Jump to content
Major Upgrade - 12 May +
Soul Source
  •  

Jerry Cook - I Hurt On The Other Side

Posted

A member on here had this up for sale in the Ebay section -I looked at it and thought thats looks like the Counterfeit so I check in manships and yes it represented the 106 as in Johns book. It was at around £70+ with a few hours to go.

No mention of the counterfeit in the description.

I pmd the guy on here and messaged him through Ebay putting forward that according to Johns book this looks like the boot - I received no replies back at all either here or on Ebay.

I dont have the link as Im at work on my lunch but you can get it from the "completed" if you type in Jerry Cook.

Is this one of those that had the real Capitol lables put on it like the Alexander Patton or am I wrong?

ATb Steve

P.S. He has been on here since I posted my question to him.

Edited by Ernie Andrews

  • Replies 48
  • Views 8.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Most active in this topic

Most Popular Posts

  • Ernie Andrews
    Ernie Andrews

    Technically if it is a bootleg you should not be selling it on Ebay full stop and if you try to and describe another way you are falsely describing it IMO!

Posted Images

Featured Replies

Thought this was a real one Pete?

seem to think the boot has smaller writing.

Julian

Yes it is, ignore me.

A member on here had this up for sale in the Ebay section -I looked at it and thought thats looks like the Counterfeit so I check in manships and yes it represented the 106 as in Johns book. It was at around £70+ with a few hours to go.

No mention of the counterfeit in the description.

I pmd the guy on here and messaged him through Ebay putting forward that according to Johns book this looks like the boot - I received no replies back at all either here or on Ebay.

Is this one of those that had the real Capitol lables put on it like the Alexander Patton or am I wrong?

ATb Steve

.

This record was booted around the same time as Alexander Patten, using proper Capitol label blanks. This does not have any stamps in the run out.

The orignal has a Daisy stanp in the runout and what looks like a stamped No1, or as Mr Manship says, a stamp that looks like a bed.

I have not seen one, but there could be a different original with an AIM stamp in the runout.

A member on here had this up for sale in the Ebay section -I looked at it and thought thats looks like the Counterfeit so I check in manships and yes it represented the 106 as in Johns book. It was at around £70+ with a few hours to go.

No mention of the counterfeit in the description.

I pmd the guy on here and messaged him through Ebay putting forward that according to Johns book this looks like the boot - I received no replies back at all either here or on Ebay.

I dont have the link as Im at work on my lunch but you can get it from the "completed" if you type in Jerry Cook.

Is this one of those that had the real Capitol lables put on it like the Alexander Patton or am I wrong?

ATb Steve

P.S. He has been on here since I posted my question to him.

Yes it is.

This record was booted around the same time as Alexander Patten, using proper Capitol label blanks. This does not have any stamps in the run out.

The orignal has a Daisy stanp in the runout and what looks like a stamped No1, or as Mr Manship says, a stamp that looks like a bed.

I have not seen one, but there could be a different original with an AIM stamp in the runout.

Also on the "boots" the vinyl is thicker, very chunky, where as the original it's fairly thin.

post-4408-0-14203800-1314646217_thumb.jp

Original. They have the credits above the red part of label, boots have it part on the red bit.

Edited by Chris L

  • Author

On that basis the one he was selling was a boot and a lack of reply suggests he knows it and is not being upfront about it!Especially as he mentions original in his other sales but not this one but also doesnt mention its BOOT AS WELL.

It's been a long time now but if I remember the story, SiSou just walked in off the streets to Capitol studios and bullshitted his

way into getting a bunch of blank labels. :g:

Just had a similar incident and seller says "I never said it was an original" yes of course that's true he never said it was a bootleg either :(

Clearly trying to deceive - Shameful and should be outed on here!

I don't agree, (I don't know the seller BTW)

If the seller didn't say it was an original, then the buyer should have the knowledge to be able to tell the difference.

Everyone wants everything on a plate these days, it's easy enough to find out, just check the bootleg guide (even though it's not 100%)

or ask an experienced collector.

Most US record dealers don't know what's been booted for the Northern Scene.

If you don't know enough about the record, don't pay a lot of money for it........

