LeBron Exquisite /99 - altered & damaged

[buybuymj]

I don't have any sale record with a title of BGS graded in 2005. I know for a fact that BGS graded Exquisite cards in 2005 but only under RCR. They tried, but their holder for thick card was not ready yet and that's why you see words of "RCR ONLY! This card may not be BGS-encapsulated" like the following one. I believe they started to encapsulate them in 2006 with Beckett serial number, so their pop report would be correct.

[rogermaris]

Originally Posted by UltimateDeron

I just have to chime in and say I’m truly surprised there aren’t more people simply comparing the before and after pictures of the black left and right edges. It’s pretty clear from those 2 images that the card has been trimmed. That’s not even bringing up the bottom edge, where it does look short and unfortunately trimmed as well.

I was about to post the same thing. The edges on the high-res scan of the BGS 9.5 show no signs of chipping despite there being significant chipping on the original raw scan. Also, did anyone actually watch the video from PWCC? They give very clear closeups of the edges from multiple angles. I went through it frame by frame and couldn't find any evidence of chipping.

Combined with everything else we now know about this card, I think any doubts about whether or not it's altered can be put to rest at this point...

[bmf]

Originally Posted by cowboyzqna

With a purchase this big you would hope so... But who spends that kind of money without doing their due diligence??! Have to wonder if the person who purchased knows that its altered and simply wants to sell for a profit to some un suspecting victim down the line.


A bgs 8 is worth so much more than an altered card that someone paid Beckett to slab as a 9.5.


I am more mad at this than I should be lol. Telling people at work who dont care about the hobby all about it tonight.


Its bs. Pure and simple. What once was iconic is now junk. And that is just sad!!

maybe so. but maybe the buyer doesn’t care that it was altered. didn’t nat turner talk about how he didn’t care that certain cards he has in his pc are altered because they are still important and iconic? I think it was on an episode of cardboard chronicles. and josh the host seemed to agree with him. it bothers many of us but there may be collectors who don’t care. i personally would be trying to get a refund since the trim wasn’t disclosed/known.

[bmf]

Originally Posted by usmc03vet

Cool...then the card is legitimate, graded 9.5/10. End of discussion.

joe you still here? still think this? ^^^^

[rogermaris]

Originally Posted by usmc03vet

how could you give these guy's the stamp of approval to move forward on purchasing the card?

Doesn't seem like you should have given an opinion at all if you did not have all of the information necessary to form an adequate one.

Keep in mind the only thing that can be proven are alterations themselves. Trying to prove the absence of alterations with 100% certainty is impossible, the same way it's impossible to be certain of any negative claim. You can only prove positives, not negatives.

People asking 312 for advice should know this. Soliciting him for his free opinion on something no one can be certain of and then putting the burden of responsibility on him when he's wrong is unfair and unreasonable. If you buy an altered card, it's your responsibility. If you want to hold someone else responsible, contact the person who sold it to you or the company that was paid to grade it.

There are a handful of people in this hobby working very hard to keep it clean. They act in good faith and don't charge for their services. Punishing them when they make a mistake is the easiest way to drive them out of the hobby.

[bmf]

Originally Posted by rogermaris

There are a handful of people in this hobby working very hard to keep it clean. They act in good faith and don't charge for their services. Punishing them when they make a mistake is the easiest way to drive them out of the hobby.

amen ^^^^^

[rogermaris]

*dupe*

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by buybuymj

I don't have any sale record with a title of BGS graded in 2005. I know for a fact that BGS graded Exquisite cards in 2005 but only under RCR. They tried, but their holder for thick card was not ready yet and that's why you see words of "RCR ONLY! This card may not be BGS-encapsulated" like the following one. I believe they started to encapsulate them in 2006 with Beckett serial number, so their pop report would be correct.

Thank you. This is the information I was looking for. So BGS must not have started slabbing them until summer 2006.

The only thing left that doesn't jive for me at this point is serf saying he graded it twice and it got an 8 both times. If you believe the PWCC data showing the raw sale on August 6, 2006, then these are the only BGS grades between that sale at the 9.5 being slabbed.

