|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Shawn
Walter, |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Walter
Shawn, |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Clint
I thought this was interesting. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jeff W.
Clint |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Lee Behrens
I think what we are seeing hear is more and more evidence that this is actually an underprint. To me interesting but would not go out of the way for it, but the way printer scraps are bought up this seems to be a truly unique item. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Clint
Jeff, I'm not trying to prove or disprove anything. I just stated I thought this was interesting. I'm by far not a pro when it comes to cards but it looks to me like the cigar stamp is under the other. I couldn't tell you if any of the stamping is legitimate for that matter. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jeff W.
Thanks Clint |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jeff Lichtman
Yes, poor Scott Elkins. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jeff Lichtman
And for what it's worth, myself along with plenty of others thought this "underprint" claim was a fraud well before we knew that the seller was Elkins. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Tim
Jeff- |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: leon
No need to spin anything. Elkins deserves far more bashing than he gets and no one was bashing Kevin as much as just disagreeing with him. I am still not sure I am sold on this....and if it is an "underprint" I think the value could go all the way up to $20,in my mind.....but to each their own..... |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Shawn
Pulled this off of Wiki... Hopefully no one here is related to Washington or Jefferson. That would be tragic! |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Matt
according to that study, the founding fathers probably committed violent crimes against people! |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: leon
Some of those were probably into slavery too.....Cruelty to animals is cruelty to animals no matter when, where, or who does it. It's not really debatable. I hope you aren't defending cockfighting? |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jeff Lichtman
Ok, you're right. Matt, smart comeback -- since Jefferson had slaves I guess that's ok too. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Matt
Jeff - not condoning any of that - it's certainly disgusting and inhumane; just thought the study was a bit out of place; the study really has no relevance here. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jeff Lichtman
Actually, the whole point of the study is to predict future behavior of those that abuse animals. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Matt
for what purpose? Are we in a Tom Cruise movie? |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jeff Lichtman
Matt, I guess I'm just not intelligent enough to discern the humor in that last comment. I'm sure it was quite hilarious and filled with conspiracy theories. Oh well. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Shawn
Certainly not defending any such acts, but man we are really into some serious baseball talk here... Perhaps we could go into the ethics of Grey Hound racing and betting? |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Steve
To those indicating that this is a witch hunt, I disagree. I hold no contempt for Kevin or Scott. I believe the scrutiny and critique of Kevin's assesment is a benefit to the future owner and will help all collectors. In this high-dollar game, a healthy dose of skepticism is necessary with these anomalies. Kevin, If you agree., Would you mind addressing the issues in my prior post? Thanks, Steve F |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: fkw
1st time Ive seen this thread. |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: leon
I wouldn't support any activity that abuses animals...that being said I do eat meat so don't claim to be holier than thou and don't want to be hypocritical either. It seemed as you had copied the Wikipedia blurb to defend cockfighting. But you are right; this is a vintage baseball card forum so we should get back to that. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Tim
I completely agree that this should not be a witch hunt and the highest degree of skepticism should be expected. But in this case it seems that due to the source there is no room for debate. And rather than take the opportunity to see if this card holds any new information, it’s simply dismissed. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: davidcycleback
From a practical standpoint, you'd guess that even if the Cigar rubber stamp were legitimate, it would be placed on the card after not before the card was printed. It's safe to assume that genuine 'Old Put' rubber stamps were stamped on finished cards rather than blank uncut sheets. Overprint literally means printed over the other printing. |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jeff Lichtman
Frank's explanation makes total sense. Try coloring with a magic marker on top of a pre-printed label surrounded by white paper; the ink from the marker sinks into the white paper and the pre-printed ink is not affected by the marker's ink. The result would appear as if the ink from the marker is below the pre-printed label -- which, of course, it is not. |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Rob D.
