Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

1980’s Star Basketball - fake production insight

“With limited, location-based distribution, the Star XRC is by far the rarest of all Jordan RC's. It may also be the most controversial. Following the discovery by U.S. Marshalls of over 125,000 Star cards believed to be fakes, PSA refused to grade the cards.”

Fortunately I bought them when they came out. I was irate when this scheme was made public back in the 90’s. These original cards were destined for staggering values.

When you see a little more detail on what might have been (125K fake production!) you have to understand why everyone is not bought in..even with authentication .

Comments

  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You're talking about the Shop at Home scandal. The '84 Star #101 wasn't involved in the Shop at Home scandal.

    Arthur

  • ReedDACWReedDACW Posts: 37 ✭✭✭

    @ReggieCleveland said:
    You're talking about the Shop at Home scandal. The '84 Star #101 wasn't involved in the Shop at Home scandal.

    Arthur

    Agreed. You would think the OP - knowing so much about Star Company Basketball - would know this?

    Star Company tanking in the mid-90s due to the President/Owner making second runs and fantasy Star issues/releases were the reason I had student loan debt when I graduated college. I would love to meet Robert Levine in person someday and mess him up.

  • 2000man2000man Posts: 24 ✭✭

    @ReggieCleveland said:
    You're talking about the Shop at Home scandal. The '84 Star #101 wasn't involved in the Shop at Home scandal.

    Arthur

    Broader strokes of perception after the scandal. Many didn’t know or care about the specifics Just counterfeiting being thrown around was enough , they were a tainted brand after that.
    Star has recovered some but not to it’s full potential . After Levin got caught playing games many moved to Fleer and never went back. Yes jail wasn’t enough of a punishment.

  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @2000man said:

    @ReggieCleveland said:
    You're talking about the Shop at Home scandal. The '84 Star #101 wasn't involved in the Shop at Home scandal.

    Arthur

    Broader strokes of perception after the scandal. **Many didn’t know or care about the specifics Just counterfeiting being thrown around was enough , they were a tainted brand after that. **
    Star has recovered some but not to it’s full potential . After Levin got caught playing games many moved to Fleer and never went back. Yes jail wasn’t enough of a punishment.

    Yeah, I think that was from a lot of people making sensationalistic posts about fakes and forgeries without actually explaining what really happened. Unattributed quotes, too.

    Arthur

  • nam812nam812 Posts: 10,408 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ReggieCleveland said:
    Yeah, I think that was from a lot of people making sensationalistic posts about fakes and forgeries without actually explaining what really happened. Unattributed quotes, too.

    Arthur

    I see what you did there Arthur. lol

  • 2000man2000man Posts: 24 ✭✭

    @nam812 said:

    @ReggieCleveland said:
    Yeah, I think that was from a lot of people making sensationalistic posts about fakes and forgeries without actually explaining what really happened. Unattributed quotes, too.

    Arthur

    I see what you did there Arthur. lol
    Fact driven analysis

  • PorkinsPorkins Posts: 592 ✭✭✭

    I hope I’m not hijacking the thread, but I have a question for Reed (or anyone else), that I’ve alwasys wanted to ask... How confidant would you be in Star BGS slabbed being authentic and/or first run?

    Thanks

  • ReedDACWReedDACW Posts: 37 ✭✭✭

    @Porkins said:
    I hope I’m not hijacking the thread, but I have a question for Reed (or anyone else), that I’ve alwasys wanted to ask... How confidant would you be in Star BGS slabbed being authentic and/or first run?

    Thanks

    I feel like I know Star Company stuff pretty damn well, but I wouldn't say I'm an expert on it. Steve Taft, a longtime basketball card specialist and dealer, is an expert, and he was the one who trained the Beckett graders on how to authenticate Star cards, which gave them the confidence to begin and continue to authenticate Star Basketball cards.

    With that being said, I think I'm quite confident in what BGS is doing with Star Basketball.

  • PorkinsPorkins Posts: 592 ✭✭✭

    Great, thanks Reed.

  • 2000man2000man Posts: 24 ✭✭

    @dustinspeaks said:

    I've also got to add when you say something is rare, you kinda have to put it in perspective. There are over 30,000 graded 1986 Fleer Jordan RCs. So, even if the Star stuff was made half as much or a third as much, it may appear rarer in the marketplace. But, there is likely nothing rare about it.

