What do you guys think about..........Cardtarget [Archive]

View Full Version : What do you guys think about..........Cardtarget

Archive

02-17-2006, 04:51 AM

Posted By: Tom Boblitt<a href="http://www.cardtarget.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi" target="_new" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://www.cardtarget.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi</a" target="_new">http://www.cardtarget.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi</a</a>>

Archive

02-17-2006, 04:53 AM

Posted By: warshawlawA card isn't a company; Why would I want to own a fractional share of a card that I never get to touch?

Archive

02-17-2006, 05:10 AM

Posted By: Chris McThis is really dumb. It's the same principle as the stock market, which unless you buy a stock that gives dividends isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Stocks are shares of a company but what say do you have, same as the these card stocks. If people really took a hard look at the stock market and what it really was, it would all crash. Save your money and buy a card you can afford and hold. That's the real deal not a worthless piece of paper that says you own shares in something. My two cents.

Archive

02-17-2006, 05:29 AM

Posted By: Jay MillerThere are many factors to consider in looking at this: 1-Are you an investor or a collector-If an investor go on 2-Will high grade(read expensive) vintage cards outperform lower value cards--If so go on 3-Is the fee for performing this service reasonable-If so go on If you are at this point maybe it is worth looking into this further. Not for me but possibly for others. Funds invest in alot of things from stocks to commodities to real estate. This is effectively a fund investing in a diversified portfolio of high grade baseball cards.

Archive

02-17-2006, 05:59 AM

Posted By: howardHas anyone checked out the cards they are selling shares of? A bunch of cr_p. If anyone but the owners of this site make money I'll eat my entire collection.

Archive

02-17-2006, 06:00 AM

Posted By: Tom Boblittfew stocks even pay a dividend anymore but just eliciting some responses. This guy came over here a while back asking about vintage cards. Don't know if anyone remembers him. He was asking about scarcity, grading and some other issues in the vintage cards market. His 'Cardtarget' market is pretty slick otherwise. I have followed it a little and they trade the 'Etopps' cards. Not a good market for them in particular but this guy has this secondary market where you can buy and trade them and it's pretty slick. Just wondering where it will all go....

Archive

02-17-2006, 06:13 AM

Posted By: leonBut not for most on this board, I don't think. I would rather own a $10-$20 vintage card (Obak, strip, lower grade T card etc..) than a piece of paper showing I own part of a card locked up somewhere else...Sounds sort of crazy to me....but then again so did "pet rocks".....

Archive

02-17-2006, 06:35 AM

Posted By: Kevin CummingsFractional shares of items that are very expensive and you want to share might make sense in some areas (airplanes; vacation condos), but I think fractional shares of sports memorabilia makes no sense at all. Since most of us treat card collecting as a hobby and not as an investment, physical possession of what we hunt for is the name of the game. It might sound selfish, but if I can afford a $100,000 card, I don't want to share it with anyone else (at least in terms of letting them own it part of the time). And if I'm going to spend $X for something, I want it to be something I can hold any time I want.

Archive

02-17-2006, 06:56 AM

Posted By: jackgoodmanDidn't the founder of PSA originally try to do something like this - selling securities backed by portfolios of "investment grade" cards? Didn't go anywhere then as I remember.

Archive

02-17-2006, 07:24 AM

Posted By: Josh K.Im really surprised that no one is jumping all over the "stocks arent worth more than the paper they are written on" statement. Its just plain wrong. By that same token, since the US no longer recognizes the gold standard, paper money is worth no more than the paper its written on either. Yet we all recognize that paper money has value.

Archive

02-17-2006, 07:42 AM

Posted By: Max WederPerhaps someone with US securities law background can comment: is there any issue here about publicly selling security interests not by way of prospectus or offering memorandum? The numbers may be small enough that there is an exemption or perhaps no regulatory body would care, but it did strike me as a question to ask. Max

Archive

02-17-2006, 08:13 AM

Posted By: Jon CanfieldI'm only a law student but it seems to me that under a Howey analysis, card target would be considered offering a security and must register with the SEC. In short, a Howey analysis states that something is a security if: 1. there is an investment of money 2. in a common enterprise 3. with the expectation of profits 4. derived solely from the efforts of others In the actual Howey case, for example, fractual ownership of an orange grove was found to be a security and as such, needed to register with the SEC before being legal... Edited to add that I believe the minimum number of investors needed is either 9 or 15.

Archive

02-17-2006, 08:29 AM

Posted By: dstudebaThat argument about stocks not paying dividends being worthless is just laughably ignorant. I do recall that this was done with coins a while back. Many portfolios of fine coins were created and as I recall some municipalities lost money and got in hot water for investing in groups of overgraded coins. I think Bruce McNall was involved in some of them. To me, this site is purely an investment vehicle so unless they have some prospectus and some proven history in the securities business I woudn't look into it, even if I was interested in investing in baseball cards. (edited to add a missing and)

Archive

02-17-2006, 08:41 AM

Posted By: Josh K.ok, Jon - this is completely off point, but Ive got to ask - how does a law student afford a classic car collection, a jag and a vintage bb card collection? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> (actually, please dont feel any obligation to respond to this - I just know when I was in law school I was lucky to scrap up some cash for pizza).

Archive

02-17-2006, 08:45 AM

Posted By: Chris McIf you have stock you own a piece of paper that has a worth of only what another party is willing to pay for it. I have a opinion and have stated it as I see it. You don't have to agree. I have invested in tangible assets and have done well. I view stocks not as tangible assets but as pieces of paper that state I hold a share of a company. This type of investing holds no interest for me. I think calling my view as "ignorant" is a little over the top but you are entitled your own opinion. Best to all, Chris

Archive

02-17-2006, 08:56 AM

Posted By: dstudebaI called the opinion ignorant because a stock has more than a paper value. It is backed by the assets of the company. If you liquidated the company whatever you are left with would be divided up amoung the shareholders. Therefore in most cases as a shareholder even if no one was willing to buy your shares, it would still have a value. Also if the stock was not liquid the shareholders would most likely force the company to pay a dividend creating a cash stream of "more" tangible value.

Archive

02-17-2006, 09:05 AM

Posted By: howardThis has gotten off topic. I think stock market discussions should be done via private e-mails.

Archive

02-17-2006, 09:13 AM

Posted By: DerekDoes this mean if you buy 51% of the card that you can have full posetion? HAHA, Ill buy it for 3k and ask for my rights!!

