What is the origin of Frank Thomas NNOF?

[lowpopper]

Has anyone ever figured out where these cards actually went to? Did they go to packs, complete sets, dealer exclusives, promotional items, retail team sets?

I only ask this because I just bought a collection from a man who was a regional manager for Friendly's in the late 80's/early 90's. I have heard "East Coast distribution" in the same breath as the Thomas No Name many times, but never and concrete examples. There are plenty of claims/stories on the internet about the origin but they will remain theories until they are proven.

Friendlies operates exclusively on the east coast, fitting into the lore.

So in this large, mostly oddball collection. I found a box of about 50 unmarked sealed packs. I opened 3 packs so far, as seen in the scan. The cards are absolutely MINT. Each pack contains 3 of the same player and a Friendly's promo contest flyer with an August expiration date.

A "collect X number of coupons" based promotion usually goes for a few months and the cards had to be made prior to the packaging. This leads me to believe the cards were produced early in the year.

Did I find what could be "IT" or am I getting excited for nothing here? Someone with some some verifiable knowledge please chime in.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4691/39490395431_89499dedd9_b.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4693/25620508688_f7b0a0f5fd_b.jpg

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

I'm certainly not saying you won't find the unicorn in there but I would think that if something as specific as Friendly's packs were a reliable source we would have heard about it by now. Just rip them and find out.

Arthur

[ALR-bishop]

Greg-- if you have not seen it, there is a very long thread on the Thomas card, how it occurred, other cards impacted by the defect, and theories on distribution, on the PSA CU board. If you have not seen it I can try to post a link to it.

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

Here it is.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/709331/1990-topps-frank-thomas-nnof-revisited-introduction-to-my-theory/p1

[ALR-bishop]

Thank you, Sir Arthur

[WillBBC]

It's a long read but it's one of the most enjoyable card related threads I've ever followed closely. Definitely worth the time!

[swarmee]

Yep, that's a critical thread. I don't remember ever hearing of the promotion from Friendly's being related to the Thomas NNOF rookie though.

Can you send me one/couple of the Friendly's coupon cards though? I have a lot of fun memories as a kid eating their ice creams. I will send you back something cool as a thank you.

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

Yes, in the annals of cardboard threads, that Thomas one is a first ballot Hall of Famer. Just a wonderful read for anyone that loves the hobby and discovery.

Arthur

[West]

So far there are no verified reports of any NNOF in anything regular wax packs. Not cello, not jumbo, rak, factory sets, vending, or to my knowledge, Friendly's promotional packs. I think we would have heard about that. Sorry! Might as well crack them all open anyhow!

[savedfrommyspokes]

I saw the link to this in a previous thread, but here is a video of a guy pulling a NNOF Thomas card from an unopened pack.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbWZQAWbAJ4

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

I saw the link to this in a previous thread, but here is a video of a guy pulling a NNOF Thomas card from an unopened pack.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbWZQAWbAJ4

That was the one of the worst fake rips I've ever seen.

Arthur

[West]

I hate that video, they are just trying to sell overpriced jumbo packs. There are so many fake NNOFs out there as well as a ton of misinformation about the actual provenance of the card.

[ALR-bishop]

By the way, welcome aboard Mr West. Tell us what you know

[ALR-bishop]

I found mine inside a plastic prison

http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/jj555/Bishop539/img252.jpg

[insidethewrapper]

Does anyone know when the 1990 Topps Thomas NO Name was first reported ? By chance I'm looking at a Oct, 1991 Beckett Monthly featuring Frank Thomas cards and there is no mention of it in the article or in the price guide.
If it was in packs etc. early in the production run it should have been reported in late 1989 or early 1990 in the hobby publications and later listed in price guides. I'll continue to check my publications.

[West]

By the way, welcome aboard Mr West. Tell us what you know

Does anyone know when the 1990 Topps Thomas NO Name was first reported ? By chance I'm looking at a Oct, 1991 Beckett Monthly featuring Frank Thomas cards and there is no mention of it in the article or in the price guide.
If it was in packs etc. early in the production run it should have been reported in late 1989 or early 1990 in the hobby publications and later listed in price guides. I'll continue to check my publications.

I've been following this card as well as the other 13 blackless errors for quite a few years now. A common refrain heard in discussion of this error is that it is an "early print run error that was corrected quickly". I agree about the corrected quickly part, but I've yet to see concrete evidence that it was an early print run. The nearest evidence you would be able to find 27 years later would be anecdotal - a first hand account of a pack pulled Thomas NNOF shortly after the 1990 Topps release date. I've yet to see anyone come forward with such an account.

The rumors of an east coast distribution are very accurate as it seems 95% came from there, though I have seen a report of someone pulling the Thomas in Las Vegas.

I'll also say that the other 13 errors seem to be exceedingly rare as every year goes by and none of them surface. One would think that the Biggio and Carlton Fisk especially will gain quite a bit of value to registry collectors of those particular players as they are both a pop 3 or less on PSA. I know that the person - Joe (RookieWax on CU) - that pulled the 5 NNOFs in the Collector's Universe thread has at least 1 each of the blackless Biggio and Fisk that are BGS graded. I'm also aware of one other person, in 2014/2015, that got a Thomas NNOF, Biggio, Fisk, Hart, Morris and Russell out of 10 wax cases (that's 200 boxes for those counting). Those are the ONLY NNOF/blackless errors pack pulled out of all the 1990 Topps since 2009, that I'm aware of. "Rare" does not even begin to cover the odds. "Saucywombat" on CU has several of the blackless errors and Ross, the creator of the thread, has the Biggio at least.

I've been trying to find these cards either through buying unopened or hunting them down on any online marketplace. Buying unopened is probably the worst way to go about it, and has resulted in a massive amount of kindling for my woodstove.

[ALR-bishop]

Great info. Thank you Mr West

[jp1216]

From the CU board:
http://www.billripken.com/bucket/nnofsheet.jpg

[West]

I forgot to mention, there is a user named Gigfy on CU and freedomcardboard that has a few of the blackless including the Biggio and the Thomas. All ungraded so not in a pop report. Guy pulled them out of packs in NY in 1990 sometime. Biggio total pop is probably around 6. 3 on PSA, 2 on Beckett, 1, maybe 2 raw copies. I know Ross sent his copies of the blackless in and PSA screwed up and labeled them normal '90 Topps, not sure if he ever got it corrected, so it wouldn't show up in the pop report.

Definitely less out there of the Fisk. Pop 1 on PSA, 1 on BGS, and that's all I know of.

The blackless cards are of more interest to me than the Thomas. The Thomas is out there, it's a known quantity (A BGS 8 ended tonight for $4500). In 1990-1991, Thomas became a star in short order. Because his cards were popular early on, and the NNOF being an obvious oddity and hobby sensation by 1993, meant that probably at least 50% of the total NNOF print run were saved from the trash heap or the attic. I don't think you can say that for the other 13 errors. It makes total sense that they would be so rare. Because so many of those cards from that era are worthless, they get thrown away all the time. That's why I find them so interesting, because probably only 10% of the original print run of those cards is out there. And probably more get thrown away every year.

I would guess the original print run of the NNOF and related errors was 600 sheets. 600 cards of each error. I base that population on the existing pop reports of PSA, BGS and SGC graded NNOFs (around 290 combined), subtracting 10% for crack/resubmits. I figure another 200 NNOFs never saw the light of day - either thrown out by moms, lost by kids, destroyed by water damage, fire or accident, or just stuffed in a box and forgotten about by someone who didn't read Beckett. I'd guess the remaining 150 NNOFs are out there in raw form. I see about 2-3 per year pop up on EBay.

People often estimate the total NNOF population at around 200-300, but the population reports already show that many, and I don't think there are that many crack and resubmits on the NNOF. It's just too coveted a card (I don't think everyone is comfortable cracking open a holder) and I feel like the crack/resubmit game is more for vintage cards. I also feel that people always underestimate the massive size of the 1990 Topps print run.

Chances that there is still a NNOF out there lurking in a wax pack? I'd put them at less than 50%.

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

I feel like grandpa Biff Tanner saying this, but, one day, someone's going to be offering 1990 Topps unopened that they themselves have pulled Thomas NNOF cards from. It's going to look like a solid opportunity and they may even have a decent reputation. Stay away. The collation of 1990 Topps is like a Swiss watch. If you know the sequence, you can pull a Thomas rookie 6 or 7 cards out. Meaning, even if you're actually opening legit blackless packs, your odds of getting a Thomas are very low. Got it, buttheads?

Arthur

[swarmee]

Well, lowpopper sent me 5 unopened packs of these when I only asked for the Friendly insert card, so I really appreciate it. I got two packs of Randy Johnson and three commons. Now I have to figure out something I think he will like as a return piece of the trade... it will be mailed tomorrow. Thanks!

[Rich Klein]

I wish I still had the letters we received from collectors in 1990-91 who received the Thomas out of the pack while we were working on exactly what that card was.

I have no doubt from my memory that these cards are legit, were put into packs, and more importantly it was just a printing fluke which make the NNOF. Since we were a publishing company in those days, we had tons of people with printing experience. I still remember we showed one of our pre-press managers the card and he said the error was a printing mistake and was absolutely legit.

Rich

[West]

I wish I still had the letters we received from collectors in 1990-91 who received the Thomas out of the pack while we were working on exactly what that card was.

I have no doubt from my memory that these cards are legit, were put into packs, and more importantly it was just a printing fluke which make the NNOF. Since we were a publishing company in those days, we had tons of people with printing experience. I still remember we showed one of our pre-press managers the card and he said the error was a printing mistake and was absolutely legit.

Rich

Thanks a lot for your response Rich. I've been working on something - independently of this thread - regarding this card and I may PM you for a bit of information at some point.

An educated opinion from someone with pre-press or plate making experience would be very helpful as I am always looking for more opinions on these cards.

One thing I might note on the print variation vs. printing defect discussion. Many people have termed the NNOF and the other blackless errors a "short run print defect". When I think of print defect, I think of fisheyes, ink run, solvent drips and the like. The most convincing theory that I have seen put forth regarding the cause of the error contends that the error was the result of a bad plate, which in my opinion is quite different from a print defect. According to those with printing experience, that is the only way that this error could be exactly reproduced in quantities in the hundreds. The cause of the plate production error is still in dispute. The most likely hypothesis that I've seen (from forum member Steve B) is that a piece of tape or paper blocked the negatives from being exposed onto the black printing plate when the plate was made. This theory makes a great deal of sense to me given the conditions required to produce an exact replica of the error over a print run of 400-1000 sheets. Also, when looking at the physical shape of the error, it appears that tape or paper could very well be the culprit. Looking at different examples of errors in the "Show me your...print variations" thread that were caused by solvent or water drips, this fact becomes fairly indisputable.

I wholeheartedly agree that the error was indeed a printing mistake and not an intentional move by Topps to recreate the Fleer FF fiasco or generate buzz. At the same time, I think that knowledge of exactly how this error occurred is beneficial to collectors who want to reach an understanding of what constitutes a simple print defect (fisheye, etc), a print variation (an actual change in the printing plates, such as the different Fleer FF versions) or a print error (the player's name mispelled, wrong team, etc).

If we accept the conclusion that the error was produced with its own set of printing plates, and then had to be corrected by producing a new set of plates, I would be inclined to characterize the NNOF and the other dozen errors as true printing variations (not just a random "print defect"), worthy of their inclusion in the PSA registry.

[steve B]

Well, it's limited but I do have experience in most of the departments of a small print shop.

I worked in one in High school. While I was technically there to do cleaning, the place had us do other tasks after our regular work was done, sometimes before if things were busy enough. So I got cross trained in everything eventually. To them it was handy to have extra help available if someone was hurt or sick. Generally though the other guys would slide into the tougher jobs, and I'd get into one of the easier jobs.

I had a piece of art I did made into a small poster, so I've done original art. (After the yearbook company cut it in half :mad::mad::mad: )

I helped a couple times in the camera room. - Yes, literally a camera that was room sized. Lighting and original art on a large sliding holder, camera in the wall, and darkroom behind the camera to develop the huge negatives. Other than the size and ability to scale the size of the resulting negative it's just like operating most other cameras.

When the camera guy drank a bit too much and "cleaned" the camera room stirring up a ton of dust just before shooting a big job, I got to spend a few days fixing the masks with some special whiteout or tape. Interesting stuff, semi transparent red scotch tape that would block the light used to expose the plates.

I helped a couple times in the platemaking room, another biggish job and even essentially untrained I helped get it done a bit quicker. Made probably 5-6 plates?

My last week one of the press operators got hurt and I got to run a 35" Heidelberg sheetfed press. They didn't expect I'd be as fast as the regular guys, and told me to just concentrate on quality. By the end of the week I was doing pretty well on speed too.

I got to do a lot of stuff in the bindery. That was "my" area to keep up with (and the stockroom, but that's not anything fancy) I didn't get to do any setup work, but ran a bunch of the machines. The only ones I didn't get to run were the cutters, but they're simple and I was around them every day for a bit over 2 years. In a later job I ended up going back there and repairing one of the cutters (I did 11 years of hydraulic repairs)

Also did a bit of shipping/receiving, plant maintenance, carpentry, painting....
But no front office work, like cost estimating or sales etc. (I don't count the hour watching the phone while the office people had a meeting about something. It didn't ring, so it was pretty much just sitting there. )


Topps I think farmed out some of the printing at the time, and was more of a high production lower quality sort of shop. They also did FAR more proofing than we did. The handful of proofs I saw at our place were basically photo mockups of booklets done from the masks and hand folded/stapled.

