not to aggravate you or diminish your stature in the hobby but to clear up your misconceptions. My description of the card always has been and always will be accurate and those who have seen the card know it. Thank you.


edit: grammar

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason

I don't know everyone here exactly but I know the response in offense to the Wentz's are not at all accurate. I have bought tons of pre war vintage from them over the last few years in lower and mid grades. They ALWAYS disclose anything questionable on their product. Matter of fact I have NEVER had a card not grade from them. I have purchased cards like M101-5 Ruth rookie, Wide pens, Caramels, tobacco, Bowmans, Leaf, Goudeys, Play Balls, etc........As far as your "grading companies" go on the other hand I did buy a t206 set from SCP auction last DEC in which several of the SLABBED PSA cards were trimmed in the holders. To simply say that the cards that Mike may purchase off of ebay will soon turn into mint slabbed holders is just a ridiculous statement to make. Sounds like someone is trying to make far out false accusations to get the heat off their ass! BOTN- I think you should burn the stinkin card in a ritual ceremony with members of the forum at the next National. If this continues to be a problem I will take the card off your hands for $200. Mike, if you and Brian have any nice pre war groups in mid lower grade available email me. Greg- your statements about the Wentz's are just not accurate. I am sure you are a swell guy but you shouldn't make rash statements without knowing exactly what they do and sell.

Jason

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Mike,

I am quite certain that the N172 appears to be, then and now, one of the finest examples of its kind. Fortunately there are no high definition images of the back and front of the card to compare it to in the raw or PSA 6 holder and the holder it now resides in. I am however puzzled about why you now use Mastro and PSA as endorsements to confirm the condition of the card--two entities that you have no respect for and openly criticize at almost every chance you get.

Also on April 22, 2004 in this forum you wrote:

"The N172 Kelly first publicly appeared in a Mastro auction many years ago. Despite the grade of PSA 6, Mastro proclaimed it to be the best Old Judge on earth. Those who had viewed the card at the previously National agreed with this conclusion. And, based on the barcode, we know that it was a very early PSA grade. I purchased the card raw and submitted it to PSA. PSA graded it a 9. When I stopped submitting to PSA, I converted the card to an SGC holder."

You stopped submitting to PSA (and are clearly an SGC supporter) but the card back in the PSA 9 holder? You do not need to address any of this as this really is my witch burning and I hate sharing the spotlight.

Hi Jason,

Careful calling me a swell guy. Around here that is punishable by weeks of endless public ridicule. My inquiry to Mike about his purchases of the lower graded cards on ebay, was not my way of taking the heat off of me. I was trying to illustrate again that Mike is not being honest. I have a PM from him from March 2004 where he told me he never buys low grade cards unless they come in a collection. The purchases were also made under an ID that did not directly identify them as the buyers.

I have already stated that I did not feel there was any relevance in telling Wayne about the history of the card given the thrice- graded Cobb. That was a judgment call that I made and I did not feel anyone was being injured in my doing this. I thank you for your offer of the $200 but it is not necessary. I have already contacted Wayne and the ball is in his court as to what he wants to do about this.

I can assure all of you that this card would grade every time it was submitted. I understand it appears slightly different than the image Scott provided but it does not appear to have been changed as drastically as some are making out. Admittedly I have become jaded being in this hobby. I am not going to throw anyone under the bus but those of you who are making an issue over what you feel is a lack of ethics by selling the card to Wayne, really have no idea what really is going on in the hobby.

I have read several threads on this board and PSA’s where folks are openly talking about removal and restoration and what they are doing to their cards to “improve” their appearance. Do we know with absolute certainty that these cards will not make it back into the hobby at some point? One day it is a collection, the next it becomes a vehicle to make a buck or upgrade to a better one. This is the stuff at the collector level. What do you think goes on at the dealer level where guys make their livings?

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Greg,

The Mastro-Steinbach catalogs had different verbiage and varying content years ago. I don't think any knowledgeable vintage collector would argue with that statement. Also, the fact that I disagree with someone on one particular issue does not mean that I can't agree with them on a different issue. For instance, if Bill Mastro told me that he found you to be repulsively odorous and hideously ugly, I just might have a difference of opinion. I think you smell just fine.

Finally, the Kelly is not "back" in a PSA holder. Please check your facts. Thank you.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

"Finally, the Kelly is not "back" in a PSA holder."
What does this mean?

"I purchased the card raw and submitted it to PSA. PSA graded it a 9. When I stopped submitting to PSA, I converted the card to an SGC holder."
If it was in the SGC holder as you admitted, how is it now in the PSA 9 holder?

