Alteration vs. Conservation Defined

[Brent Huigens]

PWCC will soon publish our Marketplace Tenets, which describes the rules of engagement for transacting on the PWCC Marketplace and the commitments and responsibilities of all parties involved. Among other things, the Tenets will describe what cards we will allow to be sold on our marketplace and will draw a distinction between cards that were altered and cards that were conserved. Cards that are proven altered through physical evidence are not allowed to be sold, while cards that are proven conserved are indeed allowed to be sold.

In an effort to define an enforceable PWCC policy, we want to open up the dialogue with the community to allow for feedback before our official Tenets are published. Acceptable forms of conservation exist in all collectibles markets, ranging from coins to comics to fine art, and we feel it’s time the trading card market better defines a stance on what is acceptable conservation. The following is a draft of our current understanding of majority opinion, and this is subject to edit.

Conservation. PWCC believes conservation, as defined, to be healthy, sustainable, and supportive of the marketplace and the investors and collectors who participate. Assets that have been conserved can be sold on the PWCC Marketplace.

Conservation is defined as an act which returns an asset closer to its as-manufactured condition but does not otherwise enhance or artificially distance the asset beyond the as-manufactured status. An act which removes a foreign substance from an asset and does so in a way which doesn’t otherwise alter the condition of the as-manufactured product is usually considered acceptable and generally renders the asset worthy of professional grading. Dirt, glue, writing, wax and other foreign substances can be removed from an asset and the result is considered acceptable conservation, so long as the professional Third-Party Authenticators agree the asset is void of unnatural aspects induced as a result of the conservation. Lying flat a warped or bent region of a card (i.e. in a screw down holder), so long as it doesn’t disrupt the card’s natural properties, is generally considered acceptable conservation, whereas pressing a card and thereby changing its as-manufactured properties (i.e. thickness of the card stock) is generally not acceptable and may render the card altered. Laying flat a nonplanar corner, crease, or edge, so long as the card stock is not pressed to a state of artificial thickness, is typically acceptable so long as no other unnatural change to the as-manufactured card stock is discernable.

Alteration. PWCC believes alteration, as defined, is damaging to the marketplace. Altered assets cannot be sold on the PWCC Marketplace unless this detail is disclosed during the sale.

Alteration includes any act which meaningfully renders a change to the as-manufactured qualities of the asset, outside of the normal wear and deterioration inherent to circulation. Any purposeful material addition or material removal to or from the as-manufactured asset, outside of normal wear or environmental degradation, is generally considered an alteration. Trimming, recoloring, autograph retracing, rebuilding of corners or other surfaces, swapping of patches, or any other action which distances a card from its as-manufactured attributes is considered an act of alteration. Altered cards which are stated as such in a transparent nature are permitted for sale on the Marketplace.

Alteration is only ever officially determined by the presence of physical evidence. Speculation is not considered evidence. Evidence of alteration can be determined in two different ways; either in technical review by a reputable Third-Party Authenticator, or when digital content asserts beyond a reasonable doubt that an alteration took place (i.e. before and after photos of trimming, recoloring, etc).

Your comments and feedback would be appreciated. The best way to share feedback is to send me a direct email at betsy@pwccmarketplace.com. I will come back onto this thread to gather feedback periodically, but won't be responding to comments actively. Thank you!

[MetsBaseball1973]

What is your policy on knowingly and publicly advertising record breaking sales where the transaction did not complete?

[swarmee]

So maybe I don't understand, but where would each of these fall in your new definitions:

1) Pre-war soaking from a scrapbook with glue paste using only distilled water
2) Soaking stains out of any card using Dick Towle's solution
3) Buffing out modern chrome scratches using Meguiar's wax as detailed by dictoresno on blowout
4) Spooning out creases on cards
5) Erasing pencil marks
6) Soaking for the express reason of removing creases

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by MetsBaseball1973

What is your policy on knowingly and publicly advertising record breaking sales where the transaction did not complete?