Archive

02-17-2006, 09:28 AM

Posted By: barrysloateInvesting in a bread basket of cards is an interesting idea, but I would be less concerned with whether the cards are a good investment and more with who these guys are that you are sending your money. I think all of us are pretty knowledgable about the card market and I think any one of us could pick some quality cards that have a reasonable chance of increasing in value. What do these guys know that we don't already know ourselves?

Archive

02-17-2006, 04:04 PM

Posted By: warshawlawwent broke in part on coin schemes and some crooked pols in Ohio will be seeing the inside of jail cells in part on the same.

Archive

02-17-2006, 05:21 PM

Posted By: Bruce BabcockAccording to the site, Rickie Weeks cards (or shares thereof, or something or other) are available @ $7.61 and Kirk Hinrichs @ $3.00. I don't think I'm part of their target audience. And I'm pretty happy about it, too. I'll stick with Babe Adams and Fred Merkle. edited for spelling

Archive

02-17-2006, 09:04 PM

Posted By: Richard MassonNot that a municipality should do such a thing, but had they possessed more staying power, they would have been the richest county in America. There is no discernible difference between being right too soon and being wrong.

Archive

02-24-2006, 08:30 AM

Posted By: leonSince Mr.Cardtarget, I would use your name but don't know it, wants more exposure, and is trying to be helpful, I figured I would shoot this back to the top. best regards.....

Archive

02-24-2006, 08:40 AM

Posted By: warshawlawnever wrong, only early <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

02-24-2006, 08:41 AM

Posted By: jay behrensWhy not just cut up the card into little squares and insert them into packs of new cards? At least this way you actually have a piece of the card rather than a piece of paper that really isn't worth much more than the paper. Jay I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Archive

02-24-2006, 08:51 AM

Posted By: steve fHis post a year ago, when he was looking for advice from collectors; Mike Masinick CardTarget.com

Archive

02-24-2006, 08:54 AM

Posted By: warshawlawWhat they are doing appears to be issuing unregistered securities and conducting an illegal security trading enterprise. Under many state laws a security is very broadly defined to include virtually any kind of transferable share or investment contract, which is what this appears to be.

Archive

02-24-2006, 09:00 AM

Posted By: leonI am not sure he want's to hear that. Can you just send a check for a piece of paper showing you own part of a card, or is it shares in part of a card? It really looks like they spent a lot of time conjuring this up...

Archive

02-24-2006, 09:01 AM

Posted By: CardtargetApparently I'm allowed to post here Leon? Note that I never posted this or responded in this thread. In fact, I didn't even know this thread existed until 5 minutes ago. My name is Mike Masinick. Here's the deal: If CardTarget isn't for you, that's fine. I certainly respect that many of you have MUCH more experience dealing with vintage cards than we do. If you have the cash to spend at Mastronet auctions and the time to do the research and you enjoy your collection, you are not our target audience. No hurt feelings, I completely understand! To understand why/how CardTarget works you have to understand a lot about where we came from. Most of our users are people who got into eTopps cards. For those of you that don't know, eTopps cards are made by the Topps company and are stored in their "vault" and bought and sold online. That whole concept was modeled after the stock market and started back in 2000. For the most part, eTopps cards lost a lot of value. Many people lost a lot of money by purchasing these eTopps cards for $9.50 from Topps and then they can only sell them for $2 a few months later. The weird thing is, they kept buying them for $9.50. Why? Because the concept of eTopps is very fetching to a lot of people in the internet generation. Being able to speculate, buy and sell, have no shipping, etc was perfect for a lot of people looking for a hobby they could enjoy at work, at home, and on the road without having to make daily trips to the post office and have closets full of cards and a nagging wife asking them why they have a full basement. Fast forward 5 years and here we are. CardTarget has taken a lot of the negative things about eTopps and replaced them with a "marketplace" where you are buying a share in a card that likely isn't going to drop in value. You can build a collection of solid high grade stuff as long as you can sacrifice the ability to pick it up and look at it every morning. This is not an investment opportunity... It's an avenue for a new class of collector. It bears saying again that CardTarget was never intended for members of this message board. But I very much appreciate the help I've received from many of you. I will now change my username since it is apparently met with aggression from the moderator. It was not my intention to invade this forum or use it for any advertising purpose. In fact, I'd prefer you all stay away from CardTarget for a few months until we streamline the processes and get the market to a more advanced state. =) Feel free to email me with any questions. mike@cardtarget.com Bottom line: Many people enjoy it and it provides them an outlet and a community. You might not be one of them, but don't discourage those of us who do enjoy online collecting from getting into vintage cards. It's all in the name of enjoyment.

Archive

02-24-2006, 09:06 AM

Posted By: leonFair enough....good luck with it...and no I wasn't being aggressive. I asked not to hijack a different thread and you responded after that. I deleted it because I had asked not to do that. This thread is fine and you have explained yourself. You're right. It's not for most on this board but maybe there is an audience somewhere.... Most on this board like to fondle and smell our cards <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>, at least I do.....

Archive

02-24-2006, 10:41 AM

Posted By: warshawlawBut when a business offers the general public a chance to buy into a pool of investment items, I think you are securitizing the investment items and it has to be registered under local and possibly Federal securities laws. Totally different than a bunch of people deciding to acquire an item as co-owners. And, if you were to form a business entity to own an item, you'd have to register it with the state under either its securities laws or an exemption to them.

