Reprints?

[swarmee]

So if/when you find out it's a reprint pasted to a real back, at least you can return it as Not As Described since it wasn't made by Cracker Jack and doesn't have Shoeless Joe.

[Bicem]

I think more likely the backs are re-printed as well and not really postal used.

[Rascal1010]

Very odd that at least 2 of them have a second postage stamp over the first stamp. I looked at these also the other day, and just wasn't convinced they were legit, but I too was unsure enough to bid.

[chalupacollects]

Looks like second seller of same postcard is from same town as original seller...probably the same person different account...

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by chalupacollects

Looks like second seller of same postcard is from same town as original seller...probably the same person different account...

Yup, same seller, two different accounts, two different reprints.

Sometimes, when somebody says that something they are selling is a reprint, you just have to take their word for it.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Rascal1010

Very odd that at least 2 of them have a second postage stamp over the first stamp. I looked at these also the other day, and just wasn't convinced they were legit, but I too was unsure enough to bid.

That's what they've done.
Printed a postcard image of a postcard that was postally used, then added an actual used stamp so it doesn't look flat.

They did a decent job of matching the cancel up on second two, and got it totally wrong on the Philadelphia one.

[Leon]

When anyone gets one of these it would be nice to know what they are....

[BeanTown]

Originally Posted by Leon

When anyone gets one of these it would be nice to know what they are....

+1

[Bicem]

Originally Posted by Rascal1010

Very odd that at least 2 of them have a second postage stamp over the first stamp. I looked at these also the other day, and just wasn't convinced they were legit, but I too was unsure enough to bid.

They are pretty obvious in person. And you are correct, they put a real stamp on the reprinted back. The stamp under the real one is just part of the reprinted back and not a real stamp.

[pbspelly]

I wonder why his "uncle" collected reprinted postcards and then put old stamps with forged postal markings on them. Such a strange collection, but glad to see these beauties getting into the hands of people who will appreciate them.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by pbspelly

I wonder why his "uncle" collected reprinted postcards and then put old stamps with forged postal markings on them. Such a strange collection, but glad to see these beauties getting into the hands of people who will appreciate them.

The postal markings on the real stamps are not forged. Those stamps were used for years to mail postcards, and there are thousands of them readily available. I'd say I'd mail a similar stamp to anyone who wants one, but the postage is more than one is worth. (Unless you get really lucky - and if it's me mailing the old stamp you won't)

The reprinted markings and reprinted stamps themselves I think are a gray area. I think in this context they aren't allowed, but that's probably a question for a postal inspector.

[pbspelly]

Originally Posted by steve B

The postal markings on the real stamps are not forged. Those stamps were used for years to mail postcards, and there are thousands of them readily available. I'd say I'd mail a similar stamp to anyone who wants one, but the postage is more than one is worth. (Unless you get really lucky - and if it's me mailing the old stamp you won't)

The reprinted markings and reprinted stamps themselves I think are a gray area. I think in this context they aren't allowed, but that's probably a question for a postal inspector.

If the markings on the real stamps are not forged, then how is it that the lines line up (albeit not always perfectly) for the stamps on the Chicago and Detroit cards? It looked to me like they used a pen to ink in the wavy lines on the stamps. But perhaps I am mistaken.

There is still clearly an intent to deceive here. What makes it a bit tricky from a legal perspective is that he is not expressly claiming that these items are genuine, and, in fact, is, at least superficially, presenting them as reprints. But what the seller is really doing, of course, is pretending to be more ignorant than he really is, and hoping that buyers looking for a bargain will think that he doesn't know what he's really got. What the seller is misrepresenting here is his own knowledge about the genuineness and provenance of these items. He's trying to take advantage of people who are, in some ways, looking to take advantage of him. It reminds me a bit of the adage that it is hard to con an honest man. But they are looking to take advantage of his ignorance, while he is pretending to be something he's not. There is a difference. What would be kind of funny would be to send him a message telling him that he shouldn't be selling these for such a low price since they look genuine, and you don't want to see him get taken advantage of, and see how he responds to such "honesty."

[Leon]

Wow. A real stamp to make it look real.....scamming 102.

Originally Posted by Bicem

They are pretty obvious in person. And you are correct, they put a real stamp on the reprinted back. The stamp under the real one is just part of the reprinted back and not a real stamp.