Someone bought a one-of-one Tom Brady rookie trading card — a 2000 Fleer Showcase Masterpieces — for nearly $400,000 at auction last week.
Problem is, the card isn’t actually a one-of-one. A second, identical one also exists, and both are foil-stamped as being the sole card. Yet it doesn’t appear to be fraud.
Advertisement
Both of the cards had been authenticated by one of the major card-grading agencies — one by Beckett Grading Services (or BGS), the other by Professional Sports Authenticator (PSA). PWCC, the auction house that sold the card, disclosed the pains it took to confirm the provenance of both cards in the item description prior to the listing going live — going so far as to fly the card to BGS’ headquarters to confirm its authenticity and create a video showing both “1/1” cards — so bidders would know the card wasn’t a true 1/1. The second card, graded by PSA, remains in private hands and is not for sale.
PWCC also provided The Athletic with the backstories of both cards and a copy of the letter of certification from BGS.
So this isn’t so much “person buys Tom Brady’s last touchdown ball and it turns out not to be.” This is “we knew there were two, we confirmed both are authentic, what an odd situation … let’s get to the bidding.”
The buyer of the PWCC-listed card declined to speak about their decision to purchase the 8.5 grade (near-mint condition) Brady. Its initial list price at auction was $1,000 two weeks ago, though it quickly jumped to $150,000 and then $170,000 before eventually selling for $396,000 late Thursday.
It remains a mystery, however, how two of what were supposed to be one-of-one cards came to both be in the marketplace.
It’s not possible to ask Fleer — it was bought by Marvel for $540 million in 1992 — because it is long out of business, a casualty of the overproduction/over-licensing era. Upper Deck bought the Fleer name in 2005 for a reported $6.1 million. It’s possible, industry sources said, that amid the financial failure and change in ownership, cards never meant for retail sale got loose into the world — a rarity, particularly among highly sought cards.
Advertisement
The card industry ramped up its use of artificial scarcity at the turn of the century to drive consumer interest as manufacturers tried to recover from the 1990s implosion, and the 1/1 Brady card is one example of a rookie who went on to elite fame — fueling the value of his early cards.
Rare cards, particularly rookies of the best players, with serialized limited production runs and adorned with autographs and maybe a swatch of jersey fabric, are catnip to collectors and investors. Those can make for headline-grabbing sales in the millions of dollars.
There are many Brady rookie cards, and the one in question is not even the most coveted — a Beckett-graded Mint 9 “2000 Playoff Contenders Championship” Brady rookie card sold for a then-football card record $3.1 million in June 2021 — but it’s among the cards for which collectors will still pay a handsome sum.
Even, apparently, if it’s not truly a one-of-a-kind card.
It appears that PWCC’s disclosure explanation and the confirmation that both cards were authenticated were enough to satisfy any buyer concerns. Card authentication and grading, particularly for the priciest cards, is critical because of ethics and fraud issues within the industry, particularly altering older cards to improve their value. The trading card industry has plenty of horror stories about swindles and manipulation of cards to boost resale value — and PWCC has been at the center of an FBI investigation — so skepticism and due diligence are wise to have when investing in cards.
Jesse Craig, PWCC’s director of business operations, supplied answers to questions submitted by The Athletic prior to the auction’s close. They have been lightly edited for clarity and length.
How did this card come to auction?
The card comes from a client who we have a history of working with but isn’t a high-volume buyer or seller. They’re a collector who likes Tom Brady. The owner told me directly they paid about $2,000 for this card in 2005 and felt that was a very high price at the time. Now they say they wish they had spent the money to purchase some of the Tom Brady Championship Ticket cards as well, as those are consistently selling above $1 million at auction. But it appears this was the lone elite Brady asset they bought.
Advertisement
Why are they selling?
The owner recently determined they’d like to move this Brady card and, as they don’t store items in the PWCC Vault, they sent this in via mail. Because they don’t move cards a lot, this specific card stayed in a private collection and hadn’t been seen by many eyes.
How did the issue of a possible second card come to light?
When we received the card, we connected with another client of ours who is a known Brady collector and card expert to inquire about the history. That’s when we discovered that this collector also owned the card — but in a PSA Authentic case.
We have systems in place in our software platform and curation process that monitor for instances like this. That said, with this specific card, we found this as part of initial due diligence. We asked the owner of the PSA copy if we could examine their copy and they agreed.
Are there measures to ensure it’s not a really well-done fraud beyond trusting the two grading agencies?
Before we took the card to Beckett, we did an in-house review. This included confirming key information with the seller such as when they bought it, where the purchase took place and how much they paid. We wanted that on the record to ensure it aligned with Beckett’s eventual analysis of when the card was first encased. We later determined the seller’s stated pedigree of the card did align with Beckett’s documented history. Beckett originally graded and encapsulated this card on Feb. 5, 2004, and confirmed it is still in the original case. The owner purchased the card in 2005.
