Any Post Card experts here?
 

I believe this is a modern back and not 1930s. I think these backs were done in the late 1950s and 1960s. Dan.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1932-George-...item4cfd4096f5

uh...definitely not 1930s. I realize this is a 1932 image, but wtf was SGC thinking slabbing that like that? My opinion is that was made in the 1960s or 70s. I would say with 99.9% certainty that this was made by Jim Rowe in the 70s. SGC should slab it as such too. $125?? with 6 days to go?? It's a $5-$10 postcard.

I have seen this specific postcard circulate and sell every few months, or at least it appears that way. Once the new owner realizes that it is not from 1932, they probably sell it off and move on.

I thought so, yea, this is a mistake. SGC should consult a post card expert before slabbing something they know nothing about. I am no post card expert and knew this was bogus. unreal.

How does anyone see that reverse and still drop $100+ on that postcard? Slabbed by SGC as 1932, that's how.

I have a revelation! maybe SGC should buy it and get it off of the market? fix a mistake they made? Should only set them back a few hundred.

SGC is pretty worthless when it comes to grading postcards. Not as bad as PSA, but still not very good.

I have no relationship with anyone at SGC, but perhaps someone could point out that auction and this thread to someone over there and they can get it off the market. Apparently the only reason it's staying in that bogus slab is because no one wants to lose money on it.

I noticed that one too. The Kodak stamp box on the back means it's at least from the 1950's. SGC got this one wrong.

" 1932 p/c "
 

Dan

I have one of these. It's buried somewhere in one of my numerous junk-piles. If I find it, I will post it.

Anyway, I acquired it in small Antique shop in Pennsy approx. 15 years ago for $10. I asked the owner why was it only $10 ?

He said he that it was most likely issued circa 1950's (or 1960's).


Happy New Year to you and your Dad.

TED Z

I am still trying to find any proof at all that these Burke/Brace Kodak backed postcards were ever issued in the 1950s. I don't think Rowe started making them until the 1960s.

Happy New Year Ted! Good to hear from you!

Yes I may be off, 60s and 70s may be correct, like I said, I am no expert on post cards but sure know enough not to slab this 1932!

ugh grading!

more like 1970s

same back as all the real photo postcards made by Jim Rowe

How about this Ruth postcard? Any ideas on the dating or whether the ebay listing is good? Link

looks ok, but really hard to tell from those scans

probably not good
 

I bought a generic Ruth PC from this seller recently that I believe is not good and will be returning. All of his other stuff he is currently selling is fake and I would bet this one you ask about is too. I am going to lunch with some friends, who are graders, in the next day or two and will let them look at the PC I have but on first glance I don't like it, or the one shown. They have that "fake rough" paper feel. Most times when someone is selling reprints/fakes then the other things they have are too. We have seen this happen time and again. regards

Not Good
 

These were a fantasy piece intended to deceive. A postcard magazine wrote up this fake a few years ago.

They pointed out that no postcards were issued at the time with both the stadium and Ruth's image.

Robert S

No good for sure Gary, stay away from that recently made fake! I will try to shut it down.

There's a good website that I use that shows all the stamp boxes on postcards and when they were used. From that, you can see that this postcard was printed after 1950. The site is at:
http://www.playle.com/realphoto/

I still don't understand why they don't fake the stamp box also, but I guess that not many people know about them

In checking his feedback, he seems to have just recently forayed into the sports collectibles business.

You guys are killing me.
 

I have this same postcard in a SGC 50 holder! I bought it on ebay a year or two ago for around $300. Obviously that was a big mistake. I don't know anything about postcards so in the end I know I shouldn't have bought it. I saw the SGC slab and assumed that it was good. :mad:

I don't think it is going to go too well for him.

You should ask them to make you whole.
You made your purchase based on their advertised expertise.

I bet that almost all semi-serious postcard collectors know about dating postcards using the stamp boxes and back designs

Comical! But true, they should make good as you trusted their supposed expertise! That is the problem with buying stuff based on what someone who knows nothing is grading!