    The product was not plentiful when it came out. If it didn’t make it to my hobby shop in the mid - 80’s you weren’t getting it. I got so frustrated trying to complete sets I started to order directly from Star .

    The guy says 3,000 sets produced! I will attach the back up to prove it.

    The activity around these the last decade feels like triple that amount , especially 101. Just my opinion lol

  • rtimmerrtimmer Posts: 1,345 ✭✭✭✭

    @dustinspeaks said:

    @2000man said:

    @dustinspeaks said:

    I've also got to add when you say something is rare, you kinda have to put it in perspective. There are over 30,000 graded 1986 Fleer Jordan RCs. So, even if the Star stuff was made half as much or a third as much, it may appear rarer in the marketplace. But, there is likely nothing rare about it.

    The product was not plentiful when it came out. If it didn’t make it to my hobby shop in the mid - 80’s you weren’t getting it. I got so frustrated trying to complete sets I started to order directly from Star .

    The guy says 3,000 sets produced! I will attach the back up to prove it.

    The activity around these the last decade feels like triple that amount , especially 101. Just my opinion lol

    In the early 90s it was available in stores and at shows. Not cheap. But available. Pre eBay. I'm in Los Angeles though.

    3000 is a pretty low number. I tend to compare to Black Lotus. 3300 Beta Black Lotus were printed. I really doubt 3000 is an accurate number for the Star stuff.

    Interesting supposition. So if I had a Jordan 101 rookie I’d definitely want to get it graded right and the only place around to get the graded is Beckett. The Beckett pop report has 810 total graded so 3000 as the total production seems very possible.

    Especially when you add in the Barkley rookie too which again close to everyone that has one would send it it in for grading has a pop of 490.

    Thank you Beckett for providing the star card service to collectors!

    PSAtimetostartgrading!

    Follow me at LinkedIn & Instagram: @ryanscard
    Join the Rookie stars on top PSA registry today:
    1980-1989 Cello Packs - Rookies
  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Porkins said:
    I hope I’m not hijacking the thread, but I have a question for Reed (or anyone else), that I’ve alwasys wanted to ask... How confidant would you be in Star BGS slabbed being authentic and/or first run?

    Thanks

    I know you just wanted Reed's input but I'm going to chime in anyway. I will say this: I would never buy a raw Star basketball card. Having said that, while I have zero doubt in Beckett's ability to detect authentic Star period cards, I have seen an alarming number of trimmed cards in BGS slabs. It's to the point where I don't purchase cards that don't have the accompanying card-specific defect: 1. Olajuwon's L/R centering, 2. Barkley's right edge, etc. I would be wary of any Olajuwon that has a centering subgrade of 8.5 or higher.

    Get to know what each card is supposed to look like size-wise and if it seems too good to be true, it is.

    Arthur

  • empigtvempigtv Posts: 58 ✭✭

    Maybe the reason PSA does not grade Star cards relates to PSA’s buy back guarantee. If someone ever proves Star printed a bunch of Jordans after 1985, Beckett has nothing to lose because Beckett doesn’t guarantee anything. If PSA were faced with the same information, they would potentially have a lot of Jordans to buy back. If I were underwriting PSA’s buyback policy, I wouldn’t allow them to guarantee Star cards.

  • rtimmerrtimmer Posts: 1,345 ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 12, 2020 8:21AM

    @empigtv said:
    Maybe the reason PSA does not grade Star cards relates to PSA’s buy back guarantee. If someone ever proves Star printed a bunch of Jordans after 1985, Beckett has nothing to lose because Beckett doesn’t guarantee anything. If PSA were faced with the same information, they would potentially have a lot of Jordans to buy back. If I were underwriting PSA’s buyback policy, I wouldn’t allow them to guarantee Star cards.

    Yeah I’m not sure we will ever know exactly why they won’t grade them today. I think the abundance of evidence from those in the know have proven the 84-85 star cards in question weren’t reprinted and also we know the 86 fleer Jordan is one of the most reproduced fakes out there so grading the star cards is very likely less risky from an actuarial stand point.

    My guess is PSA made an emotional reactionary decision years ago and just haven’t taken in the new evidence to reconsider the facts of today. Momentum is a tough force to overcome in smart decision making.

