BGS Black Labels, Joe Clemons (eBay ID: wjc75056), and Illegitimate Grading

[twkgcm]

There has been a quid pro quo and cronyism at BGS for as long as I can remember.

I attended the 2007 BGS grading summit, where Kevin Burge and psa.al and all of the "big guys" attended, bertscards included.

One of the major benefits that BGS offered at this summit was to sit down with a grader and have the opportunity to tell him why a specific card of yours should be bumped to a higher grade. I remember with 100% clarity that bgs.al was able to get his Joe Montana 1981 Topps bumped. If memory serves he had a lot of these cards that were close, and was quite confident he was on his way to the first BGS 10. I remember showing up at a card show within the next year or two, speaking with him for a few mins, and low and behold he had gotten the Montana Pristine. The entire reason for this "BGS summit" was to buddy up to BGS, and strike up better grading deals. This was around the time that the min grade bulk orders started.

Much thanks to the OP and whomever else has worked on this issue. PWCC has had first hand knowledge and the ability to stop Moser, Burge, and all of the other crooks that they have sold for. They have been alerted to this for many years, and instead of being proactive, they have harbored their ability to steal from collectors, and lined their pockets in doing so. Shame on them. The same is true for BGS, as going back a good 15 years they have made deals and buddied up to their big submitters, and have not only knowingly turned a blind eye to their crimes against cardboard, but have continued to deal with them with all of the knowledge and proof to incriminate them, yet decided to keep this information and be complicit in the crime.

[NoleinJax]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

Seems pretty reasonable actually. And if that pricing structure doesn’t exist anymore, that’s a huge positive. But based on Joe’s subs the last year, I bet it is still offered to certain customers.

Most of these cards are being sold for $20 or so. The cost basis is presumably the equivalent of $0. Say every other card does not meet the minimum. That’s $9-$12 in grading feeds on average, then $2 in eBay fees, and another $1 in PayPal fees. So at best, a profit of $8 a card on a bunch of cards that aren’t easy to sell, and don’t sell quickly. The black labels make the difference though. Because now you can turn that $20 into $100 or more.

Basically these guys found a way to capitalize on your average collector’s stupidity, and BGS offered a service (and may still offer) that allowed them to do so in a way that was financially lucrative.

Still doesn't account for Joe's own words about how he does small order because he does better that way. So many people doing their best to find any excuse for Joe when he has not used any of them himself.

[Cubsfanp]

Originally Posted by Kuch86

This new "potential" information still doesn't explain away Joe's claims/actions in the thread:

- he only submits his VERY best cards in extremely small batches because he feels he has better chance at BL's
- his eye for picking out the best graded cards is waaaay better than everyone else's and that's why he has such high grades
- only releases his BL grades and not his BGS10
- told one member he never does RCR and told another one of his perfect submissions was because of RCR

There is no question in my mind he (and likely LEAF) has been shady/dishonest in this thread. He deserves what he got.

If you look at Joe's responses, it comes off that he genuinely believes and feels he is the Michael Jordan of selecting cards that will grade well.

What if he really wasn't as good as he thought he was? What is he is like the Lonzo Ball of grading, where his dad told him how great he was his whole life and the systems around him helped him do well until the rug was pulled from under him?

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by NoleinJax

Still doesn't account for Joe's own words about how he does small order because he does better that way. So many people doing their best to find any excuse for Joe when he has not used any of them himself.

You know where I fall on this. I’m not making excuses. Rather, I am presenting a plausible best case scenario. One which we can use the other information gathered to completely dismantle it. Which we have done over and over again.

[Cubsfanp]

Originally Posted by kyaa

Please stop pushing "the bulk orders are treated differently and that explains Joe's results" theory in this thread. Myself and many others on this forum have submitted orders as large as Joe to BGS. None have gotten comparable results or had their cards serial numbered the way Joe's are. Many of his don't even appear to be part of a bulk order. So that theory clearly doesn't explain what's going on here.

