How many people on Ebay will be duped by these?

[the 'stache]

A T206 collector will spot them as fakes. But to the uninformed consumer, or a newbie, once these sets are broken up, this spells trouble. Big trouble.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/T206-Reproduction-Set-/190879909037?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item2c715444ad

They're pristine now. But it's not hard to add a little corner wear, or soil the edges just a bit.

Now, I'm not saying anything bad about the creator of these cards. As somebody that has started collecting the set, I'd love to have these to look at. But you know there are unscrupulous people that will take these, and take advantage of others. There is nothing that identifies them as reprints, at least from what I can see, and that's opening Pandora's box.

Net 54, and reputable dealers are more important than ever.

[the 'stache]

Hmm, I'm sorry guys, it looks like this has already been discussed here last year. It's late, I'm on lots of pain meds, and I'm not thinking too clearly I guess. I'd done a quick search on Google, but only after starting the topic did I go back and search on the seller's name.

Here's the original discussion:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=151826&page=2

The thing that bothered me most was this line:

These cards are virtually indistinguishable from the originals.

As no pictures of the backs are provided, and no mention of "reproduction" being printed on the back was mentioned in the auction description, I assumed the worst as far as fakes being sold.

But what I would like to do now, seeing as how it's been almost 15 months since the original discussion, is ask if any of you seasoned T206 collectors have seen these being passed off as originals on Ebay? I wouldn't expect you to buy them, of course, but have these at all become a problem in the "wrong hands"?

Thanks in advance for your input. ;)

[steve B]

I think the $195 price will keep the reprint sellers and fakers away. It's far easier to print your own, or buy any of the much cheaper reprints that are out there.

They do look better than his trimmed "NM" cards.

Steve B

[ZenPop]

I just checked out his website and the back of the cards are labeled as "reproduction"...

Some scammer could remove that, but he did a great job w/ quality and also put it in small type at the bottom...

[ALR-bishop]

Fritsch has bee selling reproductions of this set and numerous other old sets for years. What is a "newbie" anyway ?

[itjclarke]

Thanks for posting Bill, I hadn't seen the previous thread.

I don't like these. Like you, I don't think I have a real problem with the seller/maker of them. If there's a market and they can sell these, more power to them (I guess). I just don't like that they exist at all, whether they say reprint on the back or not. Some people may want these as display pieces, but I'm sure there are as many, or more licking their chops at the prospect of rebacking these with real Sweet Cap/Piedmont/PB/EPDG/etc backs and then slipping them it into cracked SGC or PSA cases.

It's great PSA is re-designing their holders.. but I view that with the same opinion I've had about the countermeasures (watermarks/etc) for counterfeit money... why fake the new money (or crack the new PSA holder) when you can just print off a bunch of the old bills (or swap cards into old cases).

[sbfinley]

I have this set. Picked it up several years ago and put it in a binder out on the coffee table. Been in a box, however, since I moved.

I don't really think this true "threat" to unknowledgeable collectors. You can't post post a Wagner, Plank, or Cobb listed as authentic on eBay that hasn't been authenticated and enough collectors follow the market that if a Young, WoJo, Matty, or other top Hall of Fame star is listed it would be reported almost instantly. Thus you are left with the semi-star/common market and honestly if you can make a living passing off fake Joe Lake cards more power to you.

[gnaz01]

I bought this set from Mike last year, as I will NEVER be able to collect the whole set, and what I can tell you about them is, in hand, they feel and look incredible. I only imagine this is what they felt like 100+ years ago pulling them from packs of Piedmont, SC, etc.

This is, IMHO, the definitive reproduction set out there today. No glossy fronts, no bad printing on the back, etc. they are beautiful!!

Greg

[drcy]

Newbie is slang for a beginner, someone new to an area. "This is your first day on the job? Welcome, newbie."

My opinion has long been that reprints should be significantly and obviously different than the originals. If someone complains that a reprint is too close-looking to the originals, I will most likely agree with them.

[the 'stache]

I just checked out his website and the back of the cards are labeled as "reproduction"...

Some scammer could remove that, but he did a great job w/ quality and also put it in small type at the bottom...

Yup, I saw in the older thread that "reprint" was placed on the back of the card. I was concerned initially because we could not see the backs of the cards in the auction, and it was not mentioned.

What is a "newbie" anyway ?

Somebody like me, Al, who has collected baseball cards, but does not have a lot of experience with buying vintage cards. I'm a "newbie" to this niche.

I don't really think this true "threat" to unknowledgeable collectors. You can't post post a Wagner, Plank, or Cobb listed as authentic on eBay that hasn't been authenticated and enough collectors follow the market that if a Young, WoJo, Matty, or other top Hall of Fame star is listed it would be reported almost instantly. Thus you are left with the semi-star/common market and honestly if you can make a living passing off fake Joe Lake cards more power to you.

It's true, collectors do a pretty darned good job of policing the vintage and pre-war portion of the hobby, and for that, I am grateful, believe me. And maybe the "crooks" out there know that well enough so they won't even try. I'm just concerned that a few might slip through, and somebody could end up buying a $1,000 Walter Johnson with "reprint" magically removed from the back, only to discover it was a fake years later. If the technology exists to make cards that are so close to the original, it also exists to alter those same cards. I don't know if it would be some form of bleaching, etc, but anything is possible so long as there is money to be made.

[Zach Wheat]

Bill,

There were some of these listed on eBay. The seller was trying to pass them off as originals but it was fairly easy to pick up on....as when back scans we're viewed there was damage at the exact same spot on every card.

Coincidentally, it happened to be where the "Reprint" should have been on the back. I thought they were fairly easy to spot.

Z Wheat

[the 'stache]

Thanks, Zach. I'm assuming Ebay took those down, no doubt after being flooded by Net 54 members :D

I'd be curious as to just how they would try to remove the reprint. Do they get a little scraper, or put a piece of tape at the top and bottom, and say "these amazing near-pristine T206 cards were just discovered in my grandfather's basement. They were glued in a book. Sadly, the taped area at the bottom has left a little damage"..

[Zach Wheat]

Bill,

It was actually a combination of things that when considered together led you to believe they were all repros. 3 or 4 had the Reproduction scraped off with a knife, others were missing the bottom portion due to being glued in an album, most had funny corner wear unlike any normally aged T206, and the color of the paper underneath the corner wear looked too white.

With all the evidence taken together it was easy to figure out what the guy was doing. I don't think eBay did anything either but not sure. I do not remember how the auctions ended up.

Z Wheat