Woops! Home Run Baker??
 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/FRANK-HOME-R...item3ce3739a1f

Oh, that Home Run Baker.

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s...psdedba9e6.jpg

Interesting he died in 63 but is on a 71 card.:p. someone's gonna get duped on this one.
Drew

That's hilarious. How do you like those eggs on your face Beckett? Poached?

BTW, tip of the hat to you Jeff for outing an auction you surely want to win ;)

Nice detective work Jeff. But I am assuming by your user name that you know alot about Home Run Baker (the real one).

JimStinson
 

Well I guess I'll have to throw this one away ..a case of mistaken identity
______________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

Vintage autographs for auction in my e-bay store Home of the Bargains
http://stores.ebay.com/Jim-Stinson-Sports

I would, it's on a Yankee picture.

Not a tremendous amount but I do know that ain't his signature and Beckett should have known it too, and Leaf. What did that index card cost them, a $1?

I did trade several ebay messages with the seller who eventually did take it down.

The thing about this is that BGS is not at all an authenticator. They printed the flips that Leaf ordered and slabbed up the cards, but I doubt they barely even looked at the cards. I think this screw up is all on Leaf.

Is there a checklist for the product? Is the Frank Baker who actually signed that index card supposed to be in the product? If so, there may be a quite-a-bit-more valuable variant of his card floating around, but I doubt it.

This is another intriguing example from a similar type of product (this is from Razor, a predecessor to the current iteration of Leaf).

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/f...jack/zzz/7.jpg


This is clearly NOT Hunter's autograph, but appears to be cut from some sort of internal memo. In any case, BGS slabbed what they were paid to; they didn't authenticate or probably even look at the card itself.

Leaf does this intentionally. BGS is stabbing a card made by a company, but many consumers (incorrectly) think that a slab means authentication. In reality, it does not.

They may not be authenticators, but still could face liability. Slabbing these could be considered a deceptive business practice and a misrepresentation of authenticity, especially when they include on their flip the year of death. As I understand it, that info is not on the "card" itself and thus the flip is not using it as any kind of identifier; rather, it could serve as a representation by Beckett that the signature encased is from an individual who died in year XX when that in fact is untrue. IMO of course.

completely agree, this garbage needs to stop.
That "Catfish Hunter" creation is disgusting.

I disagree about Leaf. They put out a card with "Pinstripe Pride Frank Baker." Well, Frank Baker did play for the yankees. They didn't label it as HR Baker, it makes sense to me they knew exactly which Baker they had.

I blame BGS for slapping the "Home Run" label on this.

But you see, BGS only slabs what is on the checklist. Who creates the checklist? The card manufacturer. I am 99% sure that BGS does not get these cards in hand, look at each one and attribute names and dates of death. They are given a stack of cards and told how to slab them.

Again, they are not authenticators. They slab according to checklists, which in turn have been issued by the card manufacturer.

Wat about the Catfish Hunter posted above? Is the blame there shared by both companies? That tells me that BGS is simply saying "here's a card that the manufacturer claims is authentic." It then got returned to Leaf to be inserted in a box and shipped out. Where's the QC there?

It sucks, and I view the problem as Leaf's. BGS is complicit, but they are doing exactly what they have been paid to do, nothing more.