Archive

02-24-2006, 11:07 AM

Posted By: jay behrensI noticed that he sidestepped the legal issue brought up by Adam. Although I have zero interest in ever getting involved with them, I certainly like to hear what have to say about what Adam brought up. He might even pick up a few customers if cleared up any legal concerns. Jay I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Archive

02-24-2006, 12:34 PM

Posted By: Mike MasinickWe passed our whole business plan through a team of lawyers before we began. While the laws are always, of course, open to interpretation, it is unlikely that the SEC would reasonably consider sports cards to be a "security" in their sense of the word. A security that the SEC deals with is a share in a business sold to raise funds for the business or to raise funds for a certain project. While some of you may have expectation of future results for sports cards and the word "investment" is thrown around, that is not how they are marketed by us or any of the CURRENT major retailers. They know better than to say that the cards they sell today will be worth more in the future. The people in our marketplace are purchasing a share of ownership in a physical item. What that item represents to them personally or to the marketplace is irrelevant. It's still a physical item that does not represent anything else (unlike a stock certificate which represents ownership in the profits and losses of an actual company). These physical items may go up or down in perceived "value", but that does not change the physical item in any way or change what they actually own. While we do have clauses in our user agreement for the sale of items, it is unlikely that many of our items will ever leave our marketplace once they enter. That said, we have made our marketplace as transparent as we possibly can. You'll know exactly how many shares any of the big holders of an item have before making your purchase and we do our best to make all of the information necessary to make an informed decision available to everybody. This is what the SEC is in place to make sure of... and even though we don't feel we are covered by the Securities acts of 1933 and 1934, we will do our best to give the market users any information requested in accordance with those documents. You're buying part of a sports card. That's it. We wrap it into a nice interface to make it more fun, pretty, and interesting and give users the look and feel of stock trading software, but it's still a sports card. Wayne Gretzky would be proud.

Archive

02-24-2006, 12:45 PM

Posted By: Mike MasinickI guess the most important issue is whether we are selling "investments" or selling parts of a sports card. You can argue that the reason people buy sports cards is an investment. But a more logical person, and I'd think most of you would agree, would think that people buy sports cards as a hobby and then if they happen to go up in value, that's great. We're selling the hobby, just packaged differently.

Archive

02-24-2006, 01:11 PM

Posted By: MarkThe investors have a lot of faith in the site's integrity. They can't view the cards in person (except for the possiblity that a few of the cards may be brought to shows in the future). So it takes some faith to believe that the cards were purchased in the first place when the IPO raises thousands of dollars for the site's owners. It also takes some faith to believe that the owner holds on to the cards - the shareholders have no right to receive (or view) the card as they do with etopps. There are no auditors, as there are in the case of stocks, to verify to the continued existence of the assets the certificates represent. It would be relatively easy for an unscrupulous owner to sell the cards (perhaps first resubmitting them to PSA/GAI/SGC first to get a different cert number) say to raise money to defend against an SEC lawsuit. I am sure Mike and the site are 100% honest, I'm just saying this business model requires quite a bit of faith.

Archive

02-24-2006, 01:35 PM

Posted By: warshawlawThe following is cut and pasted from the Cardtarget web site. See how many times the words "share" "investment" "IPO" "value" and "marketplace" appear in this excerpt: "Welcome to the new CardTarget Marketplace. We're not just eTopps anymore! Today we bring you a new and exciting marketplace that is a first in the collecting industry - the CardTarget partial shares marketplace! Now everybody can afford to purchase high quality investment grade memorabilia and trading cards regardless of your bankroll! There are many fantastic pieces of sports history out there in private collections that never see the light of day. They are never shared and appreciated by the world because the price is too high for most collectors. We aim to change that by providing a community where, for a fraction of what it would normally cost, you can enjoy the ownership of these great pieces of history. The new CardTarget "partial shares" marketplace community will purchase high end investment grade memorabilia, cards, autographs, and merchandise at the best possible prices and break them into "shares" at $10 each. Did you ever dream that you could own a Whitey Ford Rookie Graded PSA 9? Maybe you can't... but together as a community, WE can! By bringing together a community of buyers, we can all own sports collectables that DON'T drop in value immediately and will likely increase in value over time! CardTarget prides itself on quick customer service, safe and transparent transactions, and ease of use. You will see every transaction that happens on the marketplace in real time. You will be able to follow your collection prices based on what you paid for each and every share and see how you're doing. You will be able to research shares, compare prices, read articles, recommend IPO purchases, and even bring your own item into the marketplace! Imagine your online investment account at a stock market broker, but instead of owning 10 shares in Microsoft, you own 10 shares of a 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle Rookie Card graded near perfect by PSA!" I'm sorry, but if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and has a bill and webbed feet, you can call it what you want but it is still a duck. The web site is touting for sale to the public "shares" of "investments" that it says "DON'T drop in value immediately and will likely increase in value over time". If that isn't a forward-looking statement soliciting an investment in a security, I am not sure what is, regardless of what you want to call it.

Archive

02-24-2006, 01:54 PM

Posted By: T206CollectorAdam, You regularly make very broad statements about what state laws might apply to some set of circumstances in the vintage baseball card world and I would just like to see some proof on this occasion. What state law can you point me to that discusses selling shares of an item that is reasonably close to the definition of a baseball card? How is this much different from <a href="http://www.thepit.com/" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.thepit.com/</a>? Paul

Archive

02-24-2006, 01:58 PM

Posted By: barrysloateI'm just wondering- given a choice, why would someone want to purchase a share of baseball card they can't see or touch when it is so easy to own a baseball card and actually hold it in your hand? In the end isn't the fun actually building a collection, piece by piece? Why would a collection that one builds himself be worth any less than one someone else is putting together and holding for him. What am I missing?

Archive

02-24-2006, 01:59 PM

Posted By: leonresponse? It sure looks like your website and your statements on this board are contradictory. Maybe this board, in fact, isn't the right audience. Approximately 24% of the folks, in our last poll, are lawyers.....kind of a tough crowd over here...

Archive

02-24-2006, 01:59 PM

Posted By: Jon CanfieldFirst I wnt to state that I actually support the idea of cardtarget. Although not directed to my personal tastes, I still applaud the idea and can defenately see a potential market for others to enjoy. That being said, I have to echo Adam's post and my original post about what a security is... I think it's important to keep in mind that the SEC is out there to protect the little guy - it's what they do - they can almost deem anything they want to be a security. Even though section 2 of the 1933 Act has a laundry list of what constitutes a security, the SEC has been able to go well beyond that. As I mentioned earlier, fractional ownership of orange trees in Howey were deemed a security [ this is the cornerstone case of what is a security]. That case alone seems very similar to this - people purchased ownership interests but they weren't able to actually go an pick their trees, or walk on the property (similar to an ownership interest in a card in which you can't take it home for a night, or even hold it whenever you want to). Furthermore, in the Silver Hills Country Club case - a country club was found to be a security. Tiered partnerships have been found to be securities, and Viatical settlements damn near became a security - and the SEC may decide to fight the issue more; and a saw mill has been found to be a security. I guess my point is - a security goes well beyond the definition of what a "normal" security is - any good securities lawyer will tell you that. If you satisfy the 4 part test of Howey, then the SEC can force regulation (not to mention state laws that may be applicable even if federal laws are not).