"Also, the fact that I disagree with someone on one particular issue does not mean that I can't agree with them on a different issue."
I would say that you have more than one particular issue with both PSA and Mastro. Guess it is all a matter of convenience. I am sure you do not want me to start opening old wounds.

"For instance, if Bill Mastro told me that he found you to be repulsively odorous and hideously ugly, I just might have a difference of opinion. I think you smell just fine."

I am relieved that you do not find me attractive but concerned that you have been so close to me that you know I smell fine.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenny Cole

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I do have to say that it strikes me as extremely odd that three seperate grading companies would look at and grade this card if it was in fact altered. If they did, it seems to me that raises a bigger issue, one that encompasses more than just this card.

I will be the first to admit that I am not a fan of grading companies or of graded cards. However, that being said, one thing I thought that most of them could do at least moderately well was to authenticate cards and detect alterations. At least they all tout themselves as being able to do so, and they don't have a problem charging for that service. Up until now, I generally credited them with the ability to at least do that.

Assuming for the moment that there's a problem with the Cobb card, PSA, SGC and GAI ALL graded it. What are the odds of that occurring? If the "professional" card graders are as good as they hold themselves out to be, and if they use all of the resouces they say they use, I would think those odds to be infinitesimal. If the Cobb card has issues and everyone at 3 separate grading companies who looked at it missed those issues, shouldn't that be a major cause for concern? How many cards with issues are missed, and therefore graded, when they are only sent to one grading company?

I've never sent in a card for grading. However, as I understand the theory, you supposedly do it because the neutral and impartial grading card gods are there to tell you what you have. Consequently, if you've got qualms about a card and it comes back graded, I suppose that should normally mean its fine. I've never quite figured out how some cards could be repeatedly sent to the card gods and receive different grades, but I can understand a slight difference in assigning a grade to a given card much better than I can 3 companies missing what is claimed to be an altered card. How many more are out there? How do we tell which ones they are (I thought that's what they were sent in to determine in the first place)? Why are people paying for a "service" that, at least based upon the comments in this thread, they cannot trust even to determine whether or not the card they submit has been altered? Are the card doctors getting that good?

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

"I am relieved that you do not find me attractive but concerned that you have been so close to me that you know I smell fine."


Greg,

It was a hypothetical. I concede the fact that you might not.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Kenny makes some very valid points and ones that I have argued repeatedly to no avail.

Mike you can view the card despite three qualified grading companies already having done so, I would like others to see it as well as I know you do not have my best interest at heart.

"I am relieved that you do not find me attractive but concerned that you have been so close to me that you know I smell fine."

Greg,

It was a hypothetical. I concede the fact that you might not.

Even more disturbing that this was your hypothetical example due to the rumors abound.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

"Finally, the Kelly is not "back" in a PSA holder."
What does this mean?

"I purchased the card raw and submitted it to PSA. PSA graded it a 9. When I stopped submitting to PSA, I converted the card to an SGC holder."
If it was in the SGC holder as you admitted, how is it now in the PSA 9 holder?

"Also, the fact that I disagree with someone on one particular issue does not mean that I can't agree with them on a different issue."
I would say that you have more than one particular issue with both PSA and Mastro. Guess it is all a matter of convenience. I am sure you do not want me to start opening old wounds.

Care to address the above? While you are at it can we openly discuss one of your ebay buying ids, buying_sgc_cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenny Cole

My concern isn't primarily with this card. I don't care one way or the other about it except insofar as it affects my more overriding concern.

If the card has alteration issues, 3 seperate companies shouldn't have missed it, simple as that. If they did, that doesn't say much for them. In fact, to my way of thinking, it raises huge red flags about the competence of all 3. I can see maybe one company missing what Scott and others are saying is a clearly altered card. But all 3? If it is truly altered, that's simply ridiculous. And, it raises all of the issues I alluded to in my earlier post.

I don't have a problem with your suggestion of sending the Cobb to yet another grader. However, I really don't know what that accomplishes. The problem I see is that, at this point, I'm not sure who that almighty authority is. The 3 purported authorities have evidently already screwed it up, so who is next in line? If someone doesn't like the judgment of grader no. 4, does it then go to grader no. 5?

That was sort of my point. If all of the purported best graders around missed on this card then, as best as I can tell, the available options are that: 1) three seperate card graders missed it; 2) the card is OK; or 3) the card doctors are getting so good that the card gods can no longer tell. Anything other than #2 isn't really calculated to build my confidence in the abilities of the people who slab for a living.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

A question: If you clean a dirty item is it considered altered?

