On summits and wrinkles and math
01/25/07 00:13 PersonalGeneral Yammering
So I'm going to get together tomorrow night with some
collectors who want to discuss some of the "issues"
that have polluted the hobby message boards over the
last two months. The "issues" essentially amount to
this:
There are people who fraudulently alter trading cards with the intent of deceiving card collectors into thinking that they're getting a nice card that has lived through history in nicer condition than it really has.
There are people who like to buy cards who have until recently found that they are either too smart to have the wool pulled over their eyes, or depend on grading companies to do the work.
It seems that the latter is just realizing the degree to which the former exists.
Now, they're struggling to figure out exactly how much fraud they're willing to accept.
And they're probably also trying to square in their minds the dollars that they've spent on their collections.
The reality is this: the hobby has decided to value higher-grade cards at a premium. The logic behind this is that the cards have managed to survive in magnificent shape, and as such, are more scarce and more valuable than the same card with, say, a wrinkle across it.
The other reality is this: it is entirely possible - and unbelievably common - for people to use common household items to alter the condition of a card in such a way that it appears to be in better condition than it really is. As a result of doing this, people can dupe unsuspecting buyers into thinking they're getting something better than they really are. And if they can manage to slip their cards past a grading company - and many do - then the plastic slab becomes a license to steal.
The other other reality is this: it sounds simpler than it really is. It sounds very black and white. But consider the following:
* If the degree to which this is a problem is really brought to light, does it become an indictment of the competence of any grading company?
* If it does, what happens to the people who have invested hundreds of thousands - maybe even millions - of dollars in high-grade cards?
* And what happens to the dealers who have thousands and thousands of cards in inventory?
* And what happens to the auction houses who make a living selling this stuff?
* And what happens to the hobby - which is now driven by internet sales that are facilitated by third-party grading - if collectors lose confidence in the grading companies?
And don't think this is just a "high grade" issue, either. While the incentive to turn a 6 into an 8 represents the greatest financial upside (and potentially is the easiest alteration to make), the 6 may turn into a 7 instead. Or the "doctor" make take a wrinkle or crease out of a nice 4 or 5, and the card turns into a 5 or 6 due to some other issue. Or a scarce card is turned from a 1MK to a 3, as evidenced by a high-profile card that was rejected by my client Robert Edward Auctions and later found its way into a different auction.
And don't think this is just a "graded card" issue, either. Because the cards that are poorly altered are rejected for grading, and remain raw. And some of the old-school, super-knowledgeable collectors out there would be amazed at how many of these bad cards wind up in their collections because they really look pretty good.
Which leaves us here. A few guys are going to get together and try to make heads or tails of the situation, and try to figure out where to go from here.
My prediction? There will be good ideas kicked around, about hobby regulation, trade associations, codes of ethics, et cetera. But when the rubber hits the road, when a thief sees an opportunity to steal, and when a collector sees a card that they need, dollars will exchange hands and everyone will look the other way.
I've done it myself. Do I think I have altered cards in my collection? Of course I do. Wanna see some? Look here. It's an entire collection of moderately high-grade cards that were issued to CHILDREN inside packs of CHEWING GUM, almost 70 years ago. The cards were likely passed through two generations and never withstood so much as a corner ding? Puh-leeze. I'd be willing to accept the possibility that SOME of my cards lasted this way, but all 20-something of the Near Mint or better cards in the set? Not on your life.
A little closer to home (for you and not me), consider the most popular prewar set: T206.
Ever open a pack of 1980 Topps cards? You get a bunch of off-center cards, some corner dings, maybe a factory wrinkle. Right out of the pack, most of the cards are 7s.
What do you think it was like in 1909? When nobody cared about condition? When nobody cared about print registration, centering, rough cuts, or wrinkles? When the cards - which were primarily "stiffeners" that were designed to keep cigarettes from breaking or bending in a pack - were pressed up against loose shards of tobacco, eventually taken out of the pack by hand and delivered to some young collector?