Archive

02-24-2006, 02:01 PM

Posted By: Mike MasinickThe only difference between CardTarget and thepit, etopps, and even Upper Deck Babe Ruth jersey cards for that matter is that we don't cut the item up. Instead of getting a physical 3/4 inch square of an item to keep for your very own, we keep the item whole and put it in a safe. We also provide a marketplace for the shares, a way of tracking what you own, and we know who all of the owners are at any time. That doesn't make it a security. Like Paul suggested, pointing us toward some actual law or legal precident would be helpful to move this conversation along. I agree that this takes a lot of trust. Luckily we have personal relationship with many of our users and they do trust us. If you have any reasonable suggestions for ways to "prove" that we have the items in our possession at all times, please let me know.

Archive

02-24-2006, 02:06 PM

Posted By: Mike MasinickOrange Groves and Country Clubs both have a function that produces income on a regular basis in the form of a dividend, or have a function wrapped into the ownership where the item is USED to make money. It would be a tough argument that a sports card inherently produces some kind of dividend or makes money. I would have to read the opinion in the case to understand why that judge ruled the way he did.

Archive

02-24-2006, 02:07 PM

Posted By: barrysloateWhat if somebody wants to bail out and sell his shares. Is there a guarantee that there will be a buyer in a timely fashion?

Archive

02-24-2006, 02:17 PM

Posted By: Mike MasinickSTATUTORY DEFINITION OF “SECURITY” • The Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), the two principal Federal statutes in the area, contain definitions of the term “security” that, although not identical, are interpreted as “virtually identical.” Landreth Timber Co. v. Landreth, 471 U.S. 681 (1985). In addition to a laundry list of items, including, among other things, “notes,” “stocks,” “bonds,” “debentures,” and the like, both statutes provide that an “investment contract” constitutes a “security.” Moreover, both statutes provide that their statutory definitions of the term security apply “unless the context otherwise requires.” ---------------------------------------------------------------- I don't think it's reasonable to argue that we are providing an "investment contract". The only issue I see is the phrase "unless the context otherwise requires". Point has been taken regarding how the website is written up, and I will make some modification soon to clarify things.

Archive

02-24-2006, 02:21 PM

Posted By: Mike MasinickBarry, there is no "guarantee" that the shares will be sold in a timely manner. However, on the two items we have IPO'd so far we have no users who would not be able to sell their entire stake immediately at a price higher than what they paid for the items. While it's not guaranteed, it is reasonable to expect that someone will always be willing to step in and buy your shares at a price they feel is undervalued... just as you should be willing to sell your shares when you feel they are overvalued. It's a true marketplace in that aspect.

Archive

02-24-2006, 02:26 PM

Posted By: leonI'm sorry but the more you explain the more it sounds like an investment...but that's just me....and probably a lot of lawyers....

Archive

02-24-2006, 02:30 PM

Posted By: barrysloateIf I believe in the profitability of Microsoft the reason I buy shares is that I can't afford the whole company, and it's probably not for sale. But if I have a modest amount of money to spend I can actually buy a few nice cards and I don't see why they can't be just as profitable as shares of something I ultimately can't take possession of. Why can't I just buy a few cards that I feel may be undervalued?

Archive

02-24-2006, 02:30 PM

Posted By: jay behrensSounds like a baseball card version of the NYSE. Substitute PSA 8 1933 Goudey Ruth for IBM, etc and it's the same exact thing. Jay- is that quacking I hear? I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Archive

02-24-2006, 03:20 PM

Posted By: Bruce BabcockWith all due respect to all the parties involved, every day on ebay we see auctions where the item for sale is simply a stolen scan. Getting involved with something like this would take a lot of trust. Mike describes his potential customers as not having the "time to do the research." They like to "speculate, buy and sell, have no shipping, etc." "They are looking for a hobby they could enjoy at work, at home, and on the road without having to make daily trips to the post office and have closets full of cards and a nagging wife asking them why they have a full basement." I've known a few people who "enjoyed" their hobby so much at work that they got fired. I've never made "daily trips" to the post office. My wife doesn't nag and my entire collection would fit into a couple of medium size suitcases. People who don't take the "time to do the research" and like to "speculate, buy and sell, have no shipping, etc." should perhaps go with "Monopoly." These people are the reason Ponzi schemes still work. Most of the 1849 California Gold Rush miners found nothing and lost everything. Some lost their lives. But some of the guys who sold the miners picks, shovels and supplies got very rich. Cardtarget may do well, assuming they have their legal ducks in a row. But I don't think too many of the clients will. There are less expensive and more rewarding hobbies out there. There are also smarter investments. I realize there is a generational thing going on here, but I'm not sure this enterprise makes sense om any level. Just my 2 cents. Best of luck to all involved.

Archive

02-24-2006, 03:30 PM

Posted By: howardAt least IBM pays a dividend of about one percent. I think I hear some quacking too, Jay.

Archive

02-24-2006, 04:06 PM

Posted By: Al CrisafulliI think it's kinda cool. It's not for me, but it's kinda cool. Just another business concept. This quote in Mike's explanation is the key, IMO: "We wrap it into a nice interface to make it more fun, pretty, and interesting and give users the look and feel of stock trading software, but it's still a sports card. " I don't think anyone would go to that website and think it's something that it's not. It's people chipping in and buying a piece of a baseball card. It looks like the stock market, IMO, the same way that Monopoly looks like real estate. It's modeled after the basic concept, has a lot of the same bells and whistles, but I can't expect a dividend on a '39 Greenberg any more than I can move my family to my house on St. James Place. Want a '52 Mantle but can't afford one? Chip in with 100 other people and buy a PSA 7 for $500. To me, it seems more like timeshares than the stock market. Not for me at all, but I can see how someone might think it's a cool concept. The world is filled with business models that appeal to some and yet not to others. -Al

Archive

02-24-2006, 04:27 PM

Posted By: jay behrensThe big difference between this and Monopoly is that you stand to lose real money with this "diversion". At least I don't think anyone here plays Monopoly for real money. Jay I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Archive

