Already scooped 5 articles down.

Reminds me of the movie ghost where Whoopi Goldberg gives a check to some Nuns. Good for them. With all the poverty and suffering in the world there are people still trying to make a difference.

The white borders are cut off, and this still gets an "authentic"? Does this not seem like a potential counterfeit to anyone else? I worry especially with the controversy we had recently about the grading companies and the criteria they use -- seems there was quite a bit of discussion over on Net54 before it changed addresses (I'm registered but haven't been following the discussion since). I don't recall SGC being one of the most loved grading companies, though things may have changed.

Call me a skeptic, but I'm not certain this is even a slam-dunk $100,000 sale even if it is authentic, considering that the card has been cut apart and mutilated. The tears and bends don't bother me as much as the missing borders.

For more pictures, see here. The back is a Sweet Caporal, which I suppose is a good thing -- if it were a Piedmont back, I'd be even more skeptical (see #6 here).

What amazes me is that the bidding is already at $85,000 -- more than this nicer looking card sold for in better economic times (2001). Is the "authentic" by a grading company really worth that much more? Honestly, I'm a lot more interested in the 2001 card, especially given the supporting documentation. Seems a lot more believable than "somebody just happened to donate this."

And to think that nobody will give Cobb and Edwards a chance! I'm just as skeptical of this card as I am of theirs.

This has "fake" - as in a faked story and a fake card - written all over it.

The thing that drives me nuts is that nobody over at Net54 is even talking about this being fake.

I read this on Yahoo, it was donated by a nun's brother in his will as I read it, no doorstep involved.

As far as the internet FAKE FAKE FAKE thing, well, I see no reason to assume that as a baseline.

Its probably more reasonable to think this is real than 95 percent of the stuff Upper Deck is putting in packs at this point. In the card industry, its quite difficult to tell who is most corrupt: Beckett, the grading services, or the card companies themselves. There is a great book in there somewhere.

There is a great book in there somewhere.

Wouldn't it be nice if it were named Card Sharks? ;-)

Actually, from what I've heard (I've yet to read it), it's pretty much exclusively focused on Upper Deck's role. I think that #7 is going down the right path: the corruption spreads to the grading services, the price guides and elsewhere. We just see the bozos who print up their own cards and stick them on eBay, or get sued over the on Judge Judy, or try to sell them on Pawn Stars.

As far as the internet FAKE FAKE FAKE thing, well, I see no reason to assume that as a baseline.

The thing is that most serious collectors (especially T-206 collectors) tend to assume fake from the start. When I see this card with smoothly trimmed edges and a very suspicious discovery story, it's hard for me to refrain from assuming that it is fake. There are only about 50 or so Wagners in existence -- do any collectors recognize this one?

I'm particularly leery now that the Barry Halper collection is turning out to be fraudulent. Speaking of which, didn't he have a 4 card uncut sheet of T-206, including a Wagner? Am I going to read about that on Hauls of Shame soon?

It could be worse. Somebody could have "found" this card in an attic.

I still wonder what this means for the value of other T-206 Wagners, though. It's looking like this will actually break 6 digits, which really surprises me.

Here's a link to an article about that Halper uncut strip. It sold for a little under $80,000 in 2002 -- again, notably less than the current bidding on this trimmed Wagner, and possibly far less than the final price of this Wagner.

From the linked article:

This strip of cards actually belonged to Honus Wagner, and was discovered many years ago in the attic of Wagner's old house, along with various personal effects, including years of his personal correspondence and uniforms. We have been told that the strip was actually folded in the back pocket of one of his uniform pants when it was discovered.

Could any of those uniforms possibly be among the Halper fakes?

Anyway, I don't want to be too cynical here, but it's hard to be anything but given the current state of the memorabilia industry. It's really hard to know what is real and what is fake (for example, see the Reggie Jackson rookie uniform authenticated by Jackson himself, which, of course, was the wrong number). Honestly, we should have started suspecting something when Topps stuck strands of George Washington's hair in a baseball card.

Its probably more reasonable to think this is real than 95 percent of the stuff Upper Deck is putting in packs at this point.

What kind of stuff is UD putting in packs these days? I really never understood the appeal of owning a sliver a game-used bat or jersey. I once got a George Brett autographed card in a pack, though--that was pretty cool.