Steve B

[West]

Hi Steve
From everything I've read, Topps subcontracted printing until around 1983-'85 and then brought most if not all of it in house from then until the early-mid-90's (haven't researched beyond '93 and have no interest to).

Because of this, and the clear evidence of an east coast distribution, I believe the Thomas NNOF was printed at the factory in Duryea. The biggest challenge has been trying to figure out if it was a first run error or something that occurred in the middle of the press run. I've gotten first hand reports of the NNOF being pulled from a pack as late as April 1990 which would have been well into the press run if it had come straight from Duryea to the retail display rack. But it very well could have been sitting in a store room for 5 months before the pack was purchased.

[toppcat]

I'm not entirely sure what Topps ever printed in Duryea but would love to find out. Len Brown once said in an interview they did so "much later" (referring back to the beginning in '66 there) but they would have had to reconfigure the plant to do so and late 80's/early 90's were a time of economic issues for Topps. I do know a lot of the lithographers they used historically were out of business by 1984 or so, some a lot earlier than that. It's a bit of a mystery what they may have printed themselves vs third parties after they lost their long time printers.

Has anyone ever seen anything from the 1980's or 90's indicating where they printed cards? I think they closed Duryea in 1996, or at least drastically cut back their lease space at that time, although a nearby plant in Scranton remained (and remains) open but I think they just made candy products there. It makes Ring Pops today apparently.

[West]

I've seen evidence of some of the less mainstream stuff (usually products associated with motion pictures) being printed in Ireland. The rest of the sports product from the 1980s that I've seen came from Duryea.

[toppcat]

I've seen evidence of some of the less mainstream stuff (usually products associated with motion pictures) being printed in Ireland. The rest of the sports product from the 1980s that I've seen came from Duryea.

Yes, they had a huge facility in Ireland-I think they still do. They would occasionally import items from there for the US market.

I got the feeling the items Len Brown was talking about were the "new" cards made from 1994 onward but could be mistaken. When you say they came from Duryea, if you are referring to the copyright on the wrapper, that does not indicate where they were printed but rather where the packs were assembled with cards, gum and wrapper coming together. Some products would still have a Brooklyn address after they switched almast all the wrappers to Duryea in mid '69 but nothing was packaged there after 1966. For some products, it would seem using NY as their legal address meant more sense than PA, maybe due to licensing or regulatory concerns.

[West]

From 1982:


"Space creature helps unemployment
Aug. 27, 1982

DURYEA, Pa. -- Topps Chewing Gum Inc., riding the success of the year's most popular space alien, says it will delay seasonal layoffs and recall other workers to meet the demand for 'E.T.' bubblegum cards.

Topps Chairman Arthur Shorin said Thursday the firm also plans to market other products related to the successful Steven Spielberg film later this year.

'We knew the movie had every chance to be a hit, but we didn't know how big of a hit,' Shorin said. 'We're delighted to see how it turned out.'

Topps spokesman Norman Liss reported 'excellent sales' of 'E.T.' cards, which it markets in 30-cent packets of 10 that also include a slice of gum and a sticker.

Liss said 25 employees who had been furloughed by the firm's Duryea plant will return to work Monday and the company will delay its usual seasonal layoffs to keep up with the demand.

The plant, which employs 675 people, makes the bubblegum sold with the 'E.T.' cards and the firm's more famous baseball and football cards.

Liss said the 'E.T' cards are printed 'in different places, which we don't say for security reasons.'

Shorin said Topps will introduce an 'E.T.' sticker album in the fall and plans to market plastic figures filled with candy by Christmas. Other products, which Shorin declined to describe, are on the drawing board.

'We have a good ability to maximize on a property such as this,' he said. 'At this point, we think good combinations are possible.'

Neither Shorin nor Liss would comment on how much revenue the company expects to realize from its 'E.T.' product line.

Shorin said the company obtained the bubblegum card rights to 'E.T.' long before the motion picture's release, 'but we had a great deal of faith in Steven Spielberg and his organomething America needs. It's a refreshing character.'
"

[Rich Klein]

The "Tiffany" Sets were all printed in Ireland as were the Traded sets and I think 1-2 other products. So in the 1984-91 realm there are definitely two different printing places (if not more).

Rich

[West]

In Topps' earliest annual report available online (1997), under "Production", they detail there that:
'High-quality paperboard is sent directly to outside printers by the Company's suppliers."

http://getfilings.com/o0000812076-97-000007.html

Annual reports are available for every year since Topps went public in 1987. If someone were to acquire a report for any of the years from 1987-1994, it should detail their production methods in the same manner in which it did in 1997.

[lowpopper]

Ok so does anybody have a DEFINITIVE answer on what packs the error cards made it into?

[ALR-bishop]

If someone had a definitive answer I wonder if they would share it on a sports card chat board or just be out buying those cases, boxes and packs :)

[lowpopper]

If someone had a definitive answer I wonder if they would share it on a sports card chat board or just be out buying those cases, boxes and packs :)


I completely agree but the answer is out there somewhere. The cards have been out for 27+ years now and there is only maybe 100-200 of them. I am beginning to think that they may not have come out of packs and could have easily been found in a Topps scrap pile....just a thought.

Moreover, if there was over 100 finds so far, why is there no written account of a pull from a pack/set type of medium?

The Bush-Yale card never came from packs....

If possible, someone please cite an exact documented account of a true NNOF find.

[Rich Klein]

"I completely agree but the answer is out there somewhere. The cards have been out for 27+ years now and there is only maybe 100-200 of them. I am beginning to think that they may not have come out of packs and could have easily been found in a Topps scrap pile....just a thought. "

I will reiterate (And I wish I still had the letters) --we got more than enough letters at Beckett to verify these cards from packs. Now what type of packs or when they were in packs is a different issue but they were truly in packs. I was the E&V guy so I read those letters.

Rich

[West]

I completely agree but the answer is out there somewhere. The cards have been out for 27+ years now and there is only maybe 100-200 of them. I am beginning to think that they may not have come out of packs and could have easily been found in a Topps scrap pile....just a thought.

Moreover, if there was over 100 finds so far, why is there no written account of a pull from a pack/set type of medium?

The Bush-Yale card never came from packs....

If possible, someone please cite an exact documented account of a true NNOF find.

You really need to take the time to read through the comments on this thread which summarize nearly all of the public knowledge of this card. Your questions above have actually already been answered.

I will echo what Rich said. As I mentioned before, they were found only in wax packs. I have spoken to several people who can attest to this directly, not to mention the person in the CU boards who pulled 5 of them and documented it in that thread. As for population, there are already some 250-275 graded NNOF and I estimated the original print run at 400-1000.

[lowpopper]

I am currently on page 11 of 21 on the long CU thread...wish there was a spark notes version. :(

[lowpopper]

OK I read the whole thing. :D

The CU board reports various Blackless errors coming from "retail wax packs" and "holiday factory sets". The only claims specifically for the orange sheet errors have been from the wax however.

I cracked open a holiday set and I can confirm there are blackless examples in there. I found these:


Sheet A
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4658/38877943115_fd0724dd01_b.jpg

Sheet B
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4676/39776680081_722ea0cb55_b.jpg

[swarmee]

You could ask the Tim Wallach hoarder whether or not they have additional "blackless" 1990 cards. He has about 500 of them.
http://timwallach.blogspot.com/2011/02/1990-topps.html

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

There is a confirmed source. To the person that said no one would be posting it on a message board, you are correct.

Arthur

[ALR-bishop]

The Wallach collector's address is a legal office. Wonder if his firm specializes in Monopoly defense work.

Arthur-- is it true that the confirmed source is on Red Reddington's Blacklist ?

[jacksoncoupage]

I completely agree but the answer is out there somewhere. The cards have been out for 27+ years now and there is only maybe 100-200 of them. I am beginning to think that they may not have come out of packs and could have easily been found in a Topps scrap pile....just a thought.

Moreover, if there was over 100 finds so far, why is there no written account of a pull from a pack/set type of medium?

The Bush-Yale card never came from packs....

If possible, someone please cite an exact documented account of a true NNOF find.

Correct on the Bush Yale card. That was misinfo by Beckett.

The NNOF Thomas (orange sheet blackless) absolutely did NOT come from factory sets. That was an angle by sellers in the mid 90's to move surplus. But as you've seen, there are plenty of other near or partial blackless cards from other sheets to be found in them. I pulled that same Drabek out of one years ago.

These cards have been pulled from packs in the last 10 years, but shy of live videos of a sealed case being broken that contained them, you won't find 100% guaranteed evidence of it. From my memory, a guy on the CU boards named "RookieWax" had pulled at least one at the time of that thread. I believe he is still active on that board. He had the accompanying/connecting ones to go with it. The thread had been derailed because he decided to start offering packs for sale from the batch of retail/grocery display packs he pulled his from.

[jacksoncoupage]

A couple things to keep in mind with these cards.

There exists other degrees of missing black ink on the affected area subjects.

Thomas missing little chips and pieces of his name, Marcus Lawton with small blackless pieces, etc. So there was some type of transition between the original plate/print flaw and correction. Or perhaps the minor missing-black cards were a precursor to the famous ones.

The green sheet subjects are also prone to missing black ink. Chris Gwynn, Roger Salkeld, Jerome Walton are a few I have pulled (from junk boxes/hand collated sets, not sealed product). These, like the orange sheet cards, are not faded or "going blackless" but missing smaller sized areas of the card's black print.

And last year a seller on ebay had found (on ebay) a full, uncut, blackless "dark blue" border sheet. No black ink whatsoever. He had them cut and sold off singles. I believe a Dale Murphy was the big name on that one. He may have a few commons up for sale still.

Oh and this is 100% second-hand information from almost 20 years ago but I was working in card shop and whenever the subject of errors or odd cards stuff came up, one of our regulars would tell a story about how he bought out a local arcade's vending machine stock of cards. He described them as machines that dispensed cards for $0.25 or $0.50 (don't recall qty or exact price). Anyway, he bought these cardboard boxes filled with junk, mostly 1990 Topps. He had sorted through them looking for Thomas and Juan Gonzalez, eventually he came across a Thomas and was "disappointed" to discover that it had most of his name printed on front. He described it as either missing the beginning or ending of his name (FRANK THOM ), I do not recall, but remember trying to visualize it. I've grilled him about this over the years and he claims it was never sold and sits buried in a box in storage.

[steve B]

A couple things to keep in mind with these cards.

There exists other degrees of missing black ink on the affected area subjects.

Thomas missing little chips and pieces of his name, Marcus Lawton with small blackless pieces, etc. So there was some type of transition between the original plate/print flaw and correction. Or perhaps the minor missing-black cards were a precursor to the famous ones.



More likely they came just after.

The obstructing object, whatever it was - and I'm thinking it was some tape- was removed from the platemaking machine, but not as well as it should have been, leaving a few bits behind. Not at all a stretch --- Hey, that black plate you made is a mess, we need a new one NOW!
Later on, maybe a lot, maybe a little they realize the new one isn't great, and get another. In between the platemaker has really cleaned the machine, (and probably the whole work area, nobody likes getting in trouble over stray tape)
And the next plate is just fine.

[West]

Pretty good notes and stories here. Many of you have already seen these but I'll throw in some scans to match names to faces. The "partial missing black" run has been mentioned as a "precursor" or perhaps more accurately, a "postscript" to the NNOF error run.

A partial missing black Frank Thomas:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/1JWMGUw3CE5beHdpCwO2bDn6qiwPyvB27gQa8oTxVx_R0cnsPo dz7PpFhZSC9N_iple48fo24PifXg9C02CFIcHE28yi5df60TSH pjCKA80RApAI-18Rro-9aMXQaiqxCKEAcyJ89j5HgIZCReT2QnPDcwt-Nlsdg4AQPU-ACvFNY-APa8CaHD3B0VWeHacxxERoy7RCIafxCWGT6sjzKSAufRVqh8m7 9dpdB-aWhkiVsoS2zUZ1Ip6GdQOiCSFx3Pd-nK5N97jiG6-WYDRcBenClyBOGHBg-wqwL2qHJNJxxb5AFBTAJ1_wsPmLloeOp37D0mRupjSzPneXH4Y 0TKqBKr67vqBLImnm3pZlud3oZej1L_fVbG4n0VuzHAp7V6tKd s_l3ljETW4r7Kxm7xTKcbyzxQLcuZlfZoOwBflc6jn3MNQxNEQ U_uHd2ubXj3xICgy9jK6rTliYPqGopO1LDYEoQgmUi2RJpo5tu TpFfIuFWMTabNDBbLvgURGZHj1uPZyDUjEKQs-UX_g7jShkU5zmZSSHgcEaTulHGzkuR3kBHXrshxNSEezhUfDFW fz74NRrg9RSanHLNMF-mmmMMosMfN_jZxW4o8AVscb3cdYcwqjNuYN6pihusTz2GY_NN5 6bNchFRoXbsc7alQy4QnT3oxRK=w608-h1008-no