I suggest we should educate ourselves like we did in the good ole days and not trust ridiculous slabs created by clueless people who have been in the hobby 5 years.

Here's a pic
 

http://dixonsbaseballcards.weebly.co...28858_orig.jpg

The back is the same as the other one.

Front doesn't look bad, the back is what matters. If the back is the same back as the ebay auction I posted, then you have a 1960s or 70s post card worth about $15.

I tend to think that this particular postcard might be an isolated example as I have submitted/tried to submit many postcards to SGC and the graders are all over the stamp boxes, back designs, etc. in an effort to accurately identify the era which the postcard was produced.

Dan you might be onto something there. A whole lot more of my collection would pass for NRMT then based on the good ole days. ;);)

Maybe all sent in at the same time by one person who got lucky that an unqualified grader was working?

Dan McKee--Thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention. As someone who collects postcards, I'm always wary of hybrid cards like this one. For example, I know that Burke reprinted many of his earlier images as postcards, and over the years I've learned to identify them.
Dave--Thanks for the excellent link for identifying postcard stamp boxes. It's nice to have this organized in one source.
Ted Z--I'd love to dig around in some of those "piles of stuff" in your house.
Dan Bretta--Your comment about "unqualified grader" seems eerily accurate!

Happy New Year to all!

Cheers, Mike

this a fantasy piece thats been floating around eBay and flea markets for a few years now. If I remember right the real Yankee Stadium postcard it was designed from didnt have the image of Ruth on front. the Ruth image was added to make it more appealing... there should be info on the internet on this card and a couple others from the same source.

edited to ad a link to info and the image of the real postcard this was designed from
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=79620

The ebay seller ended his postcard. I emailed him with the bad news earlier today and he did the right thing by ending it. SGC needs to compensate this seller and they also need to compensate rdixon.

I've seen this variation before too at a Post Card Show....the seller knew what he had and did sell it as a reproduction stamped on the back... he said that he's seen others try to give it the "aged" look to make it look older...but the back is the giveaway....his advice was to learn before you buy..just like everything I guess... SGC definitely should have caught this one.

Ricky Y

Yep
 

As many have said, I really should have done my own research. It probably wouldn't have taken too much. As I said before, I saw the SGC slab and assumed it was good. Now for my lesson in humility.

I seem to do fine with cards. I've spent a few years around here and the old board and feel like I've got a pretty good eye for reprints and scam artists. It's when I get off the beaten path and buy a photo, postcard, ticket, etc. that I seem to get burned. I mean seriously....who reprints tickets!

Oh well....lesson learned. Hopefully the last one. :o

That isn't your fault RDixon, in the current collecting environment we are in, those companies portray themselves as the "experts" I have been saying since 1991 when PSA first got laughed at at the National, that the 3rd party grading is a joke. It does serve a purpose to help with a lot of online reprints. But the companies should hire or "UTILIZE" experts who have offered them help and even free help.

I think SGC is the best choice as PSA is more quantity then quality.

I do not consider myself qualified to be slabbing post cards, and I can promise you that I have forgotten more then the graders know about them.

Chin up! Keep collecting! any hobby will die without new and constant collectors.

Dan

Yes the grading sure was different! But it was also based on the naked eye. A gorgeous card that has a minute wrinkle that you can only see magnified 10 times, was considered NM. And that was acceptable in a hobby that had collectors instead of investors.

Dan' s right...I'm sure we all have been burned at one time or another in the hobby...I know I have had my share. I hope you can get SGC to work with you on this one. Good Luck!

Ricky

Thanks for the feedback, everyone. For reference, here is the other fantasy piece from the same seller.

ya Garry, thats the other one Ive seen, there might even be a 3rd one, but Im not positive. I knew there was at least 2 that had the Ruth images added to the fakes.
Good job bring these up in this thread too, many might not know about them as well...