4524354 - Graded 8/15/06. BGS 7.5/10. Subs 9.5/7.5/7.0/8.0.
4573098 - Graded 9/7/06. BGS 8.5/10. Subs 10/8.0/9.5/9.
4656904 - Graded 9/22/06. BGS 9.5/10. Subs 10/9.5/9.5/9.5.
4770016 - Graded 10/26/06. BGS 7.5/10. Subs 10/7.0/9.5/9.5.

So is he talking about *98 and he had it graded on September 7 then did a graded card review and that's why there isn't a new serial number? I can see the November 2, 2006 sale of the second BGS 9.5, so I know that isn't the copy they are talking about.

Given all of the RCRs done from 2004 until they started encapsulating them in 2006, serf may have been referencing an RCR 8 that he received.

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by rogermaris

There are a handful of people in this hobby working very hard to keep it clean. They act in good faith and don't charge for their services. Punishing them when they make a mistake is the easiest way to drive them out of the hobby.

312 is asked for an opinion, provides it, gets it wrong. That's fine. It happens. But it's what happened after that which bothers me.

Did he go to the person who asked him for the opinion and admit his mistake and discuss the new findings? Unclear because 312 won't answer any question, but I think we can all assume the answer is no.

When he posted about the card being trimmed, did he acknowledge the help he had previously provided? No. But he did go back and edit his response in the sale thread.

He didn't even see it fit to share the overlays he did to determine the card was trimmed? Why? I don't know because he won't answer.

312 and the rest of BODA are not beyond reproach. But it's good to see what happens when you ask any questions about one of his jobs.

[pcptrade]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

Thank you. This is the information I was looking for. So BGS must not have started slabbing them until summer 2006.

The only thing left that doesn't jive for me at this point is serf saying he graded it twice and it got an 8 both times. If you believe the PWCC data showing the raw sale on August 6, 2006, then these are the only BGS grades between that sale at the 9.5 being slabbed.

4524354 - Graded 8/15/06. BGS 7.5/10. Subs 9.5/7.5/7.0/8.0.
4573098 - Graded 9/7/06. BGS 8.5/10. Subs 10/8.0/9.5/9.
4656904 - Graded 9/22/06. BGS 9.5/10. Subs 10/9.5/9.5/9.5.
4770016 - Graded 10/26/06. BGS 7.5/10. Subs 10/7.0/9.5/9.5.

So is he talking about *98 and he had it graded on September 7 then did a graded card review and that's why there isn't a new serial number? I can see the November 2, 2006 sale of the second BGS 9.5, so I know that isn't the copy they are talking about.

Given all of the RCRs done from 2004 until they started encapsulating them in 2006, serf may have been referencing an RCR 8 that he received.

PWCC shows the card was sold on Aug 6th. I am assuming that is Serf sold it to someone. There was a BGS 8 (#4481010) graded on July 26th and BGS 8.5 (#4505505) on Aug 2nd. Serf21 said "I graded it before. it was 8. I graded it again and the same thing. I don't trim, so If the buyer could get it in 9.5, good for him"

I am assuming July 26th was first time serf21 got a BGS 8 and Aug 2nd was the second time. When he said "I graded it again and the same thing". I think he is referring 8.5 on Aug 2nd, both time 8's (8.0 and 8.5). This is just my guess.

Whoever bought it from Serf on Aug 6th did something to the card and it got a BGS 9.5 on Nov 14th. It appeared for sale after that and that is when the HK thread was started (Nov 20th). This is just my guess and I could be wrong.

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by pcptrade

PWCC shows the card was sold on Aug 6th. I am assuming that is Serf sold it to someone. There was a BGS 8 (#4481010) graded on July 26th and BGS 8.5 (#4505505) on Aug 2nd. Serf21 said "I graded it before. it was 8. I graded it again and the same thing. I don't trim, so If the buyer could get it in 9.5, good for him"

I am assuming July 26th was first time serf21 got a BGS 8 and Aug 2nd was the second time. When he said "I graded it again and the same thing". I think he is referring 8.5 on Aug 2nd, both time 8's (8.0 and 8.5). This is just my guess.

