Fro Joy Babe Ruth Cards

[rdixon1208]

It's my understanding that SGC or PSA will not grade Fro Joy's. I see graded examples on ebay from time to time, but they're always graded by BVG. What do you guys think BVG knows that the others don't? From time to time I think about bidding on one, but I question the authenticity of even the graded examples. What do you guys think?

[Kawika]

It might be that SGC doesn't grade them anymore. Don't know. But it looks like they did at one time anyway. (I bought this already slabbed).

[rdixon1208]

Originally Posted by Kawika

It might be that SGC doesn't grade them anymore. Don't know. But it looks like they did at one time anyway. (I bought this already slabbed).

Oh OK....I was mistaken. I thought BVG was the only company that graded them.

[fkw]

If you can get a large clear scan of the card, they are not too hard to authenticate.

The images on the authentic examples are much clearer than the reprints which usually have contrast problems.

this is a good picture to use to compare (zoom)
http://www.legendaryauctions.com/Lot...?lotid=108654#

[Batter67up]

I think the reason PSA and SGC stopped grading them was because so many people were sending in reprints,the customers were getting upset that they were paying 25-30 dollars and getting a rejection of their cards. I have 3 fro-joys that are graded by BVG and PSA and they are easy to tell the difference from the reprints as Frank mentioned

[Clutch-Hitter]

I used to think the border on the reverse of a Fro-Joy should be a solid line, without the gaps at the corners. However, this PSA graded Fro Joy doesn't appear to have a solid border on the reverse, at least the top left border. The image of the reverse is blurry compared to the front image so it's hard to see the other corners. Just to find out if I had it right, should the border on the reverse be solid? BTW, I'm not saying I think this card is questionable. I haven't yet asked the seller for a clearer picture, and I don't know if I'm correct about the border.

http://cgi.ebay.com/SUPERB-1928-BABE...item1e5eb9ffc8

[drc]

My guess is Beckett is good with Fro Joys. An expert Fro Joy collector said Beckett graded authentic Fro Joys, and the collector is knowledgeable with the cards.

I never understood why PSA and SGC quit grading them.

[fkw]

I agree that maybe they stopped because of the high % of fakes out there.

It would be a hassle grading these when 95+% of the cards submitted are rejected.

[fkw]

PSA needs to STOP grading these, they seem to grade the fakes very often.

The PSA-5 graded card in Greg's post (slidding) posted above is a bit different that known authentic cards (link I posted above to a sheet obtained with original envelop and premium)
If you compare the images, the PSA-5 card lacks clarity and has contrast issues. Also the first line on description end in "Babe on the sheet, while this PSA-5 card has "Babe" ... with 2 quote (") marks.


another example of boneheaded PSA screwing up... (blue tint cards are ALL fakes, let alone ones with extremely bad contrast)



PS. Another strange thing is the SGC example above is missing the dotted line (cut line) on the wide left border, its wide enough that the dotted line should show.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Here's a previous thread: http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...t=1928+fro+joy

Are the two Fro Joys pictured at the end of that thread authentic? The thread stated the small reverse border should be solid, no gaps at the corners, yet those two were pictured at the end as if authentic.

I personally think they stopped grading them because some counterfeits got holdered.

Maybe PSA should stop grading W516's too: http://cgi.ebay.com/1910-W-UNC-Tris-...item5641b17b91

[Leon]

Very recently (read in the last month or two) I have been the lucky collector to get involved with a few scenarios on quite a few different Fro Joys and their close cousins, the 1928 Babe Ruth Candy cards. While my good friend FKW (hey Frank) says he feels the fakes are easy to spot, I will politely disagree a bit. I have had 3-4 of these types of cards in my collection for years. A month or so ago a good friend, and very large ebay seller, asked me to take a look at some Babe Ruth Candy cards for him as one of the grading companies thought they weren't good and he had just bought them from a major auction. When I got them I thought they were a little suspicious feeling, not looking. I took them with me to have them looked at by my good friends at BVG and they agreed with the other grading company, not good. Now, they couldn't say 100% but they did say that they were not comfortable enough with them to slab them. At the same time 2 of my 3 cards that were looked at, that had been in my collection for many years, were deemed not good also. The Fro Joys and 1928 Babe Ruth Candy cards are extremely difficult to tell fakes from real ones, on many occasions. There are all sorts of levels of "correctness" to them. Some look really bad *(even colored, which no real ones are) and some are really good looking fakes. These 2 series really should be dealt with extremely carefully by anyone in the hobby, experienced or novice. If I have some time I will do some scans later and do a show and tell...One thing to point out...when all else fails in the id'ing of these, the paper quality is usually the deciding factor. However, that being said, I now believe there is a possibility that each series was printed, from date of origin, on different types of paper. In thinking a bit more, I would probably advise against very new hobbyists collecting them unless they are pedigreed somehow. Buying either series raw would be a set up for a let down ......just my 3 cents on the subject.