What was the internal review process?
We were able to compare the two cards side-by-side using a jeweler’s loupe. In the foil stamping process conducted for the “1-of-1” text on the back, you would expect to see micro-level defects that exist. These defects would be near-impossible to replicate. The foil stamping on the back of each card, defects and all, appears to be identical. This is what you want to see in confirming these are both authentic. There also appear to be flaws in the fine details of the ink used on the back of the card. These flaws are matched between the two cards.
We also examined the two cards against others that would have been used in the same printing as the 1-of-1 cards. We compared the ink flaws against the /2000 and /20 versions of these cards to further confirm their authenticity, and the flaws in those align with these two 1-of-1 copies. The results indicate they are all highly likely part of the same print run. That said, and this is extremely important to note, we are not authenticators of cards. Thus, we took it to Beckett for final review.
How did the Beckett review work?
I got on an airplane with the card and flew it to Beckett’s office in Texas. We had a meeting with the Beckett team and had them reaffirm their assessment — not only of the technical grade but that it is a genuine copy in the original case and that the case matched the timeframe of the seller’s story. This all lined up. We also requested an additional letter of authenticity, which Beckett provided and which we will be providing to the winner of the auction.
Advertisement
This was the point where we finally determined we could list the card for auction, confidently back it with the PWCC Marketplace Guarantee and announce to the world that we agree with the authenticity assessments that both copies are genuine.
Are there other known instances of a 1/1 card having a second (or more) version come to light?
Yes, we know of other instances of two 1-of-1 cards existing. It’s rare, but it does happen. We have heard — but can’t confirm — that there are two Peyton Manning 1-of-1s out there from this same set. Another we’ve heard of is the 2003 Exquisite Collection Kobe Bryant 1-of-1 having a second copy. Again, we can’t actively confirm these with images.
Aside from fraud, how can there be more than one 1-of-1 cards out there?
There are typically two ways a duplicate 1-of-1 occurs. Sometimes it is planned out. For ultramodern cards that were printed post-2010, you’ll sometimes see a company make two copies of a 1-of-1 and then a year later rebrand it with a new stamp or as an insert in a different product line. That’s not incredibly common, but it is a known practice and it’s a planned approach.
The far more rare version of this story is that two copies get released into the wild. We’ve informally heard of this happening but never had it confirmed by a company to us. This would be more common to see in the late 1990s to 2010 era. Cards back then weren’t worth nearly as much, so the idea of a second 1-of-1 being put out in the world really was far less exciting or noteworthy than it is today.
This is why third-party grading companies with trusted processes and expertise, who will stand by their grades and authentication, are so critical. It is the duty of these companies to determine authenticity, even when there is a uniqueness to a card’s story. We rely on their evaluation — and in this case, their re-evaluation — to ensure we are comfortable with selling a card under our Marketplace Guarantee.
What’s PWCC’s auction history with other versions of this card? How popular is it among the many Brady rookies?
We do see the /2000 version of the card sell on our marketplaces with some regularity for a limited issue. Since the launch of our new platform in October 2021, we’ve seen 11 sales of the /2000 version through our marketplaces. We had two BGS 9 copies both sell for $11,000 during this time. One sold in November 2021 and another in December 2021. The most recent sale was a PSA 6 for $3,240 in February 2022.
As for how popular it is, collectors definitely like it. The /2000 can sell north of $10,000 in a high grade, and the /20, while very rare to see go to auction, would likely command 10 times that or more.
Advertisement
Is this card receiving the usual bid lifecycle such a card would receive, or is there hesitation because of the issue around being 2/1?
So far, it has proven to be a popular card. We’ve been doing everything we can to make it extremely clear what people are bidding on. We’ve put the background in the card description, discussed it on the accompanying video, published an article on our site and conducted outreach to our client base via email with links to the card’s story. We know this is the right way to tell this card’s story, but admittedly we were wondering what the response would be.
If one of these cards did turn out to be a fake, what is the recourse for the buyer/seller?
The determination of the card being real or fake is ultimately the responsibility of professional authenticators. In the event that the authenticator changes its original assessment, it would need to address the impact.
PWCC has reviewed the details and fully agrees with the authenticity assessments of both BGS and PSA on these cards, thus we are applying our own Marketplace Guarantee on the sale. Our guarantee asserts that the authenticity and grade assigned in the listing are steadfast and that in the event of any discrepancy PWCC would take an active role in ensuring the original buyer’s purchase price is protected.
(Photos courtesy of PWCC)
ncG1vNJzZmismJqutbTLnquim16YvK57kmxpbmhobnxzfJFrZmltX2d%2BcMDOpmSbqpGZxm6%2Bzqiiop1dmK6zsI4%3D