Authenticity Opinions: Young American Caramel

[Smanzari]

Hey all-

I picked this card up for a pretty great price at a card show and was wondering what people thought of its authenticity. It seems to feel and have the wear and tear of a card from that period, however, the font on the front seems to be strange to me. I am in no way familiar with these cards (and neither was the dealer), but got it at a price worth a gamble!

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f48/SMVintage/young.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f48/SMVintage/young1.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f48/SMVintage/IMG_7550.jpeg

[ullmandds]

it's fake...the type is all wrong.

[Smanzari]

it's fake...the type is all wrong.

Thanks for the reply, that's what I was thinking...

[ullmandds]

With smart phones...you have the capability to compare to a real one...major advantage over the good old days.

[Smanzari]

With smart phones...you have the capability to compare to a real one...major advantage over the good old days.

Yea, I didn't know a set name, had the dealer basically throw it in on a deal (he was iffy about it too- even warned me that he didn't know); figured it was bad there was just a little bit of hope! lol

[steve B]

Now the big question.

In the cell pic the back looks like it may be ok, but the scan doesn't.

Is it a fake front glued to a real but beat common?

Steve B

[npa589]

Steve's right about that, the scan says the back is fake as well, but coloration looks a little more accurate in the cell pic --- though that is most likely illusory!

Definitely not authentic, but glad to hear your not in it too heavily. If he is a dealer, he really should know one way or the other, and if he doesn't, he should not even sell it for a penny.

[ullmandds]

not sure I agree about the back...that looks fake to me too!

[chaddurbin]

the cell pic of the back shows the fakeness off nicely, just compare the artificially aged dirtiness to the ghost-white paper loss. 100 yr old cards don't have that kind of discrepancy.