[Oldtix]

Originally Posted by Leon

Very recently (read in the last month or two) I have been the lucky collector to get involved with a few scenarios on quite a few different Fro Joys and their close cousins, the 1928 Babe Ruth Candy cards. While my good friend FKW (hey Frank) says he feels the fakes are easy to spot, I will politely disagree a bit. I have had 3-4 of these types of cards in my collection for years. A month or so ago a good friend, and very large ebay seller, asked me to take a look at some Babe Ruth Candy cards for him as one of the grading companies thought they weren't good and he had just bought them from a major auction. When I got them I thought they were a little suspicious feeling, not looking. I took them with me to have them looked at by my good friends at BVG and they agreed with the other grading company, not good. Now, they couldn't say 100% but they did say that they were not comfortable enough with them to slab them. At the same time 2 of my 3 cards that were looked at, that had been in my collection for many years, were deemed not good also. The Fro Joys and 1928 Babe Ruth Candy cards are extremely difficult to tell fakes from real ones, on many occasions. There are all sorts of levels of "correctness" to them. Some look really bad *(even colored, which no real ones are) and some are really good looking fakes. These 2 series really should be dealt with extremely carefully by anyone in the hobby, experienced or novice. If I have some time I will do some scans later and do a show and tell...One thing to point out...when all else fails in the id'ing of these, the paper quality is usually the deciding factor. However, that being said, I now believe there is a possibility that each series was printed, from date of origin, on different types of paper. In thinking a bit more, I would probably advise against very new hobbyists collecting them unless they are pedigreed somehow. Buying either series raw would be a set up for a let down ......just my 3 cents on the subject.

Does anyone know the back story on when and who produced the Fro-Joy fakes? Were they done for some purpose other than to defraud?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Oldtix

Does anyone know the back story on when and who produced the Fro-Joy fakes? Were they done for some purpose other than to defraud?

I think many of the early 1980's reprints, especially color ones, were NOT meant to defraud but just to be nice, inexpensive display pieces. Many, or most, of the black and white type reprints were probably meant to defraud.

One other hobby myth (maybe) is that there was an actual Fro Joy printing plate(s) found, much later in the hobby, and some cards were printed from it/them. Those were supposedly almost impossible to tell from the originals and that is the (supposed) reason grading companies wouldn't slab any of them. I have never seen that story be verified but the story has been around for years. Collectors need to be wary of all of these type cards even though some will be good. I do have some good ones but to say ALL of the fakes/reprints are easy to tell, would be a misnomer in my opinion. Actually, according to the head graders at 2 of the top 3 grading companies, they can be difficult to discern. best regards

[Clutch-Hitter]

Authentic or not? This card has not been sent to a grading company:

[Leon]

Hey Greg
I have never seen one that I thought was real have those dots on the borders. I have certainly been wrong on these before but do think I get it correct most of the times. At minimum it was hand cut from one of those full sheets. For the several I have ever seen graded and slabbed none have had those "dots" borders. I am going to lean as not authentic but not 100% on it. If you have it in hand does the paper have uneven gloss, even gloss, or no gloss? Does the paper feel smooth or rough? Those attributes can help identify it....

[Clutch-Hitter]

I bought it, received it, held it, deemed it counterfeit, received a refund with shipping. The seller would not provide his return address so I could send it back, although he would've had to send money for return shipping, or better yet come get it himself!

It was listed as being sold from Miss but shipped from just south of my location in Alabama.

The seller claimed he had it for many years.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Clutch-Hitter

I bought it, received it, held it, deemed it counterfeit, received a refund with shipping. The seller would not provide his return address so I could send it back, although he would've had to send money for return shipping, or better yet come get it himself!

It was listed as being sold from Miss but shipped from just south of my location in Alabama.

The seller claimed he had it for many years.

