Ty is a bit pale?

[Leon]

The last poll went over well and I have to say I was quite surprised at how many folks thought the card in question was most likely good, even if it was a lower percentage there were still quite a few. And my crystal ball says that some of the people who voted that it was definitely good are advanced collectors. So what about this Cobby, from a good seller? Just pale or not so good?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1911-m-116-t...#ht_500wt_1202



.
.

[Piratedogcardshows]

I voted no good.Even though I can't really tell from the scan the lack of item specifics being listed always leads me to believe its a questionable card.I for one like to see it at least listed as an original prewar card in the auction details.

[Leon]

This early and I am already surprised. Very interesting.

[FrankWakefield]

"no returns" is certainly a way to keep the bidding down... I voted "can't tell", and it may well be authentic. I'd want to hit it with a black light and know that it was returnable if I were going to bid.

[barrysloate]

I said card was good, but fact is it's a lousy scan.

[Bicem]

has that fake look to me.

[Davy_Kangaroo_Jones]

Looks fake, but these cards are hard to tell unless you're holding them when they look that bad.

[Tsaiko]

Cant tell from the scan, but sellers feedback (and his response to any question I might ask) would tilt me one way or the other.

Should be advertised as a "sun drenched" Cobb.

[3-2-count]

Voted cant tell from the scan. Need a back pic to confirm.

[WillowGrove]

I knew I when I checked out his other items for sale I would see some shiny stuff. Doesn't prove anything, just sayin.

Also this seller could win the most frustrating scan award. (do they still give that one out?) No back scan drives me nuts.

[Brendan]

Looks fake and the poorly listed title and item description definitely affects the chances of it being real negatively.

[Leon]

I really thought more folks would think this one was not good. To me it was obvious with the washed out look, especially after I compared it to a good one......Who knows, maybe I was wrong (again)....and here is a comparison.....

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1911-m-116-t...#ht_500wt_1202

[gnaz01]

Originally Posted by Leon

I really thought more folks would think this one was not good. To me it was obvious with the washed out look, especially after I compared it to a good one......Who knows, maybe I was wrong (again)....and here is a comparison.....

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1911-m-116-t...#ht_500wt_1202

Poof, gone!!

[calvindog]

Looks fake to me.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by gnaz01

Poof, gone!!

When I put this post up a little while ago the auction was still up. Sort of strange to take it completely down after it's over.....and it had no bids. I didn't report it.

[Davy_Kangaroo_Jones]

I have a ton of M116's. I bought some at the Card Show at Gibralter Trade Center show in Taylor. Honestly, that could have been real. Wish he would have had a picture of the back though.

[MW1]

Fake.

Edited to add: The creases look photocopied and there appear to be no signs of actual physical distress.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by MW1

Fake.

Thanks Mike....Your opinion is one of the most valued on the board, concerning this type of issue, imo. As soon as I saw that card on ebay I got that sinking stomach feeling. I am right about 95% of the time on those....