Hey, pennant guys

[bocca001]

I recently bought this very colorful Houston Colt 45s pennant. The seller told me that he bought the pennant at Wrigley Field in 1962 or 1963. It's an Adflag pennant (thanks, Greg), so it being from Chicago makes sense.

I guess I never really thought very deeply about this in the past, but I guess it's possible (likely?) that this pennant was only sold at a handful of non-Houston stadiums. Houston fans may have never seen this pennant in Houston because the vendors in Houston were selling other pennants, such as the second and third pennants below (which would help to explain why they are more common).

What do you guys think?

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by bocca001

I recently bought this very colorful Houston Colt 45s pennant. The seller told me that he bought the pennant at Wrigley Field in 1962 or 1963. It's an Adflag pennant (thanks, Greg), so it being from Chicago makes sense.

I guess I never really thought very deeply about this in the past, but I guess it's possible (likely?) that this pennant was only sold at a handful of non-Houston stadiums. Houston fans may have never seen this pennant in Houston because the vendors in Houston were selling other pennants, such as the second and third pennants below (which would help to explain why they are more common).

What do you guys think?

I think that's a great looking pennant!

And congrats for christening page 100!

[perezfan]

Great pennant, Marc. That could explain the rarity, but perhaps fewer were simply manufactured as well. We can only theorize at this point.

Rob:
For me, this is page 166

[thetahat]

Page 100 for me!

Yeah that’s a super cool pennant, hard to find as neatly cut as Marc’s. This is right around the time that Ad Flag turned over quality control to a 12 year old with scissors.

It’s interesting to note that this is the same pistol graphic on the two sided Colt 45 pennant, except smaller and inverted.

[Fballguy]

Beware the pennant eating virus. Not sure if there's a vaccine for this.

https://ebay.us/uHeZrR

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

Beware the pennant eating virus. Not sure if there's a vaccine for this.

https://ebay.us/uHeZrR

Interesting that the virus eats felt but not ink.

I may or may not be receiving a felt triangle in the mail today.

[perezfan]

If only those damn rats would wear their masks and social-distance like they're supposed to, these casualties could be avoided. That said, the "floating letters" look kind of cool.

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by perezfan

If only those damn rats would wear their masks and social-distance like they're supposed to, these casualties could be avoided. That said, the "floating letters" look kind of cool.

I was kind of thinking the same thing. You could almost do something artsy with this...but not for $89.

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by ooo-ribay

Interesting that the virus eats felt but not ink.

I may or may not be receiving a felt triangle in the mail today.

Well...If you receive an empty box, you know what happened.

[bocca001]

Not sure if Fballguy will be able to resist this beauty.

[murphusa]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

Beware the pennant eating virus. Not sure if there's a vaccine for this.

https://ebay.us/uHeZrR

don't we all have one

[murphusa]

recent finds

[murphusa]

a couple more

71 and 73

sorry for the repeat

[bocca001]

Those are pretty nice looking white pennants. I usually only see that Astros pennant stained and tattered.

[todeen]

I couldn't find this thread the other day, shocking since there are a billion posts, but I also listed these in BST. Not mine. From a store in Wallace, ID. Contact info is in that thread. Store clerk said the consignor had more pennants not on display. Clerk knew nothing about baseball, so don't ask him questions. Try to get in contact with consignor. Dodgers pennant is purple.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by bocca001

Not sure if Fballguy will be able to resist this beauty.

The pennant or the "model"?

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by bocca001

Not sure if Fballguy will be able to resist this beauty.

I had to take a closer look at this guys pennants because the way his girl was holding them made them look over sized. Alas...they aren't. And though she is a sight to behold (the pennant that is)...I have to pass as I already own this one in duplicate.

[ooo-ribay]

I'm pleased (I think) to add this atrocious New York pennant. It joins its ugly SF sisters. As I was putting the blue SF pennant back in it's sleeve, I noticed it is more of a fabric than a felt. Same with the spine, although you may not make that out from my photo. I’m not sure if this is what Greg calls “cloth” because it still seems like felt. Do we know who made these atrocities? My powers of recall are not up to those of Mark and Greg. I would say the thin tassels are an identifying characteristic.

