MJ 98-99 PMG #/50

[Orangejello727]

Originally Posted by kencope

Not sure how, I don't see a 1/1 on them anywhere?

How do you know they dont have masterpiece tags on the back? If they did, would you consider them legit?

I mean you cut sheets, fleer cut sheets its the same..

I mean fleer stamped 1/1 tags, I could stamp 1/1 tags, its still the same right? According to your logic?

[motu79]

Originally Posted by Orangejello727

So if I cut theses cards, they can be considered legit 1/1 flair legacies?

Just want to cofirm that you are saying uncut cards are real and legit just like pack pulled and what I have below is a real 1/1 from fleer?

You make a good point since those are supposed to be serial #'d. That brings a whole new discussion in as the Jambalayas are not. Damnit OJ, now I'm on the fence.

Are those originally from Fleer and produced by them? That would be a dilemma, but everything Fleer did towards the end was shady. haha

[kencope]

I'm obviously not as familiar with the cards as you are. If they were intended to be 1/1s and had some kind of stamping on them to that effect, and the actual 1/1 version was already released, I, personally, would not feel it were right to then stamp another one as a 1/1 without destroying the first copy.

Originally Posted by Orangejello727

How do you know they dont have masterpiece tags on the back? If they did, would you consider them legit?

I mean you cut sheets, fleer cut sheets its the same..

I mean fleer stamped 1/1 tags, I could stamp 1/1 tags, its still the same right? According to your logic?

[Orangejello727]

What if sheets are half stamped? like this..

[Pejarox7620]

Originally Posted by Orangejello727

What if sheets are half stamped? like this..

Ohhh snap OJ bringing out the Big guns

[Orangejello727]

Originally Posted by kencope

I'm obviously not as familiar with the cards as you are. If they were intended to be 1/1s and had some kind of stamping on them to that effect, and the actual 1/1 version was already released, I, personally, would not feel it were right to then stamp another one as a 1/1 without destroying the first copy.

Just like your Jambalaya uncut sheet, these sheets were replacements. The only difference was the Jambalaya you cut up never came serial numbered. None the less, they were still replacements. Replacements that were probably let out post bankruptcy sale.

Say the print run on the Jambalaya was /100. There should only be 100 or less in the open market. With cut up sheets, the circulation now is 100 or more. That was never the intention of uncut sheets. They were meant for replacement so that if 1 came in, an uncut sheet version would replace it while the one returned would be destroyed to maintain the integrity of the set and its rarity. This is the reason why people have issues with sheets being cut and put into circulation.

Look at what happen with the Superfractors from bowman baseball.


Just want to also point out, im not against selling these. Im all for buying and selling. But im against passing them off without full disclosure. If you disclose their nature, you are doing your part. Thats my stance on them.

[Pejarox7620]

Originally Posted by kencope

I'm extremely sorry and disheartened that you've lost respect for me in any way, and of course that was never my intent.

These cards are the way Fleer intended them to be in every respect ; the fake patch situation you mentioned is of course not. That's the difference.

Your comments about doing whatever I need to to make money are, quite honestly, hurtful. If I was crossing a moral line in my own mind (and in the scale of humanity, I would consider myself to have quite high morals) then I wouldn't have done it. The fact is, I truly deep down don't believe this practice to be immoral. If others do, that's their prerogative.

My comment about the money going to my children's college education was never meant to be a justification for anything. It was a response to someone saying that I was "in the hobby for the wrong reasons", and I can personally think of no better reason (it is of course fun to me as well). Please don't misconstrue that comment for something it wasn't.

Also, I would disagree that the uncut sheet is supposed to be uncut. It's just that Fleer didn't get around to it. They don't just make uncut sheets for the hell of it. They make it so that they can eventually be cut and released to the public as such.

That's not entirely true, a lot of the uncut sheets were from the Fleer Bankruptcy, some are given in contest, and i assume others are Backdoored...I don't know how you got your uncut sheet but the only justification for cutting it fairly would be if you got permission from fleer themselves. I really believe uncut sheets aren't meant to be cut by anyone but by the manufacturer themselves..I mean have you seen the Exquisite uncut sheets they were inserting into packs? Do you honestly believe those are supposed to be cut later by whoever got them?

[kencope]

I apologize profusely. I wasn't aware that you used to work for Fleer and had designated the Jambalaya sheet as a replacement to be used only if the same card were relinquished and destroyed. Oh, wait, you didn't? So....it's your opinion that was the intention.

So, just so I'm following your logic correctly, I should have to go find another beat up Andrew Luck Topps Chrome SSP auto in order to accept that one that was never inserted into packs that is being offered to me as a replacement for another card? Because, otherwise, Topps would be diluting the odds of what was originally put into the packs which is incomprehensible and immoral?

Originally Posted by Orangejello727

Just like your Jambalaya uncut sheet, these sheets were replacements. The only difference was the Jambalaya you cut up never came serial numbered. None the less, they were still replacements. Replacements that were probably let out post bankruptcy sale.

