1921 Herpolsheimers graded w/o mark

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

Howard, I would be curious to know what you can tell us about the date you acquired this and whether it was already graded. The Herps Collins sold by Legendary looks very much like the card you show-- on the front anyway (big writing on the back).

I got the card in September. It was in the holder I pictured - incorrectly labeled as an E121 and not identified as a Herpolsheimer. I had PSA correct it (I don't think I have a pic of the corrected holder). I am not sure how long the collector I got it from had it. VCP does show a sale of it on June 7, 2006 by "ManontheRock".

Can you post a pic of the Legendary example to compare? Or email to me at hcv123@att.net if you aren't comfortable posting.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by hcv123

I got the card in September. It was in the holder I pictured - incorrectly labeled as an E121 and not identified as a Herpolsheimer. I had PSA correct it (I don't think I have a pic of the corrected holder). I am not sure how long the collector I got it from had it. VCP does show a sale of it on June 7, 2006 by "ManontheRock".

Can you post a pic of the Legendary example to compare? Or email to me at hcv123@att.net if you aren't comfortable posting.

How could a grading company, still number 1 in the industry in terms of volume and cards graded, make such a pathetic error by both misidentifying the set and excluding the advertiser. Where is the quality control?

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Yoda

How could a grading company, still number 1 in the industry in terms of volume and cards graded, make such a pathetic error by both misidentifying the set and excluding the advertiser. Where is the quality control?

John, all I can say and as you likely already know, it happens frequently. You can still find many instances of 1916 cards labeled as Sporting News whether the back is blank or carries another advertiser's back--including Herpolsheimer. Granted, I doubt that occurs much any longer.

In defense of PSA (I can't believe I'm saying this), the set is obscure and was probably not in their database as a recognized set when the card was first submitted, so they gave it the more blanket E121 designation, much like they did with the 1916 cards.

[calvindog]

I'm surprised there's still any discussion about the authenticity of these cards. If you handle them raw, there would be no question that they are real. We've all seen and handled fake cards. These aren't fake. Also, are the 1916 Herpos also believed to be fake? Or just 1921?

[Brian Van Horn]

Jeffrey,

Just the 1921.

Happy Thanksgiving,

Brian Van Horn

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

John, all I can say and as you likely already know, it happens frequently. You can still find many instances of 1916 cards labeled as Sporting News whether the back is blank or carries another advertiser's back--including Herpolsheimer. Granted, I doubt that occurs much any longer.

In defense of PSA (I can't believe I'm saying this), the set is obscure and was probably not in their database as a recognized set when the card was first submitted, so they gave it the more blanket E121 designation, much like they did with the 1916 cards.

Todd, fair enough. Mustn't grumble about TPG'ers on Thanksgiving Day. I will wait until Xmas. Humbug.

[G1911]

A dealer doesn't have incentive to claim a card they are selling is not real. However, it does happen. I've been a beneficiary of it it happening, a dealer described a series of particularly valuable proof sheets in my tobacco boxing niche as "early reprints". They were not early reprints at all (there has never been any fake or reprint, 1 of the cards in it was unknown to exist until 2006 and thus could not really have been counterfeited long ago, and in hand the items are clearly genuine proof sheets and not fakes after thorough examination).

The claim doesn't dictate the result. A thing is not true or false because someone says it is true or false; it is actually true or actually false. We would never believe a card is real just because the person selling it says it is real; same idea.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by G1911

A dealer doesn't have incentive to claim a card they are selling is not real. However, it does happen. I've been a beneficiary of it it happening, a dealer described a series of particularly valuable proof sheets in my tobacco boxing niche as "early reprints". They were not early reprints at all (there has never been any fake or reprint, 1 of the cards in it was unknown to exist until 2006 and thus could not really have been counterfeited long ago, and in hand the items are clearly genuine proof sheets and not fakes after thorough examination).

The claim doesn't dictate the result. A thing is not true or false because someone says it is true or false; it is actually true or actually false. We would never believe a card is real just because the person selling it says it is real; same idea.

Greg,

Thank you, but I can't and won't get around the guy's honesty. That was the impression he left which was honesty and I know the two lawyers in this thread will have issue with the claim and this is meant as no shot at them. The cards are fakes and I don't need to capitalize the word or on the opportunity because they are fakes.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Greg,

Thank you, but I can't and won't get around the guy's honesty. That was the impression he left which was honesty and I know the two lawyers in this thread will have issue with the claim and this is meant as no shot at them. The cards are fakes and I don't need to capitalize the word or on the opportunity because they are fakes.