A properly authenticated BGS "partial missing black" owned by Joe:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/XNARCCrsk4uudOYcKx2fVrndlPipKHuaHZaNJ92a9qmz00OMRP V-59h5Zfp6U995brj30WvTBroq-L3Qsy1499E6Az2_ytL2OUoIDYvz5VZxZaW0M1x_-t9HUuHE_ZmepXgBBS3ujJVq73LKMXT71KETSaxCKLw0MzkVTQY ypsmdj56krzQg1XxLL11n9YoGGxq0X0mwr-QwaZlOVkEXf8HUM3rHHb6S5yi4cIV5t1NQ-Ugf8EDO52JdQVSIjseYK5pLfn5PPjTmWp0zFQeVjrl_L2JfmKI nZP7ZHbU44MRxfh6mnw6KeBaMDn73VTC38ECnnCYwmaQv4Zzhl N5TnGQnJjlbFhHLteTZlvOh9QBRdrG4qe6ukHxOoKrevwd56Ho CXt1ofg6LtXCkEbq1BA2tMrmj74JjeioHhBXEuLoKpvNanh5R3 IDd7UppAR1-17IZWc1ekJY_nYWDo9bowJFoiOHGGMKGC0szpknfSjusckrZhO Vtw2QNytA_OVsHHAc6dkNNMWWeePJON-AwDdj-6ysWOZoH62JYDYrLwNwErdTSnkQQ-0eQUixvDOPPQVwboIJf6geDacAZVOsKBpWFWNbIPbCWvQ82p3g 6I9IoZSUTG-N4K0XrKw4vq90j_LKjhqN9Etx9oUcNqvEKCll9f3LZ56l9=w78 7-h1166-no


3 known cards affected by the partial missing black error run (I believe the Magrane could possibly be a 4th):
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/88acDKXijWXOIvFEVvWUdnG_sUOPlBpbdWmZYeEoijt3cbxjan byIpEMAwgpGztckMpBPJm-wKFJunWNes3eccg2Llz1Tg-rONIhUDo_1tah3tPUyGDF_6uH31OguoOXvu-NEgnUnKOM6VtPe2zs7du5wiUN2RehZZQG-jt8TZ9yvlosoM8DjUhtEUo98Tf2vwaEJkt-U5Q9plZf0PB3gQZGSWfcPxWEbHADgU0Ba7P2X2U7Mo0CxcVc84 0eIe6asEY00Sqknj3BuTB4seWiQ_uHd2OG_NVJ5ZcMZV6lzhXA rSLQJrYUWdBOY7WYqKvChOyvT3lemy7XDV3zmsFxklcCFpOMju cVKI4Bw1LdbVfVmHR4L7yhrNhgr-sCZB8fyGPJ96mKUQMD4n42dWb7akv_KD7Ga4GOIL8Rr0o9ESSb 5APgcbAEq8aNCopgjd-uQVCqyyz9XTaRX7UJ4WLi5yM5T4cXlGdOCC7TBcPt7pTSrzl-6J_Lj5-BQuo_Hf4U4OSScvukdbOV231G6tbM9yDV7eBR_bqJVh7mw2fYA cvl2nIq_UzgGDfDnBly5K962DrnpRHW6nIkqiU5GYuke59xGmA Mu3hHjZxFOk0IxVBcoy1jHOrUW1g9bkpnRHcfjiXqsD-BGvEvvxcLhAsdwbUSJ5gtlGdg=w1616-h721-no

Notice that the Tapani has a very faint, vertical/slightly diagonal blue line running up the card that passes through the middle of his face. Check out an actual blackless Tapani with the exact same blue line which tells you the printing plates are directly related:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/qgDwAAhjPnHDDhI-H2ny_6LJ-mzrv1K8k0jA4y_n50yh86w45rp-2FpAtpeiphsGRxP40gvQS8MLnS24rnc4DXQnuwtAk-QzbcPoGaoEDU0Yt-ymgj0iTr4xEyi4ItPGvXPvn9XGrk7lTCIaCl_S39yZT1w7DIiy sqaonQ98_pA_BNwxDdy-l44-v_inO0l88QyPzGEvpONH_Vfar1-YprC1O9Ye4zhkDKpLrRAzobYVIrDhVrbMevTDXlFnxPeuMDz-p-eizvW1EUrt92pvu47rBGDxbhFU5wNf5yYO3BdEkcj1OP_-eheHGuAiyELOEgY34RpqB-G6PwWkCK7CNmlneENg_DyKJo3Ji9tzbZ9UlKPFTMkN2gO8S72n JFOzl6FaX_z1BWax35L-sCCYtaAGUfMy1CLgrThbS02_BQhAQIu5tkZbZ3wzfqh70PwuZc ldynmSZ1uvUX5Q7ivKqkOSel1gSw4OFehQ4ehAbYQlKl5beHMY wKi6NsbwO4q_ncWwjvAAuptd4zKpvmLQeGkvVo1c98FYy5utza 5nWKaSTIU3Bf0Vc1tbfs74fGerp9BNh60g-TreLdrhFtpWmBLsKk7dUc9VUx0snbtblyPNFaaLbdQwy1kM0vf jEzB2eUiXfxp-88Bbz0b1fa_j5_z_h1k0G6uz=w875-h1166-no

A run of different Marcus Lawton errors pulled from the same case by Joe (RookieWax). L to R, a blackless Lawton from NNOF run, a partially missing black from the related error run, and a partial missing black variation:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/xKSuZ3YFV6rPUFYyyaQyVn7ZGslaVXzzAJErRIR7kloOH4qMZn LDPMqThahL9vZM-b9YxZGUM6qF8j2IvEX5XzhouX9q49IGUB9hJMVUifIfYar47SC JoZvD-fwI1P4P7L87VfzpGVigEr9S0LIqnHaXFtHd3HaI7nQ1HwK0cxJ 9YnnPt-6Y6KseOX2Ag8uhdwseo6oTbjGPY0eiXv5q9KgFGuDy40XfUB7B XFP9igrReH4_2uz9aeTW8dvTqmfslWj2Gg4TfnptJkpPpYptaJ n--iYZS-k9VgCROw5fLFj0Bju6ojfK55mfPU_akZ2-jKCAqqzEONcOe6MR2L8CfcjER7Cp5nxZIEsyPrGiJEybdEam6O G4dEesaiki_41bNngs--QrKsNaUW_NO27Wjs-m2G7JYcLn81RPZchF0Q6XYb0ZO05D9aZp2BcpmJthjyqpHqlcc oCKRhjDz6uakKU4fPPJgsn-3qqMXL3iAVduZ_9dcC1R_-Usp6bzbZW61FYci9GHH9jRlltML-nX9plY189SuRjraThLfzp0U_889K4_At_y-uwW3Lxaz9mkD9pOsc2rCEl4i_ukwHdHgHgZIHWajwhfsA8KDJA H29SMbUtt9HVraCGvw0o1Xx4t5Z-DpWInHUAs2fGKtqqhi6InIfKvBdSV=w1023-h507-no


A slight correction to the post about green sheet errors only containing border breaks. Here are two (of 4 known) partial blackless Chris Speier that I own:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/F7avSZXjOvocTr5DygSoXhg1bk1-vivRUF92Ub2hW4JBUoHCplR3oDZ496EiKijPIeHb8Kej_vXFMf 6lbgxzQZZnYHEK928kARaJ7P0f5e00mXAlftlAfys3M3Vza2hn mS8TbJQnDmrInWD2P7AHs0LSCxksriTvLrf4PEcpSI5KJOEPT3 AXsC8kmlKm9pc9Kikwnyx6p0qAKhOVBDOviQJNHjFBQHoeuk1W ZAqGXf1h7bO1pAQ9dMe40u2ufiY0gwSI4xYF1Fdm9zYPJccPtp XBpu0LXwURIE57SoecMjr7Np0-QZyRuTIdpdoq7iLzds9hYnI49-mptR_R-fZmPCjVNXf2rXYjrT06296l76ZS2HB2B_W1ZxAq6rHbkh0xujm nxd0z0pwPXfh3ZoDAo0YAYCFvfj1o_dXw3RrUVZya1NwEil1jt KQVG0bLAJIIm0kYsRzc2dLyUSGjhnk3HtaDJ5q8I9ZJLUwrRhm OSbJZ8a3l8z9_U-9ofwqytnq3MsTHe9lGnUPm2CrBlKVaEr2KRVlK4ywKN-dGxUK1HpatDhFMAv8cKwJGdjcGUDbuqEiz8_7ONevD7x83yNhj YdDH0uOM58SmORg-BasNR4ZAafu_P16xoeq95VpyR9_RlXOKoMJTFbNLFWckIvZ0vQ iAhl6wtXCM=w1616-h1058-no

Other partial blackless from green sheet:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/YL3TQyPFCxfm2S1wFhG-7qbZfc1zqPQxVmQOB-I4yemB1N8Y-1dycA7zl6SI0kc9AqC28e9MdF-x60ckpk7kd3E507i16oLtX6J2xaLcB1SD9JFRrBp1RIlU-E-LEmOAIGENoj_xiLClH9aQTZvoo_RxuzMpL5Ul6BVreE-gAFyao5dvvd0fGrgX-SdeUsGACPpE3YqBspGl5CUTqPUQ9PHtMGez_VXslF-P2X1lkrMox1g1R_gLvpvnwDOE9FLS2QX34Z3l9xMpddbbzpiUl xUwmLqWk2lvzMzCv0r6UCVEZB18F_B6kyMdbsJFyVjTszYLwkE _YVEMtFjnRWdd2jaTEH1j-XuKPbrd32h6d2qRDkwu58Eir-ITAqbkflzUHM2emRMBzHKzOL3QOTw_8t6CcWNas9hdtaNMZApy JatbJIT7ce93_KEjRzIsDacH8gOYB8B267Mt1MGEkF8jAXkNFh ZJ7l0FF3fORAKyFP_IhDzyE6RaYl8-tt4ZJAHDA06iuJmUwXPyvxwOtSWaxzBZoQj9TcI47i1mqsE-1epaQbsL2subjVzgu9vJvrCuMsS0zpv4TpFpH68G9_WAEyMO8c oD4vrcPzBitpc6Ts0zX4LbqIEferj7TDcF72mYEGxIVScCtt3Q qpSZFCRNP4FBal5odosH=w823-h1166-no

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/E1Cp15aZBUnB1sSDpbBG5-hBvBK0xa0Z811se8Id0tEjR26hNX0g_g01PtdCZTMlUl3eoOy_ p4Y342pMZXmiOjHl37NBzfyBu2BaBnPTSJ53VLfo10kopdbheh NgrcFk8XfbAOvxqddUE0dKjtps4Fgravdg0xJ0vZgCFp-zjUJKu186R8WkGH-vHdS6VQszy7QVBEGsq8gd7Lk97dYn2plfDR5xxG3g2aZoipO7J MbJkj6kFP2-T7YQiCWdhd-Cwkpu0rYPM-RnAVpEnynOjI7GiYeG2u6vhJ0U_Hr8gq1Q7oRj3xrCmVZw_LD6 7XsrSwtDCtQeG1-rhwcNX7aUP_wG70HWdfLUF3Vdv-lDsk3e9ATI2-QxMxHMeqvKZ69nSQoLsUbCN0y8QTXDTROysfOm4UUcCPXtclcu 6pNpaFBWlW8bQIL_TMz4pjGtlNGBFaERwAeesHOLw4D8bvXyVP BsdxYjwgjOFk1qbXyJM1PLtvnDg7ADe4-KyXPv2cogLHfgFgmQHx9xALTuvv-grfPu43_FPoT0GDLPK5mPS4lT0G_RVFAZDXhAtLr8p5sipoWs5 EY1W159ZNG5X8DFtjnP5K5dZaQkVAyziHAWJ4Y068XD_uvPMXL WsAI7tuR6D4WuoKdVeP3BXjHisweLpPQkQWFtJI-t=w822-h1166-no

A normal Leibrandt (left) and a Leibrandt with border breaks (right):
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/ikTR78e9BqDQMUdS8LRJTmdGVlPG7EbFSSnWslcwB1myFJsFMe lu3BDfWHFKKp7ZClWDbuOOzcf7FlCPebHL4yVQ-5aJ3GuGvHPY0wkvqkrAfn442dG2AjwzzFmyPwqgtuZuB2_MoTd _N1Zx0aQ8_Twvb5RJyFWL0DmobBH8DWPmzbYeA_J2vLkL0I6IN RvgAFUEDQZM9xnb-hDmtaXTpVjtp1pCCgZsZdZTPFPflS1vZx9TmdPF4PVvwVD59Ub 6bQIzfBMyQGt3s1inqY43bjSU7Li05uCStiTNqUBPWq4BNF-49tV332Ic31u80VvDW0Sf3vp8sxkNs_mY4OjRUJ2mRIuUcYXtg Q7woH__3-SewhHh6dST2OmKV5Ch71QiNazIh8ZkjdY_3agtBq3J0PHoD3x1 KU6ce8n1dRCmPw3R25x5Wni_u1FxKNpnGRcjOSE4p0gEU6E0Dt qj_C-tyliyyZz0LoKavDTvw9cQyWjuC_x2pw5hp8eqsYUQ8ZusNyZLe H1kNN97QsyQaCkO7WuRiffYnP6sWAXqgH8PFX3WX7GlZz8-yzkGTea6N6YpDt7oDTT6obTadn7sZSZ-Zf8iCF4PX7Xh0ZjBWVKawzHt5573ITnSBqx6I00GLVtj8oH0PY OW5VEUMUyAYxDRDqeCv-Xfys6U=w1616-h1100-no

[jacksoncoupage]

A slight correction to the post about green sheet errors only containing border breaks. Here are two (of 4 known) partial blackless Chris Speier that I own:



I didn't mean to say the green sheet blackless cards were only border breaks, I meant that they were clearly missing all black ink in certain areas, not fading out or grayish, etc. Cited border breaks as an example since Salkeld, Gwynn and Walton had missing black ink noticeably affecting their borders.

[West]

Gotcha, that makes sense.

I do believe I have read that there are differences - in terms of the causation of the error - between the cards only missing border breaks vs cards that have both border breaks and cloudy/blackless areas in the photograph/nameplate/team name areas. Not versed enough in offset lithography to remember the differences, and I could be wrong.