Say the print run on the Jambalaya was /100. There should only be 100 or less in the open market. With cut up sheets, the circulation now is 100 or more. That was never the intention of uncut sheets. They were meant for replacement so that if 1 came in, an uncut sheet version would replace it while the one returned would be destroyed to maintain the integrity of the set and its rarity. This is the reason why people have issues with sheets being cut and put into circulation.

Look at what happen with the Superfractors from bowman baseball.

[Orangejello727]

Originally Posted by kencope

I apologize profusely. I wasn't aware that you used to work for Fleer and had designated the Jambalaya sheet as a replacement to be used only if the same card were relinquished and destroyed. Oh, wait, you didn't? So....it's your opinion that was the intention.

So, just so I'm following your logic correctly, I should have to go find another beat up Andrew Luck Topps Chrome SSP auto in order to accept that one that was never inserted into packs that is being offered to me as a replacement for another card? Because, otherwise, Topps would be diluting the odds of what was originally put into the packs which is incomprehensible and immoral?

I accept your apology for not understanding the concept of uncut sheets being produced for replacement.

If you want to act like a top notch sherlock with smarty pant comments, by all means go ahead, I have no issues with it. But please dont think you can fool us on your intentions of cutting sheets and passing them off as legit pack pulled cards all because your argument is a reverse negative. You DID NOT disclose it. I dont care that you DID NOT specify the card being pack pulled, im more concerned that you DID NOT disclose that it was cut from a sheet.

Its like me arguing that I paid you with fake dollar bills and its all good because I told you I would give you cash, but never once did I say it wasn't counterfeit? LOL thanks for coming out!

Here is a question for you. WOuld you have paid top dollar for the MJ PMG 45/50 if it were from an uncut sheet and post stamped ?

[kencope]

In response to your first point, I would then need permission from Ford to paint my car a different color or put in a new transmission. In response to your second point, I don't care one iota what those people do with their uncut Exquisite sheets. It's their property, they can do whatever they want to with them. Again, while I may be in the minority, I personally am just as happy to own a card that is "sheet cut" as one that was put into packs.

Originally Posted by Pejarox7620

That's not entirely true, a lot of the uncut sheets were from the Fleer Bankruptcy, some are given in contest, and i assume others are Backdoored...I don't know how you got your uncut sheet but the only justification for cutting it fairly would be if you got permission from fleer themselves. I really believe uncut sheets aren't meant to be cut by anyone but by the manufacturer themselves..I mean have you seen the Exquisite uncut sheets they were inserting into packs? Do you honestly believe those are supposed to be cut later by whoever got them?

[motu79]

OJ is starting to make good points. He's on your side, OP, and just thinks you should disclose that you had them cut professionally from an uncut sheet you had. I really don't think it will affect the sales that much. You'd be surprised how many sellers I've had that don't even read the descriptions.

[jj2]

So basically what I have garnered from this thread is that Ken has too much money invested in cutting up these cards and will now try and justify it however he can in order to maximise his profits. If this wasn't the case then I see no reason why he wouldn't freely state these cards are cut from a sheet in his auctions. There's only one reason why you don't state this, and it's because you know it will lessen their value, which should probably tell you something about what you are doing.

[kencope]

I'm done guys. Nowhere else to go with this and I've spent way too much time on it already. Thanks for those that provided actual productive input, it was certainly a lively discussion and I thank everyone for their viewpoint, even those that I disagree with. Anyone that wants to pm me can and I'll be happy to respond to professional points as time allows. Thanks!

[Orangejello727]

Originally Posted by motu79

OJ is starting to make good points. He's on your side, OP, and just thinks you should disclose that you had them cut professionally from an uncut sheet you had. I really don't think it will affect the sales that much. You'd be surprised how many sellers I've had that don't even read the descriptions.

Take a look at his purchase by the OP
Early 1900s Baseball Cards Lot | eBay

He left a neg for the seller because the item he bought was NOT what he thought it was because the seller DID NOT disclose the cards to be authentic.

I find it funny that the OP thinks full disclosure is a choice yet he leaves a negative and is against it when he becomes the buyer. The irony I tell you. "The cards were real, might not be authentic, but they were real" and you didnt like it.

[kencope]

To those that site final sale value as an argument, the ones I sold DID sell for significantly less than past sales, so I think that was already taken into consideration. But, I'm not omniscient, so I can't say that for a fact. Thanks again, and take care!

[kencope]

The cards were sent to SGC and were counterfeits. It's against eBay policy to sell counterfeit cards. Mine are not counterfeit. Get the facts before you make accusations. Not at all the same.

Originally Posted by Orangejello727

Take a look at his purchase by the OP
Early 1900s Baseball Cards Lot | eBay

He left a neg for the seller because the item he bought was NOT what he thought it was because the seller DID NOT disclose the cards to be authentic.