I don't agree, (I don't know the seller BTW) If the seller didn't say it was an original, then the buyer should have the knowledge to be able to tell the difference. Everyone wants everything on a plate these days, it's easy enough to find out, just check the bootleg guide (even though it's not 100%)

or ask an experienced collector. Most US record dealers don't know what's been booted for the Northern Scene.

If you don't know enough about the record, don't pay a lot of money for it........

So what you're saying is that is the seller knows it's a bootleg he/she can put it up for sale and say nothing knowing that most people

will assume it's an original and if the buyer doesn't ask that specific question, well tough sh*t then ? You must be kidding ?

Edited by Chris L

I don't agree, (I don't know the seller BTW) If the seller didn't say it was an original, then the buyer should have the knowledge to be able to tell the difference. Everyone wants everything on a plate these days, it's easy enough to find out, just check the bootleg guide (even though it's not 100%) or ask an experienced collector. Most US record dealers don't know what's been booted for the Northern Scene. If you don't know enough about the record, don't pay a lot of money for it........

let's have a little test then, here are 3 records, how many are boots ? how many original ? 1, 2 or all 3 ?

1.

post-4408-0-91122000-1314772458.jpg

2.

post-4408-0-55322400-1314772468.jpg

3.

post-4408-0-30366100-1314772476.jpg

I would say all 3 but you need to see the matrix no to be sure, its stamped in not scratched, also theres the small 45 reissue copy as well

I would say all 3 but you need to see the matrix no to be sure, its stamped in not scratched, also theres the small 45 reissue copy as well

Exactly................who can tell the difference, one is a boot, which one though ? here's the story : I got record saw it was a 70s re-issue and asked for my money back, this is what happened.

Seller

The record was not stated as an original on the auction but just the label and the condition. If the buyer had any doubts, then he should have asked before placing a bid

Me

You sold this item knowing that is was a bootleg but deliberately did not mention that, that is fraudulent."

Seller

Be careful with what you are saying. You bought a record from me April 2009 and tried fraudulent actions with paypal. To my credit i won the case.

Me

I posted negative feedback “Items was bootleg, avoid”

Seller

You have been reported for misuse of the feedback system and furthermore I will report the case to paypal of fraudulent actions of missuse of the buyer protection system

Me

The fact of the matter is that you knowingly placed a bootleg, counterfeit item for sale without describing it as such, that is fraud

Seller is from Germany : ID is ‘grundehrlich!’ and had 95.2% positive feedback.

here’s some feedbacks for this seller :

  • Artikel defekt,obwohl ohne Schäden inseriert.Nicht zu empfehlen!!

  • Not in description about the nameplates attached which glue left scratch marks

  • record was listed as stock copy but was a boot

  • Not as advertised, worthless item, seller refuses refund, avoid

All this info is in the public arena and not confidential, a tragedy but I guess you do almost every time ask “Is it an original ?” – go scammers !!!

  • Author

I don't agree, (I don't know the seller BTW)

If the seller didn't say it was an original, then the buyer should have the knowledge to be able to tell the difference.

Everyone wants everything on a plate these days, it's easy enough to find out, just check the bootleg guide (even though it's not 100%)

or ask an experienced collector.

Most US record dealers don't know what's been booted for the Northern Scene.

If you don't know enough about the record, don't pay a lot of money for it........

Can you reply to Chris Ls post please as what you are saying I think is ridiculous as outlined by Chris L.

So I walk in to the local corner junk shop in Chicago and go through the records, Is the guy behind the counter supposed to know which ones are originals and which ones are bootlegs?

No

I'm the one who should know the difference, and in the case of Jerry Cook, it's bleedin obvious.

If you're still not sure then buy the demo....

Edited by grouse

So what you're saying is that is the seller knows it's a bootleg he/she can put it up for sale and say nothing knowing that most people

will assume it's an original and if the buyer doesn't ask that specific question, well tough sh*t then ? You must be kidding ?

Why would most people assume it's an original?

If you don't know if it's an original, why should the seller?

If it's not advertised as original then it would be safer for you to assume it's a bootleg.

In the days of paper lists you couldn't see what you were buying and had to trust the dealer and on more than one occasion I had to send records advertised as original back to 'big' dealers with explanations of how to tell the bootleg from the original. Delta numbers are a pretty obvious clue...

