Huh? seller claims original. (EDIT....My mistake, I only read the part where it says 100% originals no reissues and didn't read the rest. The top line about 100% originals is wrong, though)

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/DON-VARNER-Tear-Stained-Face-Mojo-Mama-MEGA-RARE-NORTHERN-SOUL-Quinvy-45-Hear-/400533158324?pt=Music_on_Vinyl&hash=item5d41a2f9b4#ht_1515wt_1399

Edited July 22, 201311 yr by George G

But why are some people ready to pay so much when they know nothing? more fool them

No he doesn't, he states its a 70's press, its just the crazy lazy syndrome we seem to be seeing more of these days  

Huh? seller claims original.

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/DON-VARNER-Tear-Stained-Face-Mojo-Mama-MEGA-RARE-NORTHERN-SOUL-Quinvy-45-Hear-/400533158324?pt=Music_on_Vinyl&hash=item5d41a2f9b4#ht_1515wt_1399

 

Think he's a member on here, Mcboing boing from NYC, if not it's a big coincidence. 

Edited July 22, 201311 yr by Tony A

Because they trust a seller with 5.500+ positive transaction. Foolish, yes but understandable.

 

Edit: Like all bidders I overlooked the 70s 2nd press bit.

Edited July 22, 201311 yr by Benji

Huh? seller claims original.

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/DON-VARNER-Tear-Stained-Face-Mojo-Mama-MEGA-RARE-NORTHERN-SOUL-Quinvy-45-Hear-/400533158324?pt=Music_on_Vinyl&hash=item5d41a2f9b4#ht_1515wt_1399

 

says 100% original pressings no re issues , then says below ,  this is the 2nd issue 1970's version , i'm confused. about for posts came in at once missed the above

Edited July 22, 201311 yr by gogger

it's not rocket science guys "READ THE SMALL PRINT "

says 100% original pressings no re issues , then says below ,  this is the 2nd issue 1970's version , i'm confused.

 

yes, I see that now

says 100% original pressings no re issues , then says below ,  this is the 2nd issue 1970's version , i'm confused. about for posts came in at once missed the above

i'm getting confused with the thread to ,

Same as always it's a case of "buyer beware"......Seller says "mega rare" - for a second issue - really? $810 bid f.f.s...

MODERATOR - Please delete this thread, I was wrong in the original post

Something strange here. I cursory Google search would enable anyone to identify this as something other than the highly valued original. Someone is being conned but it may not be in the obvious way we might assume. Really marvellous record though. Where was it first played etc?

MODERATOR - Please delete this thread, I was wrong in the original post

Actually I don't really think you were George. The seller should have listed it as a 70`s press in the title or further up in the actual listing and not after the line "100% ORIGINAL PRESSINGS -  NO RE-ISSUES!"

its something that a lot of people would have missed.

Edited July 22, 201311 yr by Guest

:huh:

 

I got £24 for Robert parker - I caught you in a lie - Nola - vg++

 

£37 for Big Maybelle - Quittin' Time / I cant Hold on - Rojac vg++

 

on ebay yesterday . I'm gonna change my name to -Lucky Fookin Eddie !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I may as well sell all my proper records for Fook All and buy some cheap boots to re-sell (yes I'm grumpy!)

 

 

Cheers

 

Lucky Eddie

strange bidding history

''100% originals no reissues'' is clearly misleading.

Well then this surely has to top the Tomangoes at £324 (crisis averted thanks to the SS scrutiny treatment), as the highest selling boot of all time then. Right?

 

"Rare boots" are really a situation where its "as much as the buyer is willing to pay", since to most of us they should be worth f***k all compared to the original. But I guess for a certain class of collectors in this scene if it looks close enough and isn't nearly as high-ticket priced as a true original artifact, these things are ok? As someone who's not been collecting rare soul too long (certainly not as long as most of you) I bought my fair share of pressings at the start, but knowingly so. I just wasn't ready to make that much of a financial dive into it, I suppose. But as its been mentioned on here in the Tomangoes boot post, a lot of these have really horrible sound quality. Granted they haven't been on the block so long, but for my money's worth if I was happy enough to purchase mostly represses of the rare sounds I love, I'd rather give it to someone like Outta Sight who seem to at least do a great job of mastering them. 

