Cobb/Edwards and the T206 Honus Wagner

HOFAUTOS · #1 02-06-2010, 10:14 PM

I read the book "The Card" a few years ago when it was first published. I know it had been widely discussed here, way before I joined. I believe the card is a reprint, as well as 99% of people.

My question is, if you believed something was 100% original, something that could bring you 100's of thousands of dollars, wouldn't you at least make an effort to get it graded by a top tier grading compant? I know they said they didn't trust sending it in and all that, and that they think people have something against them race wise, but why not connect with an established dealer who can send it in for them, so all the biases is gone?

Im not all caught up with the story of their card, so if something has been written about the status, please update me

glynparson · #2 02-07-2010, 05:53 AM

I have no reason to doubt Brian Wentz and his claims in the book. As everyone that was at the national dinner knows, I feel this cast a shadow over the whole book. O'keefe knows they are full of it and just put the salacious story in there to "sell Books" yes that is what he told me after his speech when we talked. So I think he is a blow hard. He wants to hold everyone in this business to the absolute highest standards but when it comes to his ethics all are apparently ok to sell a book. So basically if anyone wants to read this book let me know I'll send you my copy, for I don't want O'keefe to get another dime from his book.

PS. I personally believe the story of the "card" as it is in line with what I've heard for years, but the whole Cobb/Edwards crap was just put in to make the whole hobby look bad. He essentially calls the grading companies racist. Has he been to SGC almost half the employees are of latin descent. I think that is what really set me off he was basically calling some of my friends racists and I did not appreciate it.

calvindog · #3 02-07-2010, 07:37 AM

I have to agree with Glyn here. Much of Mike O'Keeffe's adult life has been spent terrorizing the sainted baseball card hobby and industry all due to a bizarre hatred for baseball cards. Recently I found out why: when Mike was six years old and flipping cards, an especially sharp cornered 1976 Topps Kurt Bevacqua card -- yes, the one where he is blowing that huge bubble -- caught him in the left eye and caused major retina damage. Eventually Mike lost sight in the eye and has held a grudge ever since.

How Mike has been able to hide his irrational hatred all these years is really the remarkable thing. But when you write unfavorable things about such decent, wholesome, honest guys like Bill Mastro and Doug Allen, well, that's when the lid really blew off his cover because along with such solid citizens like Bill Goodwin and JP Cohen, these guys form the collective conscience of our great hobby. I only hope Mike shows up at this year's National because I for one plan on giving him a piece of my mind.

Leon · #4 02-07-2010, 07:54 AM

I am somewhere in the middle on the Okeefe issue(s). I like Mike personally, and have come to like most of his reporting, but my only qualm was not showing ANY of the good side of the hobby in "The Card". I have stated that before so it's no secret. Also, Mike did quote me verbatim in the Daily News, so I am appreciative of that. And of course I was appreciative of him speaking at our Dinner last year also. My guess is that we will see some more juicy stories come out this year. I would say that if you are an auctioneer and are doing anything wrong you might be on notice...and that includes showing stuff sold but it not really selling. If you are an auctioneer and have done that, then be on the lookout. If you have done nothing wrong then all is good. regards

edited to add that I don't mind a little sensationalism in journalism. It's their job to sell books...and a $20 card sale isn't that exciting...but a $100k+ (attempted sale) of a fake card, by an otherwise legit auctioneer and 2 idiots, is.

barrysloate · #5 02-07-2010, 08:00 AM

Leon- when you write, be it a book or an article, you need a point of view, or a thesis. O'Keeffe's reason for writing "The Card" was to expose fraud in the baseball card industry. As an investigative reporter that is his job. I am sure he recognizes there are fun aspects to collecting baseball cards, but that had nothing to do with his book.

Leon · #6 02-07-2010, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Leon- when you write, be it a book or an article, you need a point of view, or a thesis. O'Keeffe's reason for writing "The Card" was to expose fraud in the baseball card industry. As an investigative reporter that is his job. I am sure he recognizes there are fun aspects to collecting baseball cards, but that had nothing to do with his book.