"The truth is found when men are free to pursue it."
-Franklin D. Roosevelt-

[DaRitz]

Originally Posted by auburn35

Yes, Beckett should be a focus of our attention but the others involved in the equation, are still of interest.

With all of the information that has been shared, Joe/Leaf are the ones that keep popping up. We think we find someone else and it ends up coming right back to Joe/Leaf.

Not sure if you happened to look at this thread that was posted yesterday, but it's just like the scenario you are describing.
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=964886
This was a "bulk MG" submission that took place here, on Blowout.

Looking at the results; the grades are completely random, across the board, as they should.
This "Bulk" order doesn't appear to have the "rejected" cards recorded in Beckett database, suggesting that only the graded cards were entered into the system, after grading. If someone from the group want's to confirm that their "rejected" cards don't have a searchable Beckett serial numbers, that would be helpful.

So now we have at least two different submission methods "standard" and "bulk" that appear to have different processing methods but neither has the "grade grouping" pattern that has been linked to Joe and Leaf submissions.

This (grouping of grades) pattern that has consistently been occurring throughout the Joe/Leaf submissions (Small or Large, Quick or Slow services levels, doesn't seem to matter) is the one repeatable piece of evidence of collusion. There doesn't appear to be any "clear" advantage to a specific submission method, other than "WHO" is submitting that order.

This is good info BUT...

(1) In a group sub, the cards still have to be tracked individually, which is why I wouldn't expect the final grades to be grouped. If we each submit 3 TCU Acuna's in that group sub, they have to track which 3 are mine vs yours.

And (2) a group sub still has a bunch of random cards... different sports, sets, players, etc. There's less efficiency to be gained by grouping the cards.

On the other hand, if I submit 500 TCU cards... all mine... they don't have to track anything, and it would save them time to log them all at the end.

(I think that change-of-process leads to better grades overall. Intended or not.)

So to me, this bulk order would be expected to have (and does have) sort of a hybrid treatment. Maybe no logging of the cards that didn't meet the minimum, but they're not graded from one un-labeled pile and added to the DB at the end.

[NoleinJax]

Originally Posted by pcbuck

Those are good points and BGS definitely has some explaining to do. My problem with Joe Clemens is that he initially came on here basically saying, nothing to see here I’m eagle eyed Joe.

It's amazing how many people do their best to find excuses for Joe that Joe never used himself. Like you stated, Joe came on here and told us that he's better than 100% of the people here at this grading thing and we're all just jealous of his eagle eyes.

[NoleinJax]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

You know where I fall on this. I’m not making excuses. Rather, I am presenting a plausible best case scenario. One which we can use the other information gathered to completely dismantle it. Which we have done over and over again.

I didn't mean you specifically even though I quoted you. I should have made that clear. My bad.

[twkgcm]

Also I'd like to add I do not think that Joe is some mastermind crook, or a scam artist in any way. I would never think of him as a person who would outright steal, or break the law. From everything I know about him, which is a decent amount, he is a hard working guy. At the same time, he is not someone that I would ever expect to throw someone under the bus to do the morally correct thing. He has had ample opportunity to speak out against Kevin Burge and all of these characters that he dealt with, and has had first hand knowledge on. He accepted most of the submissions and became friends with Steve Tormollan, Kevin Burge, Keith Koenig, and the like. I really don't want to get into conjecture on what could've happened in this scenario too much, but I will say what I think is a very likely occurrence in regards to his grades. It truly makes sense to me that BGS and Joe have a deal where he will use their no sub grade option. In doing so, he will be rewarded with BGS 10s. Think of it from BGS's side of the equation. They want to push a new grading service, that no one wants to use. No one. They offer a guy like Joe, who is a company guy, small time hard worker, a deal that if he works as a shill for their service, he will get a certain reward. His reward turns out to be more 10s than you'd expect to get. I don't think any of the "checks" that Joe said need to be in place need to be in place at all to know that this is an order that "Joe" sent in. Clearly as others have stated, if you alert the grader beforehand to what cards are coming in, its as simple as that, and I agree. But is also could be even simpler, if all huge "no grade" orders are Joe orders. I could be off on that, but really who else is sending in boatloads of cards for this service? Someone can educate me on that one if I'm far off, because honestly I am only going by basic logic. In the end, I find it very hard to believe that Joe is on some trimming scandal, or has "someone on the inside" type of scandal. It seems to be something that would truly result as a benefit or a kickback for using a service no one in a million years would use. Whether or not there is a verbal agreement in place is another story. There is no doubt that there is an anomaly taking place, and there is no doubt that BGS is crooked as they get. There is also no doubt that Joe would not be forthright on this topic as he has never been forthright about any of the trim artists he has befriended and has knowledge on, nor has he been forthright about the crooked dealings he has had with Leaf (proven on other forums years ago), and now proving to be true here as well.

