1921 Herpolsheimers graded w/o mark
 

Question prompted by LOTG band aid find and to get your holiday juices flowing.
Most if not all come marked. Is such a card w/o a mark likely to have had the mark expertly removed or erased, or are there legitimate unmarked specimens out there? If so, do they command a premium? Happy Thanksgiving in advance, y'all!

I will venture a guess , they all had a mark at one time. Some might have been so light they didn't make an indention and, after erasing, nothing could be seen.
.

To my (and, I think, everyone else's) knowledge, every one of the known 1921 Herpolsheimers originated from one of two finds: the 2004 find of 69 or 70 cards, or the Band-Aid Box find.

EVERY 1921 Herpolsheimer in either of those two finds had a pencil notation.

The original 69 or 70 cards had a price written in pencil on the reverse. All of those cards that were originally graded either had a low grade from SGC, or a higher grade with an MK qualifier from PSA.

Eventually some of those cards had the pencil removed, and were regraded in higher-grade holders.

This new 39-card find also had pencil notations on the reverse, but they were a DIFFERENT kind of notation - each of these (including the Ruth, which didn't receive a qualifier from PSA) has the faded marking of what appears to be a card number on the bottom of the reverse (i.e. "No. 104"). Those marks are faded and in some cases difficult to see, but they're there.

-Al

This is one of those rare cases where writing on a card is desired.

And, the Herpolsheimers in LOTG are so cool.

Still overjoyed to not bid on the lots. I refer back to my story at the old Robert Morris show in Moon Township in Pittsburgh in May 1999. There, a gentleman who had the first cards from this "collection" waived his hand over the cards in the case and stated the prices on the back of the cards were because they were not original.

I am not sure what to make of this post. Are you saying that 1921 Herpolsheimers were known in 1999 (before the 2004 find, which supposedly is when they were first discovered)? And that find or the LOTG find (or both) are not original cards?

I don't think I would take much stock in 24 yr old hearsay. I have handled quite a few from that first batch and, just as the TPGs think they are real, so do I and every other sane collector.

Here's my Herpolsheimers back, with some others, from my 1st collection.
.

Just wondering
 

Is John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt in the Herpolsheimer set?

Just relaying my story once again and the cards I mentioned were eventually auctioned on eBay by another party. The thread on the matter should be able to be found. It should also be noted the guy who had them was at the first Cleveland National after 1999.

Here is a post that has me responding on December 24, 2004. I have responded the same way in other posts. By the way, happy upcoming 19th anniversary on our difference of opinions on this matter and Happy Thanksgiving to you and all other members:

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...=herpolsheimer

Not trying to embarrass Leon, but just pointing out history of the two posts. The first has him mentioning.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...=herpolsheimer

10/26/2004

It was 12/24/2004 he disputed me on it being real.

At first I thought they weren't real. Then I did, and still do.

Why would you mention someone told you they weren't real, all those years ago, in this thread? Slow day?


And I guess since you said above "Still overjoyed to not bid on the lots." you think they aren't real. LOL

The cards are real. They are neither fantasy nor counterfeit.

As Al mentioned in the write up, there was much upheaval at Herpolsheimer’s in 1920-21, as the grandfather died and the father who ran the store died unexpectedly not long thereafter. The business did not pass to the oldest son, who had worked there unremarkably, and the most experienced or capable management employee resigned because of differences with that oldest son. The son next in line was only 19 when his dad died, so technical management went to the widow, and as a result the former employee came back as general manager, with #2 son taking the reins in 1921 and oldest son shown the door around the end of 1921 (he would later sue over his inheritance). No doubt all of this maneuvering and various family tussles affected promotional and advertising plans.