    Follow me at LinkedIn & Instagram: @ryanscard
    Join the Rookie stars on top PSA registry today:
    1980-1989 Cello Packs - Rookies
  • ReedDACWReedDACW Posts: 37 ✭✭✭

    @ReggieCleveland said:

    @Porkins said:
    I hope I’m not hijacking the thread, but I have a question for Reed (or anyone else), that I’ve alwasys wanted to ask... How confidant would you be in Star BGS slabbed being authentic and/or first run?

    Thanks

    I know you just wanted Reed's input but I'm going to chime in anyway. I will say this: I would never buy a raw Star basketball card. Having said that, while I have zero doubt in Beckett's ability to detect authentic Star period cards, I have seen an alarming number of trimmed cards in BGS slabs. It's to the point where I don't purchase cards that don't have the accompanying card-specific defect: 1. Olajuwon's L/R centering, 2. Barkley's right edge, etc. I would be wary of any Olajuwon that has a centering subgrade of 8.5 or higher.

    Get to know what each card is supposed to look like size-wise and if it seems too good to be true, it is.

    Arthur

    I agree with Arthur; while buying ungraded cards will always be a risk (which we all will assume from time to time because of the incredible upside of self-submitting cards to sell at a profit), Star Company cards are especially tricky. There are some cards, like the aforementioned Olajuwon and Barkley rookies that have flaws that are so common, seeing the exceptions are simply unbelievable. The only Olajuwon I remember seeing that came close to 50/50 centering was a proof card, and even then, I question the legitimacy of that proof card. Other cards that are simply impossible to find 50/50 centered are all the 1984/85 Jordans- #101, #195, and #288. The problem with Star is the cuts were not only off-centered and not always straight (diamond cut #101 Jordans are extremely common) but aren't always cut to 2.5x3.5 inch standards. Beckett doesn't seem to follow the strict minimum size requirement that PSA does, and that could be another reason why they don't want to grade all Star Company. Yes, there are likely other reasons as well (as mentioned by empigtv previously) and we'll just have to live with it.

  • PorkinsPorkins Posts: 592 ✭✭✭

    Great stuff Reed and Arthur, much appreciated.

  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Yeah, Beckett is all over the place as far as minimum size requirement (if there's such a thing). I just wait until a copy shows up that is clearly fat and don't concern myself as much with technical grades. I'm quite happy living in the 8.5 area, or even 8s, if the card is full-bordered and centered to MY liking. Beckett's idea of gem centering has the entire graphics/image package almost touching the bottom border. I have no idea where they got that baseline (all of my early-/mid-'80s periodicals that advertise for the Star sets don't show the actual cards) but I like the whole thing more traditionally 50/50 T/B and that's a good way to lower the technical grade and price but improve on what I'm adding to my personal collection.

    I think it's important for people to know that Star basketball isn't some uncharted minefield that you're going to get burned on if you try to collect them. I've never heard of anyone reprinting stuff like the '83 and non-Jordan '84 rookies (Thomas, Drexler, Wilkins, Barkley, Olajuwon, etc.) and if they have you could spot them from the next street over. With just some cursory research you can comfortably collect these cards without fear of getting taken for a ride. The urban legends behind reprinting have gotten completely out of control (see OP's post).

    I have no idea why PSA refuses to grade them. The '84 #101 certainly isn't counterfeited nearly as much as the '86 Fleer is.

    Arthur

  • 2000man2000man Posts: 24 ✭✭

    Maybe because the guy went to prison who produced these cards. PSA not touching them keeps some validity of the doubts alive.

    Seems many who own them want to defend and deny a possibility of games played. As an original buyer I feel that too.

    No one can really prove otherwise or PSA would authenticate them.

  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @2000man said:
    Maybe because the guy went to prison who produced these cards. PSA not touching them keeps some validity of the doubts alive.

    Seems many who own them want to defend and deny a possibility of games played. As an original buyer I feel that too.

    No one can really prove otherwise or PSA would authenticate them.

    I'm not 100% sure what a strawman argument is but I believe you're making one. At the very least, you're proposing a theory without proof and then asking that it be disproven. We KNOW what happened with the Shop at Home scandal. It's not some secret locked away for us to guess about. We KNOW what the FBI confiscated and what was produced. I mean, THEY SOLD IT ON TELEVISION, it wasn't a mystery.

    It's not a case of: I own them therefore I want to defend them.

    It's a case of: I knew nothing about them, I researched them, found out what the actual story was, educated myself, realized it wasn't some boiling cauldron of financial ruin, and started collecting them.

