Looks like PWCC and Ebay have parted ways.

https://sportscollectorsdigest...bidding-sports-cards

Of course the Washington Post story that broke in 2019

https://www.washingtonpost.com...bi-is-investigating/


Does anyone REALLY believe that Ebay would sever this revenue flow if the evidence wasn't mounting?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mykdude,

Interesting paragraph in the WP story

"There are even specific ways that cards are supposed to be cleaned if they are expected to earn a grade. Soaking a card in distilled water and allowing it to air-dry to remove stains is generally permitted, collectors and graders said, but using any sort of cleaning agent, such as bleach, is a violation, even if it does not appear to materially damage the card."

I have never heard of this, seems like soaking a card in ANY water would screw it up. Anyone ever try it?

There have been many discussions and a couple of heated arguments on Card Talk about subjects involving card repair, card trimming, grading services passing repaired and/or trimmed cards, along with the FBI probe started a couple of years ago and maybe still in progress since no findings has come out of it yet. Refer to the "Card Trimming Thread?" started in June 2019 for one section that mentions it, but there are others. Because most of the attention is centered on sports cards, check Blowout forums if you want a more detailed timeline and photos.

eBay cleaning house on PWCC means that something must be obvious to them, but its probably something that eBay feels has taken advantage of its platform. So PWCC moves to its own marketplace and it will go on.

These are eye opening stories, but the eyes have already been opened and nothing has changed yet. I'm tired of hearing about horrible scandals every few years, only to have it all die down and continue as if nothing happened. If you are playing in a rigged poker game, where you KNOW everyone is cheating except you, you don't wait for the cops to come in and shut it down. You get up from the table and find another game.

I don't have to be concerned because this was never my game, but collectors of expensive cards, even the graded expensive cards, should be worried. Big money makes corruption run rampant.

No, I have never thought of soaking cards in anything. The most I've done is rub a nylon stocking over a card face to remove gum residue or dull the gloss for a better signature. However card repair has probably gotten like art restoration and there are experts out there who have tried all sorts of advancing techniques, if it means getting a better appearance or grade that makes more money. I wouldn't doubt they try everything. So if your cards smell of bleach, consider it another red flag.

I keep getting emails from PWCC, but haven't checked out their new site. Haven't bought from them in a long time.

The rules around what is acceptable to do to a card just baffle me. I've never tried to put distilled water on a card, but I've scraped junk off of old cards before -- usually with a fingernail. Not sure if a fingernail is an acceptable form of card cleaning or not.

Anyway back to PWCC -- given the volume of product they are moving it probably makes business sense to move their platform if they think they can move their client base with them.

Of course they could want to get away from eBay due to the accusations against them, but who knows.

After all the furore about Card trimming shill bidding etc collectors should have enough information about PWCC to make their own mind up .
If they want to keep on dealing with a suspect company do so but dont moan about it when they get burned
Will they have any protection etc
My opinion only is with the ammount of money involved if they stay with PWCC they are involved in PWCC s dealings and deserve all they get and should also be investigated.

PSA guilty or victim of circumstance?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4louSPP3iE

Interesting video, but I was hoping for more analysis.

I totally agree that serial numbered cards should be cataloged and if they are resubmitted that should be caught.

But for other resubs I'm not so sure. Obviously people have caught issues, but they are looking in a targeted area -- cards bought/sold by specific people.

In order to have impartial grading the grader shouldn't know anything about who submitted a card. I'm not sure I could expect someone to 'catch' a card being resubmitted based on fiber patterns on the edges.

The video talks about PSA grading 30 million cards as a badge that they should know what they are doing, but I just see that as a place processing at a volume that may not have the time/resources that would be required to look for the specific signs that these guys on blowout found. The PSA video shown doesn't exactly show a high tech operation. . .

Also. . . who determines what level of 'restoration' is ok? At what point is it PSA's duty to detect it (or at what point is it even possible).

There are obvious things, right -- like serial numbers should be tracked. And if ink is retouched or holes are filled in that is obviously bad and you would hope that would be caught.

