Of course he did well. Getting any value out of a recent sign that by all accounts was created for the sole purpose of deceiving collectors is a big win. Of course that win would be based on the OP disclosure to the buyer the real nature of the sign. If on the other hand the OP did not disclose the facts behind the sign then ot would be wrong to call this a win. If Tom Rebert sold this sign without disclosing exactly what it was then ot would clearly show a lack of ethics.
|