Another fake 52T Mantle on ebay

[steve_a]

Here you go-

[botn]

Cert is not valid. Not an expert detecting fake flips but should the last one in 311 line up directly over the vertical part of the T in NM-MT?

[Iron Horse]

Wow!, you are right cert # is not a valid one in PSA registry

[Peter_Spaeth]

At least judging by a couple of other examples of newer flips, the "S" at the end of Topps should be further to the left of "N" in Mantle, also. Well, if there are fakes in the new holders, that is going to shake things up.

For comparison on the lettering.

[MattyC]

I have had several cards graded by PSA over the years, whose cert numbers came back as unknown when entered into their site's verification feature. When this happened, they had me send the cards back and they then logged the certs into their database. This may very well be the case here, time will tell. But it's worth noting that an unknown cert is by no means proof positive a card/slab is fake. Often times it's fine but they didn't put the cert into the system after grading or bumping.

[botn]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I have had several cards graded by PSA over the years, whose cert numbers came back as unknown when entered into their site's verification feature. When this happened, they had me send the cards back and they then logged the certs into their database. This may very well be the case here, time will tell. But it's worth noting that an unknown cert is by no means proof positive a card/slab is fake. Often times it's fine but they didn't put the cert into the system after grading or bumping.

That's all well and good but that is not at all the situation in this case. The invalid cert number is not from a failure to enter it at the time of grading.

[steve_a]

It's possible that they pulled the cert if the card was determined to be fake. Anyone check the cert last week?

[bxb]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

At least judging by a couple of other examples of newer flips, the "S" at the end of Topps should be further to the left of "N" in Mantle, also. Well, if there are fakes in the new holders, that is going to shake things up.

For comparison on the lettering.

Agreed.

Looks like a fake flip.

The cert #s on the PSA registry before and after 5006-8216 were mostly low grade 49 Bowmans.

Caveat emptor.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It's getting tougher to be an emptor if this is the new norm.

[sbfinley]

From the f/b scan is there anything standing out to question the card's authenticity? I'm not an expert on the card but it looks like a token second print. In truth the one thing that jumps out is what seems to be an enhanced scan.

As for hologram, I recently noticed when I scanned the new flips at 1200dpi the holos were extremely flat, could just be that.

[MW1]

Originally Posted by steve_a

Here you go-

Looks like the holder has been compromised. This is especially evident along the right and left edges. Also, the hologram on the flip doesn't look like that when scanned and, as has been pointed out already, the font alignment is wrong.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Mike I've seen some scans where the hologram looks solid gray like that.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1935-Diamond...AAAOSw9mFWHWZF

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1888-N162-Go...kAAOSw5ZBWHWJy

Unless I am missing some subtle difference? Or maybe not so subtle and I am just missing it.

[pokerplyr80]

So that card looks good to me. What is the thought on this one? That it's a really good fake? Or that someone used a real under-graded or altered Mantle and put it into a fake 8 holder?

Peter, since you're in this thread if this is a fake does a fraud of this magnitude warrant serious jail time if someone were found to be guilty? Can you be prosecuted for submitting a fake card into a public auction?

[glchen]

I really don't know how you can compromise one of the new PSA holders like that. I've basically destroyed the holder when I've tried to crack a card out. Obviously when the $$$$ get that big, someone has a huge incentive to find a way.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by glchen

I really don't know how you can compromise one of the new PSA holders like that. I've basically destroyed the holder when I've tried to crack a card out. Obviously when the $$$$ get that big, someone has a huge incentive to find a way.

You must not be doing it right.

[MW1]

This card is emblematic of a much larger problem in the hobby: Dealers and auction companies that sell high-ticket vintage cards without proper practical knowledge about the nuances of grading, while lacking the necessary tools to eliminate altered and counterfeit cards from their inventories. For every 707 Sportscards that's out there, you've got dozens of relatively recent start-up eBay vendors, some with very high and seemingly impressive feedback numbers, who simply cannot differentiate between real and fake vintage sports cards--especially when the issue in question is unusual or scarce.

The first layer of customer security should always reside with the vendor, not with a knowledgeable customer who has to send an email to an auction company or online eBay seller informing them that their 1952 Topps Mantle is bogus. Just something to think about.

One mistaken notion, I believe, is that the real "value" of a card is solely dictated by its aftermarket sales price. That's really short-sighted. The accumulated knowledge and expertise of the seller, which should be used to guide the buyer during a purchase, is also imperative. The amount of money wasted by collectors just this last year on bogus high-ticket vintage cards is staggering. It's time to put more stock in knowledge and place less value on the sticker price of a card sold by an inexperienced, high-feedback, gimmick-driven eBay seller or auction company whose greatest asset is its recognizable name.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by MW1

This card is emblematic of a much larger problem in the hobby: Dealers and auction companies that sell high-ticket vintage cards without proper practical knowledge about the nuances of grading, while lacking the necessary tools to eliminate altered and counterfeit cards from their inventories. For every 707 Sportscards that's out there, you've got dozens of relatively recent start-up eBay vendors, some with very high and seemingly impressive feedback numbers, who simply cannot differentiate between real and fake vintage sports cards--especially when the issue in question is unusual or scarce.

The first layer of customer security should always reside with the vendor, not with a knowledgeable customer who has to send an email to an auction company or online eBay seller informing them that their 1952 Topps Mantle is bogus. Just something to think about.

One mistaken notion, I believe, is that the real "value" of a card is solely dictated by its aftermarket sales price. That's really short-sighted. The accumulated knowledge and expertise of the seller, which should be used to guide the buyer during a purchase, is also imperative. The amount of money wasted by collectors just this last year on bogus high-ticket vintage cards is staggering. It's time to put more stock in knowledge and place less value on the sticker price of a card sold by an inexperienced, high-feedback, gimmick-driven eBay seller or auction company whose greatest asset is its recognizable name.

Could part of that be that in the era of third party grading, many sellers no longer feel compelled to make independent assessments, or have not felt the need to develop the requisite knowledge?

[Peter_Spaeth]

This flip doesn't look much different than the Goodwin 8.

[MW1]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This flip doesn't look much different than the Goodwin 8.

There's still two subtle but evident differences:



1. The size and position of "PSA" relative to the edges of the bounding box formed by the hologram.
2. The sharpness of the corners of the hologram -- on the allegedly fake hologram, the corners of the box appear slightly rounded.

I'd like to see an enlarged image of the 1952 Mantle that was removed from the auction. Because of the scanning method that was used, it is difficult to tell what the background of the hologram really looks like in the smaller image.

[MW1]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Mike I've seen some scans where the hologram looks solid gray like that.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1935-Diamond...AAAOSw9mFWHWZF

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1888-N162-Go...kAAOSw5ZBWHWJy

Unless I am missing some subtle difference? Or maybe not so subtle and I am just missing it.

Those look different. In nearly every case, there's some reflective evidence of an actual hologram/background image. I'm not seeing that on the Goodwin flip.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by MW1

Those look different. In nearly every case, there's some reflective evidence of an actual hologram/background image. I'm not seeing that on the Goodwin flip.

Yeah, I see what you mean, although it would not have jumped out at me before you mentioned it.

If there was no hologram, you would think Bill would have noticed that immediately though?