Barry- I agree. And as someone who read the book, and is in the hobby quite a bit, I was only critiquing it. Overall, it was ok and was interesting........

barrysloate · #7 02-07-2010, 08:21 AM

There is no question that fraud and scandal make for good entertainment. O'Keeffe understands this, and his paper, The Daily News, lives by that credo.

There are any number of reasons one might critique "The Card", but the fact that the author left out the fun parts of the hobby is inconsequential.

calvindog · #8 02-07-2010, 08:33 AM

Barry, you should only know what Woodward and Bernstein left out of their Watergate reporting -- all the warm and fuzzies about Nixon and G. Gordon Liddy. Those investigative reporters can sure be cold bastards.

barrysloate · #9 02-07-2010, 08:40 AM

Good investigative reporting can be brutal, but that's the way the game is played.

Leon · #10 02-07-2010, 09:07 AM

I guess only if you want to a be a "fair" reporter, would you want to report everything. There is no room for that kind of nonsense when trying to make money, I understand that (I guess).

teetwoohsix · #11 02-07-2010, 09:36 AM

I've read the book a couple of times-after the first time I read it,I HAD to see what it looked like.
Then,one day on Net54,there was a link in a thread (can't remember the title of the thread),and it took me to a site where these two found an auction house who was going to TRY to auction off the fake.You should have read the auction houses' write up on it!!!
But then,there it was!!!A photo of the front and back!!!
No doubt about it,was fake as can be-they know this,thats why they won't send it in to be graded.
I wish I could remember the thread...........

barrysloate · #12 02-07-2010, 09:46 AM

The board's best guess was that a Wagner reprint was glued onto a real T206 common. The two owners sent the card to be chemically analyzed, and a small piece of the back was removed and tested. It was deemed to be genuine antique paper, and consistent with paper from the early part of the 20th century. Obviously, a modern reprint wouldn't pass that test.

Based on that conclusion, the owners believed their card was genuine.

DanP · #13 02-07-2010, 10:52 AM

Help me out here...

Is someone saying that the PSA 8 Wagner is a fake? I thought it was believed it was cut from a sheet??? Or are we talking about another Wagner?

Dan

teetwoohsix · #14 02-07-2010, 10:58 AM

No,the "Wagner" the thread is about is regarding two individuals Cobb & Edwards who claim to have a real Wagner,but won't submit it for grading-because it is fake.
There is a section of the book that is about them and their card.
Sincerely,Clayton

glynparson · #15 02-07-2010, 09:33 PM

If you think the friends I was referring to are any of the boneheads you mentioned. You are wrong I was actually referring to your client you know Dave, as well as Joe Orlando both I consider friends. But O'Keefe infers in his book that they wont grade the Cobb/Edwards Wagner due to an old boys club atmosphere that goes on in the hobby. I don't like any of the peolpe you named, well I actually don't dislike Goodwin but the rest of those jokers can go away as far as i'm concerned. Also Leon can vouch for this as I discussed it with him at the dinner. I feel putting the Cobb Edwards junk in the book took the focus off the true story (in my opinion) and the reason for the book. Heck when i would put an irrelevant topic to my thesis in a paper the teacher always put a big x over thhe whole paragraph. I feel that's what should have been done with the Cobb/Edwards chapter to not dilute going after the true bad guys (in my opinion).

Jewish-collector · #16 02-07-2010, 10:11 PM

Maybe Leon can get Cobb & Edwards to come to this years Net54 dinner.

drc · #17 02-07-2010, 11:44 PM

My impression is the book was written by people who didn't know how to tell if a T206 Wager is real or reprint.

calvindog · #18 02-08-2010, 05:59 AM

O'Keeffee apparently flunked the 30 second course "How to Tell if Your Wagner is Real or a Reprint." In my opinion he flunked it on purpose -- because he just wants to give the hobby a bad name.

Of course, he's the one who gives the hobby a bad name, not all the frauds that make a living from it.

