T206 Moeller (Raw) with a Pencil Mark
 

I went to a local show yesterday, in Grapevine Texas, and picked up this beauty along with 20 other raw, common T206s. Not pristine but just nice looking cards. Of course none will grade above a 4 (or so) so this isn't going to be a big time pick up. That said, we have had discussions about different alterations blah blah blah. So why not a real world one we can discuss? This card has a pencil mark on back. I have a trusty Mars plastic eraser on my desk that I will probably use on it. It isn't a crime to do that, unless you say you didn't, although some consider it sacrilegious and I can see that point too. So getting the "it is fraud" discussion out of the way, is it ok to erase this mark? If I then submit it what happens if it later gets found with the mark and then, graded, it doesn't have it? And actually, for sake of discussion, that mark might hold it back up to 2 grades!! I could see it being a 1 to 1.5 with the mark and a 2.5?-3 without it. Yikes. :eek: Real world issue on a 35 buck card.
.

Personally i have no problem with erasing...id surmise many times there will still be traces remaining...BUT...with that fat left border...this card could become perfectly centered with a little help!!!:D

Is there any reason the pencil lead will further damage the card over time?

I personally couldn't care less about an erasure like that if done with a high quality art eraser.

Erasure doesn't bother me personally, but I understand why it bothers some. The PA find that had been posted here a while back that I ended up auctioning off had pencil on over half the cards. I did not remove because of the differing opinions on such removal. I am sure many of them are clean today.

Cool find....
 

Leon,

No issues here with the eraser method but after you have finished, it will be interesting to view the results and the complete "Moeller Report" hahhahahahahahah

Peace, Mike :D

if any markings on a card are erased the card can received a grade no higher then Authentic as it is viewed as being altered.

I say you can erase it and still sleep well at night. If we made a list of all the possible alterations that could be done to a baseball card, this minor improvement would be among the least. And it's so minor that I will say it is acceptable.

A bigger question is if you decide to sell it, are you obligated to disclose the erasure? And my answer is I don't know.

+1 There have been a lot of really silly(IMHO) ways of saying altered cards are not altered lately.

I get the discussion more on the postcard side, since it was a regular occurrence for postcard dealers to write the price on the back of the card. Dealers would buy a collection, erase one seller's prices, and replace with theirs.
This mark, to me, is interesting because it shows that the person who owned it was likely trying to complete the set. "451" may signify the owner's order in adding it to his T206 collection.

Beautiful card, Leon...with or without the number on the back.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

My guess is that you picked them up from Roger. :-)

At some point, in my opinion, stuff is so de minimis as to be unimportant. I don't think Leon's playing word or definition games here, I think he's just of the view -- as am I, and Barry, and others I assume -- that it's trivial.

I can't wait to bid on that Moeller card 6 months from now in a PWCC auction, graded a PSA 8.

Is it okay because there is no surface gloss on a T206? If this was on a 1989 Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr would erasing the pencil still be okay?

This goes to the detectable/undetectable issue as well as the additional damage to the card issue. Does it matter based on the value of the card? If it is alteration on a Baltimore Ruth to remove the pencil mark, shouldn't it be the same on a $50 card?

If the intent is to only remove the pencil mark, it doesn't meet the standard definition of conservation, so I would still call it alteration.

Full dislosure: I used a bad eraser to try and remove a price off the 1939 Cobb HOF postcard, but once it started smearing I left the price on it. PSA graded it a 4 with no qualifiers. It should have, at a minimum, got a 4(MK).

Maybe at PSA, SGC will grade it if the erasure isn't badly done.

If it was me, I wouldn't grade the card. I don't see it being any better than maybe g-vg because of the crease. The number on the back doesn't bother me at all, I'd leave it mostly out of laziness.

I've shown this one recently, but it's really appropriate here. When I asked SGC at a show about the grade, they pointed out the erased number on the back, which kept it from being a bit better than a 40. I've had it since maybe 1980, and never noticed it till they pointed it out.

http://www.net54baseball.com/picture...ictureid=26971

I don’t really consider someone erasing pencil marks as a horrible thing. Ill do it and have done it. That said, if someone has wrote their name or its some notations as to the player, position, etc. then I’d rather leave it. If it’s complete chicken scratch, then I’d erase.

OK Peter I will play. Is it trivial to you because of the value or because 90%+ of T206 cards have had something done to them?:confused:

If it wasn’t on the card when it was originally printed then it’s not a problem to remove it.

That would make the use of chemicals, etc OK...by your definition...to remove stains, etc.

What about Cracker jacks...they weren't printed with the stains on them...this occurred in the box?

How about this scenario Pete: You're sorting your raw T-206's on the kitchen table when you decide to take a break for lunch. While eating your meatball hero you spill tomato sauce all over your green Cobb. Is it ethical to remove the sauce off the card?:)

Is that even possible to remove the ragoooo?????

Tomato sauce would blend well into a red Cobb, but not so well with a greenie. Maybe pesto would be better.

garlic aioli on the bat on????

There once was a Moeller with mark,
In the daylight it seemed somewhat dark,
With polymer erasion, I removed the abrasion,
And now they say I’m a card shark.

I have done it a couple times--including, coincidentally, on a T206 Moeller. No harm, no foul as far as I am concerned. It's kind of like running the vacuum over the carpet in front of the couch after the Super Bowl to remove Tostitos.

Agree

??
 

You vacuum?????? You must be married!!! Lol!

I liked the poem...or limerick? :)

Peace, Mike


My shot at 2 in the morn with a few beers in me!

Moeller was marked with #2
Not really as bad as Ragu
So Leon in haste
Got rid of the waste
Now Moeller is just about new

:)

Yes sir and here are the others too which will soon be listed in the BST. I will let the future owner of the group decide what to do on the pencil mark. The "Moeller Report" was kind of catchy, nice one!
I would probably, not positively, erase the pencil if it were in my collection. Sort of undecided on it. My thinking is these were from an older collection as they were in tobacco penny sleeves inside of cardsavers and the sleeves have made their familiar impressions on them. I ousted the old sleeves.
All Sweet Cap and Piedy with a plate scratch on the back of Donohue.

What impact had the sleeves had on the cards?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

None I could tell. Here are larger scans of some of them...

http://luckeycards.com/t206x9.jpg

Guess I misunderstood/misread what you meant by the sleeves making their familiar impressions on them. They are a nice looking group.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Personally, I'd leave the mark. Then again I'm a history nerd. I feel like when I buy raw cards I'm buying them exactly as is and erasing something that meant something to the previous owner is like potentially erasing history. Never know what that 457 could have meant to the previous owners (assuming they weren't crooks).

I meant impressions on the cardsavers. Of course I am biased but it is a clean looking group and has found a new home too. :)

erasure
 

I think erasing it would be fine, but if you changed it to a "454" with your pencil, I'd consider that altered.

Nice snag!
Geno