Fake Getzlaf Patch on Ebay

[g-force]

I got an email from PWCC today. Because I do not have a scan of the original patch they are not going to pull the auction but indicated they will investigate further. Anyone watching the cards listed in this thread, all I can say is "Buyer Beware".

 

[gomaz]

So here is an email chain between myself and PWCC. I await their response but at best I have extreme concern with their current position.


Me to PWCC's Melody with a CC to Brent Huigens, owner.

Hi Melody,

Here is an image of the original card with serial # 33/99.

There is a discussion about fake patches in your auctions here:

http://www.hobbyinsider.net/forum/showthread.php?t=414853

Regards,
Jeremy Lee

Response from Brent

Thanks for your help on this.

Brent
-Sent from mobile

Later response from Melody

Hi Jeremy,

Thank you so much for getting us this information. Since the card has been graded by Beckett we are sending the card back to them for further review of the card. As of right now we have to side with the grading companies, but with the information you've provided us we have more to go on with the Beckett review. Thank you very much.

Best Regards,

--

Melody Simnitt

PWCC Auctions, LLC
3 Monroe Parkway Suite P, #601
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
eBay id: pwcc_auctions
website: www.pwccauctions.com

510-725-7853
[email protected]

My response to both

This is a big mistake on your part. Beckett has no way to know if the patch has been replaced. They do not have that expertise. They grade the cardboard, and the autograph, not the memorabilia. You say you need to side with the grading companies, however, they have not taken a side on this specific matter. No where on their slab does it indicate that the patch is original. At least you should state in your auction that the patch has been replaced or improved post production.

Once word of this gets out, and it will quickly, the collecting community will be more aware (this isn't the first incident of PWCC selling fake patches) that the patch fakers use PWCC as a shield. I have been battling patch fakers for close to 10 years. I have assembled databases of key cards and was even invited by Upper Deck to photograph every patch card that was inserted into 2008-09 The Cup, for this exact reason. I still have my original photolog of over 28,000 cards. They invited me to do this because they were aware of my fight against fake patches.

So you can imagine my disappointment with your position being that PWCC will hide behind Beckett and patch fakers will hide behind you. This is a terrible thing for the long-term health of our hobby and the values of the cards in people's collections.

I strongly urge you to reconsider your position and to realize that Beckett is not an authority on fake patches.

Regards,
Jeremy

I will update this thread with PWCC's response to this last email and also once they have heard back from Beckett.

Let's hold off on the bashing until they respond to my last email. Let's give them an opportunity to make this right.

Perhaps someone should video document a patch faking straight from pack pull and have Beckett grade it.

All beckett really needs to do is to state somewhere that by virtue of slabbing a card, they do not gaurantee that the patch is original.

And if the major consignment companies (PWCC, Probstein) are made aware that they are selling a slabbed fake patch card, that they indicate same in their auction.

These things would sure go a long way to restore some confidence in Patch Cards, PWCC and Beckett.

Funny thing is I have a feeling these actions would actually have the effect of creating a market for souped up cards. Similar to the way there is still a market for trimmed vintage cards and restored vehicles.

 

[SNobles]

Thanks for the info Jeremy. Let's all hope that PWCC takes a step back and realizes this is wrong. So even with photo evidence they are unwilling to do anything. I am guessing with video evidence they would say it was manipulated somehow too.

Not bashing, just disappointed at this time. As I said previously, to them it is money out of their pockets not to sell these cards so I can see why they want to do everything they can to keep them up.

 

[gomaz]

Thanks for the info Jeremy. Let's all hope that PWCC takes a step back and realizes this is wrong. So even with photo evidence they are unwilling to do anything. I am guessing with video evidence they would say it was manipulated somehow too.

Not bashing, just disappointed at this time. As I said previously, to them it is money out of their pockets not to sell these cards so I can see why they want to do everything they can to keep them up.

