Mars wrote:For anyone who doesn't remember there were claims that Pete Kerestan known as Weewarriors on Ebay was recasting minis and selling them:

http://theminiaturespage.com/news/talk/msg.mv?id=9150

If these claims are true and it is the same person - which in my opinion seems more than likely, it is not a a far stretch that the photocopies were made by Pete to sell more copies and make a profit.

Yes this was big news in the mini world.  Watch out for any loose Talisman figs and expensive minis that look like they are made of tin and not pewter/lead.

Not quite sure where to start on those latest posts but I'll give it a try.

Mars wrote:For anyone who doesn't remember there were claims that Pete Kerestan known as Weewarriors on Ebay was recasting minis and selling them:

http://theminiaturespage.com/news/talk/msg.mv?id=9150

If these claims are true and it is the same person - which in my opinion seems more than likely, it is not a a far stretch that the photocopies were made by Pete to sell more copies and make a profit.

Zero evidence, Mark.
Yes, same guy, but IIRC the only Character Archaic Pete had to sell is the oldest copy in existence (ask a2jeff) - and a bargain at that - and as for PotVQ;

. wrote:One would have expected to see him list a copy then?
Who wouldn't buy a PoVQ from the author and ask him to sign it?

Yes, Pete listed a PotVQ: it was his original "shop copy" and you were around before and during that discussion, thinking that he might be able to solve all the outstanding questions.
Net result; Pete admitted he'd messed up and that copy was actually a later one from after the black folder, but in the process a complete list of "possible items" to look out for was compiled in case parts of his recollections were accurate after all.

Which brings us on to;

. wrote:...into the list of some 10 printings of this module.

Where are those "10 printings"? Double-sided copies don't count, I think.

The full list of what had been seen, rolled-in with what could be made out from Pete's "rememberings" is at viewtopic.php?p=37162#37162 . Posted in 2005 as a basis for future fact-based discussion as we'd more-or-less reached a dead-end at that point with the material and evidence available.
*
In that list, the toymom/Bella copy is deliberately split off (with carefully worded "dates interchangeable" and other flaggings) from the "3rd"s distributed via TSR and the "3rd"s with Zocchi's label (presumed late 77 onwards, judging by the combined evidence from both TSR and Games Workshop's catalogues and that the run-of-the-mill TSR "2nd"s were very closely associated with the black folder "1st"s and thus likely to have been needed/used up within that initial year or so, rather than appearing at a later/post-digest date, or otherwise after the "3rd"s).

The above link was posted from actual evidence and nothing has fundamentally broken that, since as opposed to "There were those yellow tower photocopies all over the place here around 1990" (paraphr.) but zero physical evidence at present to back that up, with the only copy that's turned up in the stated area since actually being a "2nd print" cover (see above).
Please, please find us some copies, Ian, as you're suggesting you'll try. We'd all love to try to fit the jigsaw together, I'm sure, rather than setting light to the whole subject matter in a destructive manner because of a belief in ubiquitous fakes that simply are not there/visible at present.

. wrote:Or printing and selling them at $1K a shot. Would be a much better choice. Might as well add a new 1st Print Beta ....
And TBH, those black folders can't be that difficult to have produced over in China. I'm surprised no-one's turned up with an undiscovered box of ST1's.

aside: What value do those comments have to this discussion?
All the more reason to be surprised that there are not floods of obvious fakes.

. wrote:Not really. Just another observation. It's all data. US paper size does not preclude UK photocopying. But the date sticker and accompanying supporting product add weight. Just find the difference between the front covers a little off.

If this is what you're meaning, there's no date sticker on toymom/Bella; just a $5 price tag which doesn't appear to match what was understood to be the standard selling price at the time (see above link, again).

. wrote:Seems as though either Zocchi 'enhanced' his covers, or there are two seperate covers, one for the UK market without the princess, and one for the US market with the princess. But then the UK Basic would not suggest there is a censorship issue in play. So why two differenct covers is my query?