02-24-2006, 05:15 PM

Posted By: Al CrisafulliI understand that, Jay, but I also think that with any business that sells things, a certain level of responsibility lies with the consumer to make educated decisions about how they spend their money. I have a cousin who just destroyed an entire storage locker full of rookie cards he bought as "investments" in the 80s - thousands of Kevin Seitzer and Gregg Jeffries cards, all burned in a big Long Island bonfire. I see very little difference, other than the fact that my cousin actually had possession of the cardboard, and that it was absolutely worthless. Given a choice between buying a thousand Robinson Cano rookie cards and a fraction of a PSA 8 Ruth, if there were no other choices and someone was holding a gun to my head, I'd pick the Ruth. I think. -Al

Archive

02-24-2006, 05:25 PM

Posted By: Richard MassonWouldn't it be easier to just make side bets on SMR price changes every month? Just another sign of the apocalypse. I'd hate to be this guy's lawyer in a couple of years. So many ways for it to go bad... What if the secondary market trades at a discount (like almost all closed end funds)? Can the promoter buy up shares, sell the card and pocket the difference? Who can sell the card? Can the promoter sell the card and distribute the proceeds to the shares even though all shareholders may have purchased at different prices? And even if this results in a loss to some or all shareholders? Shares being sold primarily to unsophisticated investors (Gee, Mr. Keating, I thought these holding company bonds were federally insured bank deposits!). The only way this doesn't end in a train wreck is if it never leaves the station. End this thread and run away-NOW.

Archive

02-24-2006, 05:31 PM

Posted By: barrysloateI agree with Mike that the network54 board is not his target audience but also agree with Richard that too many things can go wrong here. The real target audience probably knows very little about baseball cards, and that is the problem right there. I'm going to predict in the short run this company will entice a large number of clients but the enterprise will ultimately come to an unhappy ending.

Archive

02-24-2006, 05:38 PM

Posted By: Joann.

Archive

02-24-2006, 05:43 PM

Posted By: warshawlawYou can securitize almost anything; remember when David Bowie issued securities on the future royalties of his music? Focusing on the Federal law exclusively is incorrect. Nearly every developed state has a Blue Skies Law that prohibits the sale of "securities" in the state absent either state or Federal registration. You asked for specifics. OK: California's Corporate Securities Law of 1968 (Corporations code 25000 et seq) defines security to include "any note; stock; treasury stock; membership in an incorporated or unincorporated association; bond; debenture; evidence of indebtedness; certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement; collateral trust certificate; preorganization certificate or subscription; transferable share; investment contract..." [25109] and a whole host of similar vehicles. The definitions are not exclusive; the courts look through the transactions to determine what is really going on. There are cases going all the way back to the 1920s that find securities to exist where the investors put up cash and rely on the efforts of the cash recipients to hold the assets and make them money later on. Here are some examples: Contracts for the purchase of chinchillas from a corporation, together with agreements of that and another corporation to care for the animals so as to enable the purchasers to share in the profit to be realized from the breeding and the sale through the corporations of the animals and their pelts, constituted investments not only in the animals but also in a service. Hence they were "securities" within the purview of the Corporate Securities Act and of the federal Securities Act of 1933 (15 USCS §§ 77a, 77e), and were void where the corporations had not procured a permit from California or filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission the statement required by the federal statute. Hollywood State Bank v Wilde (1945) 70 Cal App 2d 103, 160 P2d 846." Where defendant, by instruments in writing agreed that each of certain persons who advanced money to him should "have one-twentieth interest in all of the gold and other values recovered from" a mining claim leased by defendant, and that when he incorporated the copartnership such persons should receive one-twentieth of the stock, each instrument constituted a "security" within the meaning of § 2(7) of the Act. People v Claggett (1933) 130 Cal App 141, 19 P2d 805. Where corporation, which purported to operate brokerage service assisting qualified citizens to acquire oil and gas leases from federal government on tracts smaller than 640-acre minimum leased by government, entered into transactions involving trust arrangements, wherein purchaser's money and title to lease were held in trust by corporation or its representative until transaction was consummated, corporation, as trustee, issuing confirmation slip to purchaser, confirmation slip constituted certificate of interest in oil lease and hence "security" within this section. Oil Lease Service, Inc. v Stephenson (1958, 2nd Dist) 162 Cal App 2d 100, 327 P2d 628. Under Corp. Code, § 25019, defining a security to include "evidence of indebtedness" and "investment contract," installment notes bearing interest and providing for payment of a percentage of the gross income generated by the debtor's business were securities, where the investors in the notes provided defendant with money with which to operate his business and in return were promised a share of the gross income, where defendant managed, controlled and operated the business, where the investors had no authority in its conduct and the profit on their investments depended solely on defendant's expertise, skill and honesty, and the investors could be described as "relatively uninformed" regarding the operation of defendant's business. People v Coster (1984, 2nd Dist) 151 Cal App 3d 1188, 199 Cal Rptr 253. If a unit issued by an individual represents the division of the assets of a business carried on for profit, or in the distribution thereof, of the right to participate in the profits, earnings or income derived from such assets, it is a security under the definition of Corporate Securities Act § 8 subd 2. People v Oliver (1929) 102 Cal App 29, 282 P 813. Definition of security as "any transferable share, investment contract, or beneficial interest in title to property, profits, or earnings" is designed to embrace speculative schemes to attract risk capital, no matter how ingeniously designed, and courts will look through form to substance to achieve this end. Sarmento v Arbax Packing Co. (1964, 3rd Dist) 231 Cal App 2d 421, 41 Cal Rptr 869. Policy of state is to subject to regulation all schemes for investment, regardless of forms of procedure employed, that are designed to lead investors into enterprises where earnings and profits of business or speculative ventures must come through management, control, and operation of others and which, regardless of form, have characteristics of operations by corporations, trusts, or similar business structures. People v Rankin (1958, 2nd Dist) 160 Cal App 2d 93, 325 P2d 10.

Archive

02-24-2006, 06:00 PM

Posted By: T206CollectorI appreciate the citations.