[auburn35]

Originally Posted by DaRitz

This is good info BUT...

(1) In a group sub, the cards still have to be tracked individually, which is why I wouldn't expect the final grades to be grouped. If we each submit 3 TCU Acuna's in that group sub, they have to track which 3 are mine vs yours.

And (2) a group sub still has a bunch of random cards... different sports, sets, players, etc. There's less efficiency to be gained by grouping the cards.

On the other hand, if I submit 500 TCU cards... all mine... they don't have to track anything, and it would save them time to log them all at the end.

(I think that change-of-process leads to better grades overall. Intended or not.)

So to me, this bulk order would be expected to have (and does have) sort of a hybrid treatment. Maybe no logging of the cards that didn't meet the minimum, but they're not graded from one un-labeled pile and added to the DB at the end.

All true. Without having a perfect control sample, all we can use, is the data presented. I think those results in the group sub, we're individually sorted, so each offered the same efficiency possibilities to the grader/data entry person.

Joe/Leaf submissions (any service level) with a mixture of different cards/players, seem to always be grouped by grades.

Joe/Leaf submissions (any service level) with only the same types cards of cards, seem to always be grouped by grades.

Who else has their orders done in this fashion and why? That's what we're trying to find out.

[Kuch86]

Originally Posted by twkgcm

Also I'd like to add I do not think that Joe is some mastermind crook, or a scam artist in any way. I would never think of him as a person who would outright steal, or break the law. From everything I know about him, which is a decent amount, he is a hard working guy. At the same time, he is not someone that I would ever expect to throw someone under the bus to do the morally correct thing. He has had ample opportunity to speak out against Kevin Burge and all of these characters that he dealt with, and has had first hand knowledge on. He accepted most of the submissions and became friends with Steve Tormollan, Kevin Burge, Keith Koenig, and the like. I really don't want to get into conjecture on what could've happened in this scenario too much, but I will say what I think is a very likely occurrence in regards to his grades. It truly makes sense to me that BGS and Joe have a deal where he will use their no sub grade option. In doing so, he will be rewarded with BGS 10s. Think of it from BGS's side of the equation. They want to push a new grading service, that no one wants to use. No one. They offer a guy like Joe, who is a company guy, small time hard worker, a deal that if he works as a shill for their service, he will get a certain reward. His reward turns out to be more 10s than you'd expect to get. I don't think any of the "checks" that Joe said need to be in place need to be in place at all to know that this is an order that "Joe" sent in. Clearly as others have stated, if you alert the grader beforehand to what cards are coming in, its as simple as that, and I agree. But is also could be even simpler, if all huge "no grade" orders are Joe orders. I could be off on that, but really who else is sending in boatloads of cards for this service? Someone can educate me on that one if I'm far off, because honestly I am only going by basic logic. In the end, I find it very hard to believe that Joe is on some trimming scandal, or has "someone on the inside" type of scandal. It seems to be something that would truly result as a benefit or a kickback for using a service no one in a million years would use. Whether or not there is a verbal agreement in place is another story. There is no doubt that there is an anomaly taking place, and there is no doubt that BGS is crooked as they get. There is also no doubt that Joe would not be forthright on this topic as he has never been forthright about any of the trim artists he has befriended and has knowledge on, nor has he been forthright about the crooked dealings he has had with Leaf (proven on other forums years ago), and now proving to be true here as well.