Either way, quite interesting to see the Drabek and related errors. Quality control on the factory sets couldn't have been great...

[jacksoncoupage]

Here's the link to the guy with the blackless dark blue sheet cards:

https://www.ebay.com/sch/m.html?_odkw=&_ssn=leema191&hash=item284b88f705%3Ag%3ANzAAAOSwL5BZvYns&item=173065959173&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2046732.m570.l1313.TR11.TRC1.A0.H0.X1990+ topps.TRS0&_nkw=1990+topps&_sacat=0

[lowpopper]

The purpose of this thread is to unveil which packs/sets are producing
which errors....and ultimately where the NNOF might possibly be found.

I got my A & B sheet partial blackless from this set here. The orange F sheet was basically unaffected.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4759/39789665221_f182b1b6ef_b.jpg

[jacksoncoupage]

The purpose of this thread is to unveil which packs/sets are producing
which errors....and ultimately where the NNOF might possibly be found.

I got my A & B sheet partial blackless from this set here. The orange F sheet was basically unaffected.


If you or anyone else opening factory sets of 1990 Topps are interested in selling me the Topps Magazine topper/inserts, send me a PM.

[West]

The purpose of this thread is to unveil which packs/sets are producing
which errors....and ultimately where the NNOF might possibly be found.


The NNOF came out of boxes and cases of hobby wax or retail/grocery wax, from the east coast. All known NNOFs came from those two sources and there is no documentation or proof of pulls from any other type of 1990 Topps product (ie cello, rack, jumbo, factory sets). It really doesn't get any more specific than that unless someone can determine whether it came from an early print run or not.

[West]

There was discussion earlier about whether Topps farmed out printing to other print shops. We can now say with 100% certainty that the entirety of the 1990 Topps set was printed at the facility in Duryea.

------
"Only 100 cards were made, and they were all presented to President Bush,'' Topps spokesman Ken Liss said.

Yet Hull said he found one in a wax pack.

Liss said that was impossible, because the regular baseball cards were printed in Duryea, Pa., and the president's cards were printed in New York. Topps has demanded that Hull return the card, but he has refused.
------

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19900305&slug=1059335

[Rich Klein]

On a side note; we discovered there were actually "200" George Bush 1990 Topps cards issued when another 100 emerged into the market a couple of years ago. They were printed a bit differently. I do think a few Bush cards snuck into packs.

Rich

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

I'm not sure that rules out other locations. If the majority of the cards were printed in Duryea, there's no reason for Liss to qualify his statement by mentioning other places. He's making a general point and brevity is usually the go-to weapon of choice.

Also, I'd be surprised if Liss was with Topps in 1990.

Arthur

[Rich Klein]

LISS *Was* the PR Person for Topps in 1990. The Liss family was not replaced till late 1991 early 1992 by Bob Ibach and Timm Boyle.

Regards
Rich

[West]

I'm not sure that rules out other locations. If the majority of the cards were printed in Duryea, there's no reason for Liss to qualify his statement by mentioning other places. He's making a general point and brevity is usually the go-to weapon of choice.

Also, I'd be surprised if Liss was with Topps in 1990.

Arthur

It would have been very unwise for Liss, as PR man for a large publicly traded company, to lie to the media when commenting on a lawsuit. The statement does not 100% prove the cards were printed in Duryea, but it's as close as you can get to an acknowledgement of that fact.

The Topps Archives blog has done the best detective work figuring out who printed what for Topps.

link-
http://toppsarchives.blogspot.com/2015/06/printers-link.html

According to the blog, Topps had been doing some of its own printing in house starting in 1965. There were several outside printers that Topps used in the vintage era - Lord Baltimore Press in Baltimore, Zabel Bros in Philadelphia, Stecher-Traung in NY and CT, Chromographic Press and A. Hoen & Co in Baltimore.

Chromographic went under in 1971. A Hoen in '81, Zabel in '82 and Stecher-Traung in '85. Lord Baltimore was done with Topps by 1960.

I have one source that says Topps began outsourcing printing in 1994 and their first annual report confirms that several years later. That gives us a window from the early '80s to 1994 where Topps could have printed the entirety of its product at the facility in Duryea.

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

I'm not saying that Liss was lying. I'm saying that he wasn't being directly asked how many locations did they print the 1990 issue in. He was being asked about the Bush card so inconsequential information to the point he was addressing wouldn't have been brought up by him. His point was simply that the Bush card was printed in a separate place from the 1990 issue.

For the sake of argument, let's say 85% of 1990 Topps was printed in Duryea and the remaining 15% wasn't printed in New York. There's no reason, and no reasonable expectation, for Liss to mention where that other 15% was printed in the context of the Bush conversation.

Not to mention that he already proved his memory wrong with the 100 card statement.

All I'm saying is that his comment serves to purpose in furthering or disspelling any theory.

Arthur

[West]

Posting scans here so folks can discuss.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1990-TOPPS-414A-414-FRANK-THOMAS-ROOKIE-RC-RARE-ERROR-NNOF-TRUE-1-1-MUST-READ/372496340533

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/6iwAAOSw86NbzlPr/s-l1600.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/8pYAAOSwDX9bzlPF/s-l1600.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/4twAAOSwx2FbzlP4/s-l1600.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/Q2sAAOSw0i5bzlTT/s-l1600.jpg


Looks like a legit card to me.

[West]

I'm not saying that Liss was lying. I'm saying that he wasn't being directly asked how many locations did they print the 1990 issue in. He was being asked about the Bush card so inconsequential information to the point he was addressing wouldn't have been brought up by him. His point was simply that the Bush card was printed in a separate place from the 1990 issue.

For the sake of argument, let's say 85% of 1990 Topps was printed in Duryea and the remaining 15% wasn't printed in New York. There's no reason, and no reasonable expectation, for Liss to mention where that other 15% was printed in the context of the Bush conversation.

Not to mention that he already proved his memory wrong with the 100 card statement.

All I'm saying is that his comment serves to purpose in furthering or disspelling any theory.

Arthur

I'm confused when you say "His comment serves no purpose in furthering or dispelling any theory". The whole point of this thread is finding out the who, what, when, where and how of the circumstances in which the NNOF was created. The "where" is a very important piece of the puzzle for a number of reasons that I'm not going to get into.

You say "he proved his memory wrong with the 100 card statement". His memory was not wrong. Topps did not know about the other 100 cards until they surfaced later in the lawsuit. So Liss did not know. The only reason that statement was incorrect was because the 100 cards went straight to President Bush and the other 100 went out the back door of the factory or into wax packs unbeknownst to Topps. Liss can only comment on information that Topps makes available to him.

All the circumstantial evidence pointed to Topps former printers going out of business in the early '80's and Topps taking their printing in house from the mid-80's to the mid-90's. We then have the mouthpiece of Topps say that the regular issue 1990 Topps cards were printed in Duryea. The statement, combined with the painstakingly gathered evidence from the last 4 decades indicate that there is a very high likelihood the NNOF was printed in Duryea. You are correct, it is not 100%. I appreciate a healthy amount of skepticism but this seems like quibbling to me.

[Rich Klein]

The 100 George Bush cards was what was officially noted in 1990 as being produced. The second hundred (sheet of 100) which surfaced were not known until they hit the market place and were produced differently than the 100 known Bush cards.

Now, Ken Liss and his family were not regarded as good PR people in 1990 BUT in this case, they accurately mentioned what Topps had told them.

The Bush question is a good sideshow but not germane to the Thomas discussion at this time.

Makes a better subject itself

Rich

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

I'm confused when you say "His comment serves no purpose in furthering or dispelling any theory". The whole point of this thread is finding out the who, what, when, where and how of the circumstances in which the NNOF was created. The "where" is a very important piece of the puzzle for a number of reasons that I'm not going to get into.

You say "he proved his memory wrong with the 100 card statement". His memory was not wrong. Topps did not know about the other 100 cards until they surfaced later in the lawsuit. So Liss did not know. The only reason that statement was incorrect was because the 100 cards went straight to President Bush and the other 100 went out the back door of the factory or into wax packs unbeknownst to Topps. Liss can only comment on information that Topps makes available to him.

All the circumstantial evidence pointed to Topps former printers going out of business in the early '80's and Topps taking their printing in house from the mid-80's to the mid-90's. We then have the mouthpiece of Topps say that the regular issue 1990 Topps cards were printed in Duryea. The statement, combined with the painstakingly gathered evidence from the last 4 decades indicate that there is a very high likelihood the NNOF was printed in Duryea. You are correct, it is not 100%. I appreciate a healthy amount of skepticism but this seems like quibbling to me.

You're correct and I misspoke when I said his memory was wrong.

I can't explain it any better than my previous 85% analogy. This is certainly a significant piece of circumstantial evidence but it by no means puts the issue to bed, like you suggested earlier.

Arthur

[West]

Thanks for clarifying Arthur. Let’s push forward with our efforts aimed at digging for more clues.

[swarmee]

Posting scans here so folks can discuss.
Looks like a legit card to me.
Looks real to me too; maybe it got a heavy blue color pass or something so the name is partially showing up. Kind of like the 1982 Blackless"ing" cards that had some black ink on the card. If it's a real 1990 Topps card, I have no problem calling it a NNOF error. Maybe BGS or SGC will holder it.

[swarmee]

*double post; hate this computer*

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

West, is that your card? I would think it would need to be examined in-hand to really form a judgment. Tough to see the surface of a card in a scan or photo. The accuracy of the area is pretty good though.

Arthur

[West]

Not my card. I have a partial blackless Thomas, the John Hart blackless error and the Jim Acker error so I am still looking for the Thomas and the 10 other errors.

Very true that the card would have to be examined by an expert under magnification to verify it has not been altered in any way. I'm guessing there are ways to recreate this error either by using a regular Thomas, a blank front or altering a NNOF, though the latter method would be questionable as the NNOF in what looks to be PSA 6 or 7 is already worth in excess of $1500.

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

I'm sure someone could do it with carefully placed paper tape and the proper chemical. Just a matter of what the surface would look like after the procedure. I also don't know what a proper NNOF surface looks like under magnification. Did the process of leaving out the black ink also leave a different surface gloss? I imagine only someone who has examined one would know.

Arthur

[West]

There was discussion earlier about whether Topps farmed out printing to other print shops. We can now say with 100% certainty that the entirety of the 1990 Topps set was printed at the facility in Duryea.

------
"Only 100 cards were made, and they were all presented to President Bush,'' Topps spokesman Ken Liss said.

Yet Hull said he found one in a wax pack.

Liss said that was impossible, because the regular baseball cards were printed in Duryea, Pa., and the president's cards were printed in New York. Topps has demanded that Hull return the card, but he has refused.
------

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19900305&slug=1059335


I must correct the record on this. Tonight I spoke with a former Topps employee who wishes to remain anonymous. According to him Topps did NOT have printing capabilities at Duryea in 1990. They subcontracted out to other printers and had a company representative doing quality control at the printing house. The uncut sheets were then sent to Duryea to be cut up and assembled into packs, boxes and cases before being shipped out to retailers.

Additionally, despite rumors to the contrary, this person did not believe that the NNOF was a "first run" printing error. His reasoning was that there was meticulous attention to detail for the first print run and more than a few people had to sign off on the first proofs. He believes that the error occurred sometime later in the production cycle as a result of some obstruction in the printing press. I didn't get into the finer details of the theory of the error causation (obstruction in the press vs. obstruction on the negative during plate exposure) as he was not directly involved in platemaking and printing.

He estimated that quality control at the printers pulled a sheet once every 1000 sheets to check for errors. This may explain how 500-1000 NNOFs slipped out into packs.

He did not remember the error itself which is not unusual considering the massive amount of production occurring. 1990 was probably one of the peak years in terms of total base set production run. Also, this person was employed at Duryea and the error would have been caught at wherever printing was occurring.

The conversation was illuminating and it was quite interesting to speak to someone who was on the inside back then. This person gave me permission to share this information but otherwise wishes to remain anonymous and enjoy retirement and I will respect his wishes and not share any other details regarding him or his employment.

[sthoemke]

Does anyone know which of the 1990 baseball packaging were distributed first/last in the production run?

-wax packs
-cello packs
-rack packs
-factory sets

[West]

The NNOF came out of wax. Have yet to hear of anyone getting it out of cello, rack packs or factory sets. As for the order of production I have to assume it was mixed throughout but I am unsure.

[bnorth]

You have to love how eBay sellers are always looking for a moron.:D

It is technically a NNOF card.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/323520872353

[ALR-bishop]

http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/jj555/Bishop539/img631_zpsbe3acf4f.jpg

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

This is all you need to know: five of the six "frequently bought together" items for that listing are 1990 Fleer Jose Uribe cards.

Arthur

[Sierra79]

I'm sure someone could do it with carefully placed paper tape and the proper chemical. Just a matter of what the surface would look like after the procedure. I also don't know what a proper NNOF surface looks like under magnification. Did the process of leaving out the black ink also leave a different surface gloss? I imagine only someone who has examined one would know.

I'm not a printing expert...not even close, but I can't imagine how someone could replicate the ink's color set against the print dots, especially under magnification. The color loss (or in the case of the subtle increase of value) on the arm would seem virtually impossible even if altering an actual NNOF since you would have to match (at a magnified level) the gradual change in shade. As far as the gloss surface, I would think it would lead to some kind of variance in the surface of the card by changing the finish even if only to a small degree. I would think it would be easier to forge a Van Gogh than forge a card like that - under magnification.

