A_Pharis
Active member
clear plastic covering the material instead of open windows would make faking harder.
They could still split the card front/back, though.
They could still split the card front/back, though.
Welcome to our community
Be apart of something great, join today!
Hockey Patch forger caught
- Thread starter MartinFFcollector
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
A_Pharis said:
a database of patch cards would be better
if a company kept records of what the patch series cards look like that would pretty much solve it.
- Thread starter
- #23
MartinFFcollector
New member
UD Response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just wanted to chime in quickly here as Bruce shared this post with me. I won't be able to go back and forth on this so I apologize, but just wanted to at least explain our position on it and answer some questions that came up.
When we see situations like this, we look at legal action we can take. If we believe there is a case we usually will go after them on copyright infringement. They have changed our product where we authenticate a game-used swatch is used and they have changed it. For a variety of reasons, we don't comment on cases filed and what happens to people we go after, but we certainly do not turn a blind eye to it. I shared this thread with our legal team and they are reviewing.
I also shared the thread with our head of creative who ended up coming in my office shortly after I sent it over to discuss this. He's a pretty busy guy, but he came over because he takes it very seriously. He shared that we continue to look at ways to deter this practice of changing swatches out. We have looked at adding die-packs, stitching the swatch to the card, adding microfibers to the card and even sealing the edges, but the costs tied to these are pretty extreme to say the least. We discussed it and I'm of the belief these extra costs are not worth putting in because ultimately, you will end up paying for some of that.
We have taken preventative action and made scans before, but that too is very difficult as the timing on everything is so tight and counts need to be taken anytime you move cards. Additionally, you do not want to risk damaging the cards during that process either. We want to limit the handling of higher-end cards like this as much as possible. It sounds so easy, but when you do it, you realize what a big deal it is to pull off.
It’s tough, as you know where there is money to be made there are always those who are looking to take advantage. These people just care about the fast buck and after they’ve been kicked off e-bay, message boards and threatened with legal action, they pop up again under a different name. In my opinion they are like cockroaches. Luckily there are more of us than there are of them to shine a light on what they do. So on behalf of Upper Deck and myself as a sports card afficianado, thank you for any and all of your efforts to deter this practice and make examples of these people.
Chris
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just wanted to chime in quickly here as Bruce shared this post with me. I won't be able to go back and forth on this so I apologize, but just wanted to at least explain our position on it and answer some questions that came up.
When we see situations like this, we look at legal action we can take. If we believe there is a case we usually will go after them on copyright infringement. They have changed our product where we authenticate a game-used swatch is used and they have changed it. For a variety of reasons, we don't comment on cases filed and what happens to people we go after, but we certainly do not turn a blind eye to it. I shared this thread with our legal team and they are reviewing.
I also shared the thread with our head of creative who ended up coming in my office shortly after I sent it over to discuss this. He's a pretty busy guy, but he came over because he takes it very seriously. He shared that we continue to look at ways to deter this practice of changing swatches out. We have looked at adding die-packs, stitching the swatch to the card, adding microfibers to the card and even sealing the edges, but the costs tied to these are pretty extreme to say the least. We discussed it and I'm of the belief these extra costs are not worth putting in because ultimately, you will end up paying for some of that.
We have taken preventative action and made scans before, but that too is very difficult as the timing on everything is so tight and counts need to be taken anytime you move cards. Additionally, you do not want to risk damaging the cards during that process either. We want to limit the handling of higher-end cards like this as much as possible. It sounds so easy, but when you do it, you realize what a big deal it is to pull off.
It’s tough, as you know where there is money to be made there are always those who are looking to take advantage. These people just care about the fast buck and after they’ve been kicked off e-bay, message boards and threatened with legal action, they pop up again under a different name. In my opinion they are like cockroaches. Luckily there are more of us than there are of them to shine a light on what they do. So on behalf of Upper Deck and myself as a sports card afficianado, thank you for any and all of your efforts to deter this practice and make examples of these people.