Archive

02-24-2006, 10:38 PM

Posted By: BcDhe prints th e stuff! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

03-09-2006, 01:13 PM

Posted By: Lee PlummerAs a member of both eTopps and CT, just wanted to chime in and give an opinion based on the target audience. I have been collecting Baseball cards for over 20 years. Those who like this idea of owning, if even a small part, classic ball cards are normally the average joe. To say that we are not sophisticated or saavy enough to know what we are doing is, well, boorish. You would actually be surprised at what some of these collectors do for a living. All I ask is not to look down your noses at us. Not everyone makes 6 or 7 figures a year. I watch the markets of pre-war and post war cards, but I also have to dream of the day I hit the lottery so I would be able to actually OWN one. Not with this market. I do not ever expect to become rich from this idea, as the card value is pretty much based off those cards that have sold or will sell in the future. Not a very large margin for profit. I will tell you that there are some only interested in turning a buck though. I view it as a way to SLOWLY accumulate enough shares to actually own it, someway that would not "break my bank". Is that so wrong? I guess you can view it as a lay-away plan for card purchases. If he never allows for a card to be released, well then, we may have a problem. I also doubt, for the fella willing to plunk down $3,000 bucks, you would get even 50% for that. The guys who have been playing the eTopps game for awhile are kind of wily in this market. As for 51% ownership, I, too, wonder what the legal leg would be for possession. Would you own it in name only, since more shares are on the market, or do they retain possession until 100% ownership is reached? One would definitely have controlling interest of the card at 51% As for the legal aspects of it, seems some of you would know more about that than me. Although, the securities trading aspect of this did cross my mind. As for the CT staff, they are very well-respected members of the eTopps community, and I highly doubt they would do anything underhanded that would besmirch the reputation they have worked very hard at attaining. No different than that of those who regularly post to these forums. Could it happen, sure, again just like it could here. Unlike taking it to court though, I think we would be looking for a pound of flesh "wink wink".

Archive

03-09-2006, 01:21 PM

Posted By: jay behrensI make less money than anyone ont his board except for the teenagers and my meger salary is not an excess to keep from buying cards. You say you do this to buy bits and pieces of a card until you can actually afford the whole thing. Why not just buy t206 or 33 Goudey commons. You wille ventually ahve enough to sell off and buy a big ticket card. You will most likely get a better return and you will certainly have much more liquid market for those cards than you would for imaginary bits of a card. You also get to hold some real cards in your had rather imagine what it would be like to hold 33 Goudey Ruth. I can do that without having to pay someone money. Pieces of these cards still available for sale. As you can see, good bits are still available and I'll send you an acutal piece of the card <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> <img src="http://www.attic2cash.net/cards/junk.jpg"> Jay I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Archive

03-09-2006, 01:40 PM

Posted By: Lee PlummerI do happen to own a t206 of Emil Batch, several 51 Topps Red Backs, but the bulk of my collection is from 70 on up. I am also working on a 68 Topps set in PSA 8 or better. My problem is not so much funds, but the fact I collect in set form. Putting $10+ a week into say the graded 39 Williams will not keep me from buying other cards. However, dropping $900 to $1500 for an ungraded one would, and for quite some time. Everyone collects differently, we all know that. What may be within your qualifications may not make mine. Eye appeal is most important to me, so my problem lies in finding cards that match what I am willing to purchase within my price range. I also have a problem with letting cards go after I get them. I do understand what your saying about collecting the commons, would be a great way to peicemeal a set together. By the way, nice collection there. Note - edited to add a few things, including the last statement

Archive

03-10-2006, 12:14 AM

Posted By: jay behrensI am known as the King of the Crappy Commons and those are actually some of the better looking cards I own <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14> Jay I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Archive

03-16-2006, 12:33 PM

Posted By: The Golden TicketThe beginning of this idea was for 15 investors to put forth some money while being guaranteed at least enough shares to cover more then 25% of each IPO. That is why no votes can occur unless 75% or more vote on it. I know I was part of the beta group. The idea behind this market was to make liquid funds for everyone involved. We are up to $25,000 soon to be at $33,800. We will use this money to fund the eTopps booth at the National show this year since eTopps has pulled all funding. We hope to find some nice “RAW” cards while there which we can have graded and make more liquid assets. I hope people on this board see the potential we are trying to share with you on how to make easy free money. The best part about selling this product on our board is we can edit and change any and all replies that do not benefit our site. Someone points out the flaws and we delete them and lock their account. There is no record of; where the card is kept, who the owner of the card is, who it is insured to, who it is insured by, where Cardtargets’ business is located, who the owners of the site are and/or a whole other complete list of legal issues. Things should be dealt with. Most of you are Lawyers can you lend any legal advice? -Vernon

Archive

03-16-2006, 12:38 PM

Posted By: dstudebaFree money....no records...sounds like a lot of businesses and business people in the Bahamas...HAHA!

Archive

03-16-2006, 12:49 PM

Posted By: The Golden Ticket<a href="http://forums.etopps.com/etoppsForum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=70133&whichpage=1" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://forums.etopps.com/etoppsForum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=70133&whichpage=1</a>

Archive

03-16-2006, 12:50 PM

Posted By: jay behrens"...an easy way to make free money." Boy that instills all sorts of confidence in me about this venture. I run as far adn fast I can when I hear words like that when it comes to making money. Jay I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Archive

03-16-2006, 01:08 PM

Posted By: The Golden TicketThe last page of that post is the best. It talks about how the investors and owners of CTM feel about this site and it's users. Now really, have any of you passed the bar or is their post correct that you are all just beginning law students? -Vernon

Archive

03-16-2006, 01:29 PM

Posted By: warshawlaw"If I believe in the profitability of Microsoft the reason I buy shares is that I can't afford the whole company, and it's probably not for sale." No, you invest in a stock gambling that it will increase in value. The main reason why you can make that investment with confidence is that the shares are liquid on a ready market that is open and regulated, and your account is held by insured, highly regulated entities, meaning that it is virtually certain that you will get what you pay for when you want your assets. Cardtarget essentially reverses 100 years of hard lessons for investors and asks you to give your money blindly to some guys who say that they have a card and say that they will make good on your share of that card when the time comes. Where is the third party escrow holding the cards and the cash and certifying the existence of either or both? Where is the insurer who can verify that the company has a fidelity bond to cover against its officers stealing the cards and money, or even casualty insurance on the purported collection it professes to hold for you? Nevermind the unregulated, illegal securities questions already raised, anyone stupid enough to hand over money to people they don't know on a promise that they now own shares in something that none of them ever will see with no external controls deserves to lose it. I suspect that the end of this situation will not be a nice one for those who put their money into it.