I wonder if the grading companies (assuming they determined it was authentic) steered away from it because they would have a difficult time deciding how to label it. I honestly think, if it's legitimate, they should give it it's own designation like 'faded name FNOF' just as the 1937 D 3 1/2 legged Buffalo is designated as such versus the '37 D 3 Legged Buffalo nickel (for anyone who collects coins).

[steve B]

Posting scans here so folks can discuss.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1990-TOPPS-414A-414-FRANK-THOMAS-ROOKIE-RC-RARE-ERROR-NNOF-TRUE-1-1-MUST-READ/372496340533

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/6iwAAOSw86NbzlPr/s-l1600.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/8pYAAOSwDX9bzlPF/s-l1600.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/4twAAOSwx2FbzlP4/s-l1600.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/Q2sAAOSw0i5bzlTT/s-l1600.jpg


Looks like a legit card to me.


I've looked at a bunch of stuff, and I think it's real too. I also have it on good authority that fading black without fading the surrounding ink is very difficult.


I actually can't figure out for sure what caused it.


The others are almost certainly from a big bit of debris, probably tape obstructing the plate while it was being exposed.

If it wasn't then, the next likely problem is a bit of debris in the press preventing that part of the plate from being inked. But the most common of those would be a bit of paper, which of course gets inked, transfers, and looks totally different.

Maybe a bit of saran wrap type stuff? That should take ink too, but might not. Usually to repel ink the obstruction has to also hold enough water.

Most stuff like that is very transient, not usually hundreds or 1000+ impressions.


If it's something blocking the inking, then this could be within the first few impressions. Maybe in the first 5? I have a card that has an additional 4 uninked impressions, so it can extend that many at least.


But there doesn't seem to be a shadow of the border, which I'd think should be there.

I can't think there was enough damage that a strip of plate got ripped out. With the pressure required, I'd think the underlying cylinder would have been inked but printed poorly.


It could be a different blue plate that for some reason had the name on it when the rest didn't. That would be pretty strange, but then, it's Topps...

Fortunately, the card has clues!
There's a line from what's probably a plate scratch right near the left of the name plate. If it's an on-press obstruction, there should be cards with the same line.
Unless the plate got changed right after the obstruction.

And Topps wasn't great with registration, if the blue plates ever had the name on them, there should be cards misregistered showing a blue shadow of the name alongside the black printed name.

[West]

Hey Steve,
Thank a lot for the response. Always like hearing from someone with printing experience.

The line (plate scratch) you are talking about - are you referring to the dark line below where the "F" in "Frank" should be? Nearly all the regular NNOFs have this scratch, if that helps at all.

You mentioned the number of impressions (population) of the NNOF. One person with 35+years in the printing industry said that the error was likely caught at the printers after 10 minutes. He speculated that this would have created 700-1000. He said that if it were a small number caught, say 100, then the sheets would have been pulled and sent to the bailer.

What is consistent with this count is the former Topps employee told me that QC pulled uncut sheets every 1000 or so to check for mistakes and print quality.

[bnorth]

Hey Steve,
Thank a lot for the response. Always like hearing from someone with printing experience.

The line (plate scratch) you are talking about - are you referring to the dark line below where the "F" in "Frank" should be? Nearly all the regular NNOFs have this scratch, if that helps at all.

You mentioned the number of impressions (population) of the NNOF. One person with 35+years in the printing industry said that the error was likely caught at the printers after 10 minutes. He speculated that this would have created 700-1000. He said that if it were a small number caught, say 100, then the sheets would have been pulled and sent to the bailer.

What is consistent with this count is the former Topps employee told me that QC pulled uncut sheets every 1000 or so to check for mistakes and print quality.

I would add that IMHO there is no way to alter a regular Frank Thomas card to look like the one you posted. I am no expert but did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.;)

It would be a very cool card to look at under a microscope and see what is going on with it.

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

I would add that IMHO there is no way to alter a regular Frank Thomas card to look like the one you posted. I am no expert but did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.;)

It would be a very cool card to look at under a microscope and see what is going on with it.

There's always a way. I've seen people remove the back from a non-baseball tobacco card and attach it to a T206 so well that PSA couldn't tell it was rebacked. If there's enough money to gain, nothing is impossible.

Just because we can't imagine how, doesn't mean the how doesn't exist.

Arthur

[bnorth]

There's always a way. I've seen people remove the back from a non-baseball tobacco card and attach it to a T206 so well that PSA couldn't tell it was rebacked. If there's enough money to gain, nothing is impossible.

Just because we can't imagine how, doesn't mean the how doesn't exist.

Arthur

Rebacking a card is easy if you know how. Removing a layer of black ink without doing anything to the ink below/around it in that specific year/brand card would be impossible in my expert opinion.

This card could be many different things but it is not a real 1990 Topps Frank Thomas card that was altered by just removing some black ink.

PSA has put many altered/counterfeit cards in slabs. Getting something by them is really not that hard. They are better than nothing but far from perfect.

EDIT: To ask, Arthur who are those people you watched reback cards?

[Sierra79]

Rebacking a card is easy if you know how. Removing a layer of black ink without doing anything to the ink below/around it in that specific year/brand card would be impossible in my expert opinion.

Agree 100%...minus any authoritative experience on my part. If it could be done then why not just completely remove the ink and send in a gem 10 example for grading. Removing an entire layer of ink would have to require altering the ink underneath/on top/and around it. Whether someone used a blank front, added ink on an existing NNOF, or removed ink from a regular card, under magnification (or frankly the naked eye) I just don't see it possible to hold up when examining each print dot. I can't even imagine the FBI being able to pull something off like that...unless they had the original printing plates.

If anyone can pull off something like that then please post some pictures.

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

EDIT: To ask, Arthur who are those people you watched reback cards?

It wasn't nefarious. They were doing it to prove a point, as well as altering the ink in numerous fashions on other cards and getting them into PSA slabs, again, to prove a point. They changed colors, removed text, just about everything you can think of. This is why I say that not being able to conceive of a procedure isn't the same as the procedure not existing.

All of those cards were cracked out of PSA slabs.

Arthur

[bnorth]

It wasn't nefarious. They were doing it to prove a point, as well as altering the ink in numerous fashions on other cards and getting them into PSA slabs, again, to prove a point. They changed colors, removed text, just about everything you can think of. This is why I say that not being able to conceive of a procedure isn't the same as the procedure not existing.

All of those cards were cracked out of PSA slabs.

Arthur

Thanks for the response Arthur. I have done pretty much the same thing and posted pictures on this forum. I done it to help myself and others from buying altered cards.

[steve B]

Hey Steve,
Thank a lot for the response. Always like hearing from someone with printing experience.

The line (plate scratch) you are talking about - are you referring to the dark line below where the "F" in "Frank" should be? Nearly all the regular NNOFs have this scratch, if that helps at all.

Yes, that's probably a short plate scratch, or a flaw on the mask (A giant negative the plates were made from.) And it should be on almost all of them, if not actually all of them. It would be interesting to see a regular one with the same mark.

You mentioned the number of impressions (population) of the NNOF. One person with 35+years in the printing industry said that the error was likely caught at the printers after 10 minutes. He speculated that this would have created 700-1000. He said that if it were a small number caught, say 100, then the sheets would have been pulled and sent to the bailer.

What is consistent with this count is the former Topps employee told me that QC pulled uncut sheets every 1000 or so to check for mistakes and print quality.


That sounds entirely plausible. We probably didn't pull sheets for QC as often as that, but we also weren't doing the sort of production Topps was - especially in 1990. Especially when I was on the press, although I did get almost up to speed with the regular guys. :D
What's especially good to know is that Topps was still using sheet fed presses, rather than web fed. (If the web press had a cutting station they still could pull sheets, so it's not 100% )

I'd be a bit surprised if Topps sent anything to the Baler in 1990. 87 through 91 there's so much out there for misprints. One Ebay dealer had a 5000 ct box of blank front/back cards, all from the same year.

[steve B]

Thanks for the response Arthur. I have done pretty much the same thing and posted pictures on this forum. I done it to help myself and others from buying altered cards.


Ben is the guy I asked about fading black. I already knew black was often impossible to fade, since it's usually a carbon pigment. I thought some of the modern dye inks might be different and Ben has tested a few different years and colors.


Rebacking is pretty easy, not easy to do well, but not hard.

Removing certain specific colors from an older card shouldn't be a problem on some sets, more difficult on others. T206 is probably pretty easy to take the caption off, Crackerjacks are probably very hard to change except for fading the red.


On a modern card like 90 Topps, you'd have to do that through the glosscoat, or remove the gloss and regloss the whole thing after. Maybe not impossible, but not simple.

[lowpopper]

Any conclusive update on this card with the faded/added name?

[West]

Any conclusive update on this card with the faded/added name?

The only thing we know definitely is no one in their right mind will pay anything close to $10K for that.

[Rdelmonico]

I've looked at a bunch of stuff, and I think it's real too. I also have it on good authority that fading black without fading the surrounding ink is very difficult.


I actually can't figure out for sure what caused it.


The others are almost certainly from a big bit of debris, probably tape obstructing the plate while it was being exposed.

If it wasn't then, the next likely problem is a bit of debris in the press preventing that part of the plate from being inked. But the most common of those would be a bit of paper, which of course gets inked, transfers, and looks totally different.

Maybe a bit of saran wrap type stuff? That should take ink too, but might not. Usually to repel ink the obstruction has to also hold enough water.

Most stuff like that is very transient, not usually hundreds or 1000+ impressions.


If it's something blocking the inking, then this could be within the first few impressions. Maybe in the first 5? I have a card that has an additional 4 uninked impressions, so it can extend that many at least.


But there doesn't seem to be a shadow of the border, which I'd think should be there.

I can't think there was enough damage that a strip of plate got ripped out. With the pressure required, I'd think the underlying cylinder would have been inked but printed poorly.


It could be a different blue plate that for some reason had the name on it when the rest didn't. That would be pretty strange, but then, it's Topps...

Fortunately, the card has clues!
There's a line from what's probably a plate scratch right near the left of the name plate. If it's an on-press obstruction, there should be cards with the same line.
Unless the plate got changed right after the obstruction.

And Topps wasn't great with registration, if the blue plates ever had the name on them, there should be cards misregistered showing a blue shadow of the name alongside the black printed name.

Just a question. Is the NNOF semi transparent? Like a tiffany stock??

[Rdelmonico]

Is the NNOF semi transparentlike a tiffany????
Posting scans here so folks can discuss.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1990-TOPPS-414A-414-FRANK-THOMAS-ROOKIE-RC-RARE-ERROR-NNOF-TRUE-1-1-MUST-READ/372496340533

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/6iwAAOSw86NbzlPr/s-l1600.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/8pYAAOSwDX9bzlPF/s-l1600.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/4twAAOSwx2FbzlP4/s-l1600.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/Q2sAAOSw0i5bzlTT/s-l1600.jpg


Looks like a legit card to me.

[swarmee]

I've seen some people call it a "blacklessing" version similar to the partially black 1982 Topps cards.

[Davidlisa]

There are many theories as to how these cards were made including the information on the PSA website. That one makes a lot of sense but it is only a very good theory. I know these come from wax packs at least, I don't know about anything else. I don't remember the year but I saw a NNOF pulled out of a pack at at the National, I think it was in Cleveland. Since this is the same year as the George Bush cards, I wonder if there is more to the story, anyway, great card.

[HalfNipponese]

I found 9 of these cards in a shoe box this weekend. Is it worth the money to get these graded. PSA said it would be about $75 per card. Is that normal for these? Thanks for the advise.

I pulled these card from rack packs back in 1990. My friend got the NNOF Thomas and I got these. I remember the day vividly as I was pissed that my packs had a bunch of "printing errors" on them. They went into the shoe box 30 years ago and were just uncovered this Sunday making room in a closet.

[HalfNipponese]

I struck gold again. Just found the Fred McGriff card. I’m up to a nice even 10.

[Extra Innings]

Does anyone know when the 1990 Topps Thomas NO Name was first reported ? By chance I'm looking at a Oct, 1991 Beckett Monthly featuring Frank Thomas cards and there is no mention of it in the article or in the price guide.
If it was in packs etc. early in the production run it should have been reported in late 1989 or early 1990 in the hobby publications and later listed in price guides. I'll continue to check my publications.

I've been looking through the '90/'91 Beckett's I have too and so far I'm unable to find anything in the price guide about 414A NNOF.

Although, a google search led to this article concerning the card including a price from the Jan. 1994 issue. Maybe that was the first time Beckett priced it..?

https://junkwaxgems.wordpress.com/tag/1990-topps-frank-thomas-nnof/

[HalfNipponese]

I've been looking through the '90/'91 Beckett's I have too and so far I'm unable to find anything in the price guide about 414A NNOF.

Although, a google search led to this article concerning the card including a price from the Jan. 1994 issue. Maybe that was the first time Beckett priced it..?

https://junkwaxgems.wordpress.com/tag/1990-topps-frank-thomas-nnof/

I have Beckett from 1993 and it lists the NNOF at a value of $15. I don't have the issue with me but it's the one with Jim Abbott in his Yankees uniform. I thought I remember them start to surface in late 1991 but it may just be my memory. I know they were discovered before I graduated high school in 1992 but I believe it had little additional value and was considered a printing error. Collecting took a pause for me between 1993 and 1999 so I could invest more time in the fairer sex.

[Hatorade]

I've been looking through the '90/'91 Beckett's I have too and so far I'm unable to find anything in the price guide about 414A NNOF.
Although, a google search led to this article concerning the card including a price from the Jan. 1994 issue. Maybe that was the first time Beckett priced it..?
https://junkwaxgems.wordpress.com/tag/1990-topps-frank-thomas-nnof/

I was texting with a friend a couple months back after his dad just dropped off some of his childhood belongings, which included some old Beckett price guides. I asked him about any of the issues containing the prices of the NNOF within them. The earliest issue he had with 414A is from March 1993 and the price was $6 and the price bounced up to $25 in the October 1993 issue he had.

