 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
02-25-2017, 11:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Now that its over ...
... what did folks think about this item:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/182458990948...%3AMEBIDX%3AIT I assumed it was fake because every card had perfect corners, the colors were all faded, and the paper on the card that was removed didn't look right. But someone paid good money (of course if it's real that made a fortune) for what to me looked like a reprint. Cheers, Patrick 
|
|
#4
02-25-2017, 12:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Another terrible lottery ticket.
|
|
#5
02-25-2017, 01:44 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I saw this a few days ago. I contacted Sean here about it.
I was on the edge thinking it was fake and too good to be true. I closely loked at the Cobb and Wagner (2 key cards) and for some reason it did looked washed out, that's why I asked Sean. It didn't seem right at the 20 dollars it was at the time I saw it. BUT- I looked at his other auctions and saw the 54 Dan-Dee board he had as well..it kinda looked real. It had the potato chip staining and etc. Hard to replicate that. So, I was on edge about this and my instinct said stay away.And yes I saw the warning signs in the description as well. It would of been a gamble at 20 bucks.
__________________
1916-20 UNC Big Heads Need: Ping Bodie Last edited by pawpawdiv9; 02-25-2017 at 01:47 PM.
|
|
#7
02-25-2017, 02:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
fake
Someone just threw away 500 bucks. The poster board looks new, and the cards look like fakes. He isn't sure whether or not these are tobacco cards? Of course not, they are bread cards.
__________________
Rick McQuillan T213-2 139 down 46 to go.
|
|
#8
02-25-2017, 03:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Chris - In my opinion, the Dan Dee looked just as fake. Again, every corner was perfect, and the staining can be replicated if you make an exact copy of a card that had the staining.
The winning bidder for both had over 6,000 transaction on Ebay (so I assume the person is no fool) but I agree with the comment that it looked like a bad art project. Cheers, Patrick
|
|
#9
02-25-2017, 04:03 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#10
02-25-2017, 04:26 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Why is it when someone is selling cards of dubious authenticity from 1911 that it appears they also used a camera from 1911 to take all the close-up photos? Coincidence? Of course not.
Both these and the Dan Dees look like photocopies of the originals.
|
|
#11
02-25-2017, 05:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I contacted the seller when they were first listed and they seemed completely new to vintage cards. I asked for better closeups of the Cobb and they kept sending ones that weren't zoomed in enough to tell anything. Since they were listed as "original 1911" cards they'll be returned as Item Not As Described, so on the off-chance they are real, the buyer will get their money back.
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes.
|
|
#12
02-25-2017, 05:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Doesnt it say returns not accepted?
__________________
"Trolling Ebay right now" © Always looking for signed 1952 topps as well as variations and errors
|
|
#13
02-25-2017, 05:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
yes, but that doesn't absolve you of listing items accurately. Ebay will step in if "Item is not as described"
__________________
Check out https://www.thecollectorconnection.com Always looking for consignments 717.327.8915 We sell your less expensive pre-war cards individually instead of in bulk lots to make YOU the most money possible! and Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thecollectorconnectionauctions
|
|
#14
02-27-2017, 03:43 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I saw those right when they went up and thought to myself "yuck", which is not uncommon on ebay.
Quote:
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com
|
|
#15
02-27-2017, 11:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Good grief! I collected the D304s with great vigor about seven or eight years ago so I know a bit how they're supposed to look. As soon as I saw the first photo it screamed FAKE!!! All the corners were sharp even if the image was blurry. What are the odds of that? More likely a common-as-dirt D304 reprint set. Some unlucky eBayer stepped into 582 bucks worth of dog poop.
|
|
#16
02-28-2017, 05:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I bid on these and the Dan Dees. The Dan Dees looked okay to me at first. Once I saw these cards, it raised some flags. I could see someone gluing Dan Dees to a poster when they came out, but couldn't figure out why there would be two sets from two different eras glued. I asked the seller for pictures and they were very accommodating. They don't look like photocopies. But, from what I could see I couldn't reach the conclusion they were real. I ended up notifying the seller who agreed I could retract my bids--didn't want to buy and return later, wasting both our time. Seller seemed genuinely clueless about the authenticity and indicated that he found them during a construction project. I tend to believe him given his willingness to provide photos, etc. But I don't believe they are real.
__________________
Mantle Master Set - as complete as it is going to get Yankees Game Used Hat Style Run (1923-2017): 57/60 (missing 2008/9 holiday hats & 2017 Players Weekend)
|
|
#17
02-28-2017, 10:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Very good point about the two different eras.
I can believe someone in 1954 took cards straight from the pack and glued them on a poster board. I find it much harder to believe they also happened to have perfectly conditioned bread cards to put on the poster board too. For your sake, I hope you did not win! Cheers, Patrick
|
|
#19
02-28-2017, 01:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Mantle Master Set - as complete as it is going to get Yankees Game Used Hat Style Run (1923-2017): 57/60 (missing 2008/9 holiday hats & 2017 Players Weekend)
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