Chris
that email from Chris Carlin?
- Thread starter
- #26
MartinFFcollector
New member
cgilmo said:
Yes. Well... posted what I copied on HI under that name.
flightposite
Active member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 2,999
- 0
I have two comments.
1. There is proof positive for all you, "Well, there are no signs of altering", for the last time, these people are so good, you can't tell.
2. UD wants to limit the handling of a card to keep it is as good of shape as possible... That is probably a good thing, they barely touch there cards now and they already come out looking like they went through a blender. There highest product, Exquisite, always has condition problems.
1. There is proof positive for all you, "Well, there are no signs of altering", for the last time, these people are so good, you can't tell.
2. UD wants to limit the handling of a card to keep it is as good of shape as possible... That is probably a good thing, they barely touch there cards now and they already come out looking like they went through a blender. There highest product, Exquisite, always has condition problems.
matchpenalty
New member
cgilmo said:
and they should also show the jersey itself before it was cut up and how it was obtained and who authenticated it.
plainwhitejerseys
New member
- May 20, 2009
- 676
- 0
ffgameman said:
So? What's "authentic"? What's the difference between a replica jersey that UD bought and cut up and a replica jersey the seller bought and cut up? Neither of them are game-worn. Both of them are there purely for decoration.
Card Magnet
New member
Shouldn't this be on the hockey board?
MartinFFcollector said:
Thats the site i was telling you about a few weeks back there Chris. The one that i told you was making the new sports card magazine, insiders edge. Its actually a really good mag, way better than the Beckett mag.
card magnets ff collector made a thread on the Hockey boards as well
Heres a thread on the Hockey boards....
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=47443
- Thread starter
- #33
MartinFFcollector
New member
Card Magnet said:
Yes, and it is. I also posted it here to make others aware who don't frequent the hockey board.
porkNbeans
New member
- May 15, 2009
- 12
- 0
UD Response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just wanted to chime in quickly here. While I was browsing californiahelpwanted.com, Bruce shared this post with me. I won't be able to go back and forth on this because I just don't care. So I apologize, but just wanted to at least explain our position on it and ambiguously answer some questions that came up.
When we see situations like this, we look at ways we might afford to hire someone with the kind of talent this guy has. There is really no legal action we can take, because our lawyers have never worked pro bono and we ain't paying squat to pursue this. If we see an e-mail with absolute proof such as this one, we usually delete it immediatly--unless we are tricked by the 'larger *****' in the header. You would think that we would go after them on copyright infringement. However, we have already been paid for the product and have no interest in the secondary market sales. They have changed our product where we authenticate a swatch is used and they have changed it by putting patch pieces in the card which we would never, ever use. For a variety of reasons, we don't comment on cases filed unless they are through the California Better Business Bureau. Usually nothing happens to people we go after, but we certainly do not turn a blind eye to it. In fact, we are legally blind in both eyes. I shared this thread with our legal team and he is laughing.
I also shared the thread with our head of creative who ended up coming in my office. He's a pretty busy guy, do you know how long it takes to pull some of these redemption replacements out of his ass? He takes it very seriously. He shared that we continue to look at ways to profit from these practices of changing swatches out. We have looked at adding a warning sticker, but our cards are already covered with stickers. We discussed it and I'm of the belief these extra costs are not worth putting in because ultimately, you will end up paying for some of that, and we are about at the pricepoint where our garbage won't sell at all.
We have made scans before, but that too is very difficult as the timing on everything is so tight and counts need to be taken anytime you move cards. We have to get an accurate count of backdoored product afterall. Additionally, you do not want to risk damaging the cards sent to Beckett during that process either. We want to limit the handling of higher-end cards like this as much as possible. That is why we only hand seed our high end products to ensure great value in each box. It sounds so easy, but when you do it, you realize the word value is subjective at best and what a big deal it is to pull off without laughing.
