Cy Young "proof"

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott 

"Proof" that there is no limit to what some ebayers will do to make a sale. Check upper right-hand corner where the painter crossed over where the black border used to be. Well, it was a good chuckle on an otherwise boring Friday night.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2712672799

[Archive]

Posted By: petecld

Scott,

I hate to tell you this but he's right. The coloring IS hand done. Someone held a magic marker in their "hand" and filled in the background with color.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

You see guys with great feedback selling cards they bought as reprints, you see respected dealers selling trimmed cards, now you see guys trying to pass off hand-colored cards as possible "proofs". Are these people so desperate for money that they are willing to give up their reputation? My email to this joker was not friendy, and I have good reason - I'm sick of the fraud in this hobby and if we don't embarass the heck out of these people - publicly - it isn't going to stop. Some of you will disagree with me and I respect that, but I'm not stopping.

In any case, when you see a long-winded tome like this guy's response, telling you what an expert he is and all the wonderful places he's sold cards, something stinks. I wouldn't normally post someone's emails, but since this "integrity-challenged" fellow has seen fit to post mine on ebay (or at least threaten to), following is my original "ask the seller", followed by his response - geez, this guy walks on water!

>From: runscott@bellsouth.net
>To: themodo@hotmail.com
>Subject: Question for seller -- Item #2712672799
>Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 19:58:18 PST
>
>You are kidding - right? Seriously, you can see where the person who painted in the background painted over parts of the border.

But it was a good try - next time I buy a card that someone has altered by coloring, I'll remember to call it a "proof" when I attempt to cut my losses by selling it.

AND THE RESPONSE...

----- Original Message -----
From: "katie yeakley" <themodo@hotmail.com>
To: <runscott@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 2:33 AM
Subject: Re: Question for seller -- Item #2712672799


I own over 1500 vintage cards and have bought and consigned to major auction houses. I do not know what this card is and have never sold a reprint or fake or altered card in my life. If you look in the next mastronet catalog for the upcoming April Auction you will see some of my items included. I have bought, and sold to YOU before. If you feel I have made a mistake in my listing, that is fine. However, the way that you approach it in your e mail is neither cortious or justified. I read the Vintage card talk website that you post on frequently and I know that you guys talk about all of the fakes and forgeries out there. However, you have jumped the gun on this one, But, just so you or anyone else does not e mail me and make false accusations anymore, I will post your nicely worded, kind, helpful comments in my auction so that nobody will think that I am trying to pull a fast one.

Thanks once again for your constructive advice. Here is a little from me. If you guys really want to crack down on forgeries and fakes, go after the guys who are selling fakes. I posted several times in my item discription that I do not know where the hand tinting in the background came from? I advertised it as a possible proof, in my item discription, and in the title by putting a question mark after it. I contribute to the SCD catalog, and have submitted hundreds of cards to get graded without ever receiving one back as altered.

It is one thing to e mail and offer a suggestion that this card perhaps has been altered in your opinion. I would have replied cordially and posted your comments onto my auction. By making accusations it does nobody any good except make you look paranoid. Please go back and check this item at your convenience and see that I have quickly posted your thoughts to my auction so that nobody can accuse me of dishonesty, and let your friends know about it too.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ben

seems like a few familiar names have been fooled.

[Archive]

Posted By: petecld

Ben,

I see a couple familiar names on the list and I doubt they were fooled at all. I guessing they did what I have to do on some "fishy" auctions - because I have no room to track more auctions using "my ebay" I bid the minimum bid just to keep track of the auction and to see where bidding gets to.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

...no one would have gotten upset !?!? <== latest email from "magic marker boy" He's also blaming me for him his having to end his auction early! ( thanks! that makes me quite proud!)

...so why would this greedy unethical fellow try to lay a guilt trip on me? Is it my fault that he can't control his urge to pass his mistakes on to others through misleading ebay descriptions?

I sincerely hope no one thinks that I am trying to single-handedly police ebay - I do not spend hours each day measuring ebay scans as Brooks "Mr. Trim" Newell thinks, nor do I even open all the pre-wwI card auctions I find on ebay. I opened Brooks' e95 auction because I am re-building my e95 set. I opened the Cy Young auction because others pointed it out first. But it is alarming that so many of these questionable auctions are showing up now. Same for the Feldman reprints, the libertyforall cut-outs (and his clones), and people trying to break up "t206 the Monster" reprint sets. Even T3 mousepads and t-shirts! All of this under the guise of "pre-1930 baseball cards". When I first started buying pre-wwi cards on ebay three years ago, most of the items in this category really were pre-1930 baseball cards - imagine that!

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

runscott,

I'm with you on this one. Just take a look at the seller's additional description:

<< I want to add that this card is NOT being sold as a proof, and that it was just an opinion as to why the background looked different. A very rude ebay individual made the comment that it may be altered to look this way. I am selling this card as an original 1909 card with some obvious hand tinting on the background. Possible proof in my opinion but I do not want to make anyone feel misled so please bid accordingly. >>


OK. Let me get this straight. First he writes "...NOT being sold as a proof," then he later proclaims that it is a "[p]ossible proof in [his] opinion...." And what's this nonsense about "hand tinting?" Why not just call it what it is -- A MAGIC MARKER!!??!!

Recommendation to seller: If you're going to try to pass off some touch-ups with a red magic marker as a proof, don't contradict yourself while you're trying to refute sensible observations about your card.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian C Daniels

Pete-it's a "Magic Proof Marker".

the opinion of the seller can be better be described as a revision of history and his pride is in the way of an admital of this." Brooks & Dumb" syndrome.







'

[Archive]

Posted By: Joel Forrest

Maybe if he used Crayon he'd have had a childhood flashback and done a better job of staying within the lines.
"hand tinting" = "using a magic marker"
"sanitation engineer" = "garbage man"

I know this brings nothing useful to what is an extremely positive and informative chat board, and I apologize, but I couldn't resist. Call it family loyalty.