I'm not following this at all. Since when has Washington State been in the UK?
Yes, there is "something going on", but nothing at all in this context points or links to those "presumed fakes" you saw for sale circa 1990.

All comments 02c/ymmv, anyhow, and pasted together somehow... Keep on digging (constructively), thanks!

Regards,
David.

p.s. I still like Mike/IO's speculative theory on the yellow tower cover even if that would more than slightly difficult to prove one way or another.

Aneoth wrote:Did she say WHY?
Seems silly to hang onto something like that.
I would either sell them, or trash/burn them to protect against frankensteins.
Probably the latter is the best choice.

Awkward one, that, made worse by not have just a single print that could be fitted inside, given a little tweaking, merging or copying (and there are genuine old copies, of course).

I'd be reluctant to ask that if sold on that those have an embossed "folder from the Wee Warriors archive" stamp or something similar applied, even if that would be a positive manner in which to obtain good money (if wanted/needed!) whilst maintaining product integrity for the future to an "above normal" standard.

d.

Agree; that would certainly be one up from the other (TSR) replacement copies seen on internal content, including in black folder copies.

. wrote:Of all the ooh'ing and ahh'ing back and forth, can anyone offer an explanation of why the two covers are so different in the most difficult detail to fake?

With a genuine "3rd" and that toymom/Bella copy out of its original holder, alongside each other, there would be a fighting chance to make relevant observations. I had offered to have a very close look originally even if at that time I did not have a "3rd" to compare against, but only "1st"s and "2nd"s. No dice and totally messed up by the seller changing her mind multiple times, so I was staying way back after that fiasco...
Looking down the wire and at a 30 year remove, not so easy.
Even at the time I don't think I had a chance to confirm whether the slight apparent jaggies were actually on the copy or photo artifacts.

Anyhow; this is still a one-off issue that's already been identified as a one-off issue and not part of the general, undermining tendency towards "new fakes are everywhere" predicated by this thread thus far, and trying to tie other material into a specific 1990 timeframe/belief-set regardless of the primary evidence is best avoided as a default position, in my opinion.

A good call still, thanks, Ian; even if I can't say for sure where that might go any more than could be said in 2005.

Over the last few years, and even earlier this year that critter was right at the top of one of my wish lists for Rares collecting.

NOW?
I am going to stay the hell away from ALL PotVQ listings.

Unless there is a BIN of $15, or (perhaps) even $30.........
That way I would at least have a copy to read some time.....

If I somehow found enough bills to rub together to risk even that much on a likely fake module, then I would much rather spend it on a large container of good booze.......

I need some more Jack Daniels anyway.
BURP!

Richard wrote:Over the last few years, and even earlier this year that critter was right at the top of one of my wish lists for Rares collecting.

NOW?
I am going to stay the hell away from ALL PotVQ listings.

Unless there is a BIN of $15, or (perhaps) even $30.........
That way I would at least have a copy to read some time.....

If I somehow found enough bills to rub together to risk even that much on a likely fake module, then I would much rather spend it on a large container of good booze.......

I need some more Jack Daniels anyway.
BURP!

Apologies for the page bump. Thanks; this got a smile!
Where are those fakes to make them the majority or even remotely close to that? Let's start this same thread the next time a Tsojconth, Fazzle or Domesday Book is listed and see what happens. Should be fun.

Anyhow... how about $45?

Ah, the minds of children......
My 7 year old just brought up something. Perhaps the Bella version was made BEFORE the regular version. A prepub? It would explain why it seems to be unique.

afoolandhis$ wrote:Here she is:

[ Image ]

I guess the real question is how much of the pixelation effect and the seemingly blockiness is actually on the Bella copy and how much is a result of Stephen's inept ability to use a camera/scanner?

I doubt it is a fake. Why would a game store go through the hassle and potential lawsuit of making a fake $5 module? And if they did, they would of course print far more than one copy.
The dilemma here is hilarious. If it is opened, and turns out to be a fake, bad news for the owner. If it turns out to be a prepub, the value would double or triple, easily.
So the Bella printing is listed as a 4th printing? How was that decision arrived at? I missed the boat......