A few of the funniest fake t206 SLers you'll ever see

[Lucas00]

I mean come on lol.

https://www.pristineauction.com/a103...auty-Back-T206

https://www.pristineauction.com/a103...ales-Back-T206

[Johnphotoman]

It would be cool to tell how they are fakes, yes it is obvious, but it would be cool to hear someone describe how they are fakes. Who knows…could miss something and it would be fun to hear how people describe fakes along with just looking at them. John

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by Johnphotoman

It would be cool to tell how they are fakes, yes it is obvious, but it would be cool to hear someone describe how they are fakes. Who knows…could miss something and it would be fun to hear how people describe fakes along with just looking at them. John

The front alone - picture quality, colors, font, frame. Let alone the back, and the fact it's an impossible combo. It's almost like asking how can you REALLY be sure an apple isn't a banana.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

The front alone - picture quality, colors, font, frame. Let alone the back, and the fact it's an impossible combo. It's almost like asking how can you REALLY be sure an apple isn't a banana.

If you're going to fake something, why change everything to make it patently obvious it is fake?

[DougG423]

Oh the elusive T206 Foster green EPDG 1/1. It's like the scammer wasn't trying or has no knowledge about the set.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by jingram058

If you're going to fake something, why change everything to make it patently obvious it is fake?

Because these weren’t meant to deceive - these are from an early full reprint set that was an honest effort and never supposed to be confused with the originals.

[Bill77]

The cards are from one of the reprint sets of the 1980's. They pop up all the time on eBay sometimes listed correctly and also altered by scammers. I have seen them with correct back colors, plain black-, and rainbow-colored backs.
comc has a lot of them listed currently.

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by G1911

Because these weren’t meant to deceive - these are from an early full reprint set that was an honest effort and never supposed to be confused with the originals.

I cannot find the set these originated from. The typical 1980s reprint sets all copied the original font and list clearly they are reprints. And they don't have fake backs with super bad cuts.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by G1911

Because these weren’t meant to deceive - these are from an early full reprint set that was an honest effort and never supposed to be confused with the originals.

I see. Thanks 👍

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

I cannot find the set these originated from. The typical 1980s reprint sets all copied the original font and list clearly they are reprints. And they don't have fake backs with super bad cuts.

Look a little harder and you will see tons of these floating around, you can probably find 30 more from this reproduction on eBay in a few minutes. Fantasy fake backs and color combos were normal on 80’s reprints and you can find hundreds of them from multiple reprint runs on eBay every day of the year.

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by G1911

Look a little harder and you will see tons of these floating around, you can probably find 30 more from this reproduction on eBay in a few minutes. Fantasy fake backs and color combos were normal on 80’s reprints and you can find hundreds of them from multiple reprint runs on eBay every day of the year.

So yes they were meant to deceive lol. Not sure how you got to "they weren't meant to deceive" if the back literally has the word reprint removed. Like I thought before, the real 1980s reprints have it clearly listed, shown here.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/25680501835...mis&media=COPY

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

So yes they were meant to deceive lol. Not sure how you got to "they weren't meant to deceive" if the back literally has the word reprint removed. Like I thought before, the real 1980s reprints have it clearly listed, shown here.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/25680501835...mis&media=COPY

These are meant to deceive. He's talking about the set these were from, which were marked "reprint", that were used to make these fakes.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

So yes they were meant to deceive lol. Not sure how you got to "they weren't meant to deceive" if the back literally has the word reprint removed. Like I thought before, the real 1980s reprints have it clearly listed, shown here.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/25680501835...mis&media=COPY

…. No fucking shit the seller of these is trying to deceive. The cards themselves were not meant to be deceptive, which is why all the details are wrong and completely different. This was an honest reprint set, not intended to be confused with the originals. The seller here is trying to pass them off as real and scratched off the “reprint” tag. If you want to play this game, read and make sure you’re right before you play.

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by G1911

…. No fucking shit the seller of these is trying to deceive. The cards themselves were not meant to be deceptive, which is why all the details are wrong and completely different. This was an honest reprint set, not intended to be confused with the originals. The seller here is trying to pass them off as real and scratched off the “reprint” tag. If you want to play this game, read and make sure you’re right before you play.

Maybe word your post better? I've never seen somebody lose their temper that fast and be so oblivious at the same time. It's obviously not clear that's what you meant in your first post. It looked like you were referring to the cards I posted about saying they were an honest attempt. Hence James post above clarifying.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

Maybe word your post better? I've never seen somebody lose their temper that fast and be so oblivious at the same time. It's obviously not clear that's what you meant in your first post. It looked like you were referring to the cards I posted about saying they were an honest attempt. Hence James post above clarifying.

It is not complicated. This is not a difficult line to follow.

Originally Posted by jingram058

If you're going to fake something, why change everything to make it patently obvious it is fake?

Originally Posted by G1911

Because these weren’t meant to deceive - these are from an early full reprint set that was an honest effort and never supposed to be confused with the originals.

The question is why every aspect of the reprint has been changed - and the answer, like it or not, is because this reproduction run was a legitimate one that was not meant to deceive people. No difficult words were used. That we are talking about the set is explicitly stated and included, not assumed in the on sentence statement.

Before you choose to play this game:

Originally Posted by Lucas00

So yes they were meant to deceive lol. Not sure how you got to "they weren't meant to deceive" if the back literally has the word reprint removed. Like I thought before, the real 1980s reprints have it clearly listed, shown here.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/25680501835...mis&media=COPY

Make sure you read the post you are trying to correct and mock correctly.

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by G1911

It is not complicated. This is not a difficult line to follow.





The question is why every aspect of the reprint has been changed - and the answer, like it or not, is because this reproduction run was a legitimate one that was not meant to deceive people. No difficult words were used. That we are talking about the set is explicitly stated and included, not assumed in the on sentence statement.

Before you choose to play this game:



Make sure you read the post you are trying to correct and mock correctly.

You are trolling at this point and wasting my time. If you can't comprehend how your original statement can be taken numerous ways then I can't help you lol. Ignoring your future troll replies. Not going to delve this into 20 pages of argument replies like 3/4 of your posts turn into.

[Beercan collector]

What the hell is with people arguing on this site - If it has re-print on it it’s not meant to deceive - if “re-print” has been removed it’s meant to deceive

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Beercan collector

What the hell is with people arguing on this site - If it has re-print on it it’s not meant to deceive - if “re-print” has been removed it’s meant to deceive

But not by the original manufacturer of the reprint.
It all seemed pretty clear to me, but then, I've seen these and others since they were new.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by G1911

…. No fu#$^&* shit the seller of these is trying to deceive. The cards themselves were not meant to be deceptive, which is why all the details are wrong and completely different. This was an honest reprint set, not intended to be confused with the originals. The seller here is trying to pass them off as real and scratched off the “reprint” tag. If you want to play this game, read and make sure you’re right before you play.

Stop with the F bombs.

And I agree with post #17
.