Am I to believe that somehow a T206 card managed to make it INTO the pack of cigarettes in Near Mint condition? And then once it was IN the pack, it wasn't jostled or bent or crushed or folded or stained, for the entire time it was in the pack, being transported from factory to store to smoker to home?
And then it lasted in the collection of some adolescent turn-of-the-century boy who was smart enough to preserve the cards, never look at them, never expose them to sun, never drop them, fold them, touch them with dirty hands, wrinkle them, ding them, store them near something harmful.
And then the cards were passed to another generation, who treated them the same way.
And then probably another generation. And THAT generation discovered grading, and submitted the card to a grading company.
And through all that, the card somehow remained in Near Mint condition.
Impossible, right? I mean, when I think about it, I stop at the damn FACTORY, and say "no way they came out of the factory in that shape."
And yet the PSA pop reports would indicate that this has happened more than SIX THOUSAND TIMES. 6,176, in fact, which is the number of cards they've graded 7 or better. Not counting the qualifiers. That's almost 9% of all the T206 cards they've graded.
For the heck of it, I figured I'd take a look at other sets - similar sets, with similar stock, distributed a similar way - to see what percentage of those cards graded 7 or better by PSA. Here's what I found:
T205: 6.5%
E92 Crofts Cocoa: 0%
T207: 7.7%
T213 Type 2: 0%
T216 People's Tobacco: 0%
T214 Victory Tobacco: 0%
It seems odd to me that the card set that's most widely collected in the prewar arena, that has the highest number - BY FAR - of graded cards, that has a litany of people collecting graded sets in all conditions, happens to have the highest percentage of cards graded NMT or better.
Is it some anomaly? Some weird fluke that has resulted in a higher percentage of turn-of-the-century collectors taking better care of their T206 cards, despite probably not knowing the difference between a T206 and a T213?
Or is it because there are so many collectors of the most popular prewar set that there's more of an incentive for fraudulent behavior on the part of card doctors who can generate more aggressive bidding on a high-grade T206 common than they can on a high-grade T213?
So I really hope to see progress made, some monumental conclusion drawn. More likely, though, I'll be thrilled to meet some guys I've only spoken with online, share some stories, agree that card doctoring sucks, and then bid against them in the next auction for high-grade '38 Goudeys.
There are people who fraudulently alter trading cards with the intent of deceiving card collectors into thinking that they're getting a nice card that has lived through history in nicer condition than it really has.
There are people who like to buy cards who have until recently found that they are either too smart to have the wool pulled over their eyes, or depend on grading companies to do the work.
It seems that the latter is just realizing the degree to which the former exists.
Now, they're struggling to figure out exactly how much fraud they're willing to accept.
And they're probably also trying to square in their minds the dollars that they've spent on their collections.
The reality is this: the hobby has decided to value higher-grade cards at a premium. The logic behind this is that the cards have managed to survive in magnificent shape, and as such, are more scarce and more valuable than the same card with, say, a wrinkle across it.
The other reality is this: it is entirely possible - and unbelievably common - for people to use common household items to alter the condition of a card in such a way that it appears to be in better condition than it really is. As a result of doing this, people can dupe unsuspecting buyers into thinking they're getting something better than they really are. And if they can manage to slip their cards past a grading company - and many do - then the plastic slab becomes a license to steal.
The other other reality is this: it sounds simpler than it really is. It sounds very black and white. But consider the following:
* If the degree to which this is a problem is really brought to light, does it become an indictment of the competence of any grading company?
* If it does, what happens to the people who have invested hundreds of thousands - maybe even millions - of dollars in high-grade cards?
* And what happens to the dealers who have thousands and thousands of cards in inventory?
* And what happens to the auction houses who make a living selling this stuff?
* And what happens to the hobby - which is now driven by internet sales that are facilitated by third-party grading - if collectors lose confidence in the grading companies?
And don't think this is just a "high grade" issue, either. While the incentive to turn a 6 into an 8 represents the greatest financial upside (and potentially is the easiest alteration to make), the 6 may turn into a 7 instead. Or the "doctor" make take a wrinkle or crease out of a nice 4 or 5, and the card turns into a 5 or 6 due to some other issue. Or a scarce card is turned from a 1MK to a 3, as evidenced by a high-profile card that was rejected by my client Robert Edward Auctions and later found its way into a different auction.