The seller of the NY pennant originally had it on ebay for $350. He came down to $300 and then $250. I offered $150 and he said he was firm at $200. I hit him again at $175 and he accepted. He then wondered why I had only sent $150. I told him I had sent $196 to cover the price the tax and the shipping. He was not aware we don't call it "feebay" for nothing!

[ooo-ribay]

Hey Kyle –

Have you ever thought of combining all your pennant blogs into a cheap, Kinko’s type booklet? I tried to copy and paste them into Word but the pictures (essential) didn’t copy. Do you or someone else here have the ability to make a printable PDF? I’m sure many of us would love to print your blogs and keep them handy for reference; maybe in a binder. Personally, I would take a PDF file to my local copy center and have it printed on nice, glossy paper.

Who's got the skillz??

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by ooo-ribay

I'm pleased (I think) to add this atrocious New York pennant. It joins its ugly SF sisters. As I was putting the blue SF pennant back in it's sleeve, I noticed it is more of a fabric than a felt. Same with the spine, although you may not make that out from my photo. I’m not sure if this is what Greg calls “cloth” because it still seems like felt. Do we know who made these atrocities? My powers of recall are not up to those of Mark and Greg. I would say the thin tassels are an identifying characteristic.

The seller of the NY pennant originally had it on ebay for $350. He came down to $300 and then $250. I offered $150 and he said he was firm at $200. I hit him again at $175 and he accepted. He then wondered why I had only sent $150. I told him I had sent $196 to cover the price the tax and the shipping. He was not aware we don't call it "feebay" for nothing!

Yes, the blue one is the type we refer to as "cloth"... easily distinguished by the individual threads that make up the pennant. The back-lit photo you posted shows it perfectly. Also (more often than not) this type of "cloth" pennant will have some stray threads protruding from its borders.

The green ones are true/traditional felt. Tough pennant... nice find!

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Yes, the blue one is the type we refer to as "cloth"... easily distinguished by the individual threads that make up the pennant. The back-lit photo you posted shows it perfectly. Also (more often than not) this type of "cloth" pennant with have some stray threads protruding from its borders.

The green ones are true/traditional felt. Tough pennant... nice find!

The color on the blue one is amazing. Finding a cloth one that isn't faded is a feat.

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Yes, the blue one is the type we refer to as "cloth"... easily distinguished by the individual threads that make up the pennant. The back-lit photo you posted shows it perfectly. Also (more often than not) this type of "cloth" pennant with have some stray threads protruding from its borders.

The green ones are true/traditional felt. Tough pennant... nice find!

Different makers must have used different “cloth.” I’m familiar with the flimsy ones that always have stray threads on the edges. This one, while being a woven fabric, feels just like felt and has no stray threads. Perhaps it’s a different thread? Cotton vs. wool?

[thetahat]

The early cloth pennants seem thicker than, say, the 1969 ASCO cloth pennants. But I concur that the one pic with light from behind establishes it as cloth. And yes, to have retained its colors ... wow! I love the cloth pennants, how they look, feel, etc. My guess is that the first Trench cloth pennants were 1955 by virtue of the Dodgers scroll and the fact that none of the 10 different 1954 Indians versions are cloth .... I do have a 3/4 size Keezer STL Browns though ...

[Domer05]

Originally Posted by ooo-ribay

Hey Kyle –

Have you ever thought of combining all your pennant blogs into a cheap, Kinko’s type booklet? I tried to copy and paste them into Word but the pictures (essential) didn’t copy. Do you or someone else here have the ability to make a printable PDF? I’m sure many of us would love to print your blogs and keep them handy for reference; maybe in a binder. Personally, I would take a PDF file to my local copy center and have it printed on nice, glossy paper.

Who's got the skillz??

It's a great idea. But, I haven't thought to do it. Wish I knew how....

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by Domer05

It's a great idea. But, I haven't thought to do it. Wish I knew how....

Does anyone else know how to PDF Kyle’s blogs into one file? Maybe someone who works at a university.......?

[bocca001]

Originally Posted by ooo-ribay

Does anyone else know how to PDF Kyle’s blogs into one file? Maybe someone who works at a university.......?

I'm pretty sure that anyone can "print" just about anything as a PDF (which saves it as a pdf), if you have the right version of Adobe.

However: I grew up right in the middle of Silicon Valley, my dad worked at some of the earliest Silicon Valley companies (i.e., at Fairchild "growing" the Silicon chips), but I'm about the least tech-saavy person around.

