Opinions about a strange m101-4/5 card

[nolemmings]

I bought this card on ebay several months ago and upon receipt believed it to be altered in about ten seconds of examination.

I would like opinions on this card in light of the following facts. First, the card if authentic and unaltered would be worth $1-2K or maybe more. A m101-4 Cady is #25, is common and would sell for about $25 tops in this condition. A m101-5 Cady is identical in all respects except number (#23), and is very scarce ( Mordecai Brown was swapped out as card #23 early in the release). This card has no number at all. I have seen only one blank-backed m101 with no number; in fact, with the exception of a handful of unnumbered Successful Farming promo cards (see last REA auction) there are NO unnumbered m101-4/5 to my knowledge. The only one I have seen was sold at a 2008 auction by Lew Lipset, and guess who the player was—yep, Forrest Cady (this is not the Lipset card).

The card looks almost white at the bottom, which made me think immediately that the number had been power-erased. I still do, although I lost my blacklight and have not confirmed it in that way. More importantly, the card has absolutely no gloss, which is unlike any “real” m101-4/5 that I own. The size is right and the photo is pretty clear– I’m using the large scan to see what others think. The dots look pretty good under a 10x loupe, and stock is the right thickness but feels a little rough or gritty. I’m of the opinion that it is fake, but insofar as only one exemplar is known which I have not seen up close, and that any true version of this card may have been pre-production or prototype and thus different, I remain uncertain.

I bought the card on ebay for a $50 BIN the same day it was listed--as a m101-5 Cady in G-VG condition with creases–that’s all. That’s twice what a common m101-4 is worth but: 1) the seller listed almost no pre-war cards and may not know market value or 2) sellers often have unrealistic BIN prices, assuming he thought it was just a common. Seller, with over 2000 feedback of 100%, sold almost exclusively raw cards so no suspicion about this one sticking out except again he didn’t sell hardly any prewar. The listing made no mention of this card being valuable, scarce or even that it oddly lacked a number.

If it was going to be faked, wouldn’t it have been smarter to change the card to number #23 and reap the profits of a known scarcity, rather than leave it unnumbered and open it to question?–I doubt many on this board or in the hobby generally are on the lookout for what was basically a one of a kind card. Similarly, if you were just dabbling in fake m101s what are the odds of picking Cady as your card, and if your object was to fake a really scarce card wouldn’t you tout it and list it as such? I suppose the seller may have stumbled upon it from a bad guy who was trying to pass off a fake, but there are just a lot of curiosities about the card that lead me to ask for the board’s opinions.

[Leon]

Hi Todd
Neat card. While I don't specifically focus on M101-4/5 I do like them. For discussions sake could this be as easily explained as being a partial production card that just missed a step or two? And yes, if it was a sheet that missed the process(es) maybe the rest got thrown away? Thanks for sharing, and from the scan, that bottom front doesn't "look" power erased, though of course magnification would be needed to discern it completely.

[nolemmings]

Thanks Leon. Maybe the white on the bottom doesn't show as much on the scan. I'll try and bring the card to the National for some up-close opinions. The card is just so different with its matte finish that I just dismissed it as not genuine but then I keep thinking of how strange it came to me at such a modest price and without any fanfare or puffing and I'm not sure. Here are my other Cady's for comparison--note too how they all seem to have some coloring or tone to them that is lacking from the subject:

[Leon]

I would like to study it in person Todd. Please do bring it to the National if you can remember to. What I proposing as a possibility is that the gloss AND the number might have been missed in the regular production process. It's just a thought and one that might make sense. I know we have seen steps of production missed in other cards. These E195s never got cut....

And I should add, after looking at the original card more, it does look to be different colored where the number should have been. That is not usually a good sign.

[buymycards]

Hi Todd, it does seem strange that most of the card is discolored/toned except for the white area under the team name. I would vote "altered" but I would want to see the card under a 100 power microscope and a black light before making a decision.

Hope it is real.

Rick

[Jason Carota]

If it isn't altered, any chance it could be tied to the 1916 unnumbered Successful Farming set (as mentioned above?) Granted Cady isn't on the checklist. My thoughts lay along the lines of the existing teams available in the unnumbered set (Philadelphia AL & NL, Chicago AL & NL, Boston NL, and New York AL.) Could there exist the outside possibility that cards featuring Boston AL and New York NL were to be produced, but later scrapped?

[smtjoy]

Interesting card and thread Todd. The color difference where the numbers were would be a big concern for sure, imo the money difference between his M101-4 and m101-5 is huge and the temptation to alter would make a lot of sense. The matte finish also bothers me as I have never seen one like that, Leons reply in another thread had me wondering about soaking these. I have never tried it so no idea on what would happen. I also know others will soak cards in chemicals and have great success removing stuff. It makes me wonder if it could lose the gloss in a chemical bath, I dont know but seems possible to me.

I think its a cool card and at what you paid well worth keeping in your collection. I do think it warrants letting experts look at it, I personally would not attach much more value to it than you paid as I think it has two big red flags.