I think many of these types of reprints, cutouts, fakes etc.....originated in the early 1980's....so he definitely could have had it for 20+ years. I think the one you showed was definitely cut from a sheet and the real sheets are very scarce. I would go with your opinion on this one..... regards

[vintagecpa]

I would love to hear more information about a plate that was found and additional cards were printed after 1928. I wonder how many other plates exist from other issues.

[4815162342]

Originally Posted by vintagecpa

I wonder how many other plates exist from other issues.

I'm also intrigued by this.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by vintagecpa

I would love to hear more information about a plate that was found and additional cards were printed after 1928. I wonder how many other plates exist from other issues.

I would love to hear more too. As far as other printing plates existing I have not heard any stories about them. regards

[fkw]

Leon, I am agreeing with you now that the Fro-Joys are tougher to authenticate, especially compared to the Geo Ruth Candy cards which Ive followed much longer.

On the Fro-Joys..... the more I looked into them last night, the more I was confused, many slabbed examples I believe are not authentic and I just cant trust them. The only one I trust is that sheet that was found in original envelope with the premium (all framed together).

Before this thread was brought up I concentrated on the Fro-Joy Portrait card as thats the one I was seeking to buy and I think I still can tell the difference on it. But the others I dont have characteristics to look for yet.

Here is a scan I just made using the sheet card found with orig envelope and the larger card posted above.
scanner setting may have something to do with the contrast , but Im sure if they were next to each other it would be easy to tell them apart too.


left card is a known authentic card


On a slightly related note... I have dozens of scans of the Geo Ruth Candy Co. cards (slabbed, raw, in 1930s scrapbooks, etc.) and there are 3 different types, with 2 different croppings of the photos. 1 type show more image on one or more borders while the other show more image on other borders. below, example of the chase card #6



I will one day make comparison images of the other #s too.

[Zach Wheat]

Frank,

Are there any differences in the paper/gloss? Thanks

Zach Wheat

[deadballpaul]

Even if the original printing plates were used decades later, the ink would still need to be duplicated, etc... A good microscope & an original for comparison should detect the difference.

[Rob D.]

Originally Posted by deadballpaul

Even if the original printing plates were used decades later, the ink would still need to be duplicated, etc... A good microscope & an original for comparison should detect the difference.

A black light. Don't forget a black light.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Originally Posted by Leon

Hey Greg
I have never seen one that I thought was real have those dots on the borders. I have certainly been wrong on these before but do think I get it correct most of the times. At minimum it was hand cut from one of those full sheets. For the several I have ever seen graded and slabbed none have had those "dots" borders. I am going to lean as not authentic but not 100% on it. If you have it in hand does the paper have uneven gloss, even gloss, or no gloss? Does the paper feel smooth or rough? Those attributes can help identify it....

The counterfeit I have is smooth. I'm not sure what to look for in the gloss. The paper is not 1928, definitely not 20's paper/cardboard.

While I think the scan looks good and a photo would look good, it's obviously a counterfeit when holding it in person. I'm going to get my camera out later and get some good close up shots in an effort to replicate those close ups of the texture in the older thread.

[Clutch-Hitter]

IRRELEVANT PICTURES HAVE BEEN REMOVED by Greg Martin

This is the Red Sox warming up postcard, this one postmarked 1917:

One of the guys watching the batter who looks like the Babe but isn't. It's his belt line (edited to say):

[Clutch-Hitter]

I once bought a T206 and thought it was fake because it was in better condition than I was accustomed to (came back a PSA 5). Is this an accurate up close view of an authentic Fro Joy?

Frank, the images in the link you posted to the auction page (sheet with envelope) are very bright. I scanned the card I have and cropped it only.

The image on the left is the microscopic view from the older thread. The image on the right is the counterfeit Fro Joy I posted in this thread earlier, photographed with a macro lens, tripod, etc. Obviously, I couldn't get as close as the person did with the microscopic image.

[IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG]

[Batter67up]

Here is one of my 3 Fro-Joys, which is graded a 3. It looks to me like the counterfit card under a miscroscope has blurry print spots where the original one is much more defined (clearer). (IMO)

[Clutch-Hitter]

Nice card!

I was not as close to the card as it appears in the photos. I got as close as I could with the lens and then cropped a small area from the photo after that. I set the camera to capture the images in a large file so little quality would be lost when cropped, however, some quality loss was unavoidable.