But, for example, I fail to see why pressing a card is a problem. I understand that pressing can improve the grade of the card, but I personally don't see how flattening something out is altering it. Also it is widely accepted in comic book grading. I actually think if it was possible to flatten creases out of cards everyone would want to do that. . .

In the examples that were given pressing wasn't listed as something PSA looks for.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
PSA guilty or victim of circumstance?

Unless someone like the FBI can come up with correspondence or tape to show that PSA was in on any deal, they can just claim incompetence in passing repaired and altered cards. While that's not good for their reputation, its better than being involved in a criminal scheme.

Also not mentioned in that video is that PSA works under its own professional tolerance when it comes to measuring cards. The printing and cutting on vintage cards in particular was often bad, which is why you have so many off centered cards with lopsided borders top to bottom or side to side. If a formerly graded card is trimmed and resubmitted, but only expertly trimmed by a very little bit, it could fall within PSA's tolerance for the card measurement and therefore be undetected by them. It would then get an improved grade. At least that's story I remember hearing the last time this subject was broached here.

The bigger actors are certain high volume buyers/sellers trading with PWCC whose names have been reported in other places as allegedly buying, repairing, grading and reselling the same cards. Should PWCC have noticed this activity on the same cards? Should PSA have noticed this activity from the same clients? Should someone have at least been recording serial numbers if they had them? All good questions, but you have to prove that its collusion and not just overwhelmed systems with inexperienced personnel trying not to reject too many cards from very good clients because its bad for business.

So far this last round of accusations has been going on for at least two years and I don't think anyone has officially proven anything. That isn't the same as not knowing "something stinks in Demark" , but knowing and proving are two different things and these points are all just a rehash of what has been said before.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

Unless someone like the FBI can come up with correspondence or tape to show that PSA was in on any deal, they can just claim incompetence in passing repaired and altered cards. While that's not good for their reputation, its better than being involved in a criminal scheme.

I guess but as we have discussed before the ability to catch altered cards was PSA's claim from the very beginning. If they were maintaining their integrity the FBI would go to them for answers not investigation.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Also not mentioned in that video is that PSA works under its own professional tolerance when it comes to measuring cards. The printing and cutting on vintage cards in particular was often bad, which is why you have so many off centered cards with lopsided borders top to bottom or side to side. If a formerly graded card is trimmed and resubmitted, but only expertly trimmed by a very little bit, it could fall within PSA's tolerance for the card measurement and therefore be undetected by them. It would then get an improved grade. At least that's story I remember hearing the last time this subject was broached here.

Ok I might be a bit ignorant on this subject but does a miscut card generally equal a card of a different measurement? If you shorten the right border it generally means you increase the left.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
The bigger actors are certain high volume buyers/sellers trading with PWCC whose names have been reported in other places as allegedly buying, repairing, grading and reselling the same cards. Should PWCC have noticed this activity on the same cards? Should PSA have noticed this activity from the same clients? Should someone have at least been recording serial numbers if they had them? All good questions, but you have to prove that its collusion and not just overwhelmed systems with inexperienced personnel trying not to reject too many cards from very good clients because its bad for business.

I think my problem is that what I see in the look up features of PSA, JSA and Beckett is that it is pathetically short of useful information. Something like "Photo 5x7" leaves a massively wide open field. We have long past the stage where the service should not provide a photograph of the item no matter what level of grading/authentication is applied for. This is one area where Autograph COA has moved ahead.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
So far this last round of accusations has been going on for at least two years and I don't think anyone has officially proven anything. That isn't the same as not knowing "something stinks in Demark" , but knowing and proving are two different things and these points are all just a rehash of what has been said before.

Ok...now you sound like Tom Cruise in a Few Good Men....I like it!

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Also not mentioned in that video is that PSA works under its own professional tolerance when it comes to measuring cards. The printing and cutting on vintage cards in particular was often bad, which is why you have so many off centered cards with lopsided borders top to bottom or side to side. If a formerly graded card is trimmed and resubmitted, but only expertly trimmed by a very little bit, it could fall within PSA's tolerance for the card measurement and therefore be undetected by them. It would then get an improved grade. At least that's story I remember hearing the last time this subject was broached here.