Joe told us it's because he has the best grading eye in the world and that he only submits his very best cards in small batches. Are you calling him a liar?

[Briss]

Originally Posted by twkgcm

Also I'd like to add I do not think that Joe is some mastermind crook, or a scam artist in any way. I would never think of him as a person who would outright steal, or break the law. From everything I know about him, which is a decent amount, he is a hard working guy. At the same time, he is not someone that I would ever expect to throw someone under the bus to do the morally correct thing. He has had ample opportunity to speak out against Kevin Burge and all of these characters that he dealt with, and has had first hand knowledge on. He accepted most of the submissions and became friends with Steve Tormollan, Kevin Burge, Keith Koenig, and the like. I really don't want to get into conjecture on what could've happened in this scenario too much, but I will say what I think is a very likely occurrence in regards to his grades. It truly makes sense to me that BGS and Joe have a deal where he will use their no sub grade option. In doing so, he will be rewarded with BGS 10s. Think of it from BGS's side of the equation. They want to push a new grading service, that no one wants to use. No one. They offer a guy like Joe, who is a company guy, small time hard worker, a deal that if he works as a shill for their service, he will get a certain reward. His reward turns out to be more 10s than you'd expect to get. I don't think any of the "checks" that Joe said need to be in place need to be in place at all to know that this is an order that "Joe" sent in. Clearly as others have stated, if you alert the grader beforehand to what cards are coming in, its as simple as that, and I agree. But is also could be even simpler, if all huge "no grade" orders are Joe orders. I could be off on that, but really who else is sending in boatloads of cards for this service? Someone can educate me on that one if I'm far off, because honestly I am only going by basic logic. In the end, I find it very hard to believe that Joe is on some trimming scandal, or has "someone on the inside" type of scandal. It seems to be something that would truly result as a benefit or a kickback for using a service no one in a million years would use. Whether or not there is a verbal agreement in place is another story. There is no doubt that there is an anomaly taking place, and there is no doubt that BGS is crooked as they get. There is also no doubt that Joe would not be forthright on this topic as he has never been forthright about any of the trim artists he has befriended and has knowledge on, nor has he been forthright about the crooked dealings he has had with Leaf (proven on other forums years ago), and now proving to be true here as well.

Soooo pages went by and you still haven't said who your friend is or who you are just defending Joe when there are pages and pages and pages of hard statistics/concerns here. Therefore you must be a Joe supporter.

[tonedef2oo8]

Originally Posted by twkgcm

Spoke with a friend of mine, and we agree that is most likely that the Min BGS 10 option still doesn't exist.

The most likely reasoning for there being an order that has a lot of BGS 10's and NGs, is that this order was 10 10 9.5 9.5 s and better that were looking to either bumps to 10's or Blacks. Certainly the grader would do this at some point, so you would need to have orders that show that they were going for bumps to pristines. This would be the example of that happening.

I’ll ask again since you seemed to missed it, Who’s this friend mr new guy?

[Vintage Collector]

http://www.sportscardradio.com/bewar...rds-nscc-scam/

I know its a dupe line I posted.

In addition to picking cards that grade perfectly well above the average, it seems that Joe also has the uncanny ability to pick out some favorable packs also. Lol

[DaRitz]

Originally Posted by auburn35

All true. Without having a perfect control sample, all we can use, is the data presented. I think those results in the group sub, we're individually sorted, so each offered the same efficiency possibilities to the grader/data entry person.

Joe/Leaf submissions (any service level) with a mixture of different cards/players, seem to always be grouped by grades.

Joe/Leaf submissions (any service level) with only the same types cards of cards, seem to always be grouped by grades.

