1982 Fleer Ripken 1/1?

ripkenintheminors

I posted this on another board and thought it was worth mentioning here. This seller has a signed 1982 Fleer RC of Cal Ripken Jr that was sent and authenticated by PSA/DNA. Before sending the card for authentication, they put a 1/1 on the card. Here's the result:

LINK

Nothing ceases to amaze me.

NickM

If it's an authentic Ripken autograph (and I have no good reason to believe it's not), what else should PSA/DNA have done with this card?

Nick

ripkenintheminors

<< <i>If it's an authentic Ripken autograph (and I have no good reason to believe it's not), what else should PSA/DNA have done with this card?

Nick >>



I am not concerned about the fact that the autograph was graded, I'm concerned at the fact that the seller is attempting to pass off a serial numbered 1/1 on ebay.

zef204

<< <i>If it's an authentic Ripken autograph (and I have no good reason to believe it's not), what else should PSA/DNA have done with this card?

Nick >>

They should have rejected to grade the card because it is a blatant attempt to decieve. They should have the integrity of the hobby ahead of making ONE authentication fee.

itzagoner

well now it is kinda hard to tell from the pic but what if the knucklehead wrote 1/1 on the HOLDER after he got it back? doesn't strike me as logical otherwise

TheMcgwireMuseum

<< <i>well now it is kinda hard to tell from the pic but what if the knucklehead wrote 1/1 on the HOLDER after he got it back? doesn't strike me as logical otherwise >>



no, thats just silly. Its on the card.

itzagoner

<< <i>

<< <i>well now it is kinda hard to tell from the pic but what if the knucklehead wrote 1/1 on the HOLDER after he got it back? doesn't strike me as logical otherwise >>



no, thats just silly. Its on the card. >>



as silly as writing 1/1 on what perceivably could be a rare item?

i'm just tryin' to stir the pot, and regardless of what it is it don't look right, JMO

NickM

zef - PSA didn't grade the card. It has an "Authentic" on it, which is also issued to autographed cards that wouldn't grade because they're trimmed (or other alterations not affecting the signature). Since the 1/1 wouldn't prevent the card from grading, but give it a MK qualifier, I'm not sure why PSA/DNA should be expected to reject it.

But I'm certainly not happy with the seller's behavior, and I'm glad the cheap modern serial numbered card I bought from him a while back was machine-numbered.

Nick

Stingray

<< <i>

<< <i>If it's an authentic Ripken autograph (and I have no good reason to believe it's not), what else should PSA/DNA have done with this card?

Nick >>

They should have rejected to grade the card because it is a blatant attempt to decieve. They should have the integrity of the hobby ahead of making ONE authentication fee. >>



Agreed 100%

Sheamaster

I'm surprised there's people bidding over $100 for that card...it's way off-centered and not even a nice auto.

tennesseebanker

I agree the auto looks like crap and the card does as well. Probably just the HOF hype raising the card price.

baseballfanatic

Its the type of quality and shenanigans you can expect from the seller.....

themetalsign

An ugly card made even uglier. I would never want to own that off centered piece of cardboard.


But it has a bunch of bids.




Dave D.

Allen

I saw a 1995 Bowman Andruw Jones PSA/DNA that was marked 1/1..........

julen23

1/1 .... yea right

and if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.

julen

athleticsfan

On Jan-12-07 at 09:16:42 PST, seller added the following information:

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED OUT OF A FLEER PRODUCT AND SENT TO PSA FOR AUTHENTICATION. THE NUMBERING WAS DONE BY FLEER BEFORE THEY PUT IT IN THE PACK OF CARDS IT WAS PULLED OUT OF! GOOD LUCK THANKS

ripkenintheminors

Um...

RipublicaninMass

well since Ripken did NOT write 1/1 on the card, I feel it should have been rejected. I have a really old Clemens AUTO call where I WROTE the number 21 next to his sig. I have debated sending it in since I believe "ink was added" to the auto. WHich I believe it says on PSA/DNA's site this "ink added" will prevent an auto from being graded.

schr1st

I'm not aware of any Fleer Buyback autographed rookie cards, nor does one appear in the Beckett OPG. Anyone else aware of such an item?

1989FleerBillRipkencollector

Could be a buyback. I know they had a Griffey Fleer RD buyback Auto. Bowman Originals has a ton of those Auto buybacks avail. in packs now. Hopefully it has some sticker or something on the back to help deter fraud. If it is one PSA should of noted buyback on the flip IMO

ripkenintheminors

<< <i>Could be a buyback. I know they had a Griffey Fleer RD buyback Auto. Bowman Originals has a ton of those Auto buybacks avail. in packs now. Hopefully it has some sticker or something on the back to help deter fraud. If it is one PSA should of noted buyback on the flip IMO >>



It could be, but I'd like to think a seller would mention that. I can always send him a question.