Ok I might be a bit ignorant on this subject but does a miscut card generally equal a card of a different measurement? If you shorten the right border it generally means you increase the left.

________________________________________________
posted June 09, 2019 11:00 AM
An interesting twist is starting to emerge from this case and the statements that are being made by PSA. It's early in the investigation and no definitive remarks have been made, but I was struck by the general tone in the PSA comments that are appearing in the various forum posts.

What PSA seems to be saying is that cards, I would think particularly older cards, were not of uniform size and that a certain tolerance in the size of a trading card can be expected. To be sure quality control of older cards was not good and the printing and cutting process had problems that made certain sets very prone to systemic problems. Still I can't recall rampant problems with the size. I had and still have sports cards in boxes and if there were differences in the size of the cuts, either there weren't many or the difference was too small to notice. I didn't know it was a problem that required a built in tolerance for both the standard size and the smaller tobacco card sized cards.

In any event, this might be the argument made for the passing and grading of trimmed cards by PSA. Yes, we noticed the size difference, but it was within the tolerance of a legitimate smaller cut for that issue, so it was deemed to be in the original condition.

The problem with that argument, even if you accept it, is that it calls everything into question. It means that they are not grading for the true size, but for an acceptable range of sizes within their own rules of tolerance. As long as a good professional trimmer knows to stay within that range, the card won't be flagged as trimmed.

I've never heard of the tolerance argument, but of course grading is so subjective at the higher levels, it's all a matter of opinion and not even the same opinion. If nothing else this case as it matures should be an eye opener into the graded card world and I'm sure there will be a lot more to say about it when actual facts start to come out. For now this is just my own interpretation of recent comments.
____________________________________________

So the above is one of my own posts exactly on this subject that I left in June 2019 in another thread. I tried to look at PSA grading regulations tonight, but couldn't see anything specific to card measurement guidelines.

Yes you are correct mykdude, a miscut card refers generally to the centering of borders, not the size of the card, which should be uniform for all like cards in the set. But vintage cards had poor quality control and PSA was saying that slightly smaller or slightly larger vintage cards were not uncommon and they had a accepted tolerance when grading for slightly different sizes that were still legitimate. Personally I didn't buy that argument too much, as my post reflected.

Now if a vintage card has instead of the perfect 50/50 all around centering, borders of 60/40, that is quite noticeable and the grade comes down. If the borders are 70/30, that is bad and the grade really takes gets a deduction. You can't trim a 70/30 into a 50/50 without making the card smaller. However an expert can trim the 70 side border just a little to bring it closer to the 30 side border and it will look better. The card will register smaller, but it may be within this smaller card tolerance that PSA was accepting at the time. With expensive older cards the grades can be much lower and still collectible. Taking a graded 3 and turning it into a graded 4 by just a bit of trimming may be a difference of hundreds of dollars.

Hope that answers your question, because its too long as it is. And I'd rather be Jack Nicholson, "You can't handle the truth".

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Raven,

Still, in the end SOMEONE caught it and it wasn't PSA. The claimed experts in the field.

I would like to know what PSA's internal documentation looks like because many of these were caught through photo matching.

A couple years ago I submitted some TTM's for authentication through JSA and I asked if he takes photos for their database. He just laughed at me.

quote:

Originally posted by webjon:

The video talks about PSA grading 30 million cards as a badge that they should know what they are doing, but I just see that as a place processing at a volume that may not have the time/resources that would be required to look for the specific signs that these guys on blowout found. The PSA video shown doesn't exactly show a high tech operation. . .

Right! That is all I am seeing from every grading/authentication service right now. Too overwhelmed to effectively do their job.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
Still, in the end SOMEONE caught it and it wasn't PSA. The claimed experts in the field.

I would like to know what PSA's internal documentation looks like because many of these were caught through photo matching.

A couple years ago I submitted some TTM's for authentication through JSA and I asked if he takes photos for their database. He just laughed at me.