[HalfNipponese]

I was texting with a friend a couple months back after his dad just dropped off some of his childhood belongings, which included some old Beckett price guides. I asked him about any of the issues containing the prices of the NNOF within them. The earliest issue he had with 414A is from March 1993 and the price was $6 and the price bounced up to $25 in the October 1993 issue he had.

That's kind of what I remember. I thought the regular card was something like $2 and the NNOF was $4 or $5 but again I'm not sure if my memory is accurate.

[Extra Innings]

I was texting with a friend a couple months back after his dad just dropped off some of his childhood belongings, which included some old Beckett price guides. I asked him about any of the issues containing the prices of the NNOF within them. The earliest issue he had with 414A is from March 1993 and the price was $6 and the price bounced up to $25 in the October 1993 issue he had.

Cool. Thanks for the information. I'll post again if I see something earlier than March of '93.

[isiahfan]

I'm confused when you say "His comment serves no purpose in furthering or dispelling any theory". The whole point of this thread is finding out the who, what, when, where and how of the circumstances in which the NNOF was created. The "where" is a very important piece of the puzzle for a number of reasons that I'm not going to get into.

You say "he proved his memory wrong with the 100 card statement". His memory was not wrong. Topps did not know about the other 100 cards until they surfaced later in the lawsuit. So Liss did not know. The only reason that statement was incorrect was because the 100 cards went straight to President Bush and the other 100 went out the back door of the factory or into wax packs unbeknownst to Topps. Liss can only comment on information that Topps makes available to him.

All the circumstantial evidence pointed to Topps former printers going out of business in the early '80's and Topps taking their printing in house from the mid-80's to the mid-90's. We then have the mouthpiece of Topps say that the regular issue 1990 Topps cards were printed in Duryea. The statement, combined with the painstakingly gathered evidence from the last 4 decades indicate that there is a very high likelihood the NNOF was printed in Duryea. You are correct, it is not 100%. I appreciate a healthy amount of skepticism but this seems like quibbling to me.

This is my card...happy to answer any questions, but basically what I have posted on eBay in the description is legit. I have had NUMEROUS people send me messages on the card and offer information.

As for those questioning the price....well I have sold and bought a few NNOF...never seen anything like this so why wouldn't it be worth more?

I could be way off....or this card could be worth $100K easily if it got slabbed as a NNOF or even a partial blackless....and hit the right buyer/auction.

And just as an FYI...I have had multiple offers...one as high as $3500...those educated about fakes understand this is an authentic unaltered card.

[HalfNipponese]

This is my card...happy to answer any questions, but basically what I have posted on eBay in the description is legit. I have had NUMEROUS people send me messages on the card and offer information.

As for those questioning the price....well I have sold and bought a few NNOF...never seen anything like this so why wouldn't it be worth more?

I could be way off....or this card could be worth $100K easily if it got slabbed as a NNOF or even a partial blackless....and hit the right buyer/auction.

And just as an FYI...I have had multiple offers...one as high as $3500...those educated about fakes understand this is an authentic unaltered card.

Very cool card. If I had the 10k to burn I would buy it. Someday it will get the respect it deserves.

[bnorth]

This is my card...happy to answer any questions, but basically what I have posted on eBay in the description is legit. I have had NUMEROUS people send me messages on the card and offer information.

As for those questioning the price....well I have sold and bought a few NNOF...never seen anything like this so why wouldn't it be worth more?

I could be way off....or this card could be worth $100K easily if it got slabbed as a NNOF or even a partial blackless....and hit the right buyer/auction.

And just as an FYI...I have had multiple offers...one as high as $3500...those educated about fakes understand this is an authentic unaltered card.

Cool card. I will say whoever you quoted in your eBay listing on what happened is wrong. There is absolutely no way what they said is really what happened IMHO.

[steve B]

Cool card. I will say whoever you quoted in your eBay listing on what happened is wrong. There is absolutely no way what they said is really what happened IMHO.

I agree about the dry ink cartridges thing. Simply not the way high production printing was done. Not even low production printing.

I do think the card is cool, and that it's probably an actual NNOF. Why the shadow of the name is there is a bit of a mystery, but I can think of a few reasons why.

The normal missing black is from a poorly made plate where part of it was obscured while it was being exposed. Sloppy work, and if someone said the platemaker was asleep I might give them that..

Adding the name to a new blue plate by mistake is possible. It's not really likely, but neither is letting a huge bit of tape or something get into the plate exposing machine. (Both are so very Topps though)

"Guys! The blue block with Frank Thomas's name doesn't have a name!"
"Ok, I made a new blue plate and fixed it"
"No! not the blue one, the black plate!"
"But you said blue.... "
"The block is blue, the name is black"

Now there should be "normal" Thomas's with the blue name showing under the black if the registration isn't right. I haven't seen one of those either. But if they messed up and "fixed" the wrong plate there should be some.

[isiahfan]

Cool card. I will say whoever you quoted in your eBay listing on what happened is wrong. There is absolutely no way what they said is really what happened IMHO.


Could you please be more specific because I quoted two guys basically...one ran printing for two large card companies and the other is widely regarded as the printing error expert in the industry. I am neither an expert in printing nor print errors, but trust what those guys have said.

[ALR-bishop]

The timing and positioning of posts 101 and 102 is interesting.

[lowpopper]

And we still have yet to see indisputable proof if these were put into packs or not. :D

:cool::cool::cool::cool::cool:

[bnorth]

Could you please be more specific because I quoted two guys basically...one ran printing for two large card companies and the other is widely regarded as the printing error expert in the industry. I am neither an expert in printing or print errors, but trust what those guys have said.

I would be interested to know who is the widely regarded printing expert in the industry.

The one that really makes me shake my head is they don't even have the sheet layout or cards on a sheet correct. Those can easily be found by looking at a sheet on eBay. When you have the easiest part wrong what are the chances the hard stuff is correct.:D

I am no expert but I have definitely stayed at a Holiday Inn Express.;)

[ALR-bishop]

I would be interested to know who is the widely regarded printing expert in the industry.
.;)

Me too. Maybe he could help explain and straighten out stuff in the variations thread and help us differentiate between variations, errors and recurring print defects. We really do need an expert in charge of this stuff.

[isiahfan]

"This card would have been one of the first no name cards coming off the printing press when it occurred. This was run on an offset sheet fed press that does not use dry offset inks but wet. Somehow the printing blanket got damaged during the pressrun and stopped transferring the black ink to the card stock. But what happens is this is 4/color process which means there were 4 blankets or more that might have been used transferring all the inks and when the black blanket got damaged the black ink was still on the other blankets allowing the Frank Thomas name to be there a few more sheets before it totally disappeared. If you notice all of the missing black is consistent with all no names like the missing Topps logo in the lower right corner. You are asking how I know this, I have been in offset sheet fed printing for 43 years and worked for a printing company that printed baseball, basketball and Pokémon trading cards for 19 of those. The process has not changed hardly at all during my years in it. The card graders need a printing expert in these types of cases but think they know it all!!! I believe your card is the real deal, hope this helps your understanding of how this occurred"

[isiahfan]

I've only seen one like yours before & it was in 1990 in Florida: a 1989 Topps card with a shadow name like yours and part of the wavy box with the name inside was shadowed also. Those are usually caught and only occur on one part of the 100-card sheet affected one; maybe two rows of cards. So when these errors occur the maximum that wind up on the 11 (vertical) X 10 (horizontal) sheets is 20-cards. I wouldn't doubt that an employee at the printer kept one for himself only, then it eventually made its way into the hobby.

From the 1980's- early 1990's base cards were printed with a dry ink. When the cartridge started running out a buzzer would sound. At times employees would literally fall asleep (printing was 24/7) and many sheets would print with partial black ink (always the first color to run out) as it was used more frequently on most year cards. That's what happened to your card. Most of the ink ran out on the bottom on the card affecting only the name. Since it was dry ink, it would run out on certain areas in different degrees before it ran out everywhere. Liquid ink doesn't do that. They used liquid ink exclusively since 1995. Employees were supposed to destroy every sheet affected by dry ink cartridges, but when some slipped through it was always DONE ON PURPOSE by the printer employees (paid minimum wage, so they didn't care).

This is how SO MANY wrong back, bland back/front cards wound up in the hobby from the late 1980's to early 1990's as well. It started with Kruk Cards buying ALL these cards from Topps (hundreds of thousands of them) that they sold in 3,000-5,000 count boxes in the 2000's-2015. I have a 5,000 count box of these & a few crazy errors!

[bnorth]

"This card would have been one of the first no name cards coming off the printing press when it occurred. This was run on an offset sheet fed press that does not use dry offset inks but wet. Somehow the printing blanket got damaged during the pressrun and stopped transferring the black ink to the card stock. But what happens is this is 4/color process which means there were 4 blankets or more that might have been used transferring all the inks and when the black blanket got damaged the black ink was still on the other blankets allowing the Frank Thomas name to be there a few more sheets before it totally disappeared. If you notice all of the missing black is consistent with all no names like the missing Topps logo in the lower right corner. You are asking how I know this, I have been in offset sheet fed printing for 43 years and worked for a printing company that printed baseball, basketball and Pokémon trading cards for 19 of those. The process has not changed hardly at all during my years in it. The card graders need a printing expert in these types of cases but think they know it all!!! I believe your card is the real deal, hope this helps your understanding of how this occurred"

That is actually fairly close to what could have happened. I don't see it as being a blanket problem that caused the error. My best guess though is really really close to what this person told you. The stuff you have quoted in you listing is so silly it has to be driving any serious buyer away.

If you don't know what a blanket is I am sure I have an old one from a Hiedelberg out in the garage. I can take a pic and post it if you want.

[isiahfan]

I've removed their names and credentials so they could not be easily identified...some conflicting info for sure...maybe even some board members....

[isiahfan]

That is actually fairly close to what could have happened. I don't see it as being a blanket problem that caused the error. My best guess though is really really close to what this person told you. The stuff you have quoted in you listing is so silly it has to be driving any serious buyer away.

If you don't know what a blanket is I am sure I have an old one from a Hiedelberg out in the garage. I can take a pic and post it if you want.

As stated..I know nothing about the printing process. I am curious what you keep specifically referring to in my description and why you are so confident in how the error occurred. To be honest I don't really care about how it happened...just care that one of the big 2 card grading companies will give it a NNOF (preferably) or Partial Blackless. I highly doubt my description scares away anyone..it's the lack of grading IMHO that is killing it.

[bnorth]

As stated..I know nothing about the printing process. I am curious what you keep specifically referring to in my description and why you are so confident in how the error occurred. To be honest I don't really care about how it happened...just care that one of the big 2 card grading companies will give it a NNOF (preferably) or Partial Blackless. I highly doubt my description scares away anyone..it's the lack of grading IMHO that is killing it.

It is beyond obvious one of your experts is wrong. You quoted the wrong one in your listing.

This is what a printing blanket looks like. The streaks are rain as it and me got wet when I brought it in from the garage. I took the pic in front of my bat rack that I have posted pics of several times on this forum. That means I am not trying to act cool and pretend I know what I am talking about.

There really is no way of knowing exactly what happened but it is easy to know what did not happen.

I actually think it is 100% real if that matters.

[isiahfan]

It is beyond obvious one of your experts is wrong. You quoted the wrong one in your listing.

This is what a printing blanket looks like. The streaks are rain as it and me got wet when I brought it in from the garage. I took the pic in front of my bat rack that I have posted pics of several times on this forum. That means I am not trying to act cool and pretend I know what I am talking about.

There really is no way of knowing exactly what happened but it is easy to know what did not happen.

I actually think it is 100% real if that matters.

I appreciate it....I am always happy to learn more about the process

[bnorth]

I appreciate it....I am always happy to learn more about the process

Honestly the biggest thing for me is. If I was buying a $10K card that is a only known printing error and had no printing knowledge. I would find someone that did, When they read what you have quoted they would laugh and tell the buyer to pass. JMHO

The top part of you listing is great. I also believe it had to be the first or really close to the first NNOF card printed. I could be wrong but it is my best guess.

[isiahfan]

Honestly the biggest thing for me is. If I was buying a $10K that is a only known printing error and had no printing knowledge. I would find someone that did, When they read what you have quoted they would laugh and tell the buyer to pass. JMHO

The top part of you listing is great. I also believe it had to be the first or really close to the first NNOF card printed. I could be wrong but it is my best guess.

I got ya...and I will change it....but I think we will agree to disagree on the influence it would have on an average buyer. I don't think most would buy it without it being slabbed (Sadly...and in many cases understandably... this is where the hobby has gone), and the few that would probably crap money and don't care. I think very few people without specific knowledge themselves would procure and take into serious consideration that of an expert as the value is directly related to the certification. Next show I go to I will get it slabbed...even if just as a regular card...and see how that affects the sale?

[bnorth]

I got ya...and I will change it....but I think we will agree to disagree on the influence it would have on an average buyer. I don't think most would buy it without it being slabbed (Sadly...and in many cases understandably... this is where the hobby has gone), and the few that would probably crap money and don't care. I think very few people without specific knowledge themselves would procure and take into serious consideration that of an expert as the value is directly related to the certification. Next show I go to I will get it slabbed...even if just as a regular card...and see how that affects the sale?

I do agree with you on it being in a slab, especially if you could get it into a PSA slab.