HOFAUTOS · #19 02-08-2010, 07:13 AM

Thanks for all the replies guys!

drc · #20 02-08-2010, 02:35 PM

My opinion is I thought much of the book was good and offered interesting info and insight, but a few parts I didn't like. I won't go into details, but there were parts that, to be polite, rubbed me the wrong way. But I'm not a book critic and many people have said they enjoyed it, so I'm not here to arbitrate literary taste. Though know that certain parts will be read differently by those who know how to authenticate the card versus those who don't. A mystery novel has no mystery to those who know who done it by the end of page one, and, believe it or not, there are people who can tell if a questioned T206 Wagner is real or fake. I happen to be one of them, so found some of the melodrama to be off base and beside the point.

Brian-Chidester · #21 02-10-2010, 09:39 AM

"The Card" was a great book, and one of the only to hold the collecting industry accountable. In no way does he support Cobb/Edwards, only presents the facts as they were. In the end, they look pretty stupid in the book. But this comment above...

"But when you write unfavorable things about such decent, wholesome, honest guys like Bill Mastro"

... well, now... that just takes the cake!

Be careful of boosterism. Follow the money. Journalism 101.

Jim VB · #22 02-10-2010, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian-Chidester

But this comment above...

"But when you write unfavorable things about such decent, wholesome, honest guys like Bill Mastro"

... well, now... that just takes the cake!

Psst! Brian! (It was sarcasm.)

Exhibitman · #23 02-10-2010, 10:00 AM

Jeff, you really had me going with the first paragraph; nice satirical writing!

I did not get the impression from the book that O'Keefe was suggesting that racism or other unfair bias is really at the core of the Cobb/Edwards mess--he was simply reporting their excuses and the responses people had to them. I do think what he was suggesting is that anyone who refuses to accept third party grading ("TPG") as the ultimate arbiter of card quality and authenticity falls outside the orthodoxy of the card collecting world and is often treated as a pariah in the hobby sight unseen when they try to market a rare card. TPG is not the panacea for all that ails the card world. The book itself exposes some of the stinky in the po' that often accompanies big money and slabbing. It isn't particularly ground-shaking stuff--VCBC was on the TPG thing over a decade ago.

IMO O'Keefe is much like Jose Canseco: painfully right about a lot of things that many powerful players in the hobby would prefer not to have the collecting base read about.

barrysloate · #24 02-10-2010, 10:48 AM

It was Cobb or Edwards who accused this board of racism a few years back when we had that long thread about their card. And even that antique dealer who was helping them sell it (I forget his name) suggested the same thing on that HBO special when he said there wouldn't have been this controversy if the owners were white. There's no better way to ignore the facts than to play the race card.

Brian-Chidester · #25 02-10-2010, 11:32 AM

Having not ever seen their card myself, only having read about it, is it not possible that these two men experienced racism during their quest to authenticate and sell that card? Has it never crossed anyone's mind that they dress stereotypically urban in nearly every pictured posted of them in articles, books and online media? And that perhaps that has had an effect (however unconscious it might be) on how their card was viewed? Is that so far out of the realm of possibility?

Maybe it is completely false that they were in any way treated differently because of race. However, their very existence might defy some sort of built-in aristocracy.

I'm only being a devil's advocate here, not pointing specific fingers, as I know of no one to point at.

Brian-Chidester · #26 02-10-2010, 11:35 AM

**IMO O'Keefe is much like Jose Canseco: painfully right about a lot of things that many powerful players in the hobby would prefer not to have the collecting base read about.**

Well, O'Keefe is a journalist, whereas Canseco was a player. If O'Keefe was a card dealer or grader, then they would accurately compare.

I think Canseco emerged as a much more anti-Capra/Rockwellian character, defying that all-American adage: "Don't snitch."

Doesn't mean he wasn't right. I've come to dislike the whole steroids lot so much that I admire Canseco for doing what perhaps no one else was willing to do.

