Another fake 52T Mantle on ebay

[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?

[Iron Horse]

Walter Payton does show up on PSA certificate match. The hologram however does match the fake Mantle

[MW1]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

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?

I don't agree with the independent assessment part. Just look at all of the "certified high end" cards selling for premium prices in the marketplace. But the latter, yes, quite true. Lots of horses following the carts.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by MW1

I don't agree with the independent assessment part. Just look at all of the "certified high end" cards selling for premium prices in the marketplace. But the latter, yes, quite true. Lots of horses following the carts.

Yeah I forgot about those. When I see them I just disregard the hype, but I guess for some people it matters.

[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?