I'm almost POSITIVE this card features Shoeless Joe...

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by Moonlight Graham

First off let me start by saying that I am Heavydooty on EBAY! Now I know I'm gonna get murdered here but also I am not above taking advice from advanced collectors and if I get scorned, so be it! My thinking was that I thought the card would be worth about 1000.00. But if I would have asked 1000.00 I would have been offered maybe 600-700. The reason for the quick flip is because I found another card I want more and need to sell this one but I'm going to forget that now and just pull it and keep it. However, it is interesting that Shoeless Joe is on a T card and is the center panel. If his name appeared on the flip I think the card would definitely sell for alot more IMO. And I do think the card is undervalued considering JJJ appears on it. Not having his name mentioned on the card just keeps up with the whole mystique of Shoeless Joe. Now I just joined Net54 and I want to be a good member and will definitely take the ripping I'm about to receive. By the way, I find this forum really awesome!!!

Originally Posted by Runscott

I have never met a single soul on this board who could not at one time or another, be labeled "flipper", so don't let that bother you. The only exception I can think of was Leon in his early collecting days - that guy would not let go of anything.

Moonlight,
I guess I was the one that called you out on flipping, but there really is nothing wrong with flipping. Flipping is what makes businesses run. I have done a fair share of flipping. Once it is your card you are free to do with it as you like. If someone really wants it from you then you get to set the price.

I only pointed it out because the posts showed a psa 6 sold in August of 2010 on ebay for $266. Then you bought a psa5 nearly two weeks ago (a little over a year since the PSA 6) for $623. I would have been impressed if it could triple again within a week.

If you can sell it for the price you have out there I won't be mad at you for flipping, I will be surprised that it worked just adding the Jackson info in there (and a bit jealous).

[Moonlight Graham]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

Moonlight,
I guess I was the one that called you out on flipping, but there really is nothing wrong with flipping. Flipping is what makes businesses run. I have done a fair share of flipping. Once it is your card you are free to do with it as you like. If someone really wants it from you then you get to set the price.

I only pointed it out because the posts showed a psa 6 sold in August of 2010 on ebay for $266. Then you bought a psa5 nearly two weeks ago (a little over a year since the PSA 6) for $623. I would have been impressed if it could triple again within a week.

If you can sell it for the price you have out there I won't be mad at you for flipping, I will be surprised that it worked just adding the Jackson info in there (and a bit jealous).

The question is: should i let the auction run? should i reduce the price? or should i just end it? it would be interesting to see what happens. at this point there have been 48 hits with 1 watcher. let me know

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Moonlight Graham

The question is: should i let the auction run? should i reduce the price? or should i just end it? it would be interesting to see what happens. at this point there have been 48 hits with 1 watcher. let me know

Welcome to the forum. Let the card run. If it doesn't sell you can relist it for less if you want to. As Scott mentioned, my first years of collecting I never flipped cards. Now I enjoy it....but most of my main collection stays in place. There is no right or wrong answer. Whatever you do, just communicate well, don't scam anyone and treat others like you want to be treated and you will do fine. There is no harm in making a profit as there will be times when you don't. Hopefully more times than not you will break even or better. Have fun and happy collecting!!

[Moonlight Graham]

Originally Posted by Leon

Welcome to the forum. Let the card run. If it doesn't sell you can relist it for less if you want to. As Scott mentioned, my first years of collecting I never flipped cards. Now I enjoy it....but most of my main collection stays in place. There is no right or wrong answer. Whatever you do, just communicate well, don't scam anyone and treat others like you want to be treated and you will do fine. There is no harm in making a profit as there will be times when you don't. Hopefully more times than not you will break even or better. Have fun and happy collecting!!

Thanks for the advice Leon and thanks for letting me join the forum!! By the way i'm really just collecting anything with moonlight graham in it

[Moonlight Graham]

I've lowered the price to 1395.00 OBO-we'll see where that goes. I've had alot of looks-no offers-i guess the opening price was pretty crazy!

[CMIZ5290]

I truly believe the player is not joe jackson, but terry turner. T202s had alot of repeat players, and if memory serves me right, turner was featured in a few. I have also looked at some pics of him during that era and i would lean much more towards him than shoeless joe... Also, in 1911 shoeless joe hit .408! i would have to believe with those credentials, he would have been mentioned by name on the back

[Sterling Sports Auctions]

I don't know what all the concern is, Bret thought the card was worth $1000 so it looks like you have a buyer at a nice profit. No need to pay the ebay fees.

Lee

[Moonlight Graham]

I've decided to start the card at 99 cents and let it run for a 7 day auction-maybe adding shoeless joe will at least help me break even but who knows. I really had nearly 700 dollars in the card with tax and shipping. Any thoughts?

[brett]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

I truly believe the player is not joe jackson, but terry turner. T202s had alot of repeat players, and if memory serves me right, turner was featured in a few. I have also looked at some pics of him during that era and i would lean much more towards him than shoeless joe... Also, in 1911 shoeless joe hit .408! i would have to believe with those credentials, he would have been mentioned by name on the back

Here we go again...

You can believe all you want... but you've already been PROVEN wrong. Terry Turner WAS featured on multiple cards on the set, which means that they obviously had a contract with him and were free to use his name (which they did on a few cards in this set). So the fact that his name is not on this particular card is just another bit of eveidence that it's not him. Also, it doesn't matter what Joe Jackson hit that year, if he didn't have a contract with the card company then they wouldn't be allowed to use his name which explains why he wasn't also featured on a side panel or in the T-205 set which shared the same portrait pictures. Oh, and by the way... If you look at the card in person and know anything about Joe Jackson you can pretty clearly tell that it's him. If that's not enough for you just go back and look at the other 70 pages of evidence in this thread.

[CMIZ5290]

sorry, it's not joe jackson....also for the record, i do know just a little about jackson and i've seen the card in person because i own one!

[CW]

Believe what you will, Kevin, but you may want to check out a few key posts in this thread, mainly the initial post by Greg (botn) with a similar photo from a newspaper identifying the baserunner as Shoeless Joe, then a following comparison photo by Tim. I was also a skeptic at first, so I know where you're coming from, so to speak.

Unfortunately, Tim's comparison photo has since been removed, but it was fairly conclusive. It's a long thread, so it's tough to go back through it all, but check out post #243 (Greg's initial find of the newspaper photo identifying the baserunner as Joe), post #306 by Brett, then Tim's post #344. (other posts added to the findings, but I believe these three may be the key ones to see)

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...&postcount=243

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...&postcount=306

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...&postcount=344

[slidekellyslide]

Yeah..anyone coming in late to this thread should read the whole thing...I think it was pretty conclusive that this is Shoeless Joe.

[orator1]

Seeing the newspaper photo identified as Joe next to the card photo was the deciding factor for me. The comparison is very convincing, and I would add irrefutable in my opinion.

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by CW

Unfortunately, Tim's comparison photo has since been removed,

I put them back.

[CW]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

I put them back.

Thanks. This was a great topic.

A couple other helpful posts...

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...&postcount=361

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...&postcount=362

[brett]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

sorry, it's not joe jackson....also for the record, i do know just a little about jackson and i've seen the card in person because i own one!

You are a very difficult man to sway... I respect that..... But read the 3 posts above and the discussion is over. Sorry. Oh, and you may know a little bit about Jackson, but not as much as Mike Nola (the historian from the Black Betsy website) who said the player on that card is "100% Joe Jackson".