I will PM you with a little more info.:D

[steve B]

It is beyond obvious one of your experts is wrong. You quoted the wrong one in your listing.

This is what a printing blanket looks like. The streaks are rain as it and me got wet when I brought it in from the garage. I took the pic in front of my bat rack that I have posted pics of several times on this forum. That means I am not trying to act cool and pretend I know what I am talking about.

There really is no way of knowing exactly what happened but it is easy to know what did not happen.

I actually think it is 100% real if that matters.

That's what that is all right.
Ours were green.

Depending on the press, there would either be one, cleaned between colors. Or one for each color.
I don't know of a multi color press that put all four colors plus glosscoat on the same blanket. No that there are none, just that there aren't any I know of for offset lithography.
(BEP has/had a press or two that could do multi color intaglio from one plate, but that's an entirely different process, and not offset in any way. As far as I know they were never all that open about how it worked.)

Those blankets are fairly thick rubber, and Ours were fabric reinforced. They were hard to damage, especially to the extent of the missing black patch on the NNOF sheet. When they got old they would crack a bit like any other rubber then it was time to replace them. That wasn't all that often.

Since they're compressible, shallow damage will affect the print quality. But it doesn't look like that.

What does look like that is debris in the platemaking process, especially since the missing area looks like packing tape.

Dry offset printing could be a couple things, one process called that uses a rubber plate similar to typesetting. Which prints to the blanket. But it's usually used for printing onto plastic or metal.

Or it could be waterless printing, where instead of a plate that retains water so it can reject ink in the unprinted areas, the plate has silicone or other ink repelling materials. It's fairly new and I don't know the exact date, but the plates are made and used in a similar way to traditional plates.

[bnorth]

That's what that is all right.
Ours were green.

They come in handy around the house. Besides making perfectly centered 60s Mantles(joking) they are way better than kneeling or laying on the ground when working on stuff. That is why I have one at home, no press in the garage.

[HalfNipponese]

Here's an article about my find and the recent pull documented on the CU forum. There's also discussion about a potential 14th card on the board.

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/1990-topps-blackless-cards-a-unique-rarity-from-junk-wax-era/

[saucywombat]

Having contemplated this issue in depth and given that a lot of information is buried under the sheer size and volume of the PSA Forum thread, I have copied a 2017 post I made there regarding the source of the error in the printing process.

ITS HONESTLY VERY COMPLICATED! And not in any way a sort of a Guttenberg press sort of affair, especially at the volume that Topps was producing what is essentially cardboard packaging. If you can take the time to read all of this and the related links, its very interesting in that you will see the issues that create every type of printing error that we as collectors find on baseball cards.

If you aren't interested in reading, essentially the Thomas and related errors come from either the chemical developing of the photographic negative of the cards for the black plate or the subsequent step of chemically etching those negatives onto the physical metal plate.

The physical metal plates accept ink from the blankets. Due to the issues with the plate itself, the plate did not accept black ink from the blankets (in the areas we find the errors). The plate itself literally is worn out by the production process and must eventually be replaced. Topps would have worn out many plates during any given years production. This wearing out process explains the slight variances between the cards.

IMO - Dave
************************************************** *********

Well first let me say that the four color printing process, a variation of gravure printing, that produces baseball cards, most commercial cardboard packaging and newspaper, is a process that an immense amount of variables play in to. A quick web search will reveal a great deal of scholarly (include complex physics) energy is devoted to perfecting the process. Think fluid dynamics, capillary actions, heat, pressure, static electricity, viscosity, paper quality, ideal chemical properties, speed of rollers, thickness or rollers, tension between rollers, etc.

It defies a short explanation so if anyone is so inclined, check out printwiki.org/Gravure
Pretty interesting

Another good site which shows common defects in the 4 color process (and basic catalog of every PD in the history of Topps) see www.offsetprintingtechnology.com/sub-categories/on-press-troubleshooting

Gravure printing involves at its heart the engraving of an image onto a printing plate. in the mid-19th century processes were developed to allow for the chemical etching of photographic images into metal. This allowed for the first time for photographic images to be accurately reproduced through press printing (as it was not possible to perfectly reproduce by hand on to the plate). Interestingly today it is possible to physically etch an image with digital technology which can eliminate the chemical process but not possible in 1990.

So at some point Topps photographed and developed the the "F" plate black image. This is when the most likely error occurred that produced the blackless area on the F sheet.

Undeveloped patches are a known problem in developing photographic prints, which would be loosely defined as an area of the negative that has been unaffected by processing solutions. This may have gone unnoticed and the image transferred to the plate.

Also a possibility is that a chemical process is used to etch the photographic negative into the plate. So a perfectly good image can be distorted if the chemical etching process does not go well. I think this is probably what we are looking at with the "F" plate. In this example of the process you can easily see how bubbling or streaking of the sort present on the "F" sheet are easily made during the application of the image to the roller plate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwPVKJmElbU

The image in the video is known as a "resist". Problems that occur in rotogravure printing can include the resist not being properly applied. The video above shows a simplified process (usually the resist stays adhered longer to the plate for the image to be properly transferred). The resist usually requires a more involved process for stripping it away from the plate. Sometimes the resist (or parts there of) remain adhered to the plate. This is a very plausible explanation for the errors. To me it seems clear from the type of blackless areas produced and the quantity in which they were produced point clearly to an issue created by the production of the photographic image that produced the resist or its application or removal from the black "F" plate.

[ALR-bishop]

Great post Dave, thanks for the info

[West]

Having contemplated this issue in depth and given that a lot of information is buried under the sheer size and volume of the PSA Forum thread, I have copied a 2017 post I made there regarding the source of the error in the printing process.


I'm still confused by the digression into gravure printing. I agree that the cause of the error was an improperly exposed/damaged plate. As we have mentioned in the past, that is the only way the NNOF was reproduced 500-1000X and all copies are virtually identical. However, the Topps employee I spoke to told me they used offset lithography printing - ie a printing plate created from a mask of negatives (I'm following Steve's theory here that an obstruction - tape, etc- in the platemaking process prevented the black plate from being properly exposed). In gravure a cylinder is engraved with cells which carry ink - seems a lot different than offset lithography. Also, it says gravure prints hexagons, while offset lithography gives the dot design - an example of which can be found on the very distinct 1990 Topps colored borders.

[saucywombat]

I'm still confused by the digression into gravure printing. I agree that the cause of the error was an improperly exposed/damaged plate. As we have mentioned in the past, that is the only way the NNOF was reproduced 500-1000X and all copies are virtually identical. However, the Topps employee I spoke to told me they used offset lithography printing - ie a printing plate created from a mask of negatives (I'm following Steve's theory here that an obstruction - tape, etc- in the platemaking process prevented the black plate from being properly exposed). In gravure a cylinder is engraved with cells which carry ink - seems a lot different than offset lithography. Also, it says gravure prints hexagons, while offset lithography gives the dot design - an example of which can be found on the very distinct 1990 Topps colored borders.

Well I'd say the point of the post is not to demonstrate that a gravure method was used vs. offset lithography and that the references to gravure, by means of internet ready information, were the clearest way to demonstrate the idea of how printing made the leap from etched images to being able to accurately reproduce photographic images on a plate. I would trust your assertion regarding the use of offset lithography.

With either offset lithography or gravure (in 1990) a chemical process is required to transfer the image from the negative into a metal plate. Full stop.

My point being this is my opinion on where the error originates. It was a chemical issue that relates to the image being engraved on the plate. How the ink and/or image is then impressed or transferred to cardboard stock is not an issue.

This would correlate with the visual we have from the totality of the error area. It resembles nothing. It is an irregular fluid area, almost like you poured water on a pane of glass.

I do not understand the desire to relate all this to a piece of tape or cardboard obstruction, which the error area in no way resembles.

Perhaps it's a better narrative that more people could relate to that a careless or incompetent worker carelessly or foolishly wasn't paying attention to a piece of tape or cardboard, rather than a very esoteric discussion of offset lithography methodology and common mass production issues.

[West]

Well I'd say the point of the post is not to demonstrate that a gravure method was used vs. offset lithography and that the references to gravure, by means of internet ready information, were the clearest way to demonstrate the idea of how printing made the leap from etched images to being able to accurately reproduce photographic images on a plate. I would trust your assertion regarding the use of offset lithography.

With either offset lithography or gravure (in 1990) a chemical process is required to transfer the image from the negative into a metal plate. Full stop.

My point being this is my opinion on where the error originates. It was a chemical issue that relates to the image being engraved on the plate. How the ink and/or image is then impressed or transferred to cardboard stock is not an issue.

This would correlate with the visual we have from the totality of the error area. It resembles nothing. It is an irregular fluid area, almost like you poured water on a pane of glass.

I do not understand the desire to relate all this to a piece of tape or cardboard obstruction, which the error area in no way resembles.

Perhaps it's a better narrative that more people could relate to that a careless or incompetent worker carelessly or foolishly wasn't paying attention to a piece of tape or cardboard, rather than a very esoteric discussion of offset lithography methodology and common mass production issues.


Thank you for explaining! That makes a ton more sense. I believe your first hypothesis seems likely - "Undeveloped patches are a known problem in developing photographic prints, which would be loosely defined as an area of the negative that has been unaffected by processing solutions. This may have gone unnoticed and the image transferred to the plate."

The fact that the blackless area does resemble a fluid substance seems to point towards some kind of chemical resist with the negative as you mentioned. Considering the existence of the smaller partial blackless errors also found in the general wherabouts of NNOF packs, do you think the "chemical resist" hypothesis is still likely? I always wondered what sequence of events could produce both types of errors, and what this tells us about the causation.

We have the NNOF press run, with 14 affected cards. Two blue plate scratches run vertically down the uncut sheet, one goes down column 4, and is visible on the Nolan Ryan, Kenny Rogers, Zeile, Steve Olin, Ventura and Canale. The other goes down column 5 and can be seen on Steve Searcy, Bob Knepper, Tapani, and Assenmacher.
Another press run has small blackless areas and fainter blue plate scratches. You can only see the blue line on the Tapani and the Nolan Ryan. The blackless areas are small and located on the Biggio and Thomas (pictured below), Tapani, Morris and Lawton.
A third press run is similar but has even smaller blackless area on the Lawton.
A fourth press run has blackless areas that can only be seen on a high resolution scanner. I have examples from all four press runs if you would like to see scans.


https://us.v-cdn.net/6027503/uploads/editor/fa/cb7s4vxzinay.jpeg

https://us.v-cdn.net/6027503/uploads/editor/5m/0qg2gg4zqr2p.jpeg

[steve B]

Offset lithography and gravure are entirely different processes. Gravure is more like intaglio (engraving) than lithography.

The basics of it, that the black plate wasn't made correctly is correct.

In Offset lithography the blanket doesn't put the ink on the plate, but accepts it from the plate. The plate gets it from the inking rollers.
Ink fount/inking rollers/plate/blanket/substrate.

Here's the process for making an aluminum offset lithography plate.
With a few small changes this is what was done at the shop I worked for.
Like we had the negatives and masks taped together along with the registration marks. And our plates were a different color.
Not any big difference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr1-CCpvB74

Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXA8WkEORM8




Having contemplated this issue in depth and given that a lot of information is buried under the sheer size and volume of the PSA Forum thread, I have copied a 2017 post I made there regarding the source of the error in the printing process.

ITS HONESTLY VERY COMPLICATED! And not in any way a sort of a Guttenberg press sort of affair, especially at the volume that Topps was producing what is essentially cardboard packaging. If you can take the time to read all of this and the related links, its very interesting in that you will see the issues that create every type of printing error that we as collectors find on baseball cards.

If you aren't interested in reading, essentially the Thomas and related errors come from either the chemical developing of the photographic negative of the cards for the black plate or the subsequent step of chemically etching those negatives onto the physical metal plate.

The physical metal plates accept ink from the blankets. Due to the issues with the plate itself, the plate did not accept black ink from the blankets (in the areas we find the errors). The plate itself literally is worn out by the production process and must eventually be replaced. Topps would have worn out many plates during any given years production. This wearing out process explains the slight variances between the cards.

IMO - Dave
************************************************** *********

Well first let me say that the four color printing process, a variation of gravure printing, that produces baseball cards, most commercial cardboard packaging and newspaper, is a process that an immense amount of variables play in to. A quick web search will reveal a great deal of scholarly (include complex physics) energy is devoted to perfecting the process. Think fluid dynamics, capillary actions, heat, pressure, static electricity, viscosity, paper quality, ideal chemical properties, speed of rollers, thickness or rollers, tension between rollers, etc.

It defies a short explanation so if anyone is so inclined, check out printwiki.org/Gravure
Pretty interesting

Another good site which shows common defects in the 4 color process (and basic catalog of every PD in the history of Topps) see www.offsetprintingtechnology.com/sub-categories/on-press-troubleshooting

Gravure printing involves at its heart the engraving of an image onto a printing plate. in the mid-19th century processes were developed to allow for the chemical etching of photographic images into metal. This allowed for the first time for photographic images to be accurately reproduced through press printing (as it was not possible to perfectly reproduce by hand on to the plate). Interestingly today it is possible to physically etch an image with digital technology which can eliminate the chemical process but not possible in 1990.

So at some point Topps photographed and developed the the "F" plate black image. This is when the most likely error occurred that produced the blackless area on the F sheet.

Undeveloped patches are a known problem in developing photographic prints, which would be loosely defined as an area of the negative that has been unaffected by processing solutions. This may have gone unnoticed and the image transferred to the plate.

