T206 shappe/sharpe error

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>nbrazil</b><p>Can anyone provide a reasonable estimate of the population T206 sharpe/shappe error cards? I've read some past threads about this error card...and it seems like there is a general disagreement over whether to consider this card a true error. I get the feeling that the majority of T206 collectors do not consider this card a necessity to "complete" the set. True? <br /><br />thanks in advance

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>that most T-206 collectors do not consider the Shappe to be a true variation, and thus do not collect it as a part of their set.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>It not an error.<br /><br />Its a print defect.... <br />no different than any other mark or spot or broken type on any other card.<br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>fkw</b><p>I agree......Shappe a printing flaw, not a true error like a card where they actually went and purposely changed the design (ie. Magie/Magee, Doyle).<br /><br />Same with the Nodgrass, no red ink Sweeney etc. Print flaws.<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>George</b><p>Hello,<br />So if these are just printing errors which appeared to be somewhat common(at times) on the T206 set, why is there such a significant premium around these cards? Are there simply tiers of printing errors where one is more common than the other. I'm not sure if this is a rhetorical question but I'm curious to see what you guys think on this.<br /><br />George

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>i agree, they are printing flaws, not true error cards. and yes, there are some that are rarer than others, and they command prices accordingly.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>"I'm not sure if this is a rhetorical question"<br /><br />LOL - you've sent me into the weekend with a smile <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>While nobody knows the true population of the Shappe error, it's probably safe to say there are more fake ones than real ones.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>nbrazil</b><p>can you make an educated guess on how many sharpe/shappe cards are out there? thanks

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Martin Neal</b><p>I agree that there are probably more fakes than authentic ones although I can't recall ever seeing a fake. Psa used to grade them but they haven't listed them in their pop report for a couple of years now. The last I recall, there were three or four listed with a Psa 4 being the highest graded. Sgc doesn't list them, but it seems to me that I have seen at least one other that had graded by another company. <br /><br /><img src="http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e268/123MARTINS/shapp2.jpg">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Kevin Saucier</b><p>One is doctored and one is real. A side to side comparison.<br /><br /><br /><img src="http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s139/only_child/shappecomp-1.jpg"><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Kevin

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Kevin- your illustration shows just how easy it is to doctor that card. That's why I feel it should not be worth much of a premium at all.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Martin Neal</b><p>Let me say, I appreciate the work Kevin has done showing us the slippery path we follow when purchasing rare t206 print defects. At least, he has made us aware of these alterations and hopefully, more diligent in our inspections of these type cards. However, the example shown here falls short of convincing me of that peril. I would certainly hope that SGC or Psa (if still grading these) would know which one was the altered card. I can tell even without the use of a 10x loupe. I would love to see the altered card in person and with a loupe. I am not convinced you can remove ink from a card without some evidence of its removal discernable under high magnification. I am still an unbeliever at this point. That could change, but I would have to see the altered card in person.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Kevin Saucier</b><p>"At least, he has made us aware of these alterations and hopefully, more diligent in our inspections of these type cards."<br /><br /><br /><br />That's all I want to do.<br /><br /><br /><br />Kevin

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Kevin Saucier</b><p>"However, the example shown here falls short of convincing me of that peril. I would certainly hope that SGC or Psa (if still grading these) would know which one was the altered card. I can tell even without the use of a 10x loupe."<br /><br /><br /><br />I got several emails over this and just remembered I forgot to reveal which was which:<br /> <br />With the smeared ink, off color and seemingly uneven paper stock, everyone was convinced which one was obviously doctored...someone even said it was sloppy job and a no-brainer. Sorry to disappoint but the card on the right is the one that is altered.<br /><br />Enjoy!<br /><br /><br />Kevin

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Marty Ogelvie</b><p>Guilty as charged. Although I did NOT email you Kevin, I picked the card on the right as being altered... DOHHH!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>The print errors, a dot here or a dot there...or a letter with part of it gone, never really did much for me....The Magie error has some weight behind it as it's been a known one for a long time....Nice work on this one Kevin....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>since it can't easily be faked given the difference in width between the EE and the IE.<br /><br />Marc