I will go out on a limb a little and say that any future finds of this set will number in the dozens of cards, as was the case with the first group offered and now the one in LOTG. I say this because Herpolsheimers is the only advertiser of these 1920-21 cards that did business as a department store. The others were various bread/bakery shops or confectioner/candy makers that likely meted out the cards one per unit. Unlike what happened in 1916, when Herpolsheimer distributed its cards in series of 20 cards per/week, here the cards are unnumbered and “series” would not have made much sense. I suspect that they flat out sold them either as an entire set or in groups of several cards, rather than adding them as prizes to a store purchase. I also would not be surprised if the original owner of the cards in the Band-Aid find had a sibling or two with whom he shared the cards at first, with the others being less carefully kept over the years and now lost (although that is obviously just a wild guess). Again, however, it appears whatever the distribution plan, it was not in place very long.

Todd,

I confidently disagree. They are fakes.

Happy Thanksgiving,

Brian Van Horn

You may disagree all you want, confidently or otherwise. I am happy you are not bidding.

I have owned and examined one of these from the first find. Others here have owned and/or examined them. To my knowledge, no one here or anywhere other than you and your "dealer" from all those years ago seems to say otherwise. You offer no explanation as to what is off about them, only that this source apparently would not have had reason to lie to you. Perhaps not, but that doesn't mean he just wasn't plain wrong, because if he told you these were fakes, he was in fact wrong. Maybe he figured because some Henry Johnson and Kendig's had been faked using these same photo subjects, Herpolsheimer's must be as well, given there was no catalog listing them. Of course, those others involved cards with stamped backs, whereas these were clearly printed.

I have no idea as to the credibility of your source, and I mean no disrespect in saying this, but I have had some dealers at the National tell me with bold self-assurance some things about m101s that have made me walk away either shaking my head or chuckling. In short, they are not all experts:eek:. When it comes to obscure card issues, my attitude is to trust but verify whatever I'm told. I did that here. I have since sold my example and have no investment in the matter that could influence my opinion, and of course my opinion is of little weight anyway.

I am glad you are happy, gleeful or whatever you said about not bidding on these. Remain confident in your beliefs as you state, and I will do the same. Enjoy the Holiday.

Hi Brian-

Curious if you could share some of your concerns about the authenticity here. Is it entirely based on comments from others?

These are outside of my collecting interest, and are likely to remain so. Ergo, I really don’t have a personal interest. But I’m always interested in learning more, particularly when it comes to better understanding potential issues around authenticity.

The authenticity issue is twofold for me:

1.) The succinct honesty of the dealer at the show.

2.) if you're going to produce a card as real, it helps to have it similar, but inferior, in design to an actual card issue.

Please explain why it is inferior in design.

I am not sure how the succinct honesty of a dealer in 1999 applies to the recent find of cards.

I don't understand how the design of a card relates to whether it is real or not.

But even if that was the case, which design is inferior is clearly a matter of taste. I think they are both superior to, for example, the Gassler's American-Maid Bread design. That doesn't mean cards with a Gassler's back are not real.

Or Haffner's, Clark's or especially the hand-stamped Henry Johnsons and Keatings (See post #7).

Theory is that you take an original design and make an offtake on that.

Gassler's of course are real.

In the earlier thread Frank (canofprimo) suggests that they were ordered and printed, but ended up not being publicly distributed, which I think makes sense. I have one or two of the Henry Confectioner stamped cards, and am not very keen on those.

Todd—Has anyone ever come across a newspaper article advertising these cards? I know articles were found for various M101-4/5 backs and, if found, that would certainly clear things up.

The one other detail left out that I am amused by is that 1 Monroe is left off the back of the card for the address. I know the store was popular in Grand Rapids, Michigan, but.......

I am not sure what other sites there are, but I searched for Herpolsheimer in newspapers.com for 1916-1921. I got 82 matches, mostly from the Belding [Michigan] Banner, and mostly ads for a dentist located "opposite Herpolsheimer's".

I would add that if the cards were distributed at the store, putting the address on the back of the cards may not have been necessary. Also, if it is a place used as a landmark in someone else's ad, it was probably a place people in town knew the location of.