    I, too, was under the impression that all Star cards had been reprinted. That's incorrect. The 1984 (or 1983, for that matter) Star sets were never reprinted. They produced new sets and BACKDATED them to the original Star years (1985 & 1986). They did reprint the 1985 sheet that Jordan was on but the ink and card stock are not the same as the originals and if you know the tell-tale signs (hell, even if you don't and you're just a seasoned collector) you'll be able to easily detect fake examples.

    The NBA got involved because of licensing rights and the FBI followed this dhead to the place where they were producing these cards and he was arrested.

    Let me put it this way -- BGS makes me really nervous about a LOT of things. For the most part, if I'm going to buy a graded card, I'm going to buy PSA. But I have 100% faith that if the card is in a BGS slab it is an authentic and period Star basketball card. It's not even something I doubt. THAT'S how easy it is to spot the fakes once you know what you're looking for.

    Arthur

  • ReedDACWReedDACW Posts: 37 ✭✭✭

    @ReggieCleveland said:

    @2000man said:
    Maybe because the guy went to prison who produced these cards. PSA not touching them keeps some validity of the doubts alive.

    Seems many who own them want to defend and deny a possibility of games played. As an original buyer I feel that too.

    No one can really prove otherwise or PSA would authenticate them.

    I'm not 100% sure what a strawman argument is but I believe you're making one. At the very least, you're proposing a theory without proof and then asking that it be disproven. We KNOW what happened with the Shop at Home scandal. It's not some secret locked away for us to guess about. We KNOW what the FBI confiscated and what was produced. I mean, THEY SOLD IT ON TELEVISION, it wasn't a mystery.

    It's not a case of: I own them therefore I want to defend them.

    It's a case of: I knew nothing about them, I researched them, found out what the actual story was, educated myself, realized it wasn't some boiling cauldron of financial ruin, and started collecting them.

    I, too, was under the impression that all Star cards had been reprinted. That's incorrect. The 1984 (or 1983, for that matter) Star sets were never reprinted. They produced new sets and BACKDATED them to the original Star years (1985 & 1986). They did reprint the 1985 sheet that Jordan was on but the ink and card stock are not the same as the originals and if you know the tell-tale signs (hell, even if you don't and you're just a seasoned collector) you'll be able to easily detect fake examples.

    The NBA got involved because of licensing rights and the FBI followed this dhead to the place where they were producing these cards and he was arrested.

    Let me put it this way -- BGS makes me really nervous about a LOT of things. For the most part, if I'm going to buy a graded card, I'm going to buy PSA. But I have 100% faith that if the card is in a BGS slab it is an authentic and period Star basketball card. It's not even something I doubt. THAT'S how easy it is to spot the fakes once you know what you're looking for.

    Arthur

    I agree with Arthur 100%. In fact, when it comes to submitting cards for grading, I usually do one order to BGS every year or so - and that's only to submit Star Company Basketball. Other than that, all my business goes to PSA.

  • erikthredderikthredd Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I posted this in another thread recently but here it is again. This site answers a lot of questions on what really happened with the Star company.
    https://www.basketballgold.com/faqs.php

  • brad31brad31 Posts: 2,162 ✭✭✭✭✭

    PSA grades Star cards just not Star basketball.

    It has nothing to do with them being above grading for a shady company whose owner went to jail for selling reprints as if they were originals.

    Not sure the reasons - but it is specific to Star basketball and makes people leery.

  • ReedDACWReedDACW Posts: 37 ✭✭✭

    @erikthredd said:
    I posted this in another thread recently but here it is again. This site answers a lot of questions on what really happened with the Star company.
    https://www.basketballgold.com/faqs.php

    I think this site is wonderful, filled with a lot of information that I've never heard before. However, it is far from being objective and impartial. The owner of the site (who coincidentally, has been emailing me back and forth the past several days about a Star Company card we had for sale) really doesn't make an attempt to hide how he really feels. I guess that's why some people create their own websites...to put their version of the truth out there on the internet, because if it's on the internet, it must be true.

    I probably love Star Company cards as much as this guy does, but he's directing his disappointment and anger at the wrong entities. I would love to read more about Star Company president Robert Levin, because that, in my mind, is where the hate should be directed towards.

  • 2000man2000man Posts: 24 ✭✭

    @brad31 said:
    PSA grades Star cards just not Star basketball.