Michael -- can you elaborate on whether you think this has happened as clearly no response is going to be forthcoming?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by brent huigens

Altered assets cannot be sold on the pwcc marketplace unless this detail is disclosed during the sale.

lolololol

[felada]

Seems it would just be easier to disclose what was actually done to a card than create a whole bunch of jargon to justify it in the least transparent way possible.

[felada]

I’m sure this new policy will be enforced with equal rigor as the no bid retraction policy from a few years back

[calvindog]

The reason I'm laughing can be found in these threads which make a total mockery of Brent's "Marketplace Tenets" on issues of alterations and disclosure of alterations. His refusal to acknowledge the 600 pound gorilla on his shoulders is almost Mastronian.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1290614

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1292005

Suffice it to say, this isn't going to end well for him.

[conor912]

Assets and tenets and vaults, oh my!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

The reason I'm laughing can be found in these threads which make a total mockery of Brent's "Marketplace Tenets" on issues of alterations and disclosure of alterations. His refusal to acknowledge the 600 pound gorilla on his shoulders is almost Mastronian.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1290614

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1292005

Suffice it to say, this isn't going to end well for him.

Just laughing remembering Doug Allen's Code of Conduct.

[SAllen2556]

Originally Posted by Brent Huigens

Alteration is only ever officially determined by the presence of physical evidence. Speculation is not considered evidence.

We the king and queen of High Commission evermore from this date forward hereby proclaim that the law of the land shall officially be: "It's Only Cheating If You Get Caught".

Attention oh weary card doctor: sharpen your tools! Your skills from this date henceforth shall be in demand as never before!

It seems to me that what you're advocating is, if you can alter a card and get away with it, it's fine. And, if you alter a card and get away with it, we're going to call that (wink, wink) "conservation". If we catch you, it's still fine, but we're going to (unless the card would net us a very high commission) label your card as altered.

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by Brent Huigens

Conservation is defined as an act which returns an asset closer to its as-manufactured condition but does not otherwise enhance or artificially distance the asset beyond the as-manufactured status.

In plain English this translates to: conservation is any action/procedure performed on a card to improve its appearance provided that the card doesn't look better than the day it was made.

In plain English, your definition of conservation is total BS!

In my opinion, your definition is close to what the definition of alteration should be. In your language: alteration is defined as an act which returns an asset closer to its as-manufactured condition. In plain English, alteration is defined as an act which improves the appearance of a card.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Happier than ever that I collect 2s and 3s or worse that show obvious signs of wear.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Republicaninmass]

Another long time scammer connected with Brent. I guess they must be targeting him. There are no such things as coincidences. Wondering when the Forbes article comes out?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Johnny630]

Waiting for the hammer to fall.....I’ve been selling most all into this market when it crashes it’s gonna crash hard....real hard. The sad part is many good guy collectors will also see their cards drop big time. I hope the good guys do not get hurt, we will be collateral damage. The time to sell is now.
:-)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Per Blowout the 52 Mantle asset has not been paid for yet by the winning investor.

[barrysloate]

Agree with Corey 100% that nearly all high end T-206's have been tampered with, and likewise that nobody cares as long as they are numerically slabbed.

It's possible that the original intent of third party grading was to objectively grade and authenticate cards, but the way the industry evolved their job now is to make cards as marketable as possible, and to mint money for their clients.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Agree with Corey 100% that nearly all high end T-206's have been tampered with, and likewise that nobody cares as long as they are numerically slabbed.

It's possible that the original intent of third party grading was to objectively grade and authenticate cards, but the way the industry evolved their job now is to make cards as marketable as possible, and to mint money for their clients.

I don't think that's entirely fair. PSA is for the most part grading very strictly -- higher grades obviously would bring in a lot more money -- and they reject tons of cards which if slabbed would make lots of money. What I think you're missing is that card doctors are very very good, or some of them, and without a crime lab and without the before and after photos that make alteration obvious that you see on Blowout, it's pretty tough sometimes to tell.