NYT: "Retouching Mona Lisa Is Restoration, but a Mickey Mantle? Collectors Cry Fraud"

[callou2131]

Originally Posted by ksp6687

Hah. No, did not accuse him of that although I guess in a way that could be debated if that was what happened in hindsight.

Article came out early this year I believe

Isnt that shoplifting?

[superdan49]

Originally Posted by ksp6687

Sorry to put a damper on the circle jerk, but it's 2019. Being in the times isn't the deal it used to be. Still an accomplishment, but not one of the only sources of media out there like it was 20 years ago.

I know a girl who boned a couple dudes for $ and didn't get paid once. She found a reporter and got her story published in there.

You have the soul of a poet.

[mrdallas]

Just read article. Well done BODA.. well done. Brent's no comment speaks volumes. Walls are crumbling. We can hope that another big news outlet picks up story and it keeps snowballing.

[mattglet]

Originally Posted by Rockiesfan1993

When did this happen?

If it was 2019 or the last couple years I am surprised she did not falsely accuse them of rape.

Of course since woman can do that even years down the road I guess there is still time to do it.

First we let them vote, then we let them accuse us of rape too long after the fact. Ugh... women, amirite?

[Jblaw1]

Originally Posted by superdan49

You have the soul of a poet.

Ok. That truly made me laugh out loud at my office just now.

Thanks Superdan. After a 18 hour day I needed that.

Oh, and thanks for all the fraud stuff that you and the others have been so diligent in finding.

[MoreToppsPlease]

Originally Posted by asujbl

This is a huge deal...

But has anyone looked at PWCC today?

No one cares yet...

Is PWCC employing even more shillers to make it look like they’re not taking a hit?

[signed79]

Originally Posted by superdan49

I think it was actually worse for PSA. Gary Moser attacked their credibility, and Joe Orlando did not offer a response.

PWCC at least had the curator at the MET defending them, and although he expressed surprise about the scandal, Ken Kendrick said nice things about Brent.

From the article:

"Mr. Huigens, who positioned himself as an honest broker, has cultivated a following beyond hobbyists. Last Friday, he convened a private meeting of collectors at the Metropolitan Museum of Art to discuss the museum’s collection of baseball cards. He was joined by Allison Rudnick, the museum’s assistant curator in the department of drawings and prints."

Brent sounds like the charming type who preys on those with deep pockets. Unsuspecting and uneducated buyers or "investors" - I wouldn't be surprised if he was at the MET to persuade people into investing in this Ponzi scheme-like fraud.

[SetBuilder]

"Unlike art restoration, changes to items in the collectibles market hurt their value."

Kind of ironic that the most valuable card in the hobby is...altered.

[mrmopar]

I definitely learned something new about grading services. I have never sent in a card to be graded and have never even looked into the pricing structure to do so. From seeing people on the various boards discuss it, I knew that there were levels for service speed/turnaround times, but I had no idea that they also charged more when a card was valued higher! Maybe this is common with all sorts of services involving a wide spread in value, but since I am not a big spender in any arena, it came as a surprise to me.

How is grading a $10 and a $100,000 card any different in the level and type of of service needed to do so? I guess if you need to have your $100,000 card graded, you must spend $5K to have it done. Call me naive, but I would have a hard time paying that premium even if I had money to burn.

[CB Nostalgia]

There is a huge difference in the comparison. The Mona Lisa wasn't produced by the thousands and then later sold based on its condition. The Mona Lisa is essentially a 1/1, like any other high end art that isn't isn't a reprint.

If a collector pulled the Trout Superfractor out of a pack and it was badly damaged, I could see the case for "restoration", especially if the company wouldn't replace it. But this has nothing to do with restoration for the sake of saving valuable pieces of artwork and more about the greasiest members of the hobby trimming or filling in corners to make that BGS 3 they paid next to nothing for turn into a BGS 8 that sells for thousands.

I've seen the conservation conversation come up among the vintage crowd and to me it reads like a bunch of scared collectors worried that their thousands of dollars in investment will go down the drain if mainstream collectors abandon BGS/PSA or altered cards in general.

[mrmopar]

This pretty much describes my thoughts on the matter. When people compare restoring a single copy of an art masterpiece or historical document to preserve it (even when selling it) to that of trimming some damage off the edge or corner of an otherwise baseball card printed in the 100,000s of copies is laughable. Even if those items were identified when graded, the next guy can just break them out of the case and try again to hide that fact. Most cards are just too plentiful and can't be identified from the next copy (unless they are serial numbered, but we are mostly talking vintage here anyway)

I don't collect restored automobiles, but can appreciate bringing an oldie back to life through restoration and those vehicles are usually well documented as such, but I can also see the added value of preserving one in it's original state. Each side has valid arguments, but I just don't see where restoring baseball cards would ever be OK.

Originally Posted by JeremyNick

I for one really have no issue with the concept of restoration. It would be great for the collecting hobby to embrace this. In fact I think it would go a long way to preserving some of these amazing cards in poorer conditions. However in other hobbies I have, such as gun collecting, restoration has a place, is embraced, but is not for everyone and is advertised as such. What Mr Huigens is doing is fraud, not conservation. If he were to advertise his cards as such, have it done in a professional manner and even graded in that way, there would be value to these cards and it would not be a scam. Though right now, it's simply a scam to make money, not another avenue of collecting.