I think the photos Kevin showed in his 6:32 p.m. post are interesting. I'm not smart enough to know what they mean. |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: David Smith
Is there ANY other photo of something with the United Cigars logo in black? |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Shawn
Here is a link from the net54 non-sport forum with a United Cigar back. It's not exactly the same, but I thought I had seen another one in the non-sport forum that was a better match? I cannot find it now? |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Shawn
Here is another... |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: leon
No doubt, to me, the stamp has been seen before. I am still not convinced of the story....If it comes out that it is definitely what the seller says it is, I will say I was wrong. No major deal with that. I am just not convinced yet....and true too, if we can take the seller out of the picture, then a better debate can take place......since he has rubbed many, including me, the wrong way...many times. regards |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Joann
It seems to me that there are two choices here. |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: T206Collector
"The black ink only sticks (soaks into) the paper fibers and doesn't stick to the red ink (Sweet Caporal).... thats why the red ink look on top of the black ink." |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: E, Daniel
I don't agree Paul, It's not necessary for it to 'stick', it merely has to not "run-off" so completely as to appear that no ink ever landed in that spot. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jeff Lichtman
Elkins just changed the BIN on his POS to 150K "********AFTER SPEAKING WITH A T206 EXPERT TONIGHT, I WAS TOLD TO CHANGE MY STARTING BID AND NOT LET THIS FIND GO FOR SUCH A LOW PRICE.**********" |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Joann
Lordy, has this saga been entertaining. Can't beat it. lol |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Dave F
|
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Shawn
|
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: cmoking
Jeff, quit being an ass. This thread should not be about the seller. It should be about the card. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Steve Murray
Taking nothing away from Kevin's opinion I think this is a printing issue and as Joe D. suggests should be resolved by an expert in that field. |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jeff Lichtman
King as his listing included me in it, this thread will be about him as well. Somehow I think the discussion about the card will survive. |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: DD
(with apologies to anything factual) |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: cmoking
"King as his listing included me in it, this thread will be about him as well. " |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: jay wolt
The card had no takers at $1500 or best offer a couple of |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jantz
I do find this thread a interesting read, but I think this situation could be easily resolved with a little experiment. I'll explain. |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: DD
|
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Rhett Yeakley
I'll second what Jon said many posts ago (at least I think it was Jon, but I'm not about to reread them all) when he said to simply peel up the topmost layer of paper on a portion of the "intact" back (where the United logo is present) and see if the stamp is as bold under the top layer of paper as the area of paper loss. The card already has a large spot of back damage, so it wouldn't technically lower the condition at all. A good area would be right at the border of the paper loss on back at the bottom of the "N" in the "United" logo. If this is done it would help clear the air. |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Jeff Lichtman
DD, ok, that's the second funny post of yours on this thread. |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: Kevin Saucier
Next, get a beater T206 (possibly a double in your collection)and apply the ink liberally to the rubber stamp with the brush. Then stamp the back of the chosen T206. Now let it dry thoroughly. The last step would be to skin the back of the card with a razor blade. |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Saucier Has Spoken
Posted By: ali_lapoint
as i said before, i don't think the under/over print argument can even be made until some essential questions are answered. if this is an underprint, how can anyone possibly explain how it happened? if we are to assume that kevin is right, then somehow 100 years ago ONE SINGLE T206 was for some unknown reason stamped with a United Cigars logo on a whole sheet of other blank cards. can anyone explain why one single rectangle of a whole sheet of paper was randomly stamped or printed only one time? is there a whole single sheet of these cards with the United Cigars logo on the back then? until these questions are explained away there is no reason to believe this is a legitimate variation because it's origin cannot be explained rationally. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Thanks to Kevin Saucier (and others) | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 13 | 05-30-2008 07:30 AM |
Kevin Saucier - Adding Value | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 384 | 11-23-2007 04:56 PM |
Dinner With Kevin Saucier | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 104 | 10-16-2007 10:22 AM |
To Kevin Saucier | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 08-06-2007 05:36 PM |
Kevin Saucier: You may still be in luck. | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 29 | 07-12-2007 11:19 AM |