FS: T206 Wiltse red ghost SGC 35

[Blunder19]

Scott,

here is the reason your card has not sold yet...

your ghost image is an ink shift... it is a cool card... but an ink shift causing a ghost image of the same player is not as much as a premium.. as a ghost image with multiple ink runs...or even better a ghost image of a different player..

http://jan12.hugginsandscott.com/cgi...l?itemid=41091

the card you are trying to sell.. is valued more in the range of this card ... same red ink shift causing a ghost image.... very similar to your card.. id value it at the $500 range... list it for $500 and im confident it will attract buyers.

Jamie

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Blunder19

Scott,

here is the reason your card has not sold yet...

your ghost image is an ink shift... it is a cool card... but an ink shift causing a ghost image of the same player is not as much as a premium.. as a ghost image with multiple ink runs...or even better a ghost image of a different player..

http://jan12.hugginsandscott.com/cgi...l?itemid=41091

the card you are trying to sell.. is valued more in the range of this card ... same red ink shift causing a ghost image.... very similar to your card.. id value it at the $500 range... list it for $500 and im confident it will attract buyers.

Jamie

Jamie, I'm not actually surprised that it hasn't sold - I was more surprised that there wasn't any interest in it. As far as ink shifts go, most are aesthetically unappealing. This one is weird and aesthetic. But I completely understand your logic, and it makes complete sense.

It is probably only aesthetic to a non-scrap collector, and way too normal (looking) for scrap collectors.

I need to add one more thing: I honestly never noticed the flip error until you guys mentioned it in this thread. Is that weird, or what? Every time I look at the card I get enraged remembering them refusing to put 'ghost image' on it, so I have never thought beyond that. Now that you have pointed it out, I kinda like it