E93 · #27 02-10-2010, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian-Chidester

Having not ever seen their card myself, only having read about it, is it not possible that these two men experienced racism during their quest to authenticate and sell that card? Has it never crossed anyone's mind that they dress stereotypically urban in nearly every pictured posted of them in articles, books and online media? And that perhaps that has had an effect (however unconscious it might be) on how their card was viewed? Is that so far out of the realm of possibility?

Maybe it is completely false that they were in any way treated differently because of race. However, their very existence might defy some sort of built-in aristocracy.

I'm only being a devil's advocate here, not pointing specific fingers, as I know of no one to point at.

Brian,
I don't doubt they have experienced subtle and not-so-subtle forms of racism in this. But the card is an obvious fake. Hearing that from a bunch of racists is certainly a lot less pleasant than hearing that from others, but it does not change the fact that 99% of T206 collectors (racist or not) can tell from a two second glance at the card that it is obviously fake. And while there may have been a couple of inappropriate comments in the discussion of this card on the board, my recollection is that the focus was on the card. The guys did not like what they heard about the card and the ball rolled from there.
JimB

barrysloate · #28 02-10-2010, 11:46 AM

Brian- I have no idea how they were treated, but the card is still fake. Their position with regard to this board was, who were we to pass judgment on the authenticity of their card? We tried to explain to them that many of the most advanced and knowledgeable people in the card collecting hobby congregate here, and if there was anybody who had the skill to determine whether or not it was real it was this group. But that wasn't good enough for them. Most of the people involved in the discussion got pretty agitated, myself included.

Brian-Chidester · #29 02-10-2010, 12:20 PM

Yeah, I read the entire thread a while back. Is there a place where a scan of their card can be viewed?

I believe I have every official Wagner T206 reprint, of which, a lot of the "scuffed-up" fakes come from. I might be able to identify which reprint their card comes from. Though in recent years, a lot of very good Wagner fakes have emerged that look much closer to the real thing than any previous "official" reprints did.

glynparson · #30 02-10-2010, 01:19 PM

http://www.bobconnelly.com/honuswagnert206.html

Jim VB · #31 02-10-2010, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian-Chidester

Having not ever seen their card myself, only having read about it, is it not possible that these two men experienced racism during their quest to authenticate and sell that card?

The problem was that they wanted to be treated differently, and they weren't. They insisted on being in the grading room when the card was graded. They claimed that they would not be able to keep a grading company from switching out their "original" for a fake! Needless to say, no grading company would accommodate their wishes.

They have gotten exactly what they deserve and I don't care what color they are.

Brian-Chidester · #32 02-10-2010, 01:37 PM

Well, it's certainly not based on any "official" reprint, that's for sure. One thing you come to notice about many of the reprints is that they rely on a modern 4-color interlaced print technique, which unfortunately flattens out may of the features of the front portraits or action poses.

As far as the color of the actual Wagner portrait, this is much richer than the average reprint. No big revelation there, but that puts to bed whether this was a doctored up card that was readily reproduced. It's better than the "cheap Galasso reprint" that Mr. Mint passed it off as.

I know that many find the lack of a black line border around the portrait to be most troubling, besides the fact that it looks simply too crummy on both surfaces to have that nice of edges. The card certainly begs a lot of questions, but it does look better than I thought it was going to.

The font looks pretty black, though some T206s have a much darker brown text, which almost appears black.

Leon · #33 02-10-2010, 01:40 PM

Personally I think they were grasping for anything they could and the race card was low hanging fruit. They were idiots. Period. Black, white, green, brown, yellow.....color is blind on this issue, imo.