The link to the Legendary Auction item showed an authentic Fro Joy that had gaps in the corners of the small boxes on the card backs. Therefore, the link to the old thread that I posted contained misinformation, and that information was a factor in my deeming my card counterfeit.

So basically, I'm now trying to make sure mine is a counterfeit because I owe this guy some money if it isn't, although I have attempted to obtain his address, etc, but he will not reply. Also, like I mentioned, he said he was selling it from one town and shipped it from another in a different state. I did not expect it to look so much like the 1917 postcard.

I'm off today so I'm going to get some cards from different years out and take the same type photos. Any card issues in particular would be good for these comparisons?

[Leon]

I believe the E121's, 1928 Babe Ruth Candy and their genre, will have the same type of printing. I very much think yours is not good, Greg.....

[Clutch-Hitter]

Originally Posted by Leon

I believe the E121's, 1928 Babe Ruth Candy and their genre, will have the same type of printing. I very much think yours is not good, Greg.....

Roger that, no further, thanks

[Clutch-Hitter]

Just picked up an authentic 1928 Fro Joy, Ruth is a Crack Fielder, graded by my new favorite grading company, Beckett. That's right. If a card is located inside a slab with BVG on the rock solid holder, it's authentic, period. Anyway, let's compare the counterfeit Fro Joy mentioned earlier in this thread to the real deal:



Note the box shaped frame near the bottom of this picture of the card's back. There are no breaks/spaces near the corners of the frame (cracked it out of the BVG holder).

[Clutch-Hitter]

Here's a comparison with the Legendary Auctions card included:

Order left to right:
1. Legendary Auctions (from Frank's link)
2. Legendary Auctions with auto correct (because original had too much exposure)
3. Definitely Authentic
4. Reprint/Counterfeit

[IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG][IMG]
Backs:

1. Legendary Auctions
2. Authentic
3. Reprint/Counterfeit

[IMG][/IMG][IMG][IMG][/IMG][/IMG]

If you have a known authentic, please post a scan/photo of the front and back.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Leon

I would love to hear more too. As far as other printing plates existing I have not heard any stories about them. regards

I have print blocks from a few 50's/60's postcards, 2 baseball and 2 hockey. I could easily pull a decent print from them on paper. I don't have anything available to me that could produce enough pressure to do cardboard. But old art/typograph printing presses are out there and aren't too expensive
Black ink would be fairly easy to duplicate, even older ink. The mix is very simple and all the stuff is readily available. Colors are tougher, but possible if you know what went into them. Many ink companies kept that secret. The old paper or cardboard would be dificult but not impossible. Also not all modern papers react to blacklight.

The type of printing leaves traces of what process made the printed item, and most fakes are done with the wrong process. The extreme closeup pics show 2 very different processes.

A comparison with a different item - Comparing a Fro-Joy to a postcard in this case - isn't going to be valid aside from determining what process was used. It could rule something a fake if for instance the process wasn't used during the time period of the item, like a suposed 1860 print made by rotogravure, but it won't tell you much else.

Steve B

[danmckee]

SGC nor PSA will grade them any more. BVG will but I doubt they have a clue. Real ones are very easy to tell, paper should be white and graphics good. You should always clearly see both eyes on the Ruth portrait card. Dan.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by danmckee

SGC nor PSA will grade them any more. BVG will but I doubt they have a clue. Real ones are very easy to tell, paper should be white and graphics good. You should always clearly see both eyes on the Ruth portrait card. Dan.

Actually BVG has more of a clue than you think they do. You ought to talk to Mark Anderson or Andy Broome sometime. I assure you, you will come away thinking very differently.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Originally Posted by danmckee

SGC nor PSA will grade them any more. BVG will but I doubt they have a clue. Real ones are very easy to tell, paper should be white and graphics good. You should always clearly see both eyes on the Ruth portrait card. Dan.

Hey Dan,

There's no doubt whatsoever the "...Crack Fielder" we labeled counterfeit is indeed a counterfeit. Your comment also applies to the authentic "....Crack Fielder" card in that Ruth's facial features are much clearer compared to the counterfeit. Which brings up a good point, why doesn't the "...Crack Fielder" from the REA auction display clear facial features, and why does the box/frame on the back have gaps at the corners?

Having said that, regarding the authentication companies, we've provided examples in this thread alone of who and who does not have a clue when it comes to this card issue.