Whoever bought it from Serf on Aug 6th did something to the card and it got a BGS 9.5 on Nov 14th. It appeared for sale after that and that is when the HK thread was started (Nov 20th). This is just my guess and I could be wrong.

Here's the list again for easy reference.

4473452 - Graded 7/20/06. BGS 9.5/10. Subs 9.5/9.5/9.5/9.0.
4481010 - Graded 7/26/06. BGS 8.0/10. Subs 10/7.5/9.0/9.5.
4505505 - Graded 8/2/06. BGS 8.5/10. Subs 10/8.0/8.5/9.5.
4524354 - Graded 8/15/06. BGS 7.5/10. Subs 9.5/7.5/7.0/8.0.
4573098 - Graded 9/7/06. BGS 8.5/10. Subs 10/8.0/9.5/9.
4656904 - Graded 9/22/06. BGS 9.5/10. Subs 10/9.5/9.5/9.5.
4770016 - Graded 10/26/06. BGS 7.5/10. Subs 10/7.0/9.5/9.5.
4796960 - Graded 11/17/06
4807366 - Index card. Graded 11/14/06.

The only way the August 2 copy is the July 26 copy is if serf received the copy back from BGS on August 3, cracked it, and listed it as a 3 day auction that night. I think it's more likely that he had it RCR as an 8 before they started slabbing them, then he had it slabbed as an 8.0 on July 26. He then would have had to crack it and sell it raw on August 6 without referencing that it was graded previously. I could believe that.

[pcptrade]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

Your question is fair but you’re showing BGS 9 copies when the card in question is a BGS 9.5.

All the 9.5s can be accounted for on the Pop Report and correlated to eBay sales that line up. No 9.5 has been accounted for as sold prior to the date it was graded.

Why would sales of 9s matter other than to obfuscate the entire Beckett Pop Report, which is crystal clear as it relates to 9.5s?

We have an image from February 2006 of the 25/99.

We have serf saying he graded a card twice as a BGS 8. Only one 8 exists prior to the 25/99 getting graded a 9.5. That 8 that serf21 has received a 7.5 on the corners which look suspect in the BBMJ photo of the card raw in February of that same year.

The other 2 BGS 9.5s are accounted for as sold prior to the HK posting, leaving ONE final 9.5 that can be accounted for as graded at the time, the 25/99. The HK guys show that it’s posted on eBay (as they link to it) yet there is no completed sale of the card. Serf21 claims that it was his card which was graded a BGS 8, and the HK guys even mention the same alterations we’re talking about today (bottom edge and corners).

It’s quite obvious to anybody what’s up with the 25/99.

Yes. BGS 9.5 serial number 4473452 is RPA#92/99 which was graded on July 20, 2006. It is the first BGS 9.5 graded copy. RPA #53/99 (BGS serial #4656904) got graded on Sep 22nd. It sold on Nov 3rd for $21,100 on ebay (worthpoint). Both #92/99 and #53/99 sold prior to Hobbyking post on Nov 20th. Exquisite RPA #25/99 (Serial # 4807366) got graded on Nov 14th and those Hobbyking posts were around Nov 20th when the auction was still active or popped up on ebay (Link-https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpost.php?)

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

It’s quite obvious to anybody what’s up with the 25/99.

Do you mean it is quite obvious from the evidence provided by 31245comc and buybuymj plus the additional info provided by Abra?

[pcptrade]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

Here's the list again for easy reference.