Anyway, I don't want to be too cynical here, but it's hard to be anything but given the current state of the memorabilia industry. It's really hard to know what is real and what is fake (for example, see the Reggie Jackson rookie uniform authenticated by Jackson himself, which, of course, was the wrong number). Honestly, we should have started suspecting something when Topps stuck strands of George Washington's hair in a baseball card.

I can't imagine anyone else being more cynical than I am about the sports memorabilia business**, but I'd bet a fair amount of money that this is a real card. I suppose that some particularly devious soul might figure that the best way to get a Wagner T206 by the authenticators would be to make it look like it got shot through the forest and hit every tree, but if I were going to put that much effort into a fake I'd likely shoot for a higher SGC grade than "A".

**As an aside, that's yet another section of the new Jane Leavy bio on Mantle that makes for less than inspirational reading. I'm glad I confined my baseball collecting to books, programs and other non-card printed material.

As an aside, that's yet another section of the new Jane Leavy bio on Mantle that makes for less than inspirational reading. I'm glad I confined my baseball collecting to books, programs and other non-card printed material.

Would this mean that people are finally starting to suspect the recent surge in graded (or even non-graded) 1952 Mantle cards? :-)

Would this mean that people are finally starting to suspect the recent surge in graded (or even non-graded) 1952 Mantle cards? :-)

Tongue in cheek noted, but the Leavy book's part on the memorabilia business was more about the general sleazy atmosphere surrounding many of the shows, and in particular Mantle's dickish behavior (before he swore off the sauce) towards pretty much every fan and promoter who ever interacted with him during one of those events. In his last year he did do a 180 and tried to make up for it.

She did, however, repeat at one point the general consensus that something like 80%-90% of baseball autographs are fake, for whatever that's worth.

What kind of stuff is UD putting in packs these days? I really never understood the appeal of owning a sliver a game-used bat or jersey. I once got a George Brett autographed card in a pack, though--that was pretty cool.

If Jersey cards are the invention of the mid-90s, and Autos a spawn of the early-90s, then the oughts will be known as the era of "throw every single substance on Earth into a baseball card." In addition to the obvious bats, balls, hats, gloves, batting gloves, jerseys, socks, and buttons (seriously, jersey buttons), the industry has put ticket stubs, dirt, crumbled up bits of the Berlin Wall, and whatever the bleep else would tickle the fancies of numerous middle-aged men. More than anything, "Cut Autos" drive the market craziness these days, and if you don't know what they are, they are cut up autographs that use a baseball card as a glorified frame. Often they are a total travesty; historical documents have been cut up so that UD could put a George Washington Autograph in their set, and several cuts have come into question for their legitimacy. Topps had a card with, I believe, a lens from a pair of spectacles worn by Woodrow Wilson. They've also had cards that have hairs purportedly belonging to numerous dead guys including Abe Lincoln. The entire thing is something of a travesty in light of the original pleasures of baseball cards, but is it really that much worse than the millions of pounds of cardboard wasted in the 70s and 80s? I honestly don't know.

Nuns. No sense of humor.

Who's more the nerd, the nerd who makes the obscure Highlander reference or the nerd who gets it?

Wouldn't it be nice if it were named Card Sharks? ;-)

Actually, from what I've heard (I've yet to read it), it's pretty much exclusively focused on Upper Deck's role.

Glad you mentioned that -- I came across the book probably a couple of years ago in a used place about a mile from the house, didn't buy it, but didn't see it the next time I was there & couldn't remember the title for future reference.

But yeah, from glancing at it at the time, I'm pretty sure you're right about its Upper Deck-centricity, which is why I didn't grab it automatically.

In addition to the obvious bats, balls, hats, gloves, batting gloves, jerseys, socks, and buttons (seriously, jersey buttons), the industry has put ticket stubs, dirt, [b]crumbled up bits of the Berlin Wall, and whatever the bleep else would tickle the fancies of numerous middle-aged men.

Ah, yes, I've got one of those from the 2001 Topps American Pie set. I think the real prizes from that set were pieces from an Elvis leather jacket & a Marilyn Monroe cape, or something like that.

Wow, #14 that all seems incredibly stupid (and wasteful). I'm glad I stopped collecting cards in the early-90s (although I probably should have stopped before then).