I don't see it this way. They have no way to verify that the image I sent them is authentic. They are taking the conservative route. They are going to Beckett first because in this hobby, right or wrong, Beckett is considered to be one of the experts. To say that they would say video evidence is manipulated too is pretty much just an unfounded assumption. One that I strongly think is highly accusatory and unfair, until/if it comes to fruition. They didn't say my evidence was manipulated, they just want some additional comfort before they take action.

Regarding money out of their pockets, sure, but their greater concern is the bigger picture being the long term viability of their business and its integrity. They are simply taking the most professional route they are aware of. The only fault I really see is the amount of credence they place in Beckett. PWCC needs to realize that Beckett is not an expert on altered patches.

I know it is popular to bash PWCC but in actuality they do what they can to ensure integrity in their auctions. This fake patch issue is new to them so the hobby needs to let them figure it out. And they will, Brent is no idiot.

 

[TanguayFan]

I don't see it this way. They have no way to verify that the image I sent them is authentic. They are taking the conservative route. They are going to Beckett first because in this hobby, right or wrong, Beckett is considered to be one of the experts. To say that they would say video evidence is manipulated too is pretty much just an unfounded assumption. One that I strongly think is highly accusatory and unfair, until/if it comes to fruition. They didn't say my evidence was manipulated, they just want some additional comfort before they take action.

Regarding money out of their pockets, sure, but their greater concern is the bigger picture being the long term viability of their business and its integrity. They are simply taking the most professional route they are aware of. The only fault I really see is the amount of credence they place in Beckett. PWCC needs to realize that Beckett is not an expert on altered patches.

I know it is popular to bash PWCC but in actuality they do what they can to ensure integrity in their auctions. This fake patch issue is new to them so the hobby needs to let them figure it out. And they will, Brent is no idiot.

A consignor can NEVER ensure integrity in their auctions. Whether patch faking or shilling, PWCC and every other consignor has zero ability to ensure that neither thing happens.

 

[gomaz]

A consignor can NEVER ensure integrity in their auctions. Whether patch faking or shilling, PWCC and every other consignor has zero ability to ensure that neither thing happens.

Obviously. But they still do what they can. They discourage it and they do investigate possible shillings.

In any event, this thread is about fake patches so let's leave it at that.

And even better let's wait and see what they do about the Malkin card for which they have been provided an original image.

 

[SNobles]

I don't see it this way. They have no way to verify that the image I sent them is authentic. They are taking the conservative route. They are going to Beckett first because in this hobby, right or wrong, Beckett is considered to be one of the experts. To say that they would say video evidence is manipulated too is pretty much just an unfounded assumption. One that I strongly think is highly accusatory and unfair, until/if it comes to fruition. They didn't say my evidence was manipulated, they just want some additional comfort before they take action.

Regarding money out of their pockets, sure, but their greater concern is the bigger picture being the long term viability of their business and its integrity. They are simply taking the most professional route they are aware of. The only fault I really see is the amount of credence they place in Beckett. PWCC needs to realize that Beckett is not an expert on altered patches.

I know it is popular to bash PWCC but in actuality they do what they can to ensure integrity in their auctions. This fake patch issue is new to them so the hobby needs to let them figure it out. And they will, Brent is no idiot.

Not bashing PWCC, never used them to buy or sell but when you get information sent to you with a scan/photo of the card as it was and then saying they are siding with the grading company is basically saying that the scan/photo you have provided is the "fake" or "altered" patch at this time. Hopefully they are able to work it out with Beckett but I have no idea how they would ever be able to help them in this manor since as you said they have no idea what the original patch was.

 

[gomaz]

They have taken down the Malkin auction!

I haven't heard back but I'm sure they are being cautious.

Props to PWCC.

 

[SNobles]

They have taken down the Malkin auction!

I haven't heard back but I'm sure they are being cautious.

Props to PWCC.

Yup, that will go a long way with people buying and selling with them.

Huge move by them.