View Full Version : Anything Wrong with this Auction?
Archive
03-27-2008, 07:26 PM
Posted By: <b>Eric B</b><p>It says Real Photo Tobacco Card 1913 Yankee Baseball Team! His listing never says it is Vintage, just that it's a real photo card. Apparently he sends real photo cards...that he photographs and prints on photo paper.<br /><br />He's very sneaky.<br /><br /><a href="http://tinyurl.com/35gw7w" target="_new">http://tinyurl.com/35gw7w</a>
Archive
03-27-2008, 07:30 PM
Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>marketkingman is a known scammer...
Archive
03-27-2008, 07:31 PM
Posted By: <b>David Vargha</b><p><i>We guarantee all items are as described and as scanned. Please do not speculate on items and expect to return them. </i><br /><br /><font color=blue>Nice scam wording!</font><br><br>DavidVargha@hotmail.com
Archive
03-27-2008, 07:33 PM
Posted By: <b>peter ullman</b><p>way too perfect to be real.
Archive
03-27-2008, 07:34 PM
Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>he was selling cards with the rare "market king" back a few weeks ago on ebay.
Archive
03-27-2008, 07:34 PM
Posted By: <b>Eric B</b><p>Agreed. It's not real. But I think everything he says is technically truthful.
Archive
03-27-2008, 07:57 PM
Posted By: <b>Kenneth A. Cohen</b><p>Anyone know if T200 reprints are glossy like the originals?
Archive
03-27-2008, 08:06 PM
Posted By: <b>Eric B</b><p>He never said it was a T200. Rather, it's a photo card of the 1913 Yankees<br />
Archive
03-27-2008, 08:07 PM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>If you take a photograph of a tobacco card, the photograph is not a tobacco card. For the same reason that if I take a photograph of a dog, the photograph isn't a dog. That a photograph pictures a tobacco card or dog doesn't make it a tobacco card or dog.<br /><br />If you Xerox a Topps card, it's not a Topps card. It's a Xerox of, copy of, or reprint of a Topps card. If Topps didn't make, authorize or even know of the making of the Xerox, it's not a Topps. Topps means "made by or otherwire for Topps Chewing Gum Copmany." Billy Joe using a Xerox isn't Topps, so he can't claim he is making Topps product. Makes no difference what Billy Joe is Xeroxing.<br /><br />A card is a tobacco card if that card was made by or for a tobacco company to be used to advertise or promote tobacco. Genuine tobacco cards have pictured flowers, horses, cyclists, trees, buildings, pretty actresses and other decidedly non-tobacco subjects, so obviously what the card pictures isn't what defines whether or not it is a tobacco card. Who made the card and for what purpose, that's what defines. If Billy Joe developing photos isn't a tobacco company, he isn't making tobacco cards. Makes no difference what Billy Joe photographed.<br /><br />Whether or not I seem to split hairs, the difference between "Topps" and "Reprint of Topps," and "1887 Old Judge" and "Kodak snapshot of Old Judge" should be clear.
Archive
03-27-2008, 09:05 PM
Posted By: <b>David Vargha</b><p><font color=blue>I like this from one of his earlier auctions . . . </font><br /><br /><i>Market King cards are Not Reproductions! These are real photo tobacco cards and are clearly marked on the back "Market King" and these are all authentic. Information on these cards is limited and we do not speculate on them or give our sources! All tobacco cards are sold as is, as scanned. If you are speculating on these cards, please do not bid!</i><br><br>DavidVargha@hotmail.com
Archive
03-28-2008, 06:13 AM
Posted By: <b>Harry Wallace (HW)</b><p>Stay as far away as possible.
Archive
03-28-2008, 08:07 AM
Posted By: <b>peter ullman</b><p>the fake t200 I have is not glossy.
Archive
03-28-2008, 11:38 AM
Posted By: <b>Bruce Babcock</b><p>Will he accept a photo of real money as payment?
Archive
03-28-2008, 12:35 PM
Posted By: <b>Jodi Birkholm</b><p>The police should send him a photo of a pair of handcuffs and a 300-lb muscular man named "Bubba" with a "Market King" tattoo where the sun don't shine.
Archive
03-28-2008, 01:40 PM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>It should be noted that omission of known facts doesn't save your skin legally. Saying "I never said it was old" when you made it and knew it was modern won't wash in court. If you know its modern, you are being deceptive by not mentioning that fact which everyone (buyer, seller and judge) knows is important with an antique, and can be convicted for fraud because of the omission.<br /><br />Forgers often think that if 'technically they never said it was an original,' they will escape legal trouble, but that's often not the case. If convicted, they are convicted for withholding information from the buyer. Sure, the forger might not of said it was a vintage original, but the judge will rule he was required to tell the buyer it was a modern reprint. If someone finds a forgery he may not know its age or what it is, but when the seller is the maker of item he is responsible for full disclosure of the item's identity. Conscious omission of essential information will be classified as lying, lying by omission.<br /><br />More than one currency forger probably said something similar to, "I never said it was a real $20 bill. I simply handed it to the woman and she accepted it. It's not my responsibility that she accepted it. If she said she didn't like it, I would have taken it it back."<br />-- Judge: "Interesting story. Ten years."<br />
Archive
03-28-2008, 05:29 PM
Posted By: <b>David Vargha</b><p><font color=blue>Are David and Jodi in some kind of editing competition?</font><br><br>DavidVargha@hotmail.com
Archive
03-28-2008, 05:44 PM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>Jodi is my Canadian representative.
Archive
03-28-2008, 06:17 PM
Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Can't you use your eBay contact to get this guy slammed from eBay? Meanwhile another guy buys a worthless piece of paper for $565...
Archive
03-28-2008, 07:12 PM
Posted By: <b>Jodi Birkholm</b><p>Just one man's humble tribute to Mr. Rudd.