Hobby history: The fake-card scandal of 1972

[oaks1912]

The Henry Johnsons referred to above still rear their ugly heads from time to time, with many entrenched in longtime collections. A few years back some turned up in the hands of a larger auction house. Fortunately the buyer was able to get his money back thanks to this article.... The Sommer & Kaufman cards and mid 20's Zeenuts also pop up from time to time, and the Zeenuts have actually made it into holders. These counterfeits , believed to have been produced from two different individuals are now 45 years old and the paper has aged to where it can fool people, even the 'pros'. The Southern California individual was later identified by Nowell, but not publicly (lawsuits, you know), and he is still in the hobby......

[nolemmings]

I won a few of the Henry Johnson's about twenty years ago, and the seller was kind enough to let me inspect them in hand before even requiring payment. I passed and returned them. Wish I could find the scans--I know one was Gilhooley.

Interesting to me that these articles misidentify the Standard Biscuits as being D350-1 when they are really D350-3. Lew Lipset's catalog listing shown on another of David's threads also makes this error--unless back then it was not considered an error.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I won a few of the Henry Johnson's about twenty years ago, and the seller was kind enough to let me inspect them in hand before even requiring payment. I passed and returned them. Wish I could find the scans--I know one was Gilhooley.

Interesting to me that these articles misidentify the Standard Biscuits as being D350-1 when they are really D350-3. Lew Lipset's catalog listing shown on another of David's threads also makes this error--unless back then it was not considered an error.

Actually D350-1 is the correct number that the ACC gave the E121 like cards but they didn't catalog the E135 like version at all and had the M101-5 like version listed as D350-2. I think over time we have always cataloged them chronologically (which makes a lot more sense to me), so I have always referred to the M101-4/5 version as D350-1, the E135 version as D350-2 and the E121 version as D350-3.

The Henry Johnson's are easy to tell the fakes, I haven't come across the mid-1920's Zeenut counterfeits (I'll have to get Mark to show me one at some point I suppose).

As far as the D350-1 Standard Biscuits, I wonder if they are the ones that were auctioned off a few years back that I brought to the attention of the board and right at that moment a fake Babe Ruth sold for a bunch of money and had a "stamped" and not "printed" look to the back. I am too lazy to look for that old thread but it is on here somewhere (I want to say it sold in a Hunt's? Auction, I apologize to them if it wasn't them).

[rhettyeakley]

Felt un-lazy for a moment and found the old thread...

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...=201147&page=2

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

Actually D350-1 is the correct number that the ACC gave the E121 like cards but they didn't catalog the E135 like version at all and had the M101-5 like version listed as D350-2. I think over time we have always cataloged them chronologically (which makes a lot more sense to me), so I have always referred to the M101-4/5 version as D350-1, the E135 version as D350-2 and the E121 version as D350-3.

Thanks Rhett, I suspected as much, although I didn't know they missed the 1917 cards altogether. I wonder if the 1921's were discovered first; if so that is odd in that they are so much scarcer than the 1916's.

I too wondered if these were the ones discussed some time ago in that thread. I guess I hope so, rather than think that more were made.

[brianp-beme]

Here is a link to a thread practically a decade old that has some good images and write-up about the differences between the real and fake Henry Johnson stamped cards.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/15365...enry+a+johnson

Brian

[birdman42]

"...before it gets out of hand and somebody pays $10 for one of those fakes."

Those were the days.

[slidekellyslide]

I want to hear about Tom Hufford's success/failure rate with those 600 TTM autograph requests to Spring Training.