That card could have been owned by a Martian and it would still be fake (at least the front half of it). Even Joe O made a short video explaining why it wasn't good. They wouldn't listen because they were idiots. I don't think this situation had anything at all to do with race...though there is not much doubt that those two, or any person of color, might have previously experienced racism. That is just my take on it and others might think differently. regards

Brian-Chidester · #34 02-10-2010, 01:52 PM

Is that video posted somewhere?

barrysloate · #35 02-10-2010, 02:01 PM

I've always wondered if they knew all along it was no good, but simply loved all the publicity they were getting from it. They were on TV several times, and became minor celebrities for about 15 minutes. Perhaps in the end that was what it was all about. Could they really have believed that a grading service would switch cards on them? That doesn't even make sense. Maybe the whole thing was a put on...or they were really stupid. One or the other.

mark evans · #36 02-10-2010, 02:18 PM

They struck me more as con-men than anything else. Agree with Leon that both have likely experienced racism in the past but that has nothing to do with the bogus nature of their card. Mark

Brian-Chidester · #37 02-10-2010, 02:20 PM

Leon/Barry,

With such incendiary talk, it's not hard to see why they might have felt they were being treated in a racist manner. Certainly their intelligence is being called into question in a vehement manner, and they might be left to wonder where the anger stems from.

I understand that you guys are simply heated because you see their card as an obvious fake and wish these two would simply drop it.

That being said, didn't they pay $1,800 for it? Not a ton of money for a Wagner card, but certainly a lot more than the $2 reprints that I've bought. Perhaps they unconcsiously feel like they couldn't have been swindled? Or more likely, they think they have the real thing. The $1,800 they paid for the card makes me think they were out for more than a grand hoax and 15 minutes of fame.

But they sure are the whipping boys, when far more egregious players have been involved in fraudulent play with regards to Wagner and other high profile memorabilia, and those crooks have been respected members of the card memorabilia community for decades.

Also, it's beyond proveable that certain persons or entities have recieved special treatment from the graders, and the man who graded the PSA 8 Wagner came out in O'Keefe's book saying that he knew it was trimmed.

Yes, it is highly unlikely that anyone would switch out the Cobb/Edwards card, were it to be graded. That is paranoia that reminds me of some of my delusional pothead buddies. But to act like the grading companies are to be trusted is to defy logic. The cards look beautiful in their graded holders, but beyond that, the whole system has ruined vintage collecting as much as these low-numbered, high value inserts have ruined newer cards. It's become the province of the "investor." Yes, you can still buy raw cards, but it's almost impossible to get the really great stuff without having to buy from the graded market, and its grotesque mark-ups.

All of which points back to O'Keefe's excellent book, which called a spade a spade, the most definitive section being when the Baseball Hall of Fame comments on the memorabilia market. That section hit the nail on the head.

Leon · #38 02-10-2010, 02:29 PM

Brian- It seems this is difficult for you to wrap your arms around. Forget about color for a minute. The two guys are idiots. There are tons of people of all colors that are idiots. Those 2 just happen to be African-American. best regards

barrysloate · #39 02-10-2010, 02:42 PM

Brian- I am not convinced they ever paid $1800 for that thing. Mr. Edwards was a pack rat/junk collector. He claimed he bought it on a whim. He looks like the kind of guy who might pay $5 for a box lot and hope there is something good inside. But laying out $1800 when he said he really had no idea what he was buying? I don't think so.

calvindog · #40 02-10-2010, 02:50 PM

Barry, I think you're using racist code words. You and O'Keeffe, both racists. Who would have thunk it.

E93 · #41 02-10-2010, 02:51 PM

My guess is they knew it was fake all along and they were scammers trying to take advantage of any angle they could think up. If I remember right, they claimed not to be collectors or to know anything about the card when they originally purchased it at a yard sale, but nonetheless paid $1800 for it in 1983 (when they were probably teenagers judging from the photos). And they have the gall to cast aspersions at the people on this board who told them it was a fake and called them on their bullshit.
JimB

Brian-Chidester · #42 02-10-2010, 02:53 PM

I'm only going on what they themselves claim, with regards to the $1800.

That being said, I don't think their card is as idiotic as many fakes that I've seen over the years, and I've seen quite a few. I'm not saying I don't see some obvious red flags here, but I think calling them "stupid" and "idiots" is a bit over the top, and the thread that came about when they were trying to sell the card a few years back was so bitter and condescending so as to make my stomach turn.