    It has nothing to do with them being above grading for a shady company whose owner went to jail for selling reprints as if they were originals.

    Not sure the reasons - but it is specific to Star basketball and makes people leery.

    Concise & correct

  • erikthredderikthredd Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ReedDACW said:

    @erikthredd said:
    I posted this in another thread recently but here it is again. This site answers a lot of questions on what really happened with the Star company.
    https://www.basketballgold.com/faqs.php

    I think this site is wonderful, filled with a lot of information that I've never heard before. However, it is far from being objective and impartial. The owner of the site (who coincidentally, has been emailing me back and forth the past several days about a Star Company card we had for sale) really doesn't make an attempt to hide how he really feels. I guess that's why some people create their own websites...to put their version of the truth out there on the internet, because if it's on the internet, it must be true.

    I probably love Star Company cards as much as this guy does, but he's directing his disappointment and anger at the wrong entities. I would love to read more about Star Company president Robert Levin, because that, in my mind, is where the hate should be directed towards.

    I totally agree,I've seen him vent numerous times over in the basketball section on BO. He's definitely not a fan of people reselling those HSN sets over the past couple years. One point he makes that I kind of agree with is who knows if these sets are even the HSN sets or possibly just fake reprints that are no different than all of the #101 reprints you can find on ebay.
    I know that they're basically one in the same but where those sets would pop-up for sale a few times a year,now it seems like there's always singles from them listed as high as $100-150. I can just imagine how many buyers are getting duped thinking they're buying actual Star cards.

  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I think the scary part about these is this little fake looks like a real card and while an expert might be able to quickly tell it is a reprint a novice wouldn’t and if they saw it in the case at a shop or come for sale by someone they think they could trust it could prove to be very costly.

  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Hahaha I remember going to Taft's site. It was a fantastic resource with all sorts of great basketball card information (including a lot of good stuff on Star). Eventually I ran across that page where he goes full-Idaho and just rants for 500,000 words and I did that Simpsons .gif where Homer just backs into the bushes until he disappears.

    Steve Taft knows a lot about Star basketball but he definitely has an agenda.

    Arthur

  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 13, 2020 11:52AM

    @Dpeck100 said:
    I think the scary part about these is this little fake looks like a real card and while an expert might be able to quickly tell it is a reprint a novice wouldn’t and if they saw it in the case at a shop or come for sale by someone they think they could trust it could prove to be very costly.

    Anytime you have a card hit $20k in Mint condition there's definitely going to be fakes and forgeries. Whether you're in the market for a PSA 10 '86 Fleer, a nice '33 Goudey Ruth, a '52 Mantle, whatever card it is -- if it's that valuable you need to either a.) know your shite and have it locked down tight, or, more likely b.) don't buy raw (and still know your shite so you can examine the card when it's in-hand).

    Anyone buying an '84 #101 raw and online (and from a cell phone pic, not a scan) should have their head examined.

    Arthur

  • 2000man2000man Posts: 24 ✭✭

    @erikthredd said:

    I know that they're basically one in the same but where those sets would pop-up for sale a few times a year,now it seems like there's always singles from them listed as high as $100-150. I can just imagine how many buyers are getting duped thinking they're buying actual Star cards.

    Does this fit the bill? A lot of Sold activity around cards I don’t ever recall. Thanks

  • erikthredderikthredd Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @2000man said:

    @erikthredd said:

    I know that they're basically one in the same but where those sets would pop-up for sale a few times a year,now it seems like there's always singles from them listed as high as $100-150. I can just imagine how many buyers are getting duped thinking they're buying actual Star cards.



    Does this fit the bill? A lot of Sold activity around cards I don’t ever recall. Thanks

    Yup that is one and here are others below. These sellers are pawning these off as legit Star cards with no mention of their history or that BGS doesn't grade them. There were another 25-40 different HSN cards that sold anywhere from $50-200+ over the past 90 days but those sellers at least made an attempt at explaining their history and did mention that BGS won't grade these. Small consolation,I guess.



  • ICE9ICE9 Posts: 552 ✭✭✭

    And then there this: re-holdered (and fairly recently). I did not submit for re-holdering, I bought it in its current holder, so I do not know the back story as to how it why this was done.

    It's curious though that PSA refuses to grade Star basketball cards, but will infact place a previously graded Star basketball card into a new holder, in essence validating their original position. I dunno, I just buy 'em...