4473452 - Graded 7/20/06. BGS 9.5/10. Subs 9.5/9.5/9.5/9.0.
4481010 - Graded 7/26/06. BGS 8.0/10. Subs 10/7.5/9.0/9.5.
4505505 - Graded 8/2/06. BGS 8.5/10. Subs 10/8.0/8.5/9.5.
4524354 - Graded 8/15/06. BGS 7.5/10. Subs 9.5/7.5/7.0/8.0.
4573098 - Graded 9/7/06. BGS 8.5/10. Subs 10/8.0/9.5/9.
4656904 - Graded 9/22/06. BGS 9.5/10. Subs 10/9.5/9.5/9.5.
4770016 - Graded 10/26/06. BGS 7.5/10. Subs 10/7.0/9.5/9.5.
4796960 - Graded 11/17/06
4807366 - Index card. Graded 11/14/06.

The only way the August 2 copy is the July 26 copy is if serf received the copy back from BGS on August 3, cracked it, and listed it as a 3 day auction that night. I think it's more likely that he had it RCR as an 8 before they started slabbing them, then he had it slabbed as an 8.0 on July 26. He then would have had to crack it and sell it raw on August 6 without referencing that it was graded previously. I could believe that.

Yes, I also think Serf21 cracked it and sold it raw because the PWCC archive showing the sale on Aug 6th does not mention anything about the card Grade in the title unless it was in the description. We might never know unless we have a screenshot of the ebay listing with item description.

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by pcptrade

Yes, I also think Serf21 cracked it and sold it raw because the PWCC archive showing the sale on Aug 6th does not mention anything about the card Grade in the title unless it was in the description. We might never know unless we have a screenshot of the ebay listing with item description.

It would also be interesting to know where BBMJ acquired that photo of 25/99 in February. I can’t find any completed eBay sale around the time he saved the photo (not that it means anything).

All this is also somewhat irrelevant as to answering the question of whether the 25/99 is altered at this point. It clearly is.

[Jasondr91]

OJ.....whatever happened to Joel? Serf21......he was also the Jameer Nelson Exquisite parallel guy. I don’t remember my post from 2006 in that thread, but its scary.

We are seeing Exquisite cards trimmed how many years ago? It looked diamond cut then, and now (bottom part that is).

[theleica]

Can someone clear up confusion on my part?

Provenance was described as "ironclad" on this card by the most recent buyer. Obviously he did his research before buying the card. Less than 2 months later (February 2020) he is selling the card and has a potential buyer. The potential buyer is emailed scans of the card in 2006. COMC is also emailed photos of the card at the same time seemingly by the same person.

This is correct right?

If provenance was ironclad then the owner of the card and COMC, who helped vet the card, know who trimmed the card. Is this the correct assumption?

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by theleica

Can someone clear up confusion on my part?

Provenance was described as "ironclad" on this card by the most recent buyer. Obviously he did his research before buying the card. Less than 2 months later (February 2020) he is selling the card and has a potential buyer. The potential buyer is emailed scans of the card in 2006. COMC is also emailed photos of the card at the same time seemingly by the same person.

This is correct right?

If provenance was ironclad then the owner of the card and COMC, who helped vet the card, know who trimmed the card. Is this the correct assumption?

I don’t think that’s the correct assumption. The buyer and COMC vetted the card with the information they had at the time, and after the purchase BBMJ sends the pic showing what the card looked like in February of 2006.

Obviously the 1st vetting of the card didn’t include the February picture.

They just have photos of this card at different points, but I don’t think anybody can unequivocally say who altered the card. They can just say that the card has been altered.

[theleica]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

I don’t think that’s the correct assumption. The buyer and COMC vetted the card with the information they had at the time, and after the purchase BBMJ sends the pic showing what the card looked like in February of 2016.

Obviously the 1st vetting of the card didn’t include the February picture.

They just have photos of this card at different points, but I don’t think anybody can unequivocally say who altered the card. They can just say that the card has been altered.

Ok thank you.

February 2006, correct, not February of 2016?

So in purchasing this card did the "iron clad" provenance only go back to 2006 and not 2003/2004?

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by theleica

Ok thank you.

February 2006, correct, not February of 2016?

So in purchasing this card did the "iron clad" provenance only go back to 2006 and not 2003/2004?

Yes 2006.

We don’t know how far COMC and the buyers went back and/or what they looked at to declare the card unaltered. We just know that after they declared it “clean”, BBMJ provided photos to dispute the previous assumption.