Look at the REA card. The facial features are not crisp and clear, and the box on the back has gaps at the corners. It looks like my reprint. Am I missing something or not seeing something I should be? Why is the card's back so beige? Did Fro Joys come in singles and uncut sheets, and if so, did the singles look different?

Thanks

[Clutch-Hitter]

Originally Posted by steve B

I have print blocks from a few 50's/60's postcards, 2 baseball and 2 hockey. I could easily pull a decent print from them on paper. I don't have anything available to me that could produce enough pressure to do cardboard. But old art/typograph printing presses are out there and aren't too expensive
Black ink would be fairly easy to duplicate, even older ink. The mix is very simple and all the stuff is readily available. Colors are tougher, but possible if you know what went into them. Many ink companies kept that secret. The old paper or cardboard would be dificult but not impossible. Also not all modern papers react to blacklight.

The type of printing leaves traces of what process made the printed item, and most fakes are done with the wrong process. The extreme closeup pics show 2 very different processes.

A comparison with a different item - Comparing a Fro-Joy to a postcard in this case - isn't going to be valid aside from determining what process was used. It could rule something a fake if for instance the process wasn't used during the time period of the item, like a suposed 1860 print made by rotogravure, but it won't tell you much else.

Steve B

Steve B,

Thanks, very interesting, and that about comparing cards to postcards, etc makes sense.

If there was a Fro Joy printing plate, wouldn't there be more of them to offer? Would a printing plate be for an entire sheet (applies to my previous question, just sheets, or singles and sheets)?

Regarding the little frame/box on the reverse, my SCD catalog has a front/back picture of a Fro Joy with the solid box, no gaps at the corners. I'm getting the impression that I'm not the only one unsure of that box.

Disregard my comment about the facial features on the REA, can't tell for sure because of over exposure in the picture/scan. In my reprint, it looks like Ruth has two black eyes in addition to the shadow of his hat bill. The authentic one just has the hat bill shadow.

Here's the picture from the SCD catalog:

[IMG][/IMG]

[steve B]

The plate or print block could be for any combination of cards or sheets that would fit the press. And the presses come in a variety of sizes. So they could have run the sheets as single sheets, or as multiple sheets on one big piece of paper then cut them apart. It would depend on how many sheets they wanted, and what equipment the printer had.

Current lithography plates can make over a million impressions under the right conditions. Older systems didn't do as well.

As far as why there aren't more, they just didn't print as many. And the people doing the reprinting probably only did one batch.

Places using systems that use print blocks or steel plates will usually save them if they aren't worn out. Offset lithography plates are usually aluminum and get recycled. Old fashioned lithography stones were thick and expensive, and were usually etched flat to be reused.

The sheets as a premium could have been done by a different process than the regular cards since only a few would have been needed, maybe 2-5000? . The layout of the premium sheet wouldn't have been used for the regular cards. There's just too much paper that would be cut off and wasted.

The microscopic image from post 27 looks like it was done by a printing block. You can see impressions of the raised square parts that printed the dots, and the ink that squeezed out around the edges of them. The other image there looks too even to have been done with the same sort of block.

the fakes almost certainly wouldn't have been done with a block because of the expense, but I'd guess that the print run was also around 5000. Later ones like the color ones could have been printed in higher numbers. If they didn't sell for much, a collection of the various fakes couldbe interesting.

Steve B

[steve B]

The plate or print block could be for any combination of cards or sheets that would fit the press. And the presses come in a variety of sizes. So they could have run the sheets as single sheets, or as multiple sheets on one big piece of paper then cut them apart. It would depend on how many sheets they wanted, and what equipment the printer had.

Current lithography plates can make over a million impressions under the right conditions. Older systems didn't do as well.

As far as why there aren't more, they just didn't print as many. And the people doing the reprinting probably only did one batch.

Places using systems that use print blocks or steel plates will usually save them if they aren't worn out. Offset lithography plates are usually aluminum and get recycled. Old fashioned lithography stones were thick and expensive, and were usually etched flat to be reused.

The sheets as a premium could have been done by a different process than the regular cards since only a few would have been needed, maybe 2-5000? . The layout of the premium sheet wouldn't have been used for the regular cards. There's just too much paper that would be cut off and wasted.

