1909 E90-1 Cy Young — Real/Fake

[bcornell]

[REMOVED] This forum used to be great, but it's awful now. Arbitrary enforcement of rules by the moderator, plus people who don't know anything about vintage cards and don't care posting over & over again.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Not to mention the stellar feedback.

[swk473]

That's the sense I got. Thank you all.

[iowadoc77]

He ain't even got no feedback! My BS filter is set to a much more sensitive level thanks to the Net54 crowd. Thanks guys!

[ullmandds]

here's a real nice one!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Note how different the background looks. Shadows etc.

[ullmandds]

and the "quaity" of the type in the name, team...the fake is different...look closely...not the right color either.

[gnaz01]

Mine

[Leon]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

here's a real nice one!

Yes it is!!

[caramelcard]

Hmm, hate to be a contrarian, but not all of these cards are fakes. I actually think they look fine to me. His scans wash them out quite a bit and don't appear to show the details on the corners.

Don't know the seller. Obviously zero feedback is never a good sign, but there's no way his sold T206 are fakes. T205s look good. I don't see any problems with the E95s.

The E90 Young I'd like to see in person.

I don't think these are reprints.

Rob

[steve B]

Possibly copied from this one?

http://goodwinandco.com/1909-e90-1-a...-lot24234.aspx

It appears to have the same misregistration, the same lower border break, and the same red alignment mark at the center top. But there's a small difference on the back.
Not that that's a lock, mass production being what it is there should be others that are nearly identical. But combined with the other stuff it's a pretty big red flag.

I found it by being lazy just like a reprinter would be, Google look at images, their large scans are probably just about good enough to print well.

Steve B

[Leon]

That looks like an exact hit to me. Look at the upper right border, in the white on the outside, on the edge. There is a telltale dark mark at the exact same place on both cards. At least that is what it seems to look like. Also, directly across, horizontally, is another telltale spot of white on the black border. Those things pointed out I am still not 100% on this as the areas don't match up perfectly (almost perfectly, but not perfectly, from the scans). I doubt I would take a chance on any of them without a return policy. But with one, buyers should be protected. One other thing that is in favor of it NOT being the same card as in Goodwin is the right border of the current one is thinner than the left border, and on the Goodwin one the right border is thicker than the left one.

Originally Posted by steve B

Possibly copied from this one?

http://goodwinandco.com/1909-e90-1-a...-lot24234.aspx

It appears to have the same misregistration, the same lower border break, and the same red alignment mark at the center top. But there's a small difference on the back.
Not that that's a lock, mass production being what it is there should be others that are nearly identical. But combined with the other stuff it's a pretty big red flag.

I found it by being lazy just like a reprinter would be, Google look at images, their large scans are probably just about good enough to print well.

Steve B