Then Abra links the HK post last night where deductive reasoning can pretty much prove that back in November 2006 this card was listed on eBay and the guys on HK we’re talking about how the card was altered and previously a BGS 8, mentioning the same imperfections we’ve been discussing in this thread.

Who knows how that was missed previously because nobody was privy to the correspondence or methods the buyers and COMC used to determine the provenance prior to purchasing. It doesn’t really matter because they clearly didn’t have all available evidence at the time, thus why COMC walked back his statement and why BBMJ and Abra pretty much cleared up everything else.

[bmf]

Originally Posted by 3124508 on COMC

I'm now done posting in this thread following a threat I have been sent due to outing this card. Have a good night everyone.

am i the only one who is absolutely outraged that 312 was threatened into silence?

dying to know who made the threat and what it was

[This is]

Originally Posted by rogermaris

People asking 312 for advice should know this. Soliciting him for his free opinion on something no one can be certain of and then putting the burden of responsibility on him when he's wrong is unfair and unreasonable. If you buy an altered card, it's your responsibility. If you want to hold someone else responsible, contact the person who sold it to you or the company that was paid to grade it.

Exactly this.. did I miss something where 312 comc has a side hustle where people pay him to evaluate cards? If he's doing this for free and as a favor to the Hobby then he is literally giving away a valuable service in return for what, scorn if he may possibly get something wrong? Yet the so called professionals get paid thousands of dollars and they get a pass here.

Also an outsider reading this, this seems like a coordinated attack. If the Boda is not above reproach as Khal said then neither is he. Doublestyker who agreed wholeheartedly with your assessment Khal said it was nice to meet you. Was there any coordination on this criticism between you, doublestyker, and USMC03vet?

[Orangejello727]

Originally Posted by Jasondr91

OJ.....whatever happened to Joel? Serf21......he was also the Jameer Nelson Exquisite parallel guy. I don’t remember my post from 2006 in that thread, but its scary.

We are seeing Exquisite cards trimmed how many years ago? It looked diamond cut then, and now (bottom part that is).

I think he exited the game a while ago just like many that were around during our time. Might be around under a different alias but I doubt it.

Originally Posted by This is

Exactly this.. did I miss something where 312 comc has a side hustle where people pay him to evaluate cards? If he's doing this for free and as a favor to the Hobby then he is literally giving away a valuable service in return for what, scorn if he may possibly get something wrong? Yet the so called professionals get paid thousands of dollars and they get a pass here.

Also an outsider reading this, this seems like a coordinated attack. If the Boda is not above reproach as Khal said then neither is he. Doublestyker who agreed wholeheartedly with your assessment Khal said it was nice to meet you. Was there any coordination on this criticism between you, doublestyker, and USMC03vet?

I kind of feel the same way here. There seems to co ordinated effort to either question or discredit those who bring light/information of trimming/altered cards. It seems as if this is a push to get doubt in the open to reverse the questioning for high end premium card owners to get the light off their investments. Ive also noticed a higher frequency of premium cards being bought and sold recently, so it makes kind of sense to see the effort of discrediting anyone who sheds any information on trimming or questioning as cards for up for sale with new high purchasing prices.

The thing to remember here is that people make a judgement call based on the information they have at the time. If information presents itself later on after that decision and it turns out that information could have changed the original decision, that doesn't make the initial decision wrong. People tend to make the "best' decision with the information they had. Like RogerMaris stated, you cannot attempt to prove something that didnt happen. You can only attempt to prove what did happen. You cannot chase the negative.

Whatever 312 vetted at the time to make the decision was based on the material they had at that time. If new information presents itself post decision then you cannot blame them for not having that information at the time. All of this responsibility falls on the buyer/owner. No one else.

[pcptrade]

Originally Posted by This is

Exactly this.. did I miss something where 312 comc has a side hustle where people pay him to evaluate cards? If he's doing this for free and as a favor to the Hobby then he is literally giving away a valuable service in return for what, scorn if he may possibly get something wrong? Yet the so called professionals get paid thousands of dollars and they get a pass here.