Here are a couple of newspaper clippings I have on the origin of the Herpolsheimer store(s). I have some other clippings that I will post later.

Attachment 598146

Attachment 598147

:rolleyes:Herpolsheimer did not have its address on the 1916 cards either. Then again, neither did department stores Block & Kuhl, Burgess-Nash, Gimbels and Everybody's. Really irrelevant.

Jay, I have not seen much of anything for Herpolsheimer's store in 1921, but that isn't surprising. They only had one or two ads that I've seen from 1916. Also, the department store ads from 1916 were all the marketing idea of Felix Mendelsohn, who no doubt created the format. Several of these department stores used virtually identical ads and verbiage. As I mentioned before, it looks like Herpolsheimer's was the lone department store advertising these cards in 1921.

PAT. The articles you posted are of a different Herpolsheimer in Nebraska-- a brother of the patriarch from Grand Rapids.

Here is the ad I found for the 1916 cards, a full page from the Grand Rapids Herald. Note there does not appear to be a store address-- kind of a shame with all those bargain prices that they forgot to tell people how to find the store.:rolleyes:
https://photos.imageevent.com/imover...ge/adscale.jpg

nolemmings:

"Herpolsheimer did not have its address on the 1916 cards either. Then again, neither did department stores Block & Kuhl, Burgess-Nash, Gimbels and Everybody's. Really irrelevant, but if it amuses you, well, different strokes I guess."

LOL!

Reference points attached. Even though Herpolsheimer's was popular, out of courtesy, like Holsum Bread, you would have your address not just your floor.

We are not talking about the M101-4/5 versions.

Brian, your arguments are borderline ridiculous. Some unknown dealer a quarter century ago with an honest demeanor told you that these were fake, and the design in your view is inferior, and the lack of a street address on an advertiser's card points to a fake, even when that advertiser is shown to not use its address in advertising for years. I can just imagine the folks at Herpolsheimer saying "we need the street address on our cards-- we made that horrible mistake five years ago of not including it so let's make sure people know where we are". Seriously? Did you ever think maybe its just a matter of preference? Why no address for Clark's, Haffner's and Gassler's? Fakes?

Have you held one of these in your hand? The dot patterns, fonts, card stock, toning, etc. all exemplify the "real" cards from 1920/21. So you do think they are fake altogether or just fake backs on real fronts?

As I said, you can discount people's opinions as you see fit, mine especially. But from that old thread we can see that Dan McKee, Frank Ward, and several other very well respected collectors here have held them and concluded they are real. I really think that your casting aspersions on an ongoing auction based on such flimsy "evidence" does no good, and that's putting it lightly.

I have held them. The guy who originally had them at a show indicated the prices on the back were because the cards weren't original. If you can't accept honesty, I can't help. No offense. They are fakes.

I'll make the conversation a bit more interesting.
 

The attached card will be offered in the next Memory Lane auction. I'm not super familiar with the history on these, but this example was a lone example from a large eclectic collection. I see no evidence of any kind of erasure. It was originally mislabeled by PSA without the Herpolsheimer designation and was recently corrected. If there was only a single Collins example from the original find and a single example from the recent find, then this was not from either.

Now there's a plot twist.

Howard,

The best to you with the auction. Obviously I will not be bidding.

Happy Thanksgiving,

Brian Van Horn

Howard,

I have a question. How is it PSA listed the Collins under series of 80?

Perhaps the most interesting thing about that Collins to me is the presence of what appears to be a wet sheet transfer on the front.

Even if those cards were fake, I am not clear how this impacts the separate group of cards found 20 years later. I would think that if someone created a fake batch of cards, they would not decide to introduce them to the public in two groupings that far apart.

I believe you are being honest in reporting what the dealer said, but I am unclear what "the prices on the back were because the cards weren't original" means.