The microscopic image from post 27 looks like it was done by a printing block. You can see impressions of the raised square parts that printed the dots, and the ink that squeezed out around the edges of them. The other image there looks too even to have been done with the same sort of block.

the fakes almost certainly wouldn't have been done with a block because of the expense, but I'd guess that the print run was also around 5000. Later ones like the color ones could have been printed in higher numbers. If they didn't sell for much, a collection of the various fakes couldbe interesting.

Steve B

[Clutch-Hitter]

Thanks Steve B. That's interesting.

[Clutch-Hitter]

This is a counterfeit/reprint:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...=STRK:MEWAX:IT

[fkw]

obviously there are 2 variations of every card, one with the dotted line around card and ones w/o the dotted line.

Maybe some cards were machine cut, and some came in sheets?

Looks like the ones w/o the dotted line have a solid box on back while the dotted line cards have gaps in corners of the box.

This set is more confusing them more I look at it.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Exactly Frank, a complete set of the machine cut singles could be redeemed for a Fro Joy premium and/or an uncut sheet:

[IMG][/IMG]

[Clutch-Hitter]

I've been gathering information on these cards since they're so hard to figure out, and while there's still more to do, this is evidently the primary source of confusion: The uncut sheet

Note the differences: The back is brownish, more of a typical cardboard color. There are gaps near the corners of the frame/text box that is located near the bottom of the back.

The uncut sheet is the problem because most of the counterfeits we see contain the dotted cut lines on the front and the text box gaps on the back. The backs are not the correct color, that is brownish. The reprints we see were cut from reprinted sheets with the whitish backs we see on authentic, machine cut singles. At this point, I really think this is the reprinting problem, and I would not buy a Fro Joy single that had the uncut sheet characteristics. If a single was cut from a sheet, it would be evident, not questionable. In the information I've found, Repli-cards reprinted the set with the solid text boxes, and that's it.

Some people think all Fro Joy singles were cut from sheets, but that is certainly not correct.

The sheet is at least as rare as the premium, and it should be safe to assume that people left their sheets in tact back then. I mean, heck, they had to send six singles in for the sheet and/or the premium, so why cut the sheet back into singles?


[IMG][/IMG]

[Clutch-Hitter]

From an REA auction, which verifies the previous information:

"During a single week in 1928 (August 6th-11th) Fro-Joy Ice Cream issued a six-card set, with each of the six cards featuring Babe Ruth. The backs of these cards invited youngsters to submit (by mail) a complete set in exchange for a large (8-5/8 x 12 inches) premium card. When this special premium card was sent by Fro-Joy to kids, the original six cards were not returned. In their place Fro-Joy sent an uncut sheet of the complete set of six cards, which featured additional advertising printed below the cards, and instructions on how to cut out the cards printed above. The printing quality of the uncut sheets was slightly different and of lesser quality than the individually issued Fro-Joy cards, but were particularly neat looking in an uncut form with the extra advertising. The blue-tinted premium card was printed on a completely different and very unusual stock. One of the problems for collectors that has developed over the past twenty-five years is that for some reason literally millions of reprint Fro-Joy cards and sheets have been printed and are circulating. It's gotten to the point where it's hard to go to a flea market and not see them, and collectors are now so wary of the issue, and confused by the reproductions, that they now tend to just shy away from the set completely. Some grading companies have even stopped grading them. In the 1970s, before there were any Fro-Joy reprints, a single card could cause a riot at a card convention. No one had them! They were so rare that most collectors didn't even know what they looked like. An exciting find of a couple of hundred authentic cards in the late 1970s satisfied the most advanced collectors, but soon after reprints became so common that Fro-Joys understandably began to get a bad reputation. As time passed, some of these reproductions even had some age to them, confusing collectors all the more. Since the 1980s it appears that the printing presses have never stopped running on the reprints, both for individual cards and sheets. There are millions of them! But there also exists a small number of authentic examples. Interestingly, the blue-tint premium card (which has an embossed bevel edge and is printed on a very unusual stock) has never been reproduced. We have seen only about a dozen authentic Fro-Joy uncut sheets (each with an accompanying premium) in all our thirty-seven years. Usually the authentic sheets are accompanied by a Fro-Joy premium, as they were sent by mail together. This pair also includes the original Fro-Joy mailing envelope in which they were sent. The premium is in Vg-Ex condition with some very minor creasing in three of the four corners. The advertising section surrounding the cards on the sheet has some minor creasing and corner wear, and the bottom left corner has some chipping, but the large border has protected the actual cards on the sheet from most of the wear, leaving the six cards in overall Excellent condition. The original mailing envelope (12.5 x 9.5 inches) is addressed to Lorin Carter of Great Barrington, Mass. Total: 3 items (uncut sheet, premium, mailing envelope)."