True. People hold the grading companies up as if they are infallible, but clearly they aren't.

They should not only scan every card, but I think they should post every card online. That would make it easier to detect stuff like this.

Unfortunately like normal I don't think anything will change -- they can't even keep track of a serial number.

I would definitely like to see how they respond to not detecting that a pinhole that was filled in. They can't detect that level of alteration so obviously there is a big problem.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
A couple years ago I submitted some TTM's for authentication through JSA and I asked if he takes photos for their database. He just laughed at me.

Well when your talking about a service that processes literally millions of cards, a place like PSA isn't going to retain a photo record of every one sent in for grading.

On the other hand, cards that are sent in for signature authentication, whether it be by PSA, JSA, or BGS or anyone else probably do have a go-to database and maybe should be retaining photos of every signature they certify, if only for comparison purposes.

Don't forget, if you think there are holes in the grading process that we are discussing, you can multiply that ten times over for the holes in the third-party authentication business, which is performed by most of the same companies for a different fee.

To say that I am very skeptical of third-party experts is putting it mildly. They look for comparisons to known documented autographs. That's it. It's a judgement call that any collector could research themselves and be just as close to the call of the experts. Fake signatures can look good and genuine signatures can look bad and only auto pens and stamps should never get passed by anyone. Years ago I saw a stamped auto in a slab verified by a company that has since gone out of business.

Anyway if they can't grade them right, don't think that the autograph verification is any better. But that's the system that has been established and is relied upon, until the next scandal hits.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Well when your talking about a service that processes literally millions of cards, a place like PSA isn't going to retain a photo record of every one sent in for grading.

I guess I don't really understand why not? True when these companies started memory and drive space were costly but easily over the past 10 or 15 years that has not been a problem.

They already populate a database with information on each card, adding a photo shouldn't be that big of an issue. With as much money they are making they should also have mapping software especially for cards made before 1980.

COMC scans, stores, catalogs and hosts millions of images.

There is no reason PSA can't do the same.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Well when your talking about a service that processes literally millions of cards, a place like PSA isn't going to retain a photo record of every one sent in for grading.

I guess I don't really understand why not? True when these companies started memory and drive space were costly but easily over the past 10 or 15 years that has not been a problem.

They already populate a database with information on each card, adding a photo shouldn't be that big of an issue. With as much money they are making they should also have mapping software especially for cards made before 1980.

Well if you don't want to buy the "can't do it" answer, how about this one? If they don't keep photos, they can't be used against them.

In this day and age all these emails, twitters, IMs and pictures come back to bite everyone. Businesses don't really want to be transparent, no matter how many times Mark Zuckerberg says it. And to be fair, nobody on the regulatory side wants to be transparent either. Transparency is a myth to cover up all that's hidden.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Well if you don't want to buy the "can't do it" answer, how about this one? If they don't keep photos, they can't be used against them.

In this day and age all these emails, twitters, IMs and pictures come back to bite everyone. Businesses don't really want to be transparent, no matter how many times Mark Zuckerberg says it. And to be fair, nobody on the regulatory side wants to be transparent either. Transparency is a myth to cover up all that's hidden.

Haha! Can't argue with that.

But at least facebook is STILL free! Sort of.

So $8 a signature.


https://abovethelaw.com/2022/0...gUjZl68KtTHzz14yCl0U

Giannis Antetokounmpo is a big deal in the NBA. He came from Greek basketball and was signed by the Milwaukee Bucks in 2013. I think he's still with that team now.

So apparently back when Leaf signed him up for 1000 autographs and his image at $8 each back in 2013, probably a quick $8,000 may have seemed like a good payday for someone who was an unproven rookie.

He, or his representatives, are claiming they thought the deal was just for a one-year term and Leaf is still selling him all this time. So it depends on what the signed contract said.

I can easily believe that Leaf is playing fast and loose, because its happened with them before. But I also know that young players think a little money is a lot and may not care what they are signing. Leaf will probably cease and desist in the face of a lawsuit and that will end it.