 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11
08-19-2009, 09:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Jodi- I was defending your point of view, maybe I wasn't as clear as I should have been.
Nobody is disputing the better uses of the product. If you want to clean a stain, or if you prefer to remove an unimportant signature for display purposes, I agree that's fine. But the bigger issue is there are people out there who will alter some balls to make them more valuable, and that is the bigger concern to most who have posted here. I was referring to those who only see the benefits of the product, and don't want to admit there are some negative things too. There are enough ways collectors are being ripped off in this hobby, and we don't need yet one more. 
|
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Companion Pieces - ink blotters and E94 envelope | rman444 | Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T | 0 | 05-25-2009 09:09 AM |
| question on diamond star back ink | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 08-26-2008 11:25 PM |
| Autographed HOF baseballs FS each with HOF Year Inscribed | Archive | Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T | 2 | 09-21-2007 07:42 PM |
| Ink Bleed on Back of '33 Goudey? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 09-11-2007 06:19 PM |
| Possibly unique E94 missing ink error-Taking Offers | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 6 | 05-07-2006 05:09 PM |
Threaded Mode