Only ever seen a couple of the original presses of these and the last one was when John Vincent played it at the Central a few months ago.
What would an original copy fetch?

Elsewhere the seller has stated:

 

I was told this was a 2nd pressing from the 1970's - and thus considered it a vintage pressing from 40 years ago - and an original of this version of the pressing - certainly not a contemporary reissue...I apologize for the confusion.

 

My italics.

Edited July 23, 201311 yr by Godzilla

B side is the best side IMO original 800 to 1000

Used copies have been selling in the 1000 range. A M- one got nearly 1300. I got one a while ago from a well known collector/dealer on this site after wanting one for years. I first heard the record 20+ years ago when I got the comp "tear stained soul" on (forgot the reissue label). Blew me away - both sides - even with the misguided stereo mix. I didn't know that it was a Northern Soul record at the time. It blows up the club when I play it out here in Seattle...worth every $ or quid I paid.

Actually I don't think I've ever seen an original Don Varner WD Only the black Quinvy's..

 

But is anyone really expecting these rock, pop and psych dudes to have a detailed understanding of northern?

Elsewhere the seller has stated:

 

I was told this was a 2nd pressing from the 1970's - and thus considered it a vintage pressing from 40 years ago - and an original of this version of the pressing - certainly not a contemporary reissue...I apologize for the confusion.

 

My italics.

I can't see this on the listing but in any case a bootleg is just that and should be mentioned - except of course Ebay won't allow boots to be sold (ha)

 

"2nd issue 1970's version'' is also misleading. Is this a mega rare version of the 60's classic none of us knew to exist?

Edited July 23, 201311 yr by Mister Fish

an original of this version of the pressing 

 

You can break down a lot from this text. "Pressing", for example, is a word with a different context to northern collectors. The word "version" could imply that its some kind of different recording than the one commonly known...something that could actually excite a lot of buyers if such a thing existed. Seems all around that the guy just simply doesn't see these things under the same microscope that we do. Still though, we'd assume that regardless of how its worded... and with a soundclip, label scan, and so many guides both online and in print available to (and usually in possession of) buyers of northern soul... that nobody in their right mind would bid up that much on it. But someone did, and chances are that even though the fine print was a bit confusing to this scene's buyers, it most likely was just someone who had the money and really wanted it, regardless of where, when, and by who it was pressed up. 

I remember the shock that went around years back (90's maybe) when somebody sold a Lenny Curtis bootleg for seventy pounds.

 

Honestly I don't see any difference in somebody selling off old bootlegs for a fiver, thirty quid or seventy quid or eight hundred quid.

 

Where is the line at which point the soul fraternity jumps up in alarm and says " we must protect the fools from paying too much for a bootleg" ?

 

Is it too much to pay 20 pounds for an old boot? what about 40 quid is that too much? Is the line that shouldn't be crossed at £99 ?

 

At the end of the day the seller is offering an illegal item for much more than what was originally paid back in the 70's - so the amount the buyer pays is only relevant to them. Unless you have some emotional attachment beyond monetary value, they are valueless 

 

Sorry if my logic has spoiled all these " Shock, Horror" tabloid type threads                 

 

 2    s

Here is a picture of the boot

Is it too much to pay 20 pounds for an old boot? what about 40 quid is that too much? Is the line that shouldn't be crossed at £99 ?

 

Easy one this. No bootleg is or should be worth more than a tenner. end of.

I see the price/bidding has been reduced dramatically since this thread. 

;-)

I see the price/bidding has been reduced dramatically since this thread. 

Unfortunately, it is only one bid that had disappeared ($888). so this means that the present leading bidder at the moment ($26.27) has a massive proxy amount in hand, slightly less or greater than $888.

I think a $10.00 bid accidentaly went in at $1000, and I'll bet the withdrawn bid was only supposed to be $8.88

Cheers

Mick

The seller is on a Facebook group and has had lots of comments that's why its been reduced personally i thought it was lazy listing[wording]

£20(ish) is ok, it is a hard boot to get and I got offered £30 for my copy a few years ago. I must admit, I do collect the harder 70's boots like Eddie Parker 'I'm Gone', Lenny Curtis (this copy came in a proper 'End' sleeve!) etc and have a small box full just for a bit of NS nostalgia!! 

