Uh oh - Return or Don't Return - that is the "new" question
 

...

Leave it
 

I vote for no restore but maybe frame with the top and bottom edges at 2 1/2 and 20..... would look pretty uniform and vintage then. Would have to find a way to do that without cutting or damaging the rest however. You can experiment by laying some some black paper at those levels to see what it would look like! Very cool piece!

Better check this out
 

I Googled up the calendar for January 1896 and it doesnt match up.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Janu...hrome&ie=UTF-8

A few alarm bells go off for me. The staples are brand new. It looks like the words were filled in with watercolor. It is very noticeable in the word ‘Guide’ and below in ‘For Sale here’. The apostrophe is missing between the h and s in Reachs. They did spell it Reach’s on the cover of their guides. See http://www.seanlahman.com/2014/08/20...-guides/#Reach. The 96 in the date is poorly drawn and not the same scale as the ‘18’. They should be on the same curve, but the 6 is much higher. Those numbers are also different styles. The nine looks like a g. That type of 9 is difficult to draw/write if you haven’t done it regularly.

The ‘For Sale here’ is very poorly drawn. The frame line has inconsistent widths. The black paint in the words ‘For Sale here’ is smeared across the red background. The two end designs are completely different from each other. If they capitalize ‘For’ and ‘Sale’ they would have also capitalized ‘here’. This was a professional publication and as such they would have used a quality printer. My opinion is that it is a pathetic fake.

Great Detective Work Rocky.

I would never have thought about checking that.

Bud sadly Rocky is right and the Month's dates listed on that do not match up with reality.

As well as the issues Michael points out

I actually like the look but it does not seem authentic.

The tribe has spoken.

Return.

Thank you all!

For what it’s worth, it looks good to me—meaning I would have bought this and been mistaken as well, not meaning that it’s authentic. So, I like to think you are in good company.

It looks like for "JANUARY" they used the typeface Helvetica or one of the ones that came after it was first produced in 1957.

God help us if forgers finally learn typographic history!

Great idea to look up to see if the dates matchup on a real 1896 calendar and good catch on the "Reachs" as opposed to "Reach's"

I still like the look and depending if you did not pay to much for it I would keep it

Thanks all.


Paid $200, but set to return later this week. If someone wants for $200 let me know, it's yours.

Agreed for that amount it would be a return

Yeah, I wouldn't call it a fake. More of a Fantasy piece or "a work of art".

At $200, it's also a Fantasy price. :D

Ken wel fake
 

Here we go again:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/VINTAGE-LIT...-127632-2357-0

I know. First the Ty Cobb clocks, now the "vintage" calendars.

Seeing a whole new breed of fake items.

It looks like a hand done piece. I admire it for what it is, but it just looked too crisp to be vintage.

For $35 the one on ebay doesn't have to be legit to be enjoyed. Of course for a BIN of $35 he knows damn well it's fake.

Unfortunately there are people out there trying to make money by scamming others.

It is tougher because not everyone has the knowledge or resources like this forum.

Wish there was a way for eBay to police this better

1957 Helvetica typeface again

It says "reproduction" in the item description.

It doesn't matter because sellers are still deceptive about things like that sometimes. They should be up front and clearly say/show it is a fantasy piece or modern reproduction, not sort of hide that important fact by leaving it inconspicuously in the "fine print" of the description.

Well First and Formost Buyer Beware. Second 1921 Lou Gehrig glove? If that doesn't set off bells it is NOT the fault of the seller.

Unfortunately it is and always will be as it is.

That's hilarious, I didn't even notice that.