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenny Cole

on whether you're talking about clothes, catfish or cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

I know you can bleach clothes and cards but can you bleach a catfish?

A cleaned catfish would definately be altered, but I don't know why you would ever want to clean one? Kenny what did you have for supper?

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenny Cole

Lee,

Down here in the sort-of-south (Oklahoma - BTW, as you know, we just kicked Texas' ass for year no.5 in a row- so sweet), we eat catfish. Depending on the kind, they can be pretty dirty, so we damn sure clean them first. I've not ever bleached one though. Does it taste better that way?

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe P.

"Are the card doctors getting that good?"
*
*
Yes, and the grading experts, (sic) aren't as good as they claim to be.
Somehow I get the feeling that their real first jobs were outsourced

Kenny, back in 1990, I dealt with a card doctor that was damn good, so good he was scarey.
It involved some very heavy scratch, and you know I was going to get that scratch back.

Then we have the Alan Rosen - SGC - Keith Olbermann episode of Dec. 1999.
The painful story follows below.

http://www.t206museum.com/page/periodical_5.html

Now here in 2004, we have the harmonious grading rap trio of GAI - SGC and PSA rapping to the tune of "See No Evil - Speak No Evil"
Then we have Greg of the Gregorian Chants doing a monodic fugue with the trio like - "Although I saw it - I was outvoted - the Devil made me do it."
Greg is right in saying that there are problems out there.
Unfortunately, he's also part of it.
Come on, he knew about the before and after of that card.
We're suppose to believe that just because three so called experts got it wrong in unison that that was enough justification to not give Wayne the background of that card?
Tell it to the Marines, and unfortunately for Greg, I'm an ex Marine, and his tale doesn't cut it.

Kenny, why are you always chasing my Cuban and T207 cards?

Stay well,
Joe P.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

Kenny and Joe - I have tried several times to get a discussion going on this board regarding the actual grading process that the "big 3" use...to no avail. It seems to be a trade secret.

My interest in the e95 card was not because I have dubbed myself some sort of consumer protection guy for card collectors, but because I used to own it and I'm very familiar with it's problems - the card jumped out at me when I spotted it originally on ebay. Honestly, it had a heckuva lot of character at one time - nice caramel residue on the back, scratches, creases,etc., and it still has great color - even a little extra. If I had not owned the card, I doubt I would have been able to see alterations through a plastic slab, and I doubt that Greg or anyone else could have either.

...however, I would think that tools exist that the grading companies would routinely use to spot alterations such as glue and re-coloring. So to me, this indicates that either doctoring techniques have rendered such tools (blacklights, for instance) totally ineffective, or the slabbing companies don't use the tools. I really don't know their process - does anyone? This question has never been answered on this board to my satisfaction.

Greg would have us believe that SGC took the card out of the holder, and still felt that it was un-altered. Rubbish. I think that the slabbing of this card by 3 companies was simply forgiveable sloppy work, and that if any of the three were handed the raw card today and asked to use all reasonable resources available to determine if it had been altered, all three could give us a list of alterations at least as long as the repaired formerly torn player list on the back of the card.

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

Is it maybe possible that the first company that slabbed it made a mistake and that the next 2 that crossed it over didn't look quite as closely since it was already slabbed? Just a thought. If no color was added and it was just simply soaked in water and rolled out, could you actually tell? Now if paperloss was repaired on back and missed, yes, that is impressive! Dan. Oops! forgot to hide my name under a nickname. I agree with Barry, everyone should show their full name.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

According to Greg, all three got to look at it raw at some point.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenny Cole

I'm familiar with the Olberman fiasco, although I never had the impression that the card doctoring there was real sophisticated. I don't send cards in to be graded because I personally think the whole concept is pretty much a farce. However, I will buy a graded card if is one I want and if the fact that it has been entombed hasn't jacked its price way up. For that reason, the topic now under discussion is of concern to me. In that regard, one purported justification for grading is that it supposedly allows people to who can't personally inspect the card to buy it on-line with a greater degree of comfort than would otherwise exist. In my opinion, situations like the one at hand tend to undermine even that purported justification for grading. I've never been more than luke-warm about card grading, but I'm feeling even less warm and fuzzy about it now.