It’s tough, as you know where there is money to be made there are always those who are looking to take advantage, much like eBay and their ever escalating fee structure. These people just care about the fast buck and after they’ve not been kicked off e-bay, they just sit back, laugh hysterically and list fake patch after fake patch. In my opinion they are like cockroaches and manufactured patch cards--they always turn up. Luckily there are collectors out there to shine a light on what they do. So on behalf of Upper Deck and myself as a sports cardboard crack dealer, thank you for any and all of your worthless efforts to deter this practice and make examples of these people--oh and please buy Legendary Cuts, this product is loaded!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just wanted to chime in quickly here. While I was browsing californiahelpwanted.com, Bruce shared this post with me. I won't be able to go back and forth on this because I just don't care. So I apologize, but just wanted to at least explain our position on it and ambiguously answer some questions that came up.
When we see situations like this, we look at ways we might afford to hire someone with the kind of talent this guy has. There is really no legal action we can take, because our lawyers have never worked pro bono and we ain't paying squat to pursue this. If we see an e-mail with absolute proof such as this one, we usually delete it immediatly--unless we are tricked by the 'larger *****' in the header. You would think that we would go after them on copyright infringement. However, we have already been paid for the product and have no interest in the secondary market sales. They have changed our product where we authenticate a swatch is used and they have changed it by putting patch pieces in the card which we would never, ever use. For a variety of reasons, we don't comment on cases filed unless they are through the California Better Business Bureau. Usually nothing happens to people we go after, but we certainly do not turn a blind eye to it. In fact, we are legally blind in both eyes. I shared this thread with our legal team and he is laughing.
I also shared the thread with our head of creative who ended up coming in my office. He's a pretty busy guy, do you know how long it takes to pull some of these redemption replacements out of his ass? He takes it very seriously. He shared that we continue to look at ways to profit from these practices of changing swatches out. We have looked at adding a warning sticker, but our cards are already covered with stickers. We discussed it and I'm of the belief these extra costs are not worth putting in because ultimately, you will end up paying for some of that, and we are about at the pricepoint where our garbage won't sell at all.
We have made scans before, but that too is very difficult as the timing on everything is so tight and counts need to be taken anytime you move cards. We have to get an accurate count of backdoored product afterall. Additionally, you do not want to risk damaging the cards sent to Beckett during that process either. We want to limit the handling of higher-end cards like this as much as possible. That is why we only hand seed our high end products to ensure great value in each box. It sounds so easy, but when you do it, you realize the word value is subjective at best and what a big deal it is to pull off without laughing.
It’s tough, as you know where there is money to be made there are always those who are looking to take advantage, much like eBay and their ever escalating fee structure. These people just care about the fast buck and after they’ve not been kicked off e-bay, they just sit back, laugh hysterically and list fake patch after fake patch. In my opinion they are like cockroaches and manufactured patch cards--they always turn up. Luckily there are collectors out there to shine a light on what they do. So on behalf of Upper Deck and myself as a sports cardboard crack dealer, thank you for any and all of your worthless efforts to deter this practice and make examples of these people--oh and please buy Legendary Cuts, this product is loaded!!!
TheSportsCardFile
New member
I prefer Heritage SP's because you can alter the swatches in them. 
RL24
New member
porkNbeans said:
:lol: :lol: :lol:
That was awesome!
bballcardkid
New member
This would actually be a perfect oppurtunity for an authenticating team to step in, such as BGS in the first year of Prime Cuts. Card companies should have these cards come out of the packs in a BGS holder. Cracking one of these, altering the card, then resealing it is a lot harder process than altering the card alone. Until this happens, I will continue to not purchase game used items.
plainwhitejerseys
New member
- May 20, 2009
- 676
- 0
G $MONEY$ said:Tomlinson21RB said:
Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) are looking at laying charges
Ooooooh, not the mounties!
uniquebaseballcards
New member
- Nov 12, 2008
- 6,783
- 0
This statement should be scary to investors!
porkNbeans said:
