Mastronet, I may be wrong here but let's here opinions??

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Let's start with lot 1 of the most recent auction. The description reads in part:

"In this intriguing portrayal, the subject is depicted in the uniform of the St. Louis Browns, with the highly desirable caption, "Browns - Champions 1886," placed below the card's well-resolved sepia likeness. Here's an extremely presentable Old Judge specimen that displays quite favorably. It has a strong, clearly focused image and exhibits relatively moderate evidence of wear at the corners."

The first sentence awkwardly uses passive voice and makes the mistake of using "this" in reference to something that should be named in the sentence but really isn't. The second sentence, although using two phrases to say the same thing, actually is a topic sentence and would be better at the start of the listing. The third sentence is wordy; less is better if the meaning is the same. "Relatively moderate" is awkward; you do not need to qualify words like "moderate" or "presentable" as they are themselves qualifying terms. A better piece of writing would be:

"This attractive card depicts Nat Hudson, a memnber of the St. Louis Browns champions team, with the desirable caption "Browns - Champions 1886" below his well resolved picture. With a strong, clearly focused sepia image and moderate corner wear, the card displays quite favorably for its grade."

Moving on to lot 2:

"Goodwin & Co.'s very scarce "Gypsy Queen" advertising arches over the sepia-toned portrayal of Hall of Famer Pud Galvin on the face of this sought-after collectible. The visually compelling 19th Century insert retains full integrity in its obverse presentation and carries a minimum of standard peripheral wear; a vintage collector stamping appears on the back."

My eye tended to skip over the "crud" at the start of the sentence searching for its subject. And "obverse presentation"? Yechh! If you mean "front of the card", then say it. The best selling points of the card are that it is an uncatalogued pose of a HOFer, it is a rare N175, and it has a nice front image for the grade. The description doesn't mention the uncatalogued status of the pose, doesn't say whether it is a small or large N175, and loses the idea of rarity of N175 (I know it is rare but if you are trying for the less experienced collector and/or creating a reference tool, the listing should highlight the key concepts). Here is a better description:

"Hall of Fame pitcher Pud Galvin appears in an uncatalogued pose under the rare Gypsy Queen advertising banner on this [large or small] format N175 insert card. Although the card has been assigned a technical grade of fair by SGC due to a vintage collector's stamp on the back, the all-important image is clear and visually compelling."

I could go on all day but I will spare everyone the boredom. My point is that the catalog could use some copy editing while still retaining its selling language and content.