As far as your question about Cuban and T207 cards goes, I make it a habit never to chase yours. I only go after those that should rightfully inhabit my house. Best,

Kenny Cole

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

I agree fully that this episdode -- and others I have heard about -- gives one some pause about the competence of grading companies. What concerns me most, frankly, is that the volume of cards they review suggests that they have very little time to spend inspecting any given card, although one hopes that on issues more likely to be vulnerable to alteration for economic gain -- prewar cards and expensive cards generally -- they take more time. However, it is an imperfect world, and it seems to me especially given that most cards today are purchased without visual inspection that reliance on third party grading is far better than the alternative. It also appears from the example given in this thread that a grading company will acknowledge an obvious mistake, which further reduces one's risk. Just one man's thoughts.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim Mayer

wow, its hard to trust anyone anymore,,,,

I want forget I even read this thread,,I don't want to know what you guys did to my cards before I bought them,,,if they are graded, I guess my value is secure,,,

but this is scary

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Greg: "Bottom feeder": Is that in reference to my job? Not very creative... I don't buy your story. Bottom line: it is one thing to say you aren't sure about the card so you want a third party's opinion, but you knew the history of the card and sold it without disclosing it. That's fraudulent and you don't need to debate the meaning of "is" to come to that conclusion. I also don't believe for a moment that SGC offered to buy out the card only because we criticized SGC here. We don't have that kind of juice. We bag on PSA, SGC and GAI all the time and nothing comes of it. The more I hear the less sense you make, so I'm done with you and with this thread.

Grading: I've been saying for a long time that a grader cannot be expected to pick up on a removal and that the services make mistakes. We all do. That's not the point. The real issues are whether the services add a value to the business and whether they stand behind their service. As to the former, I believe they do add value and are here to stay, and people who complain about the concept of grading per se need to face reality. As far as standing behind their services, I for one am glad to hear that SGC allegedly offered to stand behind its service. If that is true, it is heartening.

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

If you really want to see something scary check out the article on card restoration in the July 1996 issue of the Vintage & Classic Baseball Card Collector, if you can find one. I have the article in pdf format but don't know how to post a link to it, or even if that can be done technologically, but some of the discussion and before and after photos are quite disturbing. And one can only assume that the technology and capability to alter cards has advanced from 1996.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim Mayer

thanks for the comment on my addition to the post,,,heres my email, I'd love to see the article if you can forward it..my eyes are open, why not see the whole picture...

tim

timjmayer@yahoo.com

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

was not a reference to your occupation since I have never retained your services and know nothing of your reputation, aside from beating CU. Believe what you want to believe about me, or this situation. Your mind was made up about me long before the Cobb incident and losing you as a customer will have absolutely no material impact on my life. If you had an issue with me you could have addressed it privately instead of reprimanding me here. Now get in line and join the ranks of the other BOTN haters. Scott has a cold beer waiting for you.

Aside from it now being the infamous Cobb and now being identifiable, this card will grade each time it is submitted. It is not the art project that some of the alarmists make it out to be.

None of you were part of the conversations with SGC about this card it is pure speculation on your part as to why they removed the card. The same speculation you employ in concluding the card went through massive restoration. Your arm chair analysis is most impressive.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe P.

Kenny Cole:
"I'm familiar with the Olberman fiasco, although I never had the impression that the card doctoring there was real sophisticated."
*
*
Kenny, it was so unsophisticated it fell into the ranks and subclass of amateurism. .... and SGC passed it.
Bad enough that there are people practicing questionable medicine out there, but to have the so called experts blow it, and blow it LOUD -- that's scary.

Kenny, in 1990 between Memorial Day and Labor Day, I went through one of the more learning experience of my life. ... it was a crash course.
Thankfully with the help of Lew Lipset, Larry Fritsch, Herman Kaufman, (my counselor and friend) Bob Lemke (mediator) and my West coast sidekick Mark Macrae - we got to the medicine man and my scratch.

I had obtained two (2) Slow Joe Doyle error cards.
My bad - my greed - and a typical too good to be true episode. - a very heavy learning experience.
After going through hundreds of T206 Nat'l's and comparing them to the two wannabees, and a real Doyle error, I finally got to see the constants of the true T206, and the tell tale signs of the medically treated T206. - and folks, that was worth the trip.

The cards were not slabbed, so it has nothing to do with slabbing.
My point is that in 1990 those two Doyle's were more sophisticate and passable by far than the Rosen - SGC Doyle in 1999.

Adam is absolutely right.
The grading experts (sic) are here to stay.
They are fantastic when it comes to Size - Corners and Sides.
However, there should be an addendum on their slabs, and that is: "BUYER BEWARE".
Somehow I feel that the buyers are slowly becoming aware.
It will not be a 1929 style crash, but the stocks will go down.