A person can be honest and also incorrect at the same time...


Brian (honestly incorrect on occasion, and even possibly on Thanksgiving)

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Greg,

Thank you, but I can't and won't get around the guy's honesty. That was the impression he left which was honesty and I know the two lawyers in this thread will have issue with the claim and this is meant as no shot at them. The cards are fakes and I don't need to capitalize the word or on the opportunity because they are fakes.

I hear very clearly that you firmly believe and have formed your opinion from the dealer you spoke to who was being honest. For purposes of discussion, let's say he absolutely was being honest. Unless he produced them (which you didn't mention anything about), then it was his opinion they were fakes. Said opinion which he honestly shared with you and you have taken on as yours. Since then some very knowledgeable, respected advanced collectors have handled and carefully examined them. The 2 most respected grading companies have examined them and concluded they are real. It seems to me that the consensus/weight of highly experienced and educated opinions is they are real. While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, it is a bit strange to me why you feel the need to argue an unprovable point (after offering your opinion) where your opinion is at best in the minority and at worst a lone outlier opinion.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Greg,

Thank you, but I can't and won't get around the guy's honesty. That was the impression he left which was honesty and I know the two lawyers in this thread will have issue with the claim and this is meant as no shot at them. The cards are fakes and I don't need to capitalize the word or on the opportunity because they are fakes.

It's got nothing to do with being a lawyer to want to even remotely test the credibility of some long-ago dealer; it's just common sense. Does this dealer have a name?

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Greg,

Thank you, but I can't and won't get around the guy's honesty. That was the impression he left which was honesty and I know the two lawyers in this thread will have issue with the claim and this is meant as no shot at them. The cards are fakes and I don't need to capitalize the word or on the opportunity because they are fakes.

It’s not just lawyers, Brian, it’s pretty much everyone but you.

It was not my intent to cross-examine you– believe me that would be far more rigorous. But since you alluded to my profession, I would say that I instead approached your posts as I would a client in an initial consultation. Generally, I would ask: “what brings you in today–what is bothering you or has happened that you would like to talk about?” Then “how has this affected you and what would you like done about it”? After which I would tell them that we will go into the facts more thoroughly and I will advise as to their legal options, give my opinion as to possible outcomes, and provide some strategies.

Here I did not ask the initial questions, but I believe they should be asked now. Why did you bring your unsolicited opinion about these cards as they are about to be auctioned? What is motivating your actions? I assume you are intending to discourage bidding, or at least you should know that negative comments about the cards could have that effect. So do you believe you are providing a service to the hobby and/or trying to right a wrong?

No one here is challenging that you were told these cards were not genuine by some unnamed dealer at a card show 20 or so years ago. Many or most here would take the word of the dealer making the statements and pass on buying any, although I would like to think that I would have asked him some questions about them, examined them myself, and maybe paid the very few $$$ he wanted for one or two, just for future use to better understand how they were made. Nonetheless, your decision to walk away was reasonable and no one suggests otherwise, regardless if he had an honest face and truthful-sounding voice.

But you don’t leave it there. You continue to matter of factly call these cards fakes based on nothing more than that single encounter. Over and over you make this conclusive statement. Now with the passing of a couple of decades and the essentially unanimous opinions expressed by numerous collectors and hobbyists that these are real, you just dig in, adding a couple of feeble remarks that the design is weaker and the street address of the advertiser is missing as supporting “evidence”. Again I think it’s fair to ask why?

To circle back to the beginning of my post, if a client explained to me what you have put forth, not only would I tell him he has no case in trying to prove these Herpolsheimers are fakes, I would counsel him that continually broadcasting them as such in a hobby forum days before their auction arguably could be construed as an attempt to interfere with the business transactions of others. It’s one thing to recount your personal, one-time experience of 20 years ago. It’s something different to conclusively and repeatedly call these cards fakes in the face of all that has come to light since. At a minimum it’s reckless, and in all events it does not help the hobby.

[Snapolit1]

I think the threadbare to non-existent case for counterfeit just took another hit.

https://loveofthegameauctions.com/an...ST_EMAIL_ID%5D

[Snapolit1]

What I'm not getting here, is obviously the issue existed, as per contemperanous advertisements.

