Does no brand on the tag always mean it's vintage?

passionkiller · Post by **passionkiller** » Sun Jan 25, 2015 4:53 pm

I was bumping around ebay and I found a shirt that looked vintage being sold for really cheap. My first thought was obviously that it was fake in some way, but everything I've read about it and seen on the pictures supports that it's actually quite old and worth more than it's being sold for.

The tag, which was visible in the photos, was one of those frayed, no-brand tags that just has the size and washing instructions. It was also one of the raglan, three-quarter sleeve deals. It's also a 50/50 blend of polyester and cotton.

The only print on the shirt was the band logo, which actually led me to think it was fake, because it had glitter. It had the rubbery-looking texture, but the glitter makes me unsure, as I've never seen a vintage shirt have glitter ink on it before.

What I essentially mean to ask here is if a tag having no brand on it always signifies that a shirt is actually old, and if glitter ink is characteristic of a fake.

Post by **jimmyj** » Mon Jan 26, 2015 1:14 am

Can you post a link to the tee/tag in question or photos? We'll take a look. Thanks

oscar · Post by **oscar** » Sun Feb 01, 2015 11:53 am

Sounds like an iron on which is why it would be cheap.

itsallgood · Post by **itsallgood** » Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:35 pm

oscar wrote:Sounds like an iron on which is why it would be cheap.

+1

zargosh · Post by **zargosh** » Fri Apr 08, 2022 2:00 pm

The answer to the original question is "no." These tags are both from 2016 tees

Defunkd

Re: Does no brand on the tag always mean it's vintage?

Re: Does no brand on the tag always mean it's vintage?

Re: Does no brand on the tag always mean it's vintage?

Re: Does no brand on the tag always mean it's vintage?