Soul Bowl had an (o) next to the originals. (I never had to send one back to them)

On Ebay you get a full colour photo and the ability to ask questions about the matrix via email, in addition to that Mr Manship has kindly published a bootleg guide so that anyone with no knowledge can tell the difference.

This seller hadn't stated if it was original or a bootleg. You say all his originals were advertised as originals. Wouldn't it be safe to assume that if he didn't say it was original then it isn't.

If he had listed an original and said it was a bootleg would you have been so quick to complain or would you just have bought it?

Edited by grouse

Is there not a condition on Ebay that prevents anyone describing a record as a bootleg? I'm only guessing as I've never sold anything on Ebay.

If so then that might explain why there is no description

Why would most people assume it's an original?

Because in this case the seller knew which of his records were original or reissues and described them as such - except for this one

Why would most people assume it's an original?

Because in this case the seller knew which of his records were original or reissues and described them as such - except for this one

played jerry cook in the main room of the weston super mare ALL-NITER... sounded gr8 and is a fab oldie

Can't stand this record, going to add it to the 'worst Northern' list I think

This seller hadn't stated if it was original or a bootleg. You say all his originals were advertised as originals. Wouldn't it be safe to assume that if he didn't say it was original then it isn't. If he had listed an original and said it was a bootleg would you have been so quick to complain or would you just have bought it?

Yes and no, I think, although I'm not really sure, it would depend.

Chris

Is there not a condition on Ebay that prevents anyone describing a record as a bootleg? I'm only guessing as I've never sold anything on Ebay. If so then that might explain why there is no description

You can say, reproduction, re-issue, 2nd issue, even non-original, etc. but NOT bootleg or counterfeit.

  • Author

Technically if it is a bootleg you should not be selling it on Ebay full stop and if you try to and describe another way you are falsely describing it IMO!

Clearly trying to deceive - Shameful and should be outed on here!

He was maybe sure the other records he had for sale were original, so stated so.

The Jerry Cook is hard to tell the difference, so maybe he just did not know if it was orig or not!

The legend in his own lunch time Pete S, should stick to his reggae records, and leave the northern greats to people who care!!

He was maybe sure the other records he had for sale were original, so stated so.

The Jerry Cook is hard to tell the difference, so maybe he just did not know if it was orig or not!

The legend in his own lunch time Pete S, should stick to his reggae records, and leave the northern greats to people who care!!

Honest souls like yourself, hmmm.

  • Author

He was maybe sure the other records he had for sale were original, so stated so.

The Jerry Cook is hard to tell the difference, so maybe he just did not know if it was orig or not!

The legend in his own lunch time Pete S, should stick to his reggae records, and leave the northern greats to people who care!!

Your argument doesnt stack up if you take Grouses approach that the buyer should know the difference but in this case I suspect the seller did know having looked at the persons history!

P.S. Why the dig at Pete Smith - you are getting personal- Whats reggae records got to do with this?

Your argument doesnt stack up if you take Grouses approach that the buyer should know the difference but in this case I suspect the seller did know having looked at the persons history!

P.S. Why the dig at Pete Smith - you are getting personal- Whats reggae records got to do with this?

if you want areal one get it from me have an nice ex demo at the mo + a british test press of sidney barnes complete with his comments on both 45's

Mithras,rivers of babylon the melodiansXX

This seller is younger than many of us but I do believe he knows exactly what's what regarding originals and boots and knows what he is doing and the impact it will have on the selling price of his records.

It's bad form but a case of 'caveat emptor' I'm afraid.

Oh and why the cloak and dagger about who it is - It's Sean Livesey obviously.

Ged,

This is the guy who used to be at Bury quite a lot?

He didn't strike me as the font of all knowledge so you may have been a little hard on him.

He could have asked on here though.

ROD

Rod,

Yes Sean was a regular at Bury and I found him a nice enough guy.

He needn't ask on here he could just ask his dad if he wanted to be sure (I'd not be suprised if some of these records were his dads). The vague descriptions are never present on original records when he lists them if it was a lack of knowledge he'd get the odd original wrong too.

As I say I believe he knows what he's doing but as others have said the buyers should so their research we all know what a minefield record buying can be when you have the record in your hand let alone on ebay.

Ged

We have plenty of threads on here which highlight Original records that have sold for far more than their worth, usually with the buyer being called Crazy!