[bocca001]

I'm glad that Rob got the Green-Giant. It was in nice condition. I had actually offered a bit more for it a few weeks ago, but the guy turned it down. Too bad for him. My favorite one in that family is the blue and yellow for some reason. The colors are so wrong for the Giants that they are right for that pennant. Would love to find one of those.

I did finally get this Giants 1958 pitcher pennant. I have several versions without the 1958, but always passed on this one hoping to get it at a lower price. And Erik won't trade me his

Someday I'll take my own picture of it (it is in nicer condition than the photo suggests).

[Fballguy]

Here's a team we don't talk about much but I thought this was interesting...This pennant was included in a lot I recently picked up and it's bit of an odd ball. 1970 Asco Trademark (I believe) but the pennant is soft felt. Not cloth. Not the stiff "felt". Really soft felt. Not sure I've come across a felt pennant post 1970. The topic seems vaguely familiar. Not sure if we've discussed previously?

And then, while doing some research on the pennant, I came across this recent sale of a different Brewers pennant. At first glance, it doesn't look like anything special. But, per the tax exclusive price, it appears this pennant really sold for $175 (not including $9.75 shipping and tax). Is it that rare or was the sale a fluke?

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

Here's a team we don't talk about much but I thought this was interesting...This pennant was included in a lot I recently picked up and it's bit of an odd ball. 1970 Asco Trademark (I believe) but the pennant is soft felt. Not cloth. Not the stiff "felt". Really soft felt. Not sure I've come across a felt pennant post 1970. The topic seems vaguely familiar. Not sure if we've discussed previously?

And then, while doing some research on the pennant, I came across this recent sale of a different Brewers pennant. At first glance, it doesn't look like anything special. But, per the tax exclusive price, it appears this pennant really sold for $175 (not including $9.75 shipping and tax). Is it that rare or was the sale a fluke?

Top pennant is Trench. They have some with a 1970 trademark, I have a Trench Dodgers with 1970 stamp. Bottom pennant is ASCO. Easiest way to tell is the spine and the MLB in fat letters. Early 70s felt was still on the soft side to my knowledge. .... The ASCO here is likely a few years in, this also comes with a 1970 stamp.

$175??? Yeah that’s a lot. I’ve been noticing high prices lately for semi-common pennants. Good sign I guess.

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by thetahat

Top pennant is Trench. They have some with a 1970 trademark, I have a Trench Dodgers with 1970 stamp. Bottom pennant is ASCO. Easiest way to tell is the spine and the MLB in fat letters. Early 70s felt was still on the soft side to my knowledge. .... The ASCO here is likely a few years in, this also comes with a 1970 stamp.

$175??? Yeah that’s a lot. I’ve been noticing high prices lately for semi-common pennants. Good sign I guess.

But this one isn't "on the soft side". It's as soft as any pennant from the 1940s. I know with football, I haven't come across it before but I'm not as close to baseball.

[perezfan]

Regarding the Brewers' price realized.... WTF?

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

Here's a team we don't talk about much but I thought this was interesting...This pennant was included in a lot I recently picked up and it's bit of an odd ball. 1970 Asco Trademark (I believe) but the pennant is soft felt. Not cloth. Not the stiff "felt". Really soft felt. Not sure I've come across a felt pennant post 1970. The topic seems vaguely familiar. Not sure if we've discussed previously?

And then, while doing some research on the pennant, I came across this recent sale of a different Brewers pennant. At first glance, it doesn't look like anything special. But, per the tax exclusive price, it appears this pennant really sold for $175 (not including $9.75 shipping and tax). Is it that rare or was the sale a fluke?

Gotta be a fluke....

The last time I sold one of those, it went for $16 and some change. Same exact pennant... purchased it new at Anaheim Stadium in 1972, and not particularly rare.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by bocca001

I did finally get this Giants 1958 pitcher pennant. I have several versions without the 1958, but always passed on this one hoping to get it at a lower price. And Erik won't trade me his

Someday I'll take my own picture of it (it is in nicer condition than the photo suggests).

Nice snag, Marc...

Now you've got me wondering who made this oddball series of pennants from the late '50s - early '60s.

Perhaps it's already been discussed but this grouping seems like a "one-off", featuring a very distinct look and certainly not made for all teams. Any idea which maker is responsible for these?

[bocca001]

I think that these are WGN and that Kyle has a bunch pictured on his website.

I know that there are several versions of the Giants. Soft felt. Stiffer felt. With the 1958. Without. Bright colors. All grey or white. I think baseball Rob has a good number of them.

[Domer05]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Nice snag, Marc...

Now you've got me wondering who made this oddball series of pennants from the late '50s - early '60s.

Perhaps it's already been discussed but this grouping seems like a "one-off", featuring a very distinct look and certainly not made for all teams. Any idea which maker is responsible for these?

Definitely WGN of Chicago. As far as we know, this series began in 1958 (it includes dated LA Dodgers and SF Giants pennants) and ended about 1970 (there's a Reds pennant referencing them as "Big Red Machine").

Some of the early pennants from the series, such as the Braves one shown above, bear a mark from the "G.B. Feld Co." of Chicago. According to WGN, they used this pennant maker at different points in time in the company's history, e.g., when outsourcing made financial sense.

Many of the pennants from this series featured an illuminated stadium, a bat-skewered baseball, and/or a team slogan, e.g., "Sock it to'em" for the '68 Tigers.

[Duluth Eskimo]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Nice snag, Marc...

Now you've got me wondering who made this oddball series of pennants from the late '50s - early '60s.

Perhaps it's already been discussed but this grouping seems like a "one-off", featuring a very distinct look and certainly not made for all teams. Any idea which maker is responsible for these?

I love these pennants. These are some of the versions that initially drew me to pennants back in the late 80’s. Those and the 50’s Milwaukee Braves.

[perezfan]

Thanks Marc, Kyle and Jason... Great info as always.

I believe these WGN pennants were sold outside of ballparks as opposed to inside of stadiums. When I first started collecting (back in the dark ages), a veteran dealer/collector referred to these specifically as "Vendor Pennants".

During this same timeframe, I believe Trench had the market cornered on pennants sold inside the stadiums. But will defer to Kyle on that!

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by ooo-ribay

I'm pleased (I think) to add this atrocious New York pennant. It joins its ugly SF sisters. As I was putting the blue SF pennant back in it's sleeve, I noticed it is more of a fabric than a felt. Same with the spine, although you may not make that out from my photo. I’m not sure if this is what Greg calls “cloth” because it still seems like felt. Do we know who made these atrocities? My powers of recall are not up to those of Mark and Greg. I would say the thin tassels are an identifying characteristic.

The seller of the NY pennant originally had it on ebay for $350. He came down to $300 and then $250. I offered $150 and he said he was firm at $200. I hit him again at $175 and he accepted. He then wondered why I had only sent $150. I told him I had sent $196 to cover the price the tax and the shipping. He was not aware we don't call it "feebay" for nothing!

Any of the prolific pennant collectors here want to attempt a summary of the different materials used over the past century or so of pennant manufacture, including approximate dates of usage and which companies used what material, with illustrations?

[Domer05]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Thanks Marc, Kyle and Jason... Great info as always.

I believe these WGN pennants were sold outside of ballparks as opposed to inside of stadiums. When I first started collecting (back in the dark ages), a veteran dealer/collector referred to these specifically as "Vendor Pennants".

During this same timeframe, I believe Trench had the market cornered on pennants sold inside the stadiums. But will defer to Kyle on that!

That sounds about right to me, Marc. Trench definitely cozied up with ballpark concessionaires, which did put their products for sale inside venues. But, outside the venue, much like today, was a free for all.... Any street vendor could order a hundred pennants from Trench, WGN, ADFLAG, Keezer, and sell them outside for whatever price they could get.

To this end, contributors to this thread posted several photos of street vendors selling these pennants we know and love outside of ballparks. In fact, I recall a cool black and white photo of a vendor hawking an Atlanta Braves pennant by WGN from the above referenced series, not long ago.

But, because of Trench's partnership with the concessionaires, and the overall quality of their products, Trench's pennants probably sold better than anything their competitors distributed. Which is why their stuff is more prevalent on the resale market, today, I think.

[Domer05]

Here's the photo I was referring to....

[perezfan]

Great photo of "vendor pennants!"

That Braves one is actually pretty rare. Seems like you see the Cardinals and Dodgers the most from that series with all the "lines".

[thetahat]

Question... suppose you paid a decent amount for a pennant, say over $100. You notice that the spine is not attached as it was originally, as you can clearly see the holes from the original stitching. Because, as avid collectors, we all know to look for certain things. Seller did not disclose this, upon reaching out to him he claims to have removed it to clean and then reattached it, says that it is not a transplant. I think either way, that’s something that should be disclosed due to the fact that it is not entirely original - many people might not care but I hold that it should at least be disclosed to let the potential buyers decide.

What are your thoughts? Is this reasoning valid, or am I an “uber anal retentive freak” (seller’s exact words) for not just shrugging off his undisclosed alteration?

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by thetahat

Question... suppose you paid a decent amount for a pennant, say over $100. You notice that the spine is not attached as it was originally, as you can clearly see the holes from the original stitching. Because, as avid collectors, we all know to look for certain things. Seller did not disclose this, upon reaching out to him he claims to have removed it to clean and then reattached it, says that it is not a transplant. I think either way, that’s something that should be disclosed due to the fact that it is not entirely original - many people might not care but I hold that it should at least be disclosed to let the potential buyers decide.

What are your thoughts? Is this reasoning valid, or am I an “uber anal retentive freak” (seller’s exact words) for not just shrugging off his undisclosed alteration?

Agree...

Any alteration including bleaching, trimming, re-coloring, spine transplant or tassel replacement must be disclosed. I can easily give a "pass" to ironing and removing pet hair with tape or a lint roller. Those more minor improvements do not change the original makeup or construction of the pennant.

The only grey area (to me) is the trimming of loose/stray threads on a cloth pennant. I personally don't think it's an issue, unless the scissors were to accidentally cut into the actual body of the pennant. Just my .02

[Fballguy]

.

[erikc21]

Originally Posted by thetahat

Question... suppose you paid a decent amount for a pennant, say over $100. You notice that the spine is not attached as it was originally, as you can clearly see the holes from the original stitching. Because, as avid collectors, we all know to look for certain things. Seller did not disclose this, upon reaching out to him he claims to have removed it to clean and then reattached it, says that it is not a transplant. I think either way, that’s something that should be disclosed due to the fact that it is not entirely original - many people might not care but I hold that it should at least be disclosed to let the potential buyers decide.

What are your thoughts? Is this reasoning valid, or am I an “uber anal retentive freak” (seller’s exact words) for not just shrugging off his undisclosed alteration?

This topic is complicated and filled with nuance IMHO. First, I think intent matters. I am not the best at crazy detailed descriptions when I sell, but I personally never try to mislead or omit information. I know I've sold to people in this forum and once or twice the condition wasn't what the buyer hoped for...in one case the camera phone made the pennant lot look brighter than it was, in another case there was a small portion of the spine (perhaps an inch) no longer attached. In both cases, I did not try to mislead the buyer... in one case the buyer returned the pennant lot, in the other I gave a significant discount. In both instances, since the buyers were a part of this forum, I really tried to make it right. I've also bought from people on this forum and in one case the condition wasn't what I completely expected, but again, I don't think it was intentional and because we're friends, I didn't give it a second thought. What's the point of dwelling on it? Finally, I've traded with people on this forum and in one example, the pennant I traded was believed to be fake. In that circumstance, we came up with an amicable solution. Point is, regardless of what character I am in the transaction, I try to give people the benefit of the doubt if I feel their intent is good. Hard to do when you don't know the person on the other end!

Now, I have bleached pennants before - improving their condition - and sold them. I didn't disclose it as I felt improved the aesthetics and I personally didn't think the disclosure was necessary. I can see how a purist may disagree, but my lack of disclosure wasn't to mislead...in fact, I felt it would confuse matters. But, that's just me!

Replacing a spine or trimming a flag (somewhat easy to see), if known, should be disclosed in my opinion. If somebody takes the spine off to clean it...that seems okay to me. I suppose it's impossible to know if the seller swapped the spine out, but again, if the person has a good reputation, then I'd trust that.

My point is, I think it depends and it's not a binary right/wrong.

my 2 cents

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by thetahat

Question... suppose you paid a decent amount for a pennant, say over $100. You notice that the spine is not attached as it was originally, as you can clearly see the holes from the original stitching. Because, as avid collectors, we all know to look for certain things. Seller did not disclose this, upon reaching out to him he claims to have removed it to clean and then reattached it, says that it is not a transplant. I think either way, that’s something that should be disclosed due to the fact that it is not entirely original - many people might not care but I hold that it should at least be disclosed to let the potential buyers decide.

What are your thoughts? Is this reasoning valid, or am I an “uber anal retentive freak” (seller’s exact words) for not just shrugging off his undisclosed alteration?

So, instead of the Pennant Savant we should now refer to you as the Uber Anal Retentive Freak?

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by ooo-ribay

so, instead of the pennant savant we should now refer to you as the uber anal retentive freak?

lololol!

[perezfan]

I'll vouch for Erik any day of the week... one of the very best guys on this forum and a great collector/friend. But I will play Devil's advocate, in regard to the bleaching disclosure. Bleaching can make substances more brittle over time. It can definitely affect vintage felt and make it "crispy" (for lack of a better word). Nothing wrong with doing it, as it is definitely the owner's prerogative. But when selling it really should be disclosed, IMHO.

[erikc21]

Originally Posted by perezfan

I'll vouch for Erik any day of the week... one of the very best guys on this forum and a great collector/friend. But I will play Devil's advocate, in regard to the bleaching disclosure. Bleaching can make substances more brittle over time. It can definitely affect vintage felt and make it "crispy" (for lack of a better word). Nothing wrong with doing it, as it is definitely the owner's prerogative. But when selling it really should be disclosed, IMHO.

Thanks, Mark! The feelings are mutual! And don’t get me wrong, you and most people on this forum are more avid collectors than I am, so my perspective is just that, my perspective...perhaps less seasoned, too. I do see your point and it’s a good one. I will say I typically don’t sell ‘high-end’ items so if I post condition as ‘good’, ‘fair’ or ‘vintage’, my general thought is there are flaws/integrity issues. But your comments are well taken and you’ve always been great to deal with - even if my descriptions aren’t the best

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by erikc21

This topic is complicated and filled with nuance IMHO. First, I think intent matters. I am not the best at crazy detailed descriptions when I sell, but I personally never try to mislead or omit information. I know I've sold to people in this forum and once or twice the condition wasn't what the buyer hoped for...in one case the camera phone made the pennant lot look brighter than it was, in another case there was a small portion of the spine (perhaps an inch) no longer attached. In both cases, I did not try to mislead the buyer... in one case the buyer returned the pennant lot, in the other I gave a significant discount. In both instances, since the buyers were a part of this forum, I really tried to make it right. I've also bought from people on this forum and in one case the condition wasn't what I completely expected, but again, I don't think it was intentional and because we're friends, I didn't give it a second thought. What's the point of dwelling on it? Finally, I've traded with people on this forum and in one example, the pennant I traded was believed to be fake. In that circumstance, we came up with an amicable solution. Point is, regardless of what character I am in the transaction, I try to give people the benefit of the doubt if I feel their intent is good. Hard to do when you don't know the person on the other end!

Now, I have bleached pennants before - improving their condition - and sold them. I didn't disclose it as I felt improved the aesthetics and I personally didn't think the disclosure was necessary. I can see how a purist may disagree, but my lack of disclosure wasn't to mislead...in fact, I felt it would confuse matters. But, that's just me!

Replacing a spine or trimming a flag (somewhat easy to see), if known, should be disclosed in my opinion. If somebody takes the spine off to clean it...that seems okay to me. I suppose it's impossible to know if the seller swapped the spine out, but again, if the person has a good reputation, then I'd trust that.

My point is, I think it depends and it's not a binary right/wrong.

my 2 cents

Good insight, guys. I have no problem with someone who fixes up a pennant for personal display. But it has to be disclosed IMO if resold, if original stitching is replaced. Let the buyers/bidders decide. I have a host of questions that I usually ask about a pennant if I don’t know the seller and if it seems that the seller has no experience with pennants. I think such a person might not think twice about innocently trimming a pennant, etc. In this case it was a seller who clearly should know better. I’m getting a refund - it’s owed to me of course, given the circumstances - so still it’s not really the fact that he tried to pull one off at my expense. Well maybe a little since I’m not a complete stranger to this guy. Like Erik suggests you should perhaps take extra care with people you know and people who have previously purchased from you. But it’s the fact that he had the chutzpah to insinuate that I was the problem in the transaction that really irked me.

As a side note, I do suspect it’s a full spine transplant, but either way given the totality of circumstances I believe disclosure was required.