M101 Reproductions careful
 

The deceiver went to great lengths to fake the old scrapbook removal.

But I believe these to be reproductions that you can easily tell by the space between the picture and the frame. See M101 counterfeit detection right here on Net54.

Dan

http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-SPORTING-N...item5416af0afc


.

Dan I saw those too, and contacted the seller yesterday but have not received a response (busy time of year I guess). Those scans practically flouresce in the lower right corner where "reprint" used to show. I get a feeling the seller may have been duped himself though, as he has a high feedback but does not appear to sell baseball cards.

I added a link for ya' and here they are again... Dan..

http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-SPORTING-N...item5416af0afc

..yes, very poor looking reprints. He does give a little bit of a disclaimer saying what he has been told. However, he still listed them as 1915-1916.

Yes I see where he now says he has been told they are reprints from the 1960's. Must have had others contact him as well, since I would not give these reprints that much credit. Just as likely from the 2010's. Maybe he figures the scrapbook is old :)

Someone had something similar @ Sun Times. Bought an alexander that fooled me. They are relly really close other than the spacing.

Those are a bit too "sepia" for me. It looks like the seller has amended the item desription content and has indicated that the cards are probably reprints.

I agree that the seller most likely was not trying to perpetrate a scam. Selling reprint "Pants" Rowland and Wally Schang cards as genuine doesn't seem too lucrative when the set also has high-dollar Ruth, Thorpe and "Shoeless Joe" cards.

Thanks for posting this, Dan. It's always helpful to see examples of reprints, particularly when they aren't obviously presented as such.
Best regards,
Steve

I contacted him and told him they were reprints. He asked how and I told him the reasons. He left the listing up.

Yea I think he should take them down or relist them as doctored reprints to look old.

Thanks everyone for chiming in

Dan

Looks like the title was updated...