[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

Matt,

Some of the auction cues are easier to find than card cues when it comes to spotting scams. As noted above, things like low feedback, no feedback, indistinct images, sold "as is" all point to scams. So do any references to grandma's attic, uncle joe's desk, or the little old lady that lives down the lane. Also, you often see vague disclaimers like "I don't know much about these cards" or "these are my boyfriend's cards and I don't know anything about them" or "this may be a reprint - I don't know" - basically the seller trying to create wiggle room to use later. On the other hand, he does take PayPal and many scammers won't take PP because the buyer has some recourse when the scam is discovered.

As to card cues, they are harder to describe and see. For T206's, the font on the front is often a big one. Real cards have a soft brown ink, and reprints have a harsher black ink for the name and team. Also, the reprint name/team tend to be squeezed together more.

I hate to say it, but after awhile you can just get a sense that something doesn't "look right" in ways that are hard to articulate. People used to say that back in the day, and I thought it wasn't very helpful. But I've found that being on this board and looking at ebay, etc etc, over time has led to me being able to know when somehting doesn't look right. Not always, but much better.

Finally, I do seller searches on ebay under the seller ID "carbs". He sells a lot of vintage reprints and identifies them as reprints. I download scans of his reprint cards, and have extensive files of reprint scans. This helps give a feel for general look, and also will let you see where the word "reprint" appears on the card. Often a reprint being sold as real will have paper loss or extensive staining conveniently located right where the word "reprint" would appear.

Carbs is a great resource for getting good images of reprint scans and starting a file. I've used my file several times for a card I wasn't sure of.

For reference, below are two scans of T206 font. The first is a Crandall, and you can see that the font is black and kind of harsh looking and squeezed together. The other is a close up of font on a real T206. It's lighter - not as black, not as harsh, and the letters are more widely spaced. It has a smoother and more elegant look. I find the same thing on backs for reprints. For lack of a better word, a reprint back looks harsh and doesn't have the smooth and mellow look of the real thing.

Joann

ETA: Both scans below were downloaded from this board a long time ago, when someone here helpfully posted them in response to a similar question about T206 fake-spotting. So I am passing them on again here.