I find it funny that the OP thinks full disclosure is a choice yet he leaves a negative and is against it when he becomes the buyer. The irony I tell you. "The cards were real, might not be authentic, but they were real" and you didnt like it.

[jj2]

Originally Posted by kencope

The cards were sent to SGC and were counterfeits. It's against eBay policy to sell counterfeit cards. Mine are not counterfeit. Get the facts before you make accusations. Not at all the same.

Personally, I would regard your cards as not much better than counterfeit.

Ken, answer one simple question for us all: Why do you not state these are cut from sheets by you in the auction descriptions?

[motu79]

Originally Posted by Orangejello727

Take a look at his purchase by the OP
Early 1900s Baseball Cards Lot | eBay

He left a neg for the seller because the item he bought was NOT what he thought it was because the seller DID NOT disclose the cards to be authentic.

I find it funny that the OP thinks full disclosure is a choice yet he leaves a negative and is against it when he becomes the buyer. The irony I tell you. "The cards were real, might not be authentic, but they were real" and you didnt like it.

To side with Ken on this, the auction does state the cards are real by the seller. And older cards are much easier to fake. I think he just needs to disclose in his auctions that they're cut. That would be fine by me.

[jj2]

Originally Posted by Orangejello727

Take a look at his purchase by the OP
Early 1900s Baseball Cards Lot | eBay

He left a neg for the seller because the item he bought was NOT what he thought it was because the seller DID NOT disclose the cards to be authentic.

I find it funny that the OP thinks full disclosure is a choice yet he leaves a negative and is against it when he becomes the buyer. The irony I tell you. "The cards were real, might not be authentic, but they were real" and you didnt like it.

The auction should have just left out the part about them being real. Then it might have been ok by Ken. After all, how could any of us possibly know if all of the cards in our collection are 100% real.

[jerryw]

remind me not to piss off OJ haha...guys vicious with knowledge, facts, and pulls out the hypocrisy of his debate opponent and makes them look foolish.....

[hairyangryfella]

Originally Posted by kencope

So, just so I'm following your logic correctly, I should have to go find another beat up Andrew Luck Topps Chrome SSP auto in order to accept that one that was never inserted into packs that is being offered to me as a replacement for another card? Because, otherwise, Topps would be diluting the odds of what was originally put into the packs which is incomprehensible and immoral?

Card companies holding back cards as replacements, while something that seems very shady itself, is actually different to taking something NEVER INTENDED FOR DISTRIBUTION and selling it as the real thing. C'mon man. Any shred of credibility you might have had really has gone out the window...

Again, thank you for actually being honest about it. But to not see that you're doing anything wrong, well.... SMH.

[Orangejello727]

Originally Posted by kencope

The cards were sent to SGC and were counterfeits. It's against eBay policy to sell counterfeit cards. Mine are not counterfeit. Get the facts before you make accusations. Not at all the same.

Fine.. in order to get you to stop hiding behind semantics, Are the Jambalaya cards you sold specifically from retail packs and made for retail sales? Yes or no?

Keeping in mind that Fleer never sold uncut sheets on a retail / hobby level.

[karlsta26]

OP, what would you say about this then?

Buy the cheaper base version of this



Cut it the in the same process of the Jambalaya to turn it into one of these...???

[Orangejello727]

Originally Posted by motu79

To side with Ken on this, the auction does state the cards are real by the seller. And older cards are much easier to fake. I think he just needs to disclose in his auctions that they're cut. That would be fine by me.

Its semantics are the end of the day. Same game he plays. He basically excuses himself of any wrong doing by the argument that "He never stated they were NOT from cut sheets". That does not relieve you of any wrong doing. Its like putting "To the best of my knowledge, these arent fake, and if they happen to be, tough luck". Disclosure is being open and giving the information. Disclosure is not about withholding information the guise of "I never said that I DIDNT say it". Just a wonky argument to use to justify why you choose to selectively NOT include information that I believe a buyer would find important when making a decision on the price they pay.

So if you want to play semantics, the that auction has real cards. They might not be authentic, but they are real by his standards. Just like the jambalaya, they are real but cut from sheets and not from packs. Never meant for retail distribution and most importantly never to be supported as apart of the actual packed out production cards.

[SportsItUpCards]

Funny how this was uncovered from a simple "yes" answer on post #46 of this thread..... Such a crazy world we're living in. Good thing I asked on post #60 of this thread then, huh. Otherwise we would have never known.... Remember kids, ALWAYS ask questions in class! You're welcome!

Bottom line.... For ME, thanks to you, I will probably never buy a 90's Jambalaya card, ever! So this is a big deal for me. How can I ever be sure I have the real deal? So thank you!

Ill stick to the Fleer Retro ones.... Anyway, Lebron is not in the 90's set anyway

But you seriously just ruined it for me, and I'm pretty sure many others as well. I won't even ask you how many you've cut because I'm sure you would answer "just one" anyway...

Another piece of our great hobby is now ruined thanks to you.