Are counterfeit's getting better?

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

I haven't seen many fakes recently until this one popped up in a facebook group dedicated to cracker jacks. The poster claimed he found it in his deceased father's things and was asking if it was real. From the picture it looked pretty good until I noticed one major glaring mistake with the back (which unfortunately I didn't get a screen grab of) which immediately ID'd it as counterfeit. The annoying part is the scammer probably got enough info from the group to go back and fix the error.

It's surprising to me we don't see more counterfeit cards being made given the valuations in our hobby. Hopefully the TPG's are sophisticated enough to catch these if attempted to be graded.

Have you seen an increase in fakes recently?

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

Hopefully the TPG's are sophisticated enough to catch these if attempted to be graded.

Yep, the opinion sellers have always been quite sophisticated.

[tiger8mush]

Wow AJ that front does look good. Even has a crease and some caramel staining. It looks a little too stiff in his hand to be a 1914, but if it found it's way into a slab it'd be tougher to tell. Guessing the back was a 1915 but not upside-down?

[cubman1941]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

Wow AJ that front does look good. Even has a crease and some caramel staining. It looks a little too stiff in his hand to be a 1914, but if it found it's way into a slab it'd be tougher to tell. Guessing the back was a 1915 but not upside-down?

If this was the case, I got taken many years ago with the same thing. I was into the Cubs and was traveling across country. We stopped at an antique store and I saw 4 1915 Cubs. At that time, I was not into vintage and had no knowledge at all about the 1915 Cracker Jacks. However, the price was about the same as I had seen in a price guide (didn't have it with me), so I bought them. When I got home a couple weeks later, I added them to my Cubs collection, feeling very pleased. When I looked in the price guide to get further information. I then realized they were repos as the backs were not upside-down. Of course, I contact the antique shop but got nowhere. Lesson learned the hard way. I still have them but they are listed as repos.

[ullmandds]

i must admit i was fooled by this CJ JJ. i DID miss the glaring telltale detail...the wrong set size for the issue was the giveaway.

My question regarding this JJ is that it appeared to be see through...implying super thin stock in that you could see the writing on the back from the front.

i had never seen this on a fake before.

[CW]

Originally Posted by cubman1941

If this was the case, I got taken many years ago with the same thing. I was into the Cubs and was traveling across country. We stopped at an antique store and I saw 4 1915 Cubs. At that time, I was not into vintage and had no knowledge at all about the 1915 Cracker Jacks. However, the price was about the same as I had seen in a price guide (didn't have it with me), so I bought them. When I got home a couple weeks later, I added them to my Cubs collection, feeling very pleased. When I looked in the price guide to get further information. I then realized they were repos as the backs were not upside-down. Of course, I contact the antique shop but got nowhere. Lesson learned the hard way. I still have them but they are listed as repos.

Well it's a good thing you did not just throw them away. You might look into the slight chance that your cards are actually 1914 Cracker Jack as that year the backs were printed right side up.

The paper stock is very thin on 1914 (light shines through easily), and the checklist varies slightly between 1914/1915. You could at least verify the Cubs cards in your collection are in the '14 set.

[cubman1941]

Originally Posted by CW

Well it's a good thing you did not just throw them away. You might look into the slight chance that your cards are actually 1914 Cracker Jack as that year the backs were printed right side up.

The paper stock is very thin on 1914 (light shines through easily), and the checklist varies slightly between 1914/1915. You could at least verify the Cubs cards in your collection are in the '14 set.

Appreciate your thoughts. I did do both after I got serious about vintage. Thanks.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

Wow AJ that front does look good. Even has a crease and some caramel staining. It looks a little too stiff in his hand to be a 1914, but if it found it's way into a slab it'd be tougher to tell. Guessing the back was a 1915 but not upside-down?

It's WAY too thick. Real ones are flimsy. And brittle. Hold it the way he's doing, the corners would flake off. Total BS.

[scottglevy]

I think certain repros have gotten much better. Fortunately a number of them either clearly state “reprint” or have intentional marking to make that ID quite easy. However fakes with the intent to deceive have also IMO gotten quite good. Although some “back in the day” were pretty darn great. 1988 Brett Hull RC comes to mind. I don’t remember all the details but I think the counterfeits were produced on identical stock and machinery - likely an inside job. The fatal flaw was a single missed dot but the upper portion of the design.

[BioCRN]

To stay on top of recent counterfeits I suggest checking out the largest open air counterfeiting criminal market on the internet, Etsy.

Etsy is the proud home of many homemade and custom created goods all the counterfeiting tools one would need for any criminal enterprise.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

Yep, the opinion sellers have always been quite sophisticated.

Indeed!

[lumberjack]

Nat mentioned the infamous art forger Eric Hebborn. Look the boy up on Wiki.

He started out in art restoration and was so good at it that he began, in the words of Wiki, restoring painting on blank canvases. I love that.

Hebborn was beaten to death on a street in Rome about 30 years ago. His death may be unsolvable to this day, but understandable. Another unsatisfied customer. No mystery there.

All you T206 fakers, this is a cautionary tale.

[Balticfox]

But!

Originally Posted by nat

Hebborn never claimed that his paintings were original (and he didn't sign them with forged signatures), he just painted them to look like old masters and let his customers think whatever they wanted.

He didn't actually "forge" anything or make any counterfeits. His paintings were originals. Were they good paintings or not?

"Fine" art is 90% fraud. Van Gogh himself treated his paintings like trash and sold just one painting during his lifetime. But after his death a concerted marketing campaign by his family convinced the art world that he was a tortured genius.



Moreover if a painting is found in a garage, it's worth $millions if it turns out to have been painted by Pablo Picasso. But it's "worthless" if not. But it's the same painting! I mean is it good or not?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

But!



He didn't actually "forge" anything or make any counterfeits. His paintings were originals. Were they good paintings or not?

"Fine" art is 90% fraud. Van Gogh himself treated his paintings like trash and sold just one painting during his lifetime. But after his death a concerted marketing campaign by his family convinced the art world that he was a tortured genius.



Moreover if a painting is found in a garage, it's worth $millions if it turns out to have been painted by Pablo Picasso. But it's "worthless" if not. But it's the same painting! I mean is it good or not?

I have been to the Van Gogh Museum multiple times and can say that his stuff looks way better after some Philosopher Stones. Otherwise the other art displayed there is way better than what he done IMHO. Art is something I have never understood and I have seen many of the "great" paintings in person. You can have a painting from the 1600s that looks like a picture it is so perfect but the slop(to me) of someone like Van Gogh is worth 1000X more.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

I haven't seen many fakes recently until this one popped up in a facebook group dedicated to cracker jacks. The poster claimed he found it in his deceased father's things and was asking if it was real. From the picture it looked pretty good until I noticed one major glaring mistake with the back (which unfortunately I didn't get a screen grab of) which immediately ID'd it as counterfeit. The annoying part is the scammer probably got enough info from the group to go back and fix the error.

It's surprising to me we don't see more counterfeit cards being made given the valuations in our hobby. Hopefully the TPG's are sophisticated enough to catch these if attempted to be graded.

Have you seen an increase in fakes recently?

Yes, the TPGs are very skilled and sophisticated, as evidenced below...