Was it that he (the dealer) wrote the prices on the back because he thought the cards weren't original (so it didn't matter that he wrote on the cards, since they were fake anyway)?

Was it that the prices were low because the cards were not original?

Or was it that when he came into possession of the cards they already had prices on the back, which he took as an indicator that the cards were not original?

Many (I did not check all of them) of the LOTG cards have what looks like a wet sheet transfer on the front. Is that an indicator of something? I am not clear if that is an argument for them being real or being fake.

Michael,

I have actually been waiting for that question to come up. If the first group was a bunch of fakes what would have kept the second one from being the same minus the dollar asking prices on the back? 15 years after the first group was offered for auctions on eBay and twenty years after the dealer at the Robert Morris show there was news of another group (the current ones) in 2019. At this pace a third group should be printed up by 2034, but by a different person or persons. Have to allow for mortality. Looking forward to that discussion. :D Also, I have to wonder if by that point Artificial Intelligence will play a hand in the fraud. Oh, but that is just theory by this turkey 🦃 on Thanksgiving.

You were waiting for the question to come up but you didn't answer it. Nor did you answer my question as to whether these cards are totally fake or just the backs. Given your keen eye when you handled it/them and the complete honesty shown to you by this dealer, I would appreciate your responses.

Howard, I would be curious to know what you can tell us about the date you acquired this and whether it was already graded. The Herps Collins sold by Legendary looks very much like the card you show-- on the front anyway (big writing on the back).

The obvious indications the dealer knew the cards were fake is he stated they weren't authentic and at the same time he was waiving his left hand over them. Satisfied? The cards then and now are fake. The ones we're on pace for in 2034 will be fake. No Nostradamus in this equation.

You still haven't answered the question as to whether he discussed the price markings and if so what was said. You also did not answer my question about your own observations-- are they complete fakes or just the backs? So to answer your question-- no, I am not satisfied. Is that all you got? You can say they're fake in each and every one of your posts-- put it in your signature block if you wish-- that doesn't make it so. Not even close.

The prices on the back were the prices he asked. This is after he stated they were not real. I didn't ask for a definition between front and bank. Not real is good enough for me. Thank you for the cross examination. :D

Yes I know that Todd. He sold his interest in the Grand Rapids store to his brother and opened the store in Lincoln.

Patrick,

Thank you for the advertisement from 1916 and Happy Thanksgiving.

Brian Van Horn

It was mislabeled
 

They incorrectly labeled it as an E121 series of 80.

Picked it up in September
 

I got the card in September. It was in the holder I pictured - incorrectly labeled as an E121 and not identified as a Herpolsheimer. I had PSA correct it (I don't think I have a pic of the corrected holder). I am not sure how long the collector I got it from had it. VCP does show a sale of it on June 7, 2006 by "ManontheRock".

Can you post a pic of the Legendary example to compare? Or email to me at hcv123@att.net if you aren't comfortable posting.

How could a grading company, still number 1 in the industry in terms of volume and cards graded, make such a pathetic error by both misidentifying the set and excluding the advertiser. Where is the quality control?

Howard, I've got cooking duty but will try and post a pic by tomorrow. Maybe you can pull the sale from VCP, unless it was part of a lot sale that VCP doesn't cover. The Collins Herp was in a Legendary auction that I entered into my database in March 2015. My link to the auction is no longer good, as I believe Legendary archives were sold or otherwise went kaput. I screenshot the auction pics at the time and they are sadly small, but I will post what I can. The serial number on the PSA 6MK Herps Collins is 90406430.

John, all I can say and as you likely already know, it happens frequently. You can still find many instances of 1916 cards labeled as Sporting News whether the back is blank or carries another advertiser's back--including Herpolsheimer. Granted, I doubt that occurs much any longer.

In defense of PSA (I can't believe I'm saying this), the set is obscure and was probably not in their database as a recognized set when the card was first submitted, so they gave it the more blanket E121 designation, much like they did with the 1916 cards.