Has anyone ever seen their card up close? On the surface, its colors look rich, much like a real T206, which reprints from modern printing presses rarely have. However, the black font and the lack of a black border around the portrait are troublesome. Moreover, why is the card so trashed on its surface, but relatively clean on its borders?

Speaking civily, what do you see as its obvious indicators of being a fake? Remembering that in 1984, a card of this shape would have been worth a few thousand bucks, at best, and that pulling off something that even approached making a fake look real was not something I'd heard a lot about then. I'm sure it was there, and people were re-backing T206s and creating all sorts of "error" variations on the actual cards themselves by erasing letters and whatnot. But every effort I have seen from the 1970s and '80s at creating a T206 from scratch has turned out bad. This one looks better than that... I'm just saying.

barrysloate · #43 02-10-2010, 02:54 PM

I know Jeff. They were two choir boys and how dare anyone question their integrity.

barrysloate · #44 02-10-2010, 02:58 PM

Brian- A blind man in a snowstorm could see it was fake. I've been in the hobby a long time, I've owned a Wagner and seen probably a dozen real ones. That one was fake with a capital "F."

Forget about the signs that suggest it might be fake. I didn't see one thing that even suggests it might be real.

And I meant no offense to the sightless. it was just an expression.

Brian-Chidester · #45 02-10-2010, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calvindog

Barry, I think you're using racist code words. You and O'Keeffe, both racists. Who would have thunk it.

I hope this sarcasm was not pointed in my direction. I'm only stating that the harshness of calling someone stupid and an idiot and all other sort of incendiary names could easily lead someone to wonder why such anger would be directed at them.

I never said Barry Sloate was a racist. To the contrary, I have never met the man, and all of his posts that i have read have been both informatve and gracious.

Again, if everyone here feels comfortable calling these two men every name under the sun, what does it hurt for me to ask questions of basic logic, avoiding ad hominum?

Brian-Chidester · #46 02-10-2010, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Brian- A blind man in a snowstorm could see it was fake. I've been in the hobby a long time, I've owned a Wagner and seen probably a dozen real ones. That one was fake with a capital "F."

Forget about the signs that suggest it might be fake. I didn't see one thing that even suggests it might be real.

And I meant no offense to the sightless. it was just an expression.

Barry, all due respect, I'm sure you have owned and handled many more cards of rarity and value than I have. For I am but a lowly kid from the suburbs of Philadelphia, who grew up in a row home and ridiculously got into T206 at a card show in Valley Forge in 1985 (at the ripe age of eight) when my father gave me $20 for cleaning the house up, and I bought five beater cards that day. Since that time, I've bought many T206s, and even more reprints. A kid of my means had to find some way to become more knowledgeable about the set that I loved.

As the years have gone by, disposable income has afforded me more chances to buy better cards, to be sure, so you must forgive my devilish nature, as I recieved my degree in philosophy and am a working journalist and author who can't help but stir the pot from time to time.

And while I haven't owned a T206 Wagner myself, one thing I do know is that I've seen more variations of each single T206 card than I care to count. These things rarely look the same from card to card, and that goes for the 38-40 Wagner specimens... all manner of differences pop up.

As for myself, I DO think there are some indicators that the Cobb/Edwards card might be taken more seriously, and the one is the color and printing. Yes, perhaps lithography of the early 20th century nature can be reproduced in this day and age. I have no doubt of that. However, in the mid-'80s, was there an infusion of fakes that replicated such printing qualities from 70 years prior? I'm going on the knowledge that I have of reprints, and I have never seen such a fake from the '70s or '80s.

They have done some authenticating too. I know many have passed their authenticators off as drunks or crooks, and have exonerated PSA, despite the fact that the man who graded the Gretzky Wagner admitted that he knew it was trimmed. But in this case, I'd like have just a wee bit more concise evidence than, "I know it's fake, because I know."

Not good enough for me.