So even if the dude was right that he handed Brian a stack of counterfeit cards, which none of us can prove or disprove at this point, where is the proof that these are the same cards that have now come to market? Zero, none, zip, nada.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

I think the threadbare to non-existent case for counterfeit just took another hit.

https://loveofthegameauctions.com/an...ST_EMAIL_ID%5D

The conclusion is that Herpolsheimer offered 1921 E121s at their store. What is not included is the back of the card which is interesting. Understood that the first ad wouldn't include the back because negotiations were probably under way. The second one, however, should leave you asking if this back was produced why didn't Herpolsheimer ever put in their advertisement? A back mentioning Herpolsheimer in a Herpolsheimer advertisement. Self promotion in an advertisement. What a concept? Epiphany!!!!

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

The conclusion is that Herpolsheimer offered 1921 E121s at their store. What is not included in the back of the card which is interesting. Understood that the first ad wouldn't include the back because negotiations were probably under way. The second one, however, should leave you asking if this back was produced why didn't Herpolsheimer ever put in their advertisement? A back mentioning Herpolsheimer in a Herpolsheimer advertisement. Self promotion in an advertisement. What a concept? Epiphany!!!!

Starting to feel like an argument with my nephew over chemtrails.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Starting to feel like an argument with my nephew over chemtrails.

LOL, I had that same argument with a way younger friend about psychics.

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Starting to feel like an argument with my nephew over chemtrails.

Trying to even follow the argument.

Herpolsheimer's takes out full page ads blaring the name of their business in large type. . . but they didn't show the back of the cards in the ad. . . . which would have also had the name of the store . . . so that's somehow proof of what . . .?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

The conclusion is that Herpolsheimer offered 1921 E121s at their store. What is not included is the back of the card which is interesting. Understood that the first ad wouldn't include the back because negotiations were probably under way. The second one, however, should leave you asking if this back was produced why didn't Herpolsheimer ever put in their advertisement? A back mentioning Herpolsheimer in a Herpolsheimer advertisement. Self promotion in an advertisement. What a concept? Epiphany!!!!

Just take the loss like an adult and own your conspiracy theory was groundless and proven wrong. This is pathetic

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by g1911

just take the loss like an adult and own your conspiracy theory was groundless and proven wrong. This is pathetic

lol! :d

[Casey2296]

This is why I love Net54, we've learned more about these cards in the last 24 hours than was previously known.
Props to Steve for his detective work and props to Al Crisafulli for his classy response to what was, at best, an ill-timed baseless accusation of forgery of 39 cards in his auction that is closing tonight.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by hcv123

I got the card in September. It was in the holder I pictured - incorrectly labeled as an E121 and not identified as a Herpolsheimer. I had PSA correct it (I don't think I have a pic of the corrected holder). I am not sure how long the collector I got it from had it. VCP does show a sale of it on June 7, 2006 by "ManontheRock".

Can you post a pic of the Legendary example to compare? Or email to me at hcv123@att.net if you aren't comfortable posting.

Howard, I've got cooking duty but will try and post a pic by tomorrow. Maybe you can pull the sale from VCP, unless it was part of a lot sale that VCP doesn't cover. The Collins Herp was in a Legendary auction that I entered into my database in March 2015. My link to the auction is no longer good, as I believe Legendary archives were sold or otherwise went kaput. I screenshot the auction pics at the time and they are sadly small, but I will post what I can. The serial number on the PSA 6MK Herps Collins is 90406430.

[edhans]

Originally Posted by hcv123

VCP does show a sale of it on June 7, 2006 by "ManontheRock".

I think that used to be Charlie Barokas' handle. Haven't seen him in a while. Don't know if he's still active.

[Schlesinj]

Buys & Sells lots of type 1 photos on eBay.

[CW]

Originally Posted by hcv123

I got the card in September. It was in the holder I pictured - incorrectly labeled as an E121 and not identified as a Herpolsheimer. I had PSA correct it (I don't think I have a pic of the corrected holder). I am not sure how long the collector I got it from had it. VCP does show a sale of it on June 7, 2006 by "ManontheRock".

Can you post a pic of the Legendary example to compare? Or email to me at hcv123@att.net if you aren't comfortable posting.

Not the best image, but PSA has new high resolution images of the Eddie Collins card on their cert verification site:

https://www.psacard.com/cert/50067761