Might as well issue another online counterfeit Ripken minor league card alert as well while I'm here.

lostdart58

That particular seller's reputation is known to be questionalbe...................................

fandango

seller is questionable? how so..

As far as the card in question goes, It looks like it was Authenticated only because it would have received a low grade or a OC Qualifier.....

i think its a legit buyback...

1989FleerBillRipkencollector

BINOCULARS

Same seller-Since no one has sold a pair recently on ebay they are labeled 1/1 in title. Geez. Adds 1/1 to a few that items that are not.

fandango

I think that 1/1 on the Ripken card looks like the real deal....i have a lot of cards with the same style/penmenship....

a lot of people put 1/1 in the titles of auctions, doesnt mean this ripken is doctored....

TheMcgwireMuseum

I asked him a question through ebay, and he said the card was pulled from a pack

Allen

I don't think it is from any pack. Fleer wouldn't use such an o/c card for a buyback anyways. Also as they said it would be noted on the flip.

TheMcgwireMuseum

<< <i>I don't think it is from any pack. Fleer wouldn't use such an o/c card for a buyback anyways. Also as they said it would be noted on the flip. >>

Oh I agree completely. I dont believe the guy one bit. Just wanted to post what he actually told me about the card.

NickM

"Ink Added" is when the signature has been traced over, filled in, or otherwise altered. It's not used for ink somewhere else on the card not impacting the signature.

Nick

baseballfanatic

As far as I remember, Fleer has always either crimped, embossed, or put a sticker on the back of a card. No way would Fleer take a card that badly offcenter and use it as a 1/1. I'm suprised the seller didnt trim it down and send it to Beckett for a BGS 10 like he usually does...............

NickM

Buyback autos are not done in fountain pen. The card companies pay the player to sign them (usually in front of a company representative), and even if the card is not so nice, they want a bold, clean Sharpie signature.

Nick

fandango

<< <i>As far as I remember, Fleer has always either crimped, embossed, or put a sticker on the back of a card. No way would Fleer take a card that badly offcenter and use it as a 1/1. I'm suprised the seller didnt trim it down and send it to Beckett for a BGS 10 like he usually does............... >>



funny, beckett gives out 10's like candy nowadays...

Remember, this is Fleer we are talking about, the company went out of business for a reason....i bet this IS a buyback, and the reason it is 1 of 1 is because its the only Ripken Fleer RC they got back that was signed....

schr1st

I too doubt that a Ripken buyback auto would be signed in anything but a Sharpie. If it were a new UD/Fleer buyback, it would have a serial # hologram on the back and a matching UD authentication card (like the new 89 UD Griffeys have). Otherwise it would be listed somewhere in the Beckett On-line Price Guide, which it is not. I'll check with some of the Beckett Staff members to see if they've ever heard of a Ripken Buyback Autograph 1 of 1.

ripkenintheminors

This card is a 1982 Fleer rookie card that was signed by Ripken. Somebody either took the card from the slab, wrote 1/1 on the card and resealed it (if that's even possible) or wrote 1/1 on the card before sending it to PSA/DNA for authentication. If the card was a Buy Back it would have some sort of authentication with the card. In addition, why send a card to PSA/DNA if it was authenticated by the company?

ripkenintheminors

And while on the subject of questionable items on ebay, allow me to present this nice piece of counterfeit memorabilia

LINK

Disappointing.

lostdart58

<< <i>And while on the subject of questionable items on ebay, allow me to present this nice piece of counterfeit memorabilia

LINK

Disappointing. >>



WOW....pretty big ebay seller there................Do ya thing he knows it is no good?? He guarentees it though!

ripkenintheminors

<< <i>

<< <i>And while on the subject of questionable items on ebay, allow me to present this nice piece of counterfeit memorabilia

LINK

Disappointing. >>



WOW....pretty big ebay seller there................Do ya thing he knows it is no good?? He guarentees it though! >>



I informed him of my concerns and gave him a link to the site. Initially the card was pulled while there was an attempt at verifying authenticity. Either he found someone that would tell him it's legit or decided to sell it anyways.

I have done three interviews about the counterfeits and the first one that I can confirm the date for comes out in a week. Granted, you have to do your homework, but too bad the article did not come out while the auction was running. For the record, I've given ebay more than enough evidence to warrant the auction getting pulled.

ripkenintheminors

The highest I've tracked one of these fakes at selling is $919. At $857 with a little under 2 hours remaining, this has potential.

ripkenintheminors

No additional bids, $857 to the unlucky winner.