Why is this case any different, I agree the seller could have been more open with his discription, but the winner bidder got what was said on the tin, he never claimed it was an original. and the buyer will recieve whats in the auction photo.

To me this is just another example of a Crazy Bidder, if they can't be bothered to research what they are buying, more the fool them.

I'm no expert but i certainly make sure of what i'm buying if i'm in doubt from the many sources available.

  • Author

if you want areal one get it from me have an nice ex demo at the mo + a british test press of sidney barnes complete with his comments on both 45's

Mithras,rivers of babylon the melodiansXX

Ave Mithras Sol Invicte!

  • Author

if you want areal one get it from me have an nice ex demo at the mo + a british test press of sidney barnes complete with his comments on both 45's

Mithras,rivers of babylon the melodiansXX

Ave Mithras Sol Invicte!

Rod,

Hi Ged the issue is not with the buyers as yes they should do research - Its the deliberate way to deceive that wrangles me and is technically illegal under the sale of goods act! It also need to be highlighted to show the kind of person that other buyer are daeling with.

ATB Steve

Yes Sean was a regular at Bury and I found him a nice enough guy.

He needn't ask on here he could just ask his dad if he wanted to be sure (I'd not be suprised if some of these records were his dads). The vague descriptions are never present on original records when he lists them if it was a lack of knowledge he'd get the odd original wrong too.

As I say I believe he knows what he's doing but as others have said the buyers should so their research we all know what a minefield record buying can be when you have the record in your hand let alone on ebay.

Ged

  • 2 weeks later...

Just had an exchange of mails between me and an Ebay seller, no mention if record boot or not, I asked

his answer :

Hi there, this looks like one of those 70s re-issues, is that so , The original will be in styrene with z nr stamped in run-out ? thanks

----------------

hi Chris-Thanks- Yes i have had a few asking for the number in the deadwax but if it was an original I think I would be asking for more than I am. Its got ZCSC 121599 SCRATCHED NOT STAMPED in the deadwax.Regards J

----------------

if you know it's a re-issue, you really should say so...................

----------------

Appreciate your advice but I have been had over a few times.i am not a dealer and when I started selling my collection off I had a few people contacting me telling me about deadwax,monarch numbers,reisues,originals etc and I didnt have a clue what they were on about.An example was I put on a Tobi LARK record for £4.50 and would have been happy at that-it went for over £200 but have been told I could have got £400.The ones in the know are obviously giving out wrong info about stryene/vinyl re-issues etc and I take your point but I honestly dont know if it is original reissue second pressing etc.You tell me this record is a reissue and offer say a tenner and I would say ok,then you would be laughing cos its actally worth a grand.At the end of the day I have northern soul records that I dont play anymore and want someone else to enjoy but not to take the p out of me to make a profit cos thats NOT whats its all about or is it!!!!

---------------------------

So the moral is if any seller of any record doesn't actually specify it's an original you really must ask. BTW Ebay

decided in my favour for that Vibrations single I got a full refund and I hadn't even returned it !!!!

SWONS or wot ?

---------------------------

BTW Ebay decided in my favour for that Vibrations single I got a full refund and I hadn't even returned it !!!!

SWONS or wot ?

Well I hope you have returned it now.

  • 1 month later...

I looked at it and thought thats looks like the Counterfeit so I check in manships and yes it represented the 106 as in Johns book. It was at around £70+ with a few hours to go. No mention of the counterfeit in the description.

I dont have the link as Im at work on my lunch but you can get it from the "completed" if you type in Jerry Cook.

Is this one of those that had the real Capitol lables put on it like the Alexander Patton or am I wrong?

ATb Steve

What goes around goes around, this is the same record

This was sold originally in 2009 at $140.00

post-4408-0-23996500-1319809530_thumb.jp

And again in 2010 for $80

post-4408-0-44682500-1319809549.jpg

Again in 2011 for £24.00

post-4408-0-37104700-1319809559_thumb.jp

Not once did the seller say it was a re-issie, boot, pressing or anything else, rather it was left up to the bidder to ascertain facts. I guess what does go around does come around and back around again.

:no:

they used to be called new imports in all the sales lists!

Get involved with Soul Source

Go to topic listing