Archive

03-16-2006, 01:32 PM

Posted By: leonOn this board when we are talking about this kind of stuff it is mandatory to put your first and last name. I am not sure if your question about "are they really lawyers" was tongue in cheek or not. My guess is that we have approximately 150-200 "real" lawyers that visit this board each day. That is what our last poll showed...24% were lawyers and there are approximately 800 folks a day on this board currently. Certainly not all post but I do get a count of hits and unique IP's. On the weekends there are about 850 so that is the number I use. During the week the count is higher as folks go from work to home and login....now back to your name. If you don't care to post it then please don't post anymore in this thread....It's just the rules...best regards

Archive

03-16-2006, 01:42 PM

Posted By: The Golden TicketThe name is Vernon Brittingham. I am a marketing representative for Sams Club. I ask because when I first read this thread I was under the understanding that you guys knew the legal aspects of this idea. Then I read the thread on their board and they made you all out to be a bunch of Clowns. I was just looking for any information as to how to find out the information listed above in my post. Owners, addresses, insurance papers. The owners of that site refuse to give the information to anyone. They would not even disclose the bank the cards were kept in claiming that it may cause the bank to get robbed. I also have a fax and telephone if you need further proof of who I am.

Archive

03-16-2006, 01:47 PM

Posted By: leonAll I wanted was to know who you are..We are good.....Believe me we have folks coming on here making wild accusations and if the maker of those accusations remained anonymous how could the board be taken seriously? 99.99% of the folks on this board are good, honest folks....even the lawyers <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>. There are a lot of them that's for sure.....I think lawyers, doctors, business owners, and professors/educators were the top professions on the board in the last poll....Personally I sell technology for a living.....thanks for your understanding and by all means continue to post....regards edited to say...it will be a cold day in hell when I give someone money, that I don't know, for something I can't see, don't know where it is...etc etc.....see Adam's good post for the rest....

Archive

03-16-2006, 02:20 PM

Posted By: Josh K.Though I have remained silent as to the securities issues because Im not a securities lawyer, I am one of the many actual lawyers on this board - if anyone, including the clowns trashing lawyers over at CT or Etopps want to know whehter I graduated law school, passed a bar exam, clerked for the Supreme Court of North Carolina or anything else about me when I post a legal opinion, go to my firm website and look me up. www.maupintaylor.com

Archive

03-18-2006, 07:07 AM

Posted By: Vernon BrittinghamSo no-one knows how to find the information on the company or how to assure the cards are where and what they say?

Archive

03-18-2006, 08:34 AM

Posted By: jay behrensI don't think too many members of this board are all the concerned with this company since it is not something the vast majority of us would ever get involved with. If eTopps pulled their backing and you are having this much trouble finding out anything about this company that would give you confidence in it, I'd say you'd best run as far and fast from this operation as possible. Jay I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Archive

03-19-2006, 09:06 PM

Posted By: bobbieHi, I would just like to take a minute to explain from the Buyers side. I have been buying and selling etopps cards for about 3 years. (without holding hundreds of cards) Cardtarget offered us a site to quickly (one click) without an ebay auction to buy and sell our cards. We would have an account where our money would be kept if we wanted to remove it at any time we could(also one click) I guess thats why we trust mike with our money. I have had no problem with there banking. As far as the cardtarget shares right now I have Basicly transfered my etopps cards into shares of what I consider to be better cards. I only have about $500.00 worth, by investing about 430.00 and if I decide to get out tomorow there are many buyers offers. I would make about 475.00 on a quick sell like this but for many of us this is much better then what we are used to with etopps. Plus in the future we will vote to sell the card and devide it's sale bu the shares and many of us feel the value will be enough to make us a little money. I know it must be hard for most people who are not used to dealing with virtual cards but I just thought i would try to explain a little where were coming from. Also i would like to add that since cardtarget started this project I have gained alot of interest in the lower grade cards and bought some. Thats what brought me to this forum in the first place. My stupid question about my first cracker jack card. I have started a little collection of old cards and am sure I'll buy more. This can't be bad advertising for the vintage card market. I'm sure this type of market is not for everyone but it can be alot of fun for some of us and it really does draw alot of interest in some great cards that many of us have never even looked into before. Thanks!

Archive

03-20-2006, 06:45 AM

Posted By: dennisi have read the pros of this concept. i just don't get it. i can not get by the fact that anyone would want to own a share of a card? or a card only on an internet site? etopps is a bust. to say that this does not appeal to everyone is an understatement?

Archive

03-20-2006, 08:35 AM

Posted By: T206Collector...you could have purchased on ebay last week for under $475, i.e., that you could have owned outright, as opposed to virtually. <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/1909-T206-CY-YOUNG-PORTRAIT-HOF-CLEVELAND-SGC-30_W0QQitemZ8772434919QQcategoryZ57993QQrdZ1QQcmdZ ViewItem" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://cgi.ebay.com/1909-T206-CY-YOUNG-PORTRAIT-HOF-CLEVELAND-SGC-30_W0QQitemZ8772434919QQcategoryZ57993QQrdZ1QQcmdZ ViewItem</a> <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/T206-WALTER-JOHNSON-PITCHING-SGC-40-VG-HOFer-t-206_W0QQitemZ8776300009QQcategoryZ57993QQrdZ1QQcmd ZViewItem" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://cgi.ebay.com/T206-WALTER-JOHNSON-PITCHING-SGC-40-VG-HOFer-t-206_W0QQitemZ8776300009QQcategoryZ57993QQrdZ1QQcmd ZViewItem</a> <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/T206-T-206-JOHN-MCGRAW-HOF-SGC-60-EX-5_W0QQitemZ8778493095QQcategoryZ57993QQrdZ1QQcmdZV iewItem" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://cgi.ebay.com/T206-T-206-JOHN-MCGRAW-HOF-SGC-60-EX-5_W0QQitemZ8778493095QQcategoryZ57993QQrdZ1QQcmdZV iewItem</a> Is there any doubt that these cards are not only more fun to own, but also a better investment?

Archive

03-20-2006, 08:56 AM

Posted By: bobbieSure that would be nice to own one of them but please also realize I spent the money over the last 5 weeks, Besides those cards made me interested in real vintage cards. At least my option to sell off quickly and buy somthing else on ebay is there. I do this quite a bit. I see somthing I want on ebay and sell enough virtual cards to pay the bill. I just check the items I can make the best deal with and sell them. I don't mean to bash items in hand By any means, i have alot of things. I have a great Mantle BB that I get out and look at quite a bit, I was just trying to show the ability to sell at any time if you need the money or someone posts an offer you like. I'm sure I'll learn more about the vintage cards and buy more. They are really very cool. I have alot to learn however before i would know what $500 card to buy!