[MoreToppsPlease]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

"Unlike art restoration, changes to items in the collectibles market hurt their value."



Kind of ironic that the most valuable card in the hobby is...altered.

Certainly not ironic, but rather emblematic of everything grading represents.

But in particular, grading made that card more valuable because it made the card notorious.

[MoreToppsPlease]

Originally Posted by mrmopar

This pretty much describes my thoughts on the matter. When people compare restoring a single copy of an art masterpiece or historical document to preserve it (even when selling it) to that of trimming some damage off the edge or corner of an otherwise baseball card printed in the 100,000s of copies is laughable. Even if those items were identified when graded, the next guy can just break them out of the case and try again to hide that fact. Most cards are just too plentiful and can't be identified from the next copy (unless they are serial numbered, but we are mostly talking vintage here anyway)



I don't collect restored automobiles, but can appreciate bringing an oldie back to life through restoration and those vehicles are usually well documented as such, but I can also see the added value of preserving one in it's original state. Each side has valid arguments, but I just don't see where restoring baseball cards would ever be OK.

Eh, I’d much rather have a reprint than an altered or “restored” card. For one, a reprint would look nicer, and two it would be a lot less expensive.

[IronMonkey415]

Bye bye Betsy or Betty.

[HarryLime]

Originally Posted by Rockiesfan1993

When did this happen?

If it was 2019 or the last couple years I am surprised she did not falsely accuse them of rape.

Of course since woman can do that even years down the road I guess there is still time to do it.

Comrade?

Arthur

[rngrdanny22]

The work performed by BODA has been incredible. Congrats guys!

Moser playing the victim card is laughable. He better lawyer up, and quick! Keep the pressure on this guy by identifying and cataloging more of his cards. We're basically doing the FBI's job for them.

[eastbayak]

Great read!!

[corndog]

The story being published in the NYT is a major step in the direction of public awareness. Many thanks to Peter Spaeth and others who are working tirelessly both publicly and privately to enlighten others of this growing scandal. Many prefer anonymity and that will always be respected. The help from many Net54 members has been enormous! Their knowledge of the vintage side has been invaluable and much gratitude goes their way. The ever-growing submission list is alone a huge task to coordinate and a very helpful tool. Lots of help from the Blowout community too with many working behind the scene.

There is a lot of work to do and it takes a lot of time.

Let's continue to do what we can to try and fix this mess that so many others have made.

[HarryLime]

Peter Spaeth has ulterior motives that just happen to align with what is being uncovered. He's less a go-gooder and more an opportunist.

Arthur

[superdan49]

Originally Posted by Jblaw1

Ok. That truly made me laugh out loud at my office just now.

Thanks Superdan. After a 18 hour day I needed that.

Oh, and thanks for all the fraud stuff that you and the others have been so diligent in finding.

[Stifle]

Equality. Cards like life need to be judged equally. If a card is trimmed it should be judged as a trimmed card. If a group attempts to blackball equality, then first call that group out behind the scene and ask for a change because that is the end game.

What they did was wrong, selfish and we have selfish in us. In the end we are all in this thing called life together and life comes first. We overcome.

[MoreToppsPlease]

Originally Posted by Stifle

Equality. Cards like life need to be judged equally. If a card is trimmed it should be judged as a trimmed card. If a group attempts to blackball equality, then first call that group out behind the scene and ask for a change because that is the end game.



What they did was wrong, selfish and we have selfish in us. In the end we are all in this thing called life together and life comes first. We overcome.

There should be nothing but complete transparency and everything needs to be exactly as it seems.

Anything else only invites fraud.

[sickmantz]

Originally Posted by CB Nostalgia

There is a huge difference in the comparison. The Mona Lisa wasn't produced by the thousands and then later sold based on its condition. The Mona Lisa is essentially a 1/1, like any other high end art that isn't isn't a reprint.

If a collector pulled the Trout Superfractor out of a pack and it was badly damaged, I could see the case for "restoration", especially if the company wouldn't replace it. But this has nothing to do with restoration for the sake of saving valuable pieces of artwork and more about the greasiest members of the hobby trimming or filling in corners to make that BGS 3 they paid next to nothing for turn into a BGS 8 that sells for thousands.

I've seen the conservation conversation come up among the vintage crowd and to me it reads like a bunch of scared collectors worried that their thousands of dollars in investment will go down the drain if mainstream collectors abandon BGS/PSA or altered cards in general.

The value of the art is in the art itself. The value in the card, in most cases, is in the condition.

[Triple B]

Originally Posted by ksp6687

I know a girl who boned a couple dudes for $ and didn't get paid once. She found a reporter and got her story published in there.

Wait...SHE boned THEM??? I wouldn’t pay her a damn thing either. Ain’t no way I’m paying someone to bone me. Homey don’t play that.

[MoreToppsPlease]

Originally Posted by sickmantz

The value of the art is in the art itself. The value in the card, in most cases, is in the condition.

The more rare the card, the less true this is. Also not really true for rookies, first prospect, certain teams, stars, etc.