Question regarding 1968 Milton Bradley Nolan Ryan

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by horzverti

The fake 1963 Rose rookies printed in the 1980/90s are reprints. The MB cards are not reprints.

Most people would say those are not reprints, as they were not made with the approval of the copyright holder. Therefore, they are counterfeits. Topps does make officially licensed reprints, and there is a distinction to be made. Especially when you're also splitting hairs.
Plus, most MBs are notable due to the white border from the non-baseball cards being next to the burlaps on the printing sheet. So the ones that are easily recognizable due to the white edge are also therefore off-center... ;-)

[horzverti]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Most people would say those are not reprints, as they were not made with the approval of the copyright holder. Therefore, they are counterfeits. Topps does make officially licensed reprints, and there is a distinction to be made. Especially when you're also splitting hairs.
Plus, most MBs are notable due to the white border from the non-baseball cards being next to the burlaps on the printing sheet. So the ones that are easily recognizable due to the white edge are also therefore off-center... ;-)

I would lump counterfeit cards in with the reprint designation.

[ALR-bishop]

I agree with John’s distinction between a reprint and a counterfeit, but personally do not view the MB cards as either. Like the 62 green tints,
produced in a separate print run by possibly a different printer I would classify them as variations.

But I will leave it up to whoever is in charge of the hobby to decide

[horzverti]

I am probably using the words counterfeit and reprint synonymously. If I go through a stack of cards and I spot one that looks fake, I would call it a reprint. I am not sure I would use the word counterfeit. That is just me. I am not saying that anyone is incorrect.

I remember seeing many of the fake Rose rookies actually stamped “counterfeit” on the back. I understand why John would refer to this card, which I used as an example of a reprint card, as counterfeit.

Here is a question for everyone: Fake 1952 Topps Mantles - counterfeit or reprints? Both?

Back to MBs...super set!

[swarmee]

The distinction is based on the intent of the person/company who printed them. If the intent is to deceive (sell as the original), then they are counterfeits. If the intent is to reproduce as a novelty, then it is a reprint. Appropriate reprints make changes to the original card so that they can be easily spotted and not used as a fake version later on. For example, 1933 Goudey reprints have Reprint printed on them. T206 reprints have "Capital Reprint" printed on them. Topps reprints of earlier cards are made on different stock and normally have "Topps Reprint Series #x of y cards" printed on them.

[swarmee]

*double post*

[toppcat]

I would call a card reissued by the manufacturer after the original run a reprint, or a reissue. A counterfeit is just that, a fake card. The MB's, to me, are "almost" a reprint and to others they may or may not be considered a true one. Either way I think it impacts the value a little. The MB Baseball are also a subset, as are Football and Hot Rods, of the larger set and I assume that you lose full set collectors in that scenario.

[ALR-bishop]

Are the 62 green tints reprints ?

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by toppcat

The MB Baseball are also a subset, as are Football and Hot Rods, of the larger set and I assume that you lose full set collectors in that scenario.

The MB cards are a set unto themselves, IMO. They were not co-mingled with 1968 cards and put in baseball, or 1967 football, or 1966 hot rods packs (those only had pink backs, right?). They were only packaged with the game. If you're putting together a set of MB cards, you need all the ones that were in the game, not just the baseball ones.

The Green Tints are a variation of cards in the 1962 Topps Baseball set, because they were pack issued in baseball card packs that year.