CJ Reprint?

[Edwolf1963]

I saw this one a few days ago - 1915 obviously (vs. 1914 claim) - thought it was a reprint given thicker looking paper stock and consistency which (to me) appears more in-line with other reprints. Hard to be sure off two scans ..

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1914-Cracker...gAAOSwPWRZOwte

Thoughts?

[sterlingfox]

The boldness and clarity of the print, especially at the bottom, seems very inconsistent with the other wear on the card.

Fake.

[CrackaJackKid]

99.9% chance it's fake.

[Leon]

Printing and lithography looks fake to me....

QUOTE=Edwolf1963;1673884]I saw this one a few days ago - 1915 obviously (vs. 1914 claim) - thought it was a reprint given thicker looking paper stock and consistency which (to me) appears more in-line with other reprints. Hard to be sure off two scans ..

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1914-Cracker...gAAOSwPWRZOwte

Thoughts?[/QUOTE]

[Leon]

somebody took a chance at 50 bucks.....

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1914-Cracker...p2047675.l2557

.

[Yoda]

I would bet on a Dover reprint. Pretty easy to spot if you know what you doing. Card stock and overbold printing stand out.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Yoda

I would bet on a Dover reprint. Pretty easy to spot if you know what you doing. Card stock and overbold printing stand out.

The back of the card almost looked worse (more off) than the front. And that is saying something for a reprint.