Also an outsider reading this, this seems like a coordinated attack. If the Boda is not above reproach as Khal said then neither is he. Doublestyker who agreed wholeheartedly with your assessment Khal said it was nice to meet you. Was there any coordination on this criticism between you, doublestyker, and USMC03vet?

I have contacted 31245@comc for advice before I purchased some of my high end cards. He did it for free for me and he refused to take money from me the few times I have offered it as token of appreciation for his time and effort. Two of my cards were outed publicly by rogermaris (a fake Jordan Ultra platinum medallion) and 31245@comc (a Trimmed Lebron 2003 Hardcourt Futures PSA 10).

1. Was I upset that my card was outed? Yes.

2. Did they do the right thing by outing the card- Yes.

3. Was I 100% sure that rogermaris and 31245@comc were correct in their assessment?
I was not but again I am no expert in identifying fakes and trimmed cards. Based on the evidence they presented, it was likely that my Jordan was fake and Lebron was trimmed.

4. Can BODA be wrong in their assessment?
Their job is to present the evidence and it is up to the owners of the card in question and other collectors to make their own assessment based on the evidence presented. If the owner chooses to believe that BODA is wrong, it is up to them. I could have done the same thing but I chose to return my Jordan Ultra Platinum Medallion and Lebron Hardcourt Futures since their reputation was tarnished


Fortunately, I was able to return both the cards to the sellers for a full refund using the evidence presented by rogermaris and 31245@comc. I hope the buyers can use the evidence presented here (by 31245@comc, buybuymj and Abra) to return the card if they are planning to go that route unless they are convinced it is not altered.

[ThoseBackPages]

312 has stated that he/she does BODA 40+ hours a week. then someone must paying him/her.

312 has outed thousands of cards and called out lots of bad actors with their own threads.

yet, this card, is what it took for him/her to get an email "threat"?

an email that he/she has had complete confidence in the past about using and not being able to be found?

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by This is

Also an outsider reading this, this seems like a coordinated attack. If the Boda is not above reproach as Khal said then neither is he. Doublestyker who agreed wholeheartedly with your assessment Khal said it was nice to meet you. Was there any coordination on this criticism between you, doublestyker, and USMC03vet?

I know Court (one of the buyers). Anyone who participates in the baseball forum knows that, or at least can safely assume that.

As I have said, my initial belief was that the card was trimmed. I did not discuss it with Court as I did not feel it was my place to do so. As I have also said, the manner in which the outing was posted did not sit well with me. It seemed strange that it did not receive its own thread and that it did not receive much of a response from the community. So I looked at it again on Friday and had my concerns as I first described on Saturday. I did talk to Court in person Saturday, and in essence said "hey, I have these concerns, are you okay if I post them?". I didn't know what was going on between Court/Lou and the seller, and did not want to step on any toes given the magnitude of the transaction. He gave me the okay, but preferred that I not post unless the thread was otherwise bumped by someone else as he and Lou are still in the process of making arrangements for how to handle this. I felt that was fair. The thread was bumped by Deadshot, I asked if he was still okay with me posting my thoughts, and he said he was.

Never once did Court ask me to post, nor did he direct me what to post. As I've said, I've done this on my own accord and knowingly put my neck out there in raising questions. I have nothing to gain, only credibility to lose. I understand how the Blowout mob works. So if you want to hang me, so be it. I did not disclose the added knowledge I had because I wanted my concerns discussed without them being immediately dismissed simply because I know Court.

Am I sad for Court? Absolutely. Am I happy to see the added details from Abra which help close the gaps? Absolutely. Ironically, I believe the discussion on HobbyKings to be better evidence that the card is altered than the images.

And to answer whether this was coordinated between me, doublestryker, and USMC, it absolutely was not. I don't have a clue who USMC is. I did meet doublestryker at the show, but he had no advanced knowledge of my post and I didn't ask him to comment. He did that on his own accord. As did a couple others who raised concerns.