1952 topps mantle psa

[CxG Voodoo Doll]

Says listing has been removed.

[ezez420]

Link fixed

[Brianruns10]

It looks fine to me. All the diagnostics are in place (Y in Mickey almost touches the box, solid black bat). The wear is honest, centering is typical (phony cards are almost always perfectly centered, with uniformly rounded corners to suggest wear). The coloration of the face looks correct and there is no sign of frosting anywhere in the plastic holder, and it's being sold by a seller with experience in vintage.

Do you have a link to that REA auction you're talking about? Because if indeed this card is a phony, I'd be downright scared, because it's a damned good fake.

[ezez420]

Photo isn't fake. It is what the buyer will get in the mail is what will be fake. The photos were taken directly from this REA auction. The seller was taking a nice loss...

http://bid.robertedwardauctions.com/...x?itemid=22203

You can see the second set of photos in the listing shows a photocopy of the card with a sticker on it. Just a warning whoever bought this be cautious.

[Brianruns10]

Oh I see. Still I don't think that is necessarily a red flag. They may not have had the capability to take good pictures. I've posted pictures of cards I've bought, using the auction photos, because it saves me a step, and my images won't be as good anyways.

And when the buyer gets a different card, he has plenty of recourse through ebay and paypal. The real problem is when someone buys a phony card, and doesn't figure it out in time to seek recourse.

And as for the circumstances of the sale...who knows? The person may have needed cash quick and sold to these people. Or maybe these sellers ARE the buyers and they tried (and failed) to flip for a profit.

As for the loss? Frankly I think that first buyer overpaid. A badly centered 3.5 isn't worth $7000 to me. $5000 seems about right.

I just don't think there is enough here to claim fraud, and I've rung the bell on half a dozen phony Mantles already.

[MattyC]

Totally agree there's no certain proof of this being a bad listing, and again agree with Brian in that many of us use the better scan from an AH either for display or when selling. Further agree it could have been a failed flip attempt.

However as a buyer I would still also heed ezez's advice and exercise some healthy caution; the feedback profile has two big red flags for me as a buyer... One is that I see no items sold that are remotely comparable to this one, and secondly, lots of reprints and reprint autos. Then there's the weird photo of a photocopy of the card after the good photos. Again, no ironclad proof of anything, but as a picky buyer confidence is not exactly inspired. I would have avoided this particular listing for those reasons.

If the listing is legitimate, someone got a really good deal. True, the card is stained and OC and diamond cut, but the central image is pretty nice. If real, the buyer could sell it again for 7k-ish with patience (last owner paid $8400 with the juice), and thereby make a couple grand; or the buyer got one for his collection at a sweet price. Gotta root for the fellow collector always, so hope that's the case over a fake being what gets mailed. With ebay protection and return policy would seem buyer has his back covered.

[the 'stache]

I agree with Brian and Matt here.

I would always ask the seller of a card like that to provide an additional picture of the card with their EBay ID next to it. It doesn't have to be a high quality scan, just a picture from a phone's camera would do. Something to prove possession.

This could go either way, obviously, but the seller's use of the original picture from a Robert Edwards auction in no way raises a red flag with me.