Who else has their orders done in this fashion and why? That's what we're trying to find out.

I agree. We're on the same page.

It's clearly not an advertised service level. It's an option known to certain people... certainly former BGS employees and that person's current employer.

I assume there are others. That group min-grade sub was an interesting read (before, I only read the beginning and end, but I just now read the whole thing). BGS blew the turnaround time big time... I would assume that they have since realized that these "special bulk" orders don't work for group subs of lots of different people submitting lots of different random cards. But they DO work for people submitting 500+ of their own cards, especially when they're of the same set.

But you're right... who else knows about it?

Beckett? What are the submission parameters for this method? Geez, if they'd just post it, they'd get a ton of 500-card Acuna/Soto submissions!

[twkgcm]

Originally Posted by auburn35

All true. Without having a perfect control sample, all we can use, is the data presented. I think those results in the group sub, we're individually sorted, so each offered the same efficiency possibilities to the grader/data entry person.

Joe/Leaf submissions (any service level) with a mixture of different cards/players, seem to always be grouped by grades.

Joe/Leaf submissions (any service level) with only the same types cards of cards, seem to always be grouped by grades.

Who else has their orders done in this fashion and why? That's what we're trying to find out.

Not sure if this information is helpful or not, but there is something to BGS grouping, that can be seen with RCRs. If you grade cards RCR, you will get all of the golds in the front, followed by the silvers. This might not happen every single time, but I'm sure there is enough people in this thread alone that can verify this. Does it mix up the order in which you put the cards in the batch? Yup, every single time. Has it created an issue for me in the past? Yup.

So then the question would be why this would happen? Mostly likely would be that they print all of the gold labels, and then the silver labels.

So then you have the question as to why so many Black Labels would show up in a row, and 10's. Well, in the case of a "no grade" order, it would make sense that all cards that are to 10's are put to one side to have the proper grades assigned to them, and have all of those labels printed out at the same time, followed by a standard 9.5 group.

It would be nice to find someone else who has done a massive no grade order, to share their experience on how the 10s were grouped.

Either way you cut it, the logic behind the grouping is simple. Still, the odds of getting the grades do not match up. Joe does not have a better eye than anyone else, and even if he did it wouldn't help not even to a 100000th of a degree towards the grades he received.

[kyaa]

Originally Posted by DaRitz

This is good info BUT...

(1) In a group sub, the cards still have to be tracked individually, which is why I wouldn't expect the final grades to be grouped. If we each submit 3 TCU Acuna's in that group sub, they have to track which 3 are mine vs yours.

And (2) a group sub still has a bunch of random cards... different sports, sets, players, etc. There's less efficiency to be gained by grouping the cards.

On the other hand, if I submit 500 TCU cards... all mine... they don't have to track anything, and it would save them time to log them all at the end.

(I think that change-of-process leads to better grades overall. Intended or not.)

So to me, this bulk order would be expected to have (and does have) sort of a hybrid treatment. Maybe no logging of the cards that didn't meet the minimum, but they're not graded from one un-labeled pile and added to the DB at the end.

With regards to the "bulk order theory"--that Joe and Leaf's orders are numbered differently with stacks of Black Labels and 10s because they're bulk orders and BGS treats bulk orders differently, remember:

1) Joe said he submits in small batches at least some of the time.
2) Joe still gets the same astounding results on "smaller" orders, whether it's 3 cards or 81 cards.

So perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understand why people continue to push a theory that does not match up with Joe's own results or statements.

[THE(NEXT)LEVEL]

Originally Posted by kyaa

With regards to the "bulk order theory"--that Joe and Leaf's orders are numbered differently with stacks of Black Labels and 10s because they're bulk orders and BGS treats bulk orders differently, remember:

1) Joe said he submits in small batches at least some of the time.
2) Joe still gets the same astounding results on "smaller" orders, whether it's 3 cards or 81 cards.

So perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understand why people continue to push a theory that does not match up with Joe's own results or statements.

^^^^^Truth. We all don't know who knows who, so It could be a way to deflect or put an excuse out there for Joe.

[MNmoose78]

Originally Posted by twkgcm

Not sure if this information is helpful or not, but there is something to BGS grouping, that can be seen with RCRs. If you grade cards RCR, you will get all of the golds in the front, followed by the silvers. This might not happen every single time, but I'm sure there is enough people in this thread alone that can verify this. Does it mix up the order in which you put the cards in the batch? Yup, every single time. Has it created an issue for me in the past? Yup.

So then the question would be why this would happen? Mostly likely would be that they print all of the gold labels, and then the silver labels.

So then you have the question as to why so many Black Labels would show up in a row, and 10's. Well, in the case of a "no grade" order, it would make sense that all cards that are to 10's are put to one side to have the proper grades assigned to them, and have all of those labels printed out at the same time, followed by a standard 9.5 group.

It would be nice to find someone else who has done a massive no grade order, to share their experience on how the 10s were grouped.

Either way you cut it, the logic behind the grouping is simple. Still, the odds of getting the grades do not match up. Joe does not have a better eye than anyone else, and even if he did it wouldn't help not even to a 100000th of a degree towards the grades he received.

Joes grouping of cards has gone way back before “no sub grade” orders we’re offered. And Joe himself said he hardly did RCR subs, so probably not the answer.

[superdan49]

Originally Posted by Vintage Collector

http://www.sportscardradio.com/bewar...rds-nscc-scam/

I know its a dupe line I posted.

In addition to picking cards that grade perfectly well above the average, it seems that Joe also has the uncanny ability to pick out some favorable packs also. Lol

My question from the SCR article is who is eBay user kingofswing97? Is that an account of Leaf/Brian/Joe? Because they use the same scanner as Joe for their cards sold on eBay:

[Rooftop]

Originally Posted by superdan49

My question from the SCR article is who is eBay user kingofswing97? Is that an account of Leaf/Brian/Joe? Because they use the same scanner as Joe for their cards sold on eBay:

[Cubsfanp]

Originally Posted by kyaa

With regards to the "bulk order theory"--that Joe and Leaf's orders are numbered differently with stacks of Black Labels and 10s because they're bulk orders and BGS treats bulk orders differently, remember:

1) Joe said he submits in small batches at least some of the time.
2) Joe still gets the same astounding results on "smaller" orders, whether it's 3 cards or 81 cards.

So perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understand why people continue to push a theory that does not match up with Joe's own results or statements.

It isn't even about quantity of cards submitted, it is the process which the cards are graded, regardless of order size.

Stop thinking "bulk" and think more "special process".

To me, with the data we have this seems to make the most sense.

Now who knows about this special process - seems to be just Joe and Leaf so far. Until we find another this is what we have to go off of, so they are getting the heat.

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by kyaa

With regards to the "bulk order theory"--that Joe and Leaf's orders are numbered differently with stacks of Black Labels and 10s because they're bulk orders and BGS treats bulk orders differently, remember:

1) Joe said he submits in small batches at least some of the time.
2) Joe still gets the same astounding results on "smaller" orders, whether it's 3 cards or 81 cards.

So perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understand why people continue to push a theory that does not match up with Joe's own results or statements.

It's been a while but I thought he said he submits his best cards in small batches.

[Kuch86]

Originally Posted by pspa123

It's been a while but I thought he said he submits his best cards in small batches.

He did say that he feels small batches give him the best chance at black label.

His own words have already contradicted the defense that people are now trying to use for him. It's just getting comical with these people...

[Cubsfanp]

Originally Posted by Kuch86

He did say that he feels small batches give him the best chance at black label.

His own words have already contradicted the defense that people are now trying to use for him. It's just getting comical with these people...

This thread got comical LOOOOOONG ago. My favorite was after Dan released Joe's BGS black label results...

Someone put out there was a second grader on the grassy null theory.