Kenny, always good to see you on the bidding boards.
From one collector to another, may you always find the cards that are looking for a warm home, but please give me a break and let some of them fall through a crack to my home.

Joe P.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

and I have reacquired the card. Wayne is sending the card back out to me tomorrow morning. Wayne did say had he known the stigma associated with this card he would not have bought it. This was my error in judgment and I should have know given the reputation that Wayne, Bill and Shoebox have earned from their years in the business.

For those who have never visited Shoebox's website or done business with Wayne and Bill, it is a great place to shop for raw and graded cards. Here is a link. http://www.wvshoeboxcards.com/catalog.cfm

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=153652&messageid=1082828425&lp=1082940745

This is a perfect example of a point I made yesterday where collectors are posting about the restoration they do to thier own collections. At some point when Adam croaks, unless he is being buried with his collection or God forbid he live forever, these cards will hit the marketplace. Unsuspecting collectors will end up purchasing these altered cards without proper disclosure.

I am assuming that based on Adam's reprimanding of me as well as his obligation as an attorney, that all of these cards, he has doctored, are cleary identifed as such. There is no chance that Adam the Ethicist is imposing a double standard.

I would like to thank a good friend of mine who provided me with the above link.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

I have never sold a card that was altered by me. Period. And I never would do so absent a disclosure. As far as cards altered by others go, I've sold two that I know of, both with full disclosure and I've eaten hundreds of dollars by reselling them with an honest disclosure after I'd purchased them as supposedly unaltered: a PRO-graded [I know, I know...it was a while ago] N28 Dempsey and a CSA-graded 1953 Bowman Spahn. Want to see the Dempsey? Check out VCBC issue #30, page 20. I ate hundreds on this card by selling it with an accurate disclosure. I still have the 1959 PSA 9 Drysdale mentioned in the article; maybe you want to buy it and pass it on to another dealer as a PSA 9 card? Seems to have worked so well for you here. The two cards mentioned in the article in VCBC have already been unencapsulated, BTW.

See, that's the difference between you and me, Greg; I don't have to dance through a 100 post string of stinging questions before doing the right thing because it would not cross my mind to do the wrong thing in the first place. Your argument also is what's known as a straw man argument (it's certainly GWB's main mode of reasoning; that circumspect enough Bill }. You try to avoid discussing your own blunders by bringing up someone else's actions as a smokescreen. It wasn't a defense to say the others were doing it too if you get caught smoking in the boys room, it isn't a defense in court if you're the one caught speeding out of all the maniacs on the freeway, and it isn't gonna fly here, either. Cast all the aspersions you want, Greggy, because I ain't the one who cheated a customer, and no matter what theoretical arguments I've made in past strings here, I never will be.

As far as what happens to my cards when I die, hopefully that won't even be an issue for another 40-50 years. I'll leave it to my heirs to deal with that situation. I don't think I'd like to live forever, either; too expensive

who's the anonymous good friend??

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

Adam, just so I understand your position and I seek only to understand not to judge, is removal of a crease (which is discussed in the posting to which Greg provided a link) "alteration" or is it not in your judgment; have you sold cards which you "improved" (to use a neutral term) by the methods described in that posting; and if so, did you disclose that you had done so? Thank you in advance. Also, I suppose it would be interesting to know in light of the subject matter of the thread whether any cards "improved" by this method were slabbed by the grading services. Again, thank you for whatever light you can shed.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Well I am certainly glad to hear that you find absolutely nothing wrong with doctoring cards. Funny that it is you who is concerned about buying from me. You still have not addressed the fact that were you to be run over by a bus tomorrow crossing Magnolia Blvd, would your heirs know which 3 cards in your collection have not undergone restoration? I assume you are saying that were I to view your collection this evening I would see labels on the holders of these cards that clearly identify these as cards that you restored.

As for your history of disclosing on two sales--congrats! How are we to know that constitutes all of the sales you have made of cards that you have restored? I can make similar claims ask Steve Rochhi, Mike Baker and Joe Orlando. In my situation the losses were measured in 5 figures.

Once again, three grading companies giving their approval on a card is more than good enough for me, especially after I handled the card and was able to observe it ungraded. How many cards do you know of that were submitted three times to three different grading services all having the same results? Most cards do not go through that level of scrutiny.

I am not dancing at all. After I noticed Scott go against his word again, and dredged up this card, I contacted Wayne. I never made excuses for what I did.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

edited