    "Must these Englishmen Live That I Might Die? Must They Live That I Might Die?" - The Blue Oyster Cult
  • Dpeck100Dpeck100 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ReggieCleveland said:

    @Dpeck100 said:
    I think the scary part about these is this little fake looks like a real card and while an expert might be able to quickly tell it is a reprint a novice wouldn’t and if they saw it in the case at a shop or come for sale by someone they think they could trust it could prove to be very costly.

    Anytime you have a card hit $20k in Mint condition there's definitely going to be fakes and forgeries. Whether you're in the market for a PSA 10 '86 Fleer, a nice '33 Goudey Ruth, a '52 Mantle, whatever card it is -- if it's that valuable you need to either a.) know your shite and have it locked down tight, or, more likely b.) don't buy raw (and still know your shite so you can examine the card when it's in-hand).

    Anyone buying an '84 #101 raw and online (and from a cell phone pic, not a scan) should have their head examined.

    Arthur

    No doubt.

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/Michael-Jordan-Star-85-101-Original-Print-great-condition/362967005712?hash=item548284fa10:g:YIIAAOSwF-5eRjWE&LH_Auction=1

    Is this a fake like mine? Looks very similar.

  • BJY83BJY83 Posts: 203 ✭✭✭

    Except reprints are better centered than the real ones.

    Brian

  • rtimmerrtimmer Posts: 1,345 ✭✭✭✭

    @erikthredd said:
    I posted this in another thread recently but here it is again. This site answers a lot of questions on what really happened with the Star company.
    https://www.basketballgold.com/faqs.php

    Very interesting thanks for the link to read.

    I had also heard before that the court kings was the first released Jordan/Barkley cardS, and the writing in this website seems to reaffirm that. In addition to it being second best Jordan card I’ve ever seen it also being the first leads me to believe this is pretty undervalued.

    Follow me at LinkedIn & Instagram: @ryanscard
    Join the Rookie stars on top PSA registry today:
    1980-1989 Cello Packs - Rookies
  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Dpeck100 said:

    @ReggieCleveland said:

    @Dpeck100 said:
    I think the scary part about these is this little fake looks like a real card and while an expert might be able to quickly tell it is a reprint a novice wouldn’t and if they saw it in the case at a shop or come for sale by someone they think they could trust it could prove to be very costly.

    Anytime you have a card hit $20k in Mint condition there's definitely going to be fakes and forgeries. Whether you're in the market for a PSA 10 '86 Fleer, a nice '33 Goudey Ruth, a '52 Mantle, whatever card it is -- if it's that valuable you need to either a.) know your shite and have it locked down tight, or, more likely b.) don't buy raw (and still know your shite so you can examine the card when it's in-hand).

    Anyone buying an '84 #101 raw and online (and from a cell phone pic, not a scan) should have their head examined.

    Arthur

    No doubt.

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/Michael-Jordan-Star-85-101-Original-Print-great-condition/362967005712?hash=item548284fa10:g:YIIAAOSwF-5eRjWE&LH_Auction=1

    Is this a fake like mine? Looks very similar.

    Fake.

    Arthur

  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @rtimmer said:

    @erikthredd said:
    I posted this in another thread recently but here it is again. This site answers a lot of questions on what really happened with the Star company.
    https://www.basketballgold.com/faqs.php

    Very interesting thanks for the link to read.

    I had also heard before that the court kings was the first released Jordan/Barkley cardS, and the writing in this website seems to reaffirm that. In addition to it being second best Jordan card I’ve ever seen it also being the first leads me to believe this is pretty undervalued.

    Interesting, I hadn't heard that. Renata Gallaso sold the Star basketball cards from the intial release so I can go back through all of their magazines and see which ones were offered in what chronological order (Star released a couple of team sets at a time). That would be cool if that were the first Jordan.

    Arthur

  • 2000man2000man Posts: 24 ✭✭

    @ReggieCleveland said:

    @rtimmer said:

    @erikthredd said:
    I posted this in another thread recently but here it is again. This site answers a lot of questions on what really happened with the Star company.
    https://www.basketballgold.com/faqs.php

    Very interesting thanks for the link to read.

    I had also heard before that the court kings was the first released Jordan/Barkley cardS, and the writing in this website seems to reaffirm that. In addition to it being second best Jordan card I’ve ever seen it also being the first leads me to believe this is pretty undervalued.