Edited July 24, 201311 yr by Soul-Slider

Back at almost £200     

£20(ish) is ok, it is a hard boot to get and I got offered £30 for my copy a few years ago. I must admit, I do collect the harder 70's boots like Eddie Parker 'I'm Gone', Lenny Curtis (this copy came in a proper 'End' sleeve!) etc and have a small box full just for a bit of NS nostalgia!! 

 

It's actually not a hard boot to get though, people shouldn't really pay more than £10 for it, neither is Lenny Curtis.  Eddie Parker is pretty scarce but not worth anything like the price it sells for.  Something like Rufus Wood "Before 2001" is a rare one.

$810 MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM Strange

500 +  im not having that....

My favourite sound of all time and one I would never sell.

It only takes a few seconds these days to authenticate records, specially one as blatant as DV. So in my opinion the seller knew exactly what he was doing sending all those mixed messages in the sales blurb. He's just about made his position defendable by talking about the 1970s.

Whether the buyer's now embarrassed at being fleeced or couldn't care less because he's got more money than sense, I have no idea.

Cheers.......Pete

I first heard the record 20+ years ago when I got the comp "tear stained soul" on (forgot the reissue label). Blew me away - both sides - even with the misguided stereo mix.

The LP was on Charly Records and the recording came directly from the original master tapes and Quin Ivy himself. They were transferred onto DAT and brought back to the UK (along with an original copy of the 45 which went into my collection!). It wasn't until I was played the tape version (I worked at Charly at that point) that I noticed that it was a different take (not mix) to the released 45...the brass is distinctly different and more pronounced. There were also some unissued tracks of which a few made it onto that series of (x5) LPs.

Quinvy is certainly a contender for one of the best looking black label stock copies ever...and there are no WDs...thus making the bootleg easy to spot. Great label...very collectible...and I also urge folk to listen to Don Varners, "The Sweetest Story" on South Camp...incredibly Soulful vocal and production.

_{And what about this.}

 

_{https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Lester-Tipton-Masqueraders-This-Wont-Change-How-Grapevine-GRP-138-/111022932710?pt=UK_Records&hash=item19d97b82e6#ht_1043wt_1170}

Edited July 27, 201311 yr by Wally

I read these threads all the time and every time I come up with the same answer. The people that buy these records have too much money or they really don`t care about what anyone else thinks. Is the information out there for all to read and research before spending your money? As with Wally`s link above [Morning Wally] it probably will sell to someone who has too much money and really doesn't care what anyone else thinks. Also if E-bay as has been stated are so against bootlegs then surely if the listing is mis-leading all the details can be checked upon receipt and returned. accordingly and as we all know E-bay always lean towards the buyer.

Edited July 27, 201311 yr by HARRY CROSBY

I agree with Pete, the problem lies in the mixed messages in the sales blurb.

 

Just took a look on popsike at found another from two years ago with the exact same wording:

 

Wigan classic and still filling dancefloors today. This is the 2nd issue 1970s version

 

No wonder there is confusion when the seller writes 100% Originals and then copy and pastes someone else's description. A case of lazy listing rather than deliberate attempt to confuse in my opinion.

Edited July 27, 201311 yr by Matt Male

Seller is a member on here and used to be on a fair bit, shame he hasn't joined in with the thread

it's not rocket science guys "READ THE SMALL PRINT "

Well said Arthur!

I once bought one of these just so I could get a decent recording for personal listening. Unfortunately the sound quality was bloody awful and not fit for purpose.

B side is the best side IMO original 800 to 1000

well the b-side gets a lot of plays at the moment but TSF is much the better side for the northern scene IMHO of course

Always remember my first introduction to Ebay 'Joey Deleronzo-Wake Up To The Sunshine Girl - Mi-Val I was up to £500 and had an email from the seller saying 'just to let you know the labels are reversed' I think it went for £520. BUYER BEWARE