And don't think this is just a "graded card" issue, either. Because the cards that are poorly altered are rejected for grading, and remain raw. And some of the old-school, super-knowledgeable collectors out there would be amazed at how many of these bad cards wind up in their collections because they really look pretty good.
Which leaves us here. A few guys are going to get together and try to make heads or tails of the situation, and try to figure out where to go from here.
My prediction? There will be good ideas kicked around, about hobby regulation, trade associations, codes of ethics, et cetera. But when the rubber hits the road, when a thief sees an opportunity to steal, and when a collector sees a card that they need, dollars will exchange hands and everyone will look the other way.
I've done it myself. Do I think I have altered cards in my collection? Of course I do. Wanna see some? Look here. It's an entire collection of moderately high-grade cards that were issued to CHILDREN inside packs of CHEWING GUM, almost 70 years ago. The cards were likely passed through two generations and never withstood so much as a corner ding? Puh-leeze. I'd be willing to accept the possibility that SOME of my cards lasted this way, but all 20-something of the Near Mint or better cards in the set? Not on your life.
A little closer to home (for you and not me), consider the most popular prewar set: T206.
Ever open a pack of 1980 Topps cards? You get a bunch of off-center cards, some corner dings, maybe a factory wrinkle. Right out of the pack, most of the cards are 7s.
What do you think it was like in 1909? When nobody cared about condition? When nobody cared about print registration, centering, rough cuts, or wrinkles? When the cards - which were primarily "stiffeners" that were designed to keep cigarettes from breaking or bending in a pack - were pressed up against loose shards of tobacco, eventually taken out of the pack by hand and delivered to some young collector?
Am I to believe that somehow a T206 card managed to make it INTO the pack of cigarettes in Near Mint condition? And then once it was IN the pack, it wasn't jostled or bent or crushed or folded or stained, for the entire time it was in the pack, being transported from factory to store to smoker to home?
And then it lasted in the collection of some adolescent turn-of-the-century boy who was smart enough to preserve the cards, never look at them, never expose them to sun, never drop them, fold them, touch them with dirty hands, wrinkle them, ding them, store them near something harmful.
And then the cards were passed to another generation, who treated them the same way.
And then probably another generation. And THAT generation discovered grading, and submitted the card to a grading company.
And through all that, the card somehow remained in Near Mint condition.
Impossible, right? I mean, when I think about it, I stop at the damn FACTORY, and say "no way they came out of the factory in that shape."
And yet the PSA pop reports would indicate that this has happened more than SIX THOUSAND TIMES. 6,176, in fact, which is the number of cards they've graded 7 or better. Not counting the qualifiers. That's almost 9% of all the T206 cards they've graded.
For the heck of it, I figured I'd take a look at other sets - similar sets, with similar stock, distributed a similar way - to see what percentage of those cards graded 7 or better by PSA. Here's what I found:
T205: 6.5%
E92 Crofts Cocoa: 0%
T207: 7.7%
T213 Type 2: 0%
T216 People's Tobacco: 0%
T214 Victory Tobacco: 0%
It seems odd to me that the card set that's most widely collected in the prewar arena, that has the highest number - BY FAR - of graded cards, that has a litany of people collecting graded sets in all conditions, happens to have the highest percentage of cards graded NMT or better.
Is it some anomaly? Some weird fluke that has resulted in a higher percentage of turn-of-the-century collectors taking better care of their T206 cards, despite probably not knowing the difference between a T206 and a T213?
Or is it because there are so many collectors of the most popular prewar set that there's more of an incentive for fraudulent behavior on the part of card doctors who can generate more aggressive bidding on a high-grade T206 common than they can on a high-grade T213?
So I really hope to see progress made, some monumental conclusion drawn. More likely, though, I'll be thrilled to meet some guys I've only spoken with online, share some stories, agree that card doctoring sucks, and then bid against them in the next auction for high-grade '38 Goudeys.
|