Holmes to Homes Walter Johnson

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by PhillyFan1883

I hope we get some answers too, Todd. Maybe an old newspaper article can shed light. I like the idea of it being a promo card since Wajo, and Holmes to homes were D.C based.. If there is no more information I wouldn’t call it sloppy by the AH since SGC slabbed the card. I think Ryan pointed out something smart that the Wajo was glued in on the front side instead of the back. Given its a 1 of 1 I guess the AH didn’t have more information or figured it would be fine with the unknown. I know the cards walked into the national raw so who knows if that person had more information or not. I think the clean back is easily explained by Ryan’s theory since they walked in with the same person.

I’m having trouble following your logic. It is because the card was taped on the front that makes it stand out from the others. Someone comes in with 6 Holmes to Homes cards, ONE OF THEM A RUTH ROOKIE, and yet there is apparently nothing to be shared about provenance. No questions asked? I can sort of understand it as relates to the five that show the same back damage as nearly all the rest known to the hobby, since it would seem they all originated from the same source (a press release said a family in KC). But this one? If there are privacy issues or the consignor cannot/will not answer questions, then at least note the absence of a number. There are very few Holmes 2 Homes collectors and not even that many m101 collectors, so it might not have been obvious that the card should have had a #90. Even if it did not affect the bidding, it would be appropriate to acknowledge the anomaly for purposes of accuracy.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on whether Mile High was sloppy. It is not enough to hide behind the grading company, IMO, since SGC also failed to note the Successful Farming promos it graded that lack numbers and yet REA investigated and discussed them in its auction listing several years ago. I am thankful that Mile High spent considerable time telling us about the McCoid collection and others in the past, so I am disappointed that they gave us nothing here.