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/.../2008/516.html

Here's the blue tinted premium and the sheet from that auction (couldn't make them larger):
[IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG]

[Clutch-Hitter]

In reference to the premiums, Steve's and FKW's opinions regarding the contrast were incorrect. However, they were comparing the Legendary Auctions image, which was over-exposed during the photo/scan process. The second image was resized for comparison purposes.

The Fro Joy Premiums have not been reprinted.

[IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG]

Both of these Fro Joy premiums were over-exposed to light at the time the photos were taken:

[IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG]

My premium is pictured above along with the others. Here's another example (photographed my computer screen for this one):

[IMG][/IMG]
http://cgi.ebay.com/1928-Fro-Joy-Bab...item23034d8dd4

Note the question for seller near the bottom:

Q: The blue is a reproduction. There are only three complete sets ever graded by PSA of which I own one with premium card. Two sets at PSA 7 and my set at PSA 5. NONE ARE BLUE. THE PREMIUM CARDS ARE NOT BLUE.PSA graded these cards up until about 5 years ago.

A: Just checked the premium and it is a black tint not blue (see photo). Changed tint to black in description. Not sure why I wrote blue. Stockings, belt, inscription and shaded areas are black. Other areas are off-white and gray. Thank you for your help - Norman

Hey seller, you wrote blue because it has blue. The person mis-informing the seller is referring to the blue cards, not the premium. The introduction of blue tinted Fro Joys, of which PSA has holdered some, has led to the notion that the premium does not contain blue. The person telling the seller this has a set of PSA graded Fro Joy cards along with a premium. If the cards are authentic, PSA graded or not, he probably didn't get them from the original owner. Owners of the complete six card set of singles had the option of redeeming them for a premium and a sheet, so unless the original owner had multiple sets of six and redeemed one of his sets, his statement means even less.

The seller changed his description from blue to black because he knows his premium has a hint of blue and the person asking the question destroyed the auction. The blue in the premiums is very, very subtle, but it's there.

Hooray for his set of PSA Fro Joy's!
[IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG]

[Clutch-Hitter]

I've only been able to locate a photo of one counterfeit factory single, and it was horribly done, as expected:



I have not located a black and white replicard single that allegedly matches the description of an authentic Fro Joy single. The only ones I've located are the singles cut from counterfeit sheets as mentioned previously, and color counterfeits of the singles.

This issue is too important to the history of the hobby and to baseball to let the counterfeiters force us to dismiss it. They're not that good.

I experienced those issues from both sides in December: I purchased a counterfeit card, crack fielder, which was the single cut from a counterfeit sheet mentioned previously (knew it was when I actually held it), and I purchased a premium that was later deemed inauthentic (or altered according to a subsequent e-mail) by a grading company. I never questioned the premium, and I still have it even though I could've sent it back. There are few premiums available, so the chances someone has handled one are slim to none. This one is cropped almost to the photo. I sent a message to REA today requesting they take a look at it.

I was ticked off at the grading company initially, but now, believe it or not, they're my favorite. Through all the research, I've found that they make fewer mistakes than the other two on all issues. It's Beckett BTW.

Sorry to keep bumping this up, but maybe this explains the madness.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Regarding this Fro Joy premium, http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...:X:RTQ:US:1123:

I sent these messages to the seller:

"Hello, the card should have a hint of blue. It's very subtle. http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/.../2008/516.html
It's also in the description in the corresponding section of the SCD catalog."

"By the way, you have a very nice, rare Fro Joy premium. They've never been reprinted, only the sheets and singles. It seems the person who asked the previous question was referring to the inauthentic, blue tinted Fro Joy cards. PSA has holdered some of those as authentic. PSA has never graded or holdered a premium due to the size of the issue."

The seller replied:

"It does have a tint or bluish appearance when looked at a certain way. I like it very much. Thank you for your comments - Norman"

The blue tint found in the premiums is very, very subtle.

[vintagecpa]

It is too bad the Fro Joy market is so screwed up with reprints. They are nice cards that I will just never bother to own because I don't trust any of them. Heck, if the original plate is still in existence, somebody is probably printing some out as I type.