Also a possibility is that a chemical process is used to etch the photographic negative into the plate. So a perfectly good image can be distorted if the chemical etching process does not go well. I think this is probably what we are looking at with the "F" plate. In this example of the process you can easily see how bubbling or streaking of the sort present on the "F" sheet are easily made during the application of the image to the roller plate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwPVKJmElbU

The image in the video is known as a "resist". Problems that occur in rotogravure printing can include the resist not being properly applied. The video above shows a simplified process (usually the resist stays adhered longer to the plate for the image to be properly transferred). The resist usually requires a more involved process for stripping it away from the plate. Sometimes the resist (or parts there of) remain adhered to the plate. This is a very plausible explanation for the errors. To me it seems clear from the type of blackless areas produced and the quantity in which they were produced point clearly to an issue created by the production of the photographic image that produced the resist or its application or removal from the black "F" plate.

[steve B]

What I'm saying is that something - tape, a paper scrap, whatever that was opaque got into the machine that exposes the plate. and prevented the areas that got missed from being exposed.

Could it be that the person making the plate missed an area that big while using the developer? Possibly. Large shops, which would have been Topps or whoever they used might have had an automatic plate developer.

[West]

What I'm saying is that something - tape, a paper scrap, whatever that was opaque got into the machine that exposes the plate. and prevented the areas that got missed from being exposed.

Could it be that the person making the plate missed an area that big while using the developer? Possibly. Large shops, which would have been Topps or whoever they used might have had an automatic plate developer.


Very informative video in your last post. I often wondered how plates were shipped and packaged. I see the plates in that video are stacked in a package of 100 or so with opaque tissue paper between them that prevents light exposure from damaging the light sensitive coating on the plates.

I've always felt that the existence of the smaller partial blackless errors holds the key to understanding the cause of the larger blackless errors. For instance, there are up to 4 variations on the Marcus Lawton error:
https://i.imgur.com/bMUCnpq.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/0YjjlKA.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/Q4BYcKp.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/4y3B3im.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/1U81Fni.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/W03ZeOy.jpg

Tapani:

https://i.imgur.com/dIjndQp.pnghttps://i.imgur.com/Pdw43c0.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/MgZ4uSI.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/bJtD4Ll.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/170GwYX.jpg



The NNOF plate blackless images of Tapani and Lawton I got from the web. I don't have copies of these cards but all the other cards pictured came from packs that also produced cards from the NNOF print run - partial blackless Frank Thomas, a blackless John Hart and Jim Acker, Nolan Ryan and Kenny Rogers blue line card, etc. Also, when Rookiewax on the CU boards first found NNOF in a case in 2009, that case also produced partial blackless variations of the Tapani and Lawto, so we know they are related. Not only that, but two of the Tapanis also bear the blue line (plate scratch) that is a signifier of the NNOF run. All cards have varying degrees of blackless. And if you look at the last couple Tapanis and Lawtons, you can see they have blackless areas that are similar but shifted down 1/2". The last images are cards I found that at first appeared normal (the error had been found, a repair had been made, new plates ordered up, and printing resumed). But on second look I found the most minute areas of missing black ink (see arrows)

So, would this evidence point more to a negative (mask) being damaged or the plate? I feel it is more likely that a series of plates were damaged or exposed. Is it possible that a series of plates that were stacked on top of each other were exposed or damaged in the same general area, with the top plate being the NNOF plate, the next plate down the partial blackless variations that I have pictured, and additional plates affected to smaller degrees. Also, we know that most printers printed all black ink one day, then a different color the next. I have found green sheet blackless errors that reside in the exact same location on the uncut sheet as orange sheet NNOF errors:

https://i.imgur.com/k7u385W.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/ZmVuUSS.jpg


Curious what some of our printing experts think of these variations.

[swarmee]

Your pictures aren't showing up.

[West]

Fixed, I think. I was trying to do it through Google Photos but linking photos through a message board doesn't work.

[hockeyhockey]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1990-Topps-Baseball-Unopened-Pack-from-ERROR-Box-PSA-NNOF-Frank-Thomas-M18/114371077700?hash=item1aa10c2644:g:IN4AAOSwblBfQbV a

looks like a pack is for sale from a 1990 printing error box...if anyone here buys it, please share the findings.

[lowpopper]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1990-Topps-Baseball-Unopened-Pack-from-ERROR-Box-PSA-NNOF-Frank-Thomas-M18/114371077700?hash=item1aa10c2644:g:IN4AAOSwblBfQbV a

looks like a pack is for sale from a 1990 printing error box...if anyone here buys it, please share the findings.


If everybody wants to chip in, I will buy this and open it on live stream.

[hockeyhockey]

If everybody wants to chip in, I will buy this and open it on live stream.

$50 a person, 15 cards = $750. should cover the tax and shipping.

i'm in if 13 others jump in too.

[lowpopper]

$50 a person, 15 cards = $750. should cover the tax and shipping.

i'm in if 13 others jump in too.

Sounds reasonable. Let's see who else wants in. I'll do it 100%.

[slidekellyslide]

I found one of the partial missing ink Frank Thomas cards in my collection last year. Unfortunately I have no clue where I got it. What kind of value do these partials have?

[lowpopper]

I found one of the partial missing ink Frank Thomas cards in my collection last year. Unfortunately I have no clue where I got it. What kind of value do these partials have?

Those are becoming exceedingly hard to find. That is not a junk card

:cool::cool::cool:

[ALR-bishop]

Interesting card Dan. If the illustration above about how the defect occurred on the known affected cards is correct ( similar to illustration in CU. thread) would this be a transition error or a separate defect altogether ?

[swarmee]

I'd say it's a different error altogether, since all of the black borders are visible on the outer border. So it's really independent of the original issue.

[ALR-bishop]

Agree John. Maybe one of print experts can chime in

[steve B]

I'd have to compare to be more sure of a couple things, but
Short answer
It's a different error from a different black plate

Longer answer
If the obstruction on the original error plate was something like tape, It's possible the tape wasn't completely removed, and a small remnant was still there to obscure the replacement plate.
More likely if all the missing border bits fit inside the NNOF missing black area.
Far less likely if any of the missing bits are outside that area.

So it could be a follow on partial correction, or a totally different issue.

[West]

I'd have to compare to be more sure of a couple things, but
Short answer
It's a different error from a different black plate

Longer answer
If the obstruction on the original error plate was something like tape, It's possible the tape wasn't completely removed, and a small remnant was still there to obscure the replacement plate.
More likely if all the missing border bits fit inside the NNOF missing black area.
Far less likely if any of the missing bits are outside that area.

So it could be a follow on partial correction, or a totally different issue.


It is directly related to the NNOF as these were found in the only known case to have NNOF by CU member Rookiewax in 2009. These Thomas partial blackless are from the same print run as the other partial missing black cards (Lawton, Tapani) I have scans of in my post 12 posts back from 8/8/20. I have all the cards from this press run if you guys want scans. Morris and Biggio are also affected.
Additionally, the partially affected Tapani has the same blue plate scratch as the fully affected Tapani from the NNOF press run, just slightly more faded. You can see it in the scan, it is in the exact same location on his face (runs vertically from the “E” in Kevin up through his nose then through the top border).

https://i.imgur.com/dIjndQp.png
https://i.imgur.com/Pdw43c0.jpg

[ALR-bishop]

If it is a transition misprint how did it occur ?

[swarmee]

Yeah, correlation does not imply causation, as I learned in science. They could be an interim printing stage, but they're much more likely to be a replacement of the printing plates with their own flaws, IMO. Which those were then further corrected.

Add: I recall someone saying that Topps likely had 7 printing presses, with each needing a set of plates. Not sure how true that is, but this could show that one set of plates had one set of errors (regular NNOF and other blackless partial border/background cards), then a different set of plates had these errors you're spotting (two gaps Frank Thomas, Tapani gap).

[West]

Yeah, correlation does not imply causation, as I learned in science. They could be an interim printing stage, but they're much more likely to be a replacement of the printing plates with their own flaws, IMO. Which those were then further corrected.

Add: I recall someone saying that Topps likely had 7 printing presses, with each needing a set of plates. Not sure how true that is, but this could show that one set of plates had one set of errors (regular NNOF and other blackless partial border/background cards), then a different set of plates had these errors you're spotting (two gaps Frank Thomas, Tapani gap).

I think you misunderstood my post. I fully agree with you - these smaller errors were not “caused” by the NNOF. But they are closely related. By that I mean it is 99% certain that these errors were subsequent or simultaneously printed alongside the NNOF at the factory. There is almost no other way they end up next to each other in packs of the same case when you consider the sheer volume of Topps printing back then.

I believe it is possible there were a series of bad plates or negatives in sequence as I posited above in my post on 8/8. Would love to hear other ideas/theories.

[West]

Add: I recall someone saying that Topps likely had 7 printing presses, with each needing a set of plates. Not sure how true that is, but this could show that one set of plates had one set of errors (regular NNOF and other blackless partial border/background cards), then a different set of plates had these errors you're spotting (two gaps Frank Thomas, Tapani gap).

That was me, in this and several other threads about Topps production. That info came from a former pressman at Quebecor who was interviewed by SCD. It was 6 presses. I believe your theory there is correct. The question is was it a bad negative/mask, or an improperly exposed or damaged plate? We may never know, but I always thought the affected cards with minor gaps/border breaks might hold some evidence of causation.

[steve B]

On both the Tapani and Thomas partial black missing the missing area is completely inside the area missing from the NNOF sheet cards.

I really believe this points at a piece of opaque tape being in the plate exposing machine. When it was removed, a few remnants were still on the glass and messed up a second plate.
I suspect on the next black plate made.
It doesn't surprise me that the guy who missed a big piece of tape would miss remnants when he tore that big piece of tape off the glass.
The plate maker at the place I worked would have caught hell for letting either of those go to the pressroom.

[hockeyhockey]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1990-Topps-Baseball-Sealed-Vending-Case-24-Box-POS-Frank-Thomas-NNOF-NO-RESERVE/154097629270?hash=item23e0ef3856:g:qMoAAOSwiZpfVnj q

anyone familiar with these codes on the box? i recall someone on here saying that number tells you when the boxes were made and on what shift, and other stuff.

[swarmee]

It says it's a vending case. I don't remember any NNOFs coming from Vending, only very early wax packs, and I guess rack packs sent to military bases overseas.
So it's really inappropriate of the seller to put "Frank Thomas NNOF" in the subject line.

[West]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1990-Topps-Baseball-Sealed-Vending-Case-24-Box-POS-Frank-Thomas-NNOF-NO-RESERVE/154097629270?hash=item23e0ef3856:g:qMoAAOSwiZpfVnj q

anyone familiar with these codes on the box? i recall someone on here saying that number tells you when the boxes were made and on what shift, and other stuff.

951-90 is the product code for vending case. "130101" visible on the far right of the box in the first picture. That is the serial number (that would also be found on the bill of lading) indicating it was shipped to a buyer on March 1, 1990 by the first shift of that day.

Cases were stamped as the order was filled for shipping, by the shipping department. Not at the printers or after the cards went into the packs and cases. Based on what I have seen so far, I do not believe the serial numbers will be useful for finding the NNOF. This is not the same situation as the '89 Fleer Billy Ripken FF.

[hockeyhockey]

951-90 is the product code for vending case. "130101" visible on the far right of the box in the first picture. That is the serial number (that would also be found on the bill of lading) indicating it was shipped to a buyer on March 1, 1990 by the first shift of that day.

Cases were stamped as the order was filled for shipping, by the shipping department. Not at the printers or after the cards went into the packs and cases. Based on what I have seen so far, I do not believe the serial numbers will be useful for finding the NNOF. This is not the same situation as the '89 Fleer Billy Ripken FF.

thanks for the info. as john said, not very cool to label it the way the seller did. but people do what they do i guess.

[jakeinge]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1990-Topps-Baseball-Unopened-Pack-from-ERROR-Box-PSA-NNOF-Frank-Thomas-M18/114371077700?hash=item1aa10c2644:g:IN4AAOSwblBfQbV a

looks like a pack is for sale from a 1990 printing error box...if anyone here buys it, please share the findings.

There were two for sale. I just bought one. If anyone is interested in a live stream opening let me know.

[hockeyhockey]

There were two for sale. I just bought one. If anyone is interested in a live stream opening let me know.

wow, very cool. i'd watch.

[slidekellyslide]

Would love to watch you open the pack. Good luck!!

[jakeinge]

PM me your email addresses and I'll let you know when I plan on doing it. I will try to do it on YOUTUBE.

[slidekellyslide]

PM me your email addresses and I'll let you know when I plan on doing it. I will try to do it on YOUTUBE.

You should just post a link here or PM some of us here. I get way too much email and don't always check it regularly anymore.

[Statfreak101]

You should just post a link here or PM some of us here. I get way too much email and don't always check it regularly anymore.

Agreed.

[jakeinge]

You should just post a link here or PM some of us here. I get way too much email and don't always check it regularly anymore.

Done! The live stream will be at 8:30pm tonight on my Facebook page. Here is the link:

https://www.facebook.com/jakeinge/

[hockeyhockey]

Done! The live stream will be at 8:30pm tonight on my Facebook page. Here is the link:

https://www.facebook.com/jakeinge/

working tonight, but good luck - will watch a recap if there is one.

[jakeinge]

working tonight, but good luck - will watch a recap if there is one.

I will post a link to the video.

As an aside, I wonder what the reaction would be in the hobby if someone were to pull a Thomas on video.

[Statfreak101]

I will post a link to the video.

As an aside, I wonder what the reaction would be in the hobby if someone were to pull a Thomas on video.

Awesome - looking to watching later as well.

[deweyinthehall]

Anyone here watching this live? I'm yelling "Tin Snