FS: T206 Wiltse red ghost SGC 35

[Runscott]

$1,475 Paypal (regular) or $1,425 money orders/cashier's check. Contact by email, using the Net54 'contact member' option, or the contact link at my website (in signature line below).

[Runscott]

No interest?

Honest question: do the 'error' collectors think this is a fake? I ask because in my opinion it blows away most of the printer scrap I've seen people rave about here. No problem with the lack of interest - I'm tossing a bunch of stuff up for sale and once I hit my sales goals, other items will be pulled.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by Runscott

No interest?



Honest question: do the 'error' collectors think this is a fake? I ask because in my opinion it blows away most of the printer scrap I've seen people rave about here. No problem with the lack of interest - I'm tossing a bunch of stuff up for sale and once I hit my sales goals, other items will be pulled.

I have never thought of it as a fake... But it is odd that there is no other offsetting of that color from this or the adjacent card.

Still don't know how SGC mucked up that flip.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jantz]

Scott

In no way do I think this is a fake. Not on the same level as a scrap though. Just my opinion. Without a doubt, a cool card!

Er!ck

Wiltse could possibly be positioned on the edge of the sheet and that's why there is no red ink from the adjacent card. I'm sure you already thought of that.

I don't think that SGC mucked up the flip. It was explained to me by SGC that they only have so much space to work with on the third line of the flip. So I figure it was either "Both Ears Show" or "Ghost Image".

If whoever submitted this card did not specify "Ghost Image" on the submission form then SGC labeled it as if it was a regular T206.

I had a T206 once with two distinct features. SGC would only let me choose one for the third line.

[Econteachert205]

Originally Posted by Jantz

Scott

In no way do I think this is a fake. Not on the same level as a scrap though. Just my opinion. Without a doubt, a cool card!

Er!ck

Wiltse could possibly be positioned on the edge of the sheet and that's why there is no red ink from the adjacent card. I'm sure you already thought of that.

I don't think that SGC mucked up the flip. It was explained to me by SGC that they only have so much space to work with on the third line of the flip. So I figure it was either "Both Ears Show" or "Ghost Image".

If whoever submitted this card did not specify "Ghost Image" on the submission form then SGC labeled it as if it was a regular T206.

I had a T206 once with two distinct features. SGC would only let me choose one for the third line.

Sgc mucked it up by calling an 06 an 05... I was also thinking the card was far left on the sheet. Cool card.

[T206.org]

Originally Posted by Econteachert205

Sgc mucked it up by calling an 06 an 05...

Exactly.
"Both Ears Show" is a specific pose from the T205 set too.
And referring to him as "George Wiltse" is also per T205.
He's "Hooks" on T206 flips.
The flip is a complete mistake for sure.

I think the card is legit though, and I like it a lot, but I don't feel that it's quite worth the asking price.

[mrvster]

awesome factory error! worth every penny....

but nothing holds a candle to true scrap

[Blunder19]

Scott,

here is the reason your card has not sold yet...

your ghost image is an ink shift... it is a cool card... but an ink shift causing a ghost image of the same player is not as much as a premium.. as a ghost image with multiple ink runs...or even better a ghost image of a different player..

http://jan12.hugginsandscott.com/cgi...l?itemid=41091

the card you are trying to sell.. is valued more in the range of this card ... same red ink shift causing a ghost image.... very similar to your card.. id value it at the $500 range... list it for $500 and im confident it will attract buyers.

Jamie

[Jantz]

Originally Posted by Econteachert205

Sgc mucked it up by calling an 06 an 05... I was also thinking the card was far left on the sheet. Cool card.

Jokes on me!

I thought Er!ck was referring to the ghost image not on the flip.

I never even noticed that it said T205. Proof that I'm a card collector and not a flip collector.

I'll admit that I like the card and would love to own it, but it falls on the left of my want/need column. Yes I want it, but I don't need it for my set.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Jantz

Scott

In no way do I think this is a fake. Not on the same level as a scrap though. Just my opinion. Without a doubt, a cool card!

Er!ck

Wiltse could possibly be positioned on the edge of the sheet and that's why there is no red ink from the adjacent card. I'm sure you already thought of that.

I don't think that SGC mucked up the flip. It was explained to me by SGC that they only have so much space to work with on the third line of the flip. So I figure it was either "Both Ears Show" or "Ghost Image".

If whoever submitted this card did not specify "Ghost Image" on the submission form then SGC labeled it as if it was a regular T206.

I had a T206 once with two distinct features. SGC would only let me choose one for the third line.

Jantz - I thought you were around when I submitted it? I took it over at the National and they said they would put 'Ghost image' on it. Then I waited...and waited...and waited. Finally they told me they would not put anything on it. I argued and argued and argued. They were adamant.

So it comes back with 'both ears' ?!? How could that be valid, when both ears show on BOTH portraits? They used the T205 descriptor. Morons, but the best in the business