Another T206 Wagner "? AUTHTCT"

[nat]

Who is it, exactly, that buys this junk? Is there actually someone who thinks that they can scoop up a T206 Wagner for $34 on eBay? And if the people bidding on this do think it's real, why on Earth did 23 of them get topped by a $34 bid? And if they know it's fake, why did they bid at all?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by nat

Who is it, exactly, that buys this junk? Is there actually someone who thinks that they can scoop up a T206 Wagner for $34 on eBay? And if the people bidding on this do think it's real, why on Earth did 23 of them get topped by a $34 bid? And if they know it's fake, why did they bid at all?

Again, PSA has to share some of the blame too. The word questionable leaves room for hope. It should not be labeled as questionable authenticity.

This scam has actually been discussed here before. Submitter sends fake cards to PSA knowing they will come back as questionable authenticity. Then, lists them on eBay with a pic of the flip hoping to reel in a sucker with the hopes that it might be real.

[iowadoc77]

Easy to see why people fall for this.
Unfortunate
But easy

[MetsBaseball1973]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Again, PSA has to share some of the blame too. The word questionable leaves room for hope. It should not be labeled as questionable authenticity.

Dude, you are really stretching it to try and throw shade at PSA for this. If someone sees the leading TPG flat out refused to grade something and called it "Questionable Authenticity," and still that someone wants to buy said thing, thinking it's real, that is squarely and solely on them and their idiocy.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by MetsBaseball1973

Dude, you are really stretching it to try and throw shade at PSA for this. If someone sees the leading TPG flat out refused to grade something and called it "Questionable Authenticity," and still that someone wants to buy said thing, thinking it's real, that is squarely and solely on them and their idiocy.

I disagree. It is true that anyone buying a card like this is an idiot. But if the card is fake that is what the flip should say. Not questionable authenticity. PSA should realize how stupid people are and that some of them are falling for this scam.

[begsu1013]

psa's fault?

please.

1. it says ? authen.
2. it's not holdered.
3. the cert isn't verifiable.
4. just an opinion anyways.

if you need more than that, let me show you this oceanfront compound in arizona for a steal.

the post office says no such address found, it doesn't have a pin number, walls or even a roof....

but there is a sign in the yard that says "? ocean front" in the picture.

a fool and his money...

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by begsu1013

psa's fault?

please.

1. it says ? authen.
2. it's not holdered.
3. the cert isn't verifiable.
4. just an opinion anyways.

if you need more than that, let me show you this oceanfront compound in arizona for a steal.

the post office says no such address found, it doesn't have a pin number, walls or even a roof....

but there is a sign in the yard that says "? ocean front" in the picture.

a fool and his money...

It's not their fault, but in my opinion they could and should do something to stop it. If it's fake just say so. The question mark leaves a little doubt in the minds of people who don't know better. I agree these fools will probably end up wasting their money elsewhere but this is preventable.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by MetsBaseball1973

Dude, you are really stretching it to try and throw shade at PSA for this. If someone sees the leading TPG flat out refused to grade something and called it "Questionable Authenticity," and still that someone wants to buy said thing, thinking it's real, that is squarely and solely on them and their idiocy.

What part of the authenticity do you think was questionable to PSA? Was it the card stock? The font? The ink? The fact that there's no way the Wagner could have been printed with a Broad Leaf back?

Or do you think they should have labeled it what it actually is (a reprint)?

The fact that they refuse to label it for what it is makes them somewhat responsible for this.

[Joshchisox08]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

What part of the authenticity do you think was questionable to PSA? Was it the card stock? The font? The ink? The fact that there's no way the Wagner could have been printed with a Broad Leaf back?

Or do you think they should have labeled it what it actually is (a reprint)?

The fact that they refuse to label it for what it is makes them somewhat responsible for this.

+1 that and the fact that the seller is going to more than likely get a pretty penny for this card.

[nat]

PSA could holder these things and label them "2016 Dover Reprints" or something.

On the other hand, maybe they just call them "questionable" out of an abundance of caution. Art authenticators get sued so often for determining that a work isn't original that some of them are shutting down. See http://fortune.com/2015/09/24/art-fakes-lawsuits