agree with Jon
Describing a pack as "circa"1910 is fine if you don't have information which would narrow it down to a more concrete date. I'm not a dealer, so I can't really comment on what the "industry standard" is, but I would sure hope that is isn't so lax that it allows dealers to say something so broad that their
"circa" statement basically wires around what they know, or should know, is the truth. If that's the "industry standard," then buyers are probably getting screwed on a routine basis
I don't know bupkus about packs, but, at least according to Jon, information narrowing down when the subject pack was issued was available, on the pack itself. That seems rather important to me. I don't know Jon personally, but I tend to trust his opinion since he's made a study of taxstamps on packs, and has been posting helpful information (which doesn't make him money, at least not directly), for quite some time. Then you add the fact that Legendry, IMO, tries to make it appear as if the pack was issued in the early teens by stating that it should have some sort of card in it. I have a problem with that too. If Sweet Caporal was still inserting cards into is packs during the 1918-1920's time frame, I might back off some although I would still think the description was misleading. I don't think that's the case however.
IMO, the description is either based upon a really sloppy investigation into the lot they're selling (which I doubt), or a knowing effort to mislead. Either way it is problematic IMO
|