    Interesting, I hadn't heard that. Renata Gallaso sold the Star basketball cards from the intial release so I can go back through all of their magazines and see which ones were offered in what chronological order (Star released a couple of team sets at a time). That would be cool if that were the first Jordan.

    Arthur

    That’s a good question. This is right off the original star company order form directly from them. Bulls With Series 2 Teams & Philly w/ series 3 teams were definitely a delayed release in the standard set. But when did they really arrive.

    Court Kings 26-50 blue was well behind 1-25 Yellow. What is considered “late winter” ? Feb or March is a guess ..
    I may have a shipping receipt somewhere as they came from star. If that even matters in terms of being available with dealers.
    Just a memory guess but I think the team sets were first.

  • rtimmerrtimmer Posts: 1,345 ✭✭✭✭

    Interesting data point it would be great to know in which order the 101, Court kings and slam dunk super Jordan’s came out conclusively.

    Follow me at LinkedIn & Instagram: @ryanscard
    Join the Rookie stars on top PSA registry today:
    1980-1989 Cello Packs - Rookies
  • jay0791jay0791 Posts: 3,381 ✭✭✭✭

    FYI Beckett no longer graded best of the new.
    I would double check on other star cards.
    This info is from a buddy who send cards to beckett via a big time submitter.

    Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets
    1948-76 Topps FB Sets
    FB & BB HOF Player sets
    1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It looks like the 1983 set was released in the order of the checklist. Looks like Star released 5-6 sets at a time and that would be around 4-5 team sets and 1-2 subsets. I'll have to keep digging to see the 1984 set.

    Don't forget, the "1983 NBA All-Star Game" set, while technically released in early 1983, would be considered a 1982 issue by today's rules. It depicts the All-Star game from the 1982-83 season. So, technically, that would be Isiah Thomas' rookie.

    Arthur

  • @Dpeck100 said:
    I think the scary part about these is this little fake looks like a real card and while an expert might be able to quickly tell it is a reprint a novice wouldn’t and if they saw it in the case at a shop or come for sale by someone they think they could trust it could prove to be very costly.

    Geez, this thing definitely looks real to me, the majority of fakes I've seen have fuzzy text, but this one looks clean, at least from the photos. What on this card you have here is a tell in your mind?

  • Copyboy1Copyboy1 Posts: 341 ✭✭✭

    The fakes on these are everywhere. Just bought two off an Etsy seller just to see if they might be real. Nope. Not even close. Got the dude to refund my money.

  • Copyboy1Copyboy1 Posts: 341 ✭✭✭

    @cdogstu99 said:

    @Dpeck100 said:
    I think the scary part about these is this little fake looks like a real card and while an expert might be able to quickly tell it is a reprint a novice wouldn’t and if they saw it in the case at a shop or come for sale by someone they think they could trust it could prove to be very costly.

    Geez, this thing definitely looks real to me, the majority of fakes I've seen have fuzzy text, but this one looks clean, at least from the photos. What on this card you have here is a tell in your mind?

    I don't know if it's the photo or the card, but the card image looks really pixelated to me. Lots of bad gradient color banding, too. But I'm not super familiar with a real one, so would need something to compare to.

  • ringerringer Posts: 342 ✭✭✭

    Trying to learn how to spot a fake. Any thoughts on this one’s authenticity?


  • blurryfaceblurryface Posts: 5,136 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 11, 2021 1:57PM

    fde> @2000man said:

    “With limited, location-based distribution, the Star XRC is by far the rarest of all Jordan RC's. It may also be the most controversial. Following the discovery by U.S. Marshalls of over 125,000 Star cards believed to be fakes, PSA refused to grade the cards.”

    dont wanna steer the thread off course, but the ‘84 witchita eagle is definitely the rarest xrc. and probably 200 x’s rarer than any star card.

  • eagles33eagles33 Posts: 2,660 ✭✭✭

    @Dpeck100 said:
    I think the scary part about these is this little fake looks like a real card and while an expert might be able to quickly tell it is a reprint a novice wouldn’t and if they saw it in the case at a shop or come for sale by someone they think they could trust it could prove to be very costly.

    I remember from an old thread that if he looks bald in the pic... it’s fake. That was the tell with this card

    Scans of most of my Misc rookies can be found <a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://forums.collectors.com/m...y&keyword1=Non%20major">here
Sign In or Register to comment.