Posted By:
SteveI am absolutely willing as Barry and others have suggested to have a COMPLETELY independent third-party perform a test. Again, to talk about red herrings, we all know the games with paper and ink. This is clearly something that was printed; people that use period ink tend to sign autographs and not print cards and I want to make every best effort and then some to resolve this definitively and AGAIN, if tests are inconclusive, the winning bidder gets an immediate refund.
Corey and Jay, you are both very bright guys and I respect you tremendously but how would one ever corroborate a unique item? There is not always available a vintage ad, especially as in this case, where it is likely a prototype. Testing can also be a positive as it would tell us a lot if the ink and paper were from 1929/30.
It troubles me that few address the key point as to whether this is real. Any quick look at the blog can tell that grading services often make mistakes and are not infallible; this seems to me to be a particularly potent case with a unique card. Also, this needs to be said (as it was to the winning bidder): had PSA run a paper and ink test and on that basis rejected the card, there would be no issue and an immediate refund.
People, technical issues can be debated, but why such a momentous resistance to knowing if the card is real via testing? However this resolves itself, this card needs to be tested to know its authenticity.
Strictly speaking as hobbyists (as I am a collector as well as a dealer myself), the only way to resolve something like this is to test. This happens in the art world all the time, in the world of historical documents; our hobby should be at the stage at which we can resolve thing like this and not by collecting history (ie, we all have seen or not seen this before, ergo real or fake)
Steve