Archive

03-20-2006, 09:37 AM

Posted By: steve fWhat's to prevent CT from selling shares of a hijacked scanned card? With them e-cards at least Topps has some history.

Archive

03-20-2006, 09:46 AM

Posted By: bobbieRealy nothing other then we have the links to where they were purchased and like I said many of us have had thousands of dollars in accounts with them for a long time. I'm sure if you checked there message boards you would find some very large dealers involved with cardtarget for a very long time. They use cardtarget to automacilly buy etopps cards at a price they have preset into the system and then have thousands shipped for sale in there shops and on ebay. Say a card online is worth about $5.00 they put a buy price at 3.50 then someone who wants to sell quick sells to them then they take inhand and sell in there store for sometimes much more.

Archive

03-20-2006, 09:54 AM

Posted By: T206Collector...your not putting down $500 before doing some research. What I would recommend is finding a vintage set that you like, and then tracking sales of those cards in SGC holders on ebay. You will come to understand the market for those cards, and then can start bidding on them. I would also recommend that you start with lesser dollar cards so that you can acquire a good understanding of what those cards look like in person -- so as to avoid fakes, trim jobs, etc.

Archive

03-20-2006, 07:05 PM

Posted By: bobbiewell I saw somthing to take a chance with on ebay and bought it tonight. When the cards come I'll have to send some good scans and see what people think. I'll only have a few days after they arrive to send them back. I'm kinda worried about them but I guess us virtual card people are used to taking chances and acting on spur of the moment decisions

Archive

03-21-2006, 04:24 AM

Posted By: steve fcut n paste the auction here for us to have a looksee.

Archive

03-21-2006, 01:40 PM

Posted By: bobbieHeres the pictures. I tried to checkout a few on the old cardboard site. They looked like nice cards, I can't wait to get them in my hands and check them out.<img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1142890661.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1142890706.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1142890756.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1142890796.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1142890826.JPG">

Archive

03-21-2006, 01:42 PM

Posted By: bobbieoh by the way the players names are : Players are: ADRIAN ANSON, CHAS. W. BENNETT, R.L. CARUTHERS, CHAS. W. BENNETT, JAS. H. FOGARTY, MIKE KELLY, JOHN M. WARD, JAMES RYAN, JOHN CLARKSON, VERNON "LEFTY" GOMEZ, FRANK J. "LEFTY" O'DOUL, PEPPER MARTIN, CHRISTOPHER MATHEWSON, ARTHUR FLETCHER, DAVID JONES, "JIM" DELAHANTY, FRANK BAKER, and EDDIE COLLINS

Archive

03-21-2006, 01:43 PM

Posted By: Zach RiceSorry to break it to you, but all of those cards are fake aka reprints.

Archive

03-21-2006, 01:44 PM

Posted By: leonall of them....good luck

Archive

03-21-2006, 01:46 PM

Posted By: steve fcounterfeits

Archive

03-21-2006, 01:46 PM

Posted By: bobbieyou can tell that quickly just from the pictures?

Archive

03-21-2006, 01:48 PM

Posted By: leonYES

Archive

03-21-2006, 01:51 PM

Posted By: JoannAnyone else's heart kind of sink as soon as you saw the scans? You seem pretty decent Bobbie - get them returned, and get some of the real deals. I'd hate to see your enthusiasm dampened at this point. I may be biased like some of the others, but once you actually own a real vintage card it's hard to imagine that anything virtual would be the same. And yes, people can tell just by looking. How? The beauty of this board is that if you read it long enough you will know how to tell just by looking. After awhile of reading and seeing scans and "listening in" to the experienced collectors comparing real to fake, etc, you just kind of get a feel for it. Then all of a sudden you can start picking out some of them just by pictures. Tell the seller no dice, and move on to the good stuff! Joann Edited to correct accidentally sounding cryptic and cagey the first time.

Archive

03-21-2006, 01:51 PM

Posted By: bobbieWhat would you do? This guy is trying to pass them off as real tobacco advertising cards. I have not paid him so maybe I won't. I've never not paid for somthing on ebay and have about 2400 feedback rating, so what could they do?

Archive

03-21-2006, 02:05 PM

Posted By: leonJust point him to this board and tell him they are fakes and you don't want them....any questions have that seller email me....I will explain further....you should NEVER have to pay for something that you are buying, when it is purported as real, and isn't.....

Archive

03-21-2006, 02:12 PM

Posted By: dstudebaDon't pay, take your neg, and feel fortunate that you got off lightly. You have a lot of reading to do on this board, but the best part is it is fun. After watching for a while, you can go back and dip your toe in, but try some PSA, SGC or GAI graded cards first to get a feel for it. If the cards you won were real, there is no way your bid would have picked them up. Even if the auction title was "1978 TORO gas powered lawnmower", if they were real Zach and others would have found them.

Archive

03-21-2006, 02:32 PM

Posted By: Anonymouswould you guys like to see some of his auctions? I feel pretty stupid but there were about 9 or 10 auctions some over $500. The ones with star players etc.

Archive

03-21-2006, 02:54 PM

Posted By: dstudebaNo, we see too many of these auctions already. Don't feel stupid, just learn from it. There is a lot to learn in this hobby, it really is fun.

Archive

03-21-2006, 07:54 PM

Posted By: Robert {Bigb13}All Fake!

Archive

03-22-2006, 03:38 PM

Posted By: Bruce BabcockThis is really unfortunate. The amount of time it took us to determine if those cards were fake could be measured in nanoseconds - not because we are forensic experts, although a couple of us probably are, but just because we have been around the block a few times. I got back into the hobby as an adult during the year of Fernandomania and Donruss. If I remember right, the 1952 Topps Mantle had just surpassed the insane plateau of $3000(!). I had become friends with a couple of guys who owned a local card shop and ran a monthly show with about 30 dealers. Through them I saw (and held) my first T206, Old Judge and Goudey cards. I waited quite a while to buy any, but when I did, I knew one when I saw one. The internet and grading services have their place, but there is no substitute for experience and knowledge. <img src="http://homepage.mac.com/thurber51/.Pictures/19th%20Sepia/N172%20Schomberg.JPG"> My first N172 - $30.