Do these look a bit off?....Willards Ruth, Cobb etc...

[Leon]

Originally Posted by kmac32

I now have the W572 Ruth in my possession. Met him in person and he is definitely an odd duck. After seeing the cards and hearing his story in person, I believe his cards are legit but altered. He was telling me about a soaking process that used solvents to remove debris. This would explain the fronts and his scans were not the best. Card passed the loop and black lite tests and the card stock was dead on for W572 cards. I also think the others are legit and he has more cards from the 20's that he inherited from a friend who had recently died. Have his name, email, and number and can get the address but I think the cards are legit after seeing and handeling them.

Kmac

Thanks for the update Ken. No doubt altering cards (with what looks to be chemicals) can make them look fake. Kind of a strange auction and communications. Congrats on the Ruth...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

Thanks for the update Ken. No doubt altering cards (with what looks to be chemicals) can make them look fake. Kind of a strange auction and communications. Congrats on the Ruth...

Kind of a fraudulent auction if he didn't disclose the alterations, no?

[SMPEP]

Ken - Congrats on the W572 Ruth! I know you've wnated one for a while.

Cheers,
Patrick

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Kind of a fraudulent auction if he didn't disclose the alterations, no?

If you know something is altered and don't disclose it, and you know you are supposed to disclose it, then I would say that could be fraudulent....but you are the lawyer.

If you didn't know to disclose it and didn't disclose it, would it be fraudulent? ...That is the question. (and I am not saying the buyer did or didn't know to disclose it)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

If you know something is altered and don't disclose it, and you know you are supposed to disclose it, then I would say that could be fraudulent....but you are the lawyer.

If you didn't know to disclose it and didn't disclose it, would it be fraudulent? ...That is the question. (and I am not saying the buyer did or didn't know to disclose it)

It's not a valid question, because in my opinion there is no way this seller doesn't understand the importance of alterations to baseball cards.

But generally, one needs to be at least reckless to have the state of mind necessary for fraud. So if I am wrong and the seller genuinely did not understand that an alteration could affect the value, then no, that would not be fraud.

[kmac32]

the price wasn't horrible as I used some reverse psychology on him and brought up the fact that the crazy prices listed on ebay were rediculous and knowing the last known sale of this card on ebay was a buy it now and that the buyer got it for less than the asking price. Had my magnifying loop and black light as I work at a veterinary clinic and we use both pieces on pets. My staff acted like it was a secret drug deal going down in exam room 2. Satisfied with the card as it looked better in person than the scans indicated and the price did not bankrupt me.

Also, this was not his first time using chemicals on cards. He admitted it when asked directly. Knowing what I was buying and factoring it into the price I paid, I am okay with it as I plan on having it in my collection for years.

Kmac

[rdixon1208]

Same guys has these two up:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1923-Willard...item1c56a7eb88

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1923-Willard...item1c56a7b8cb

[toledo_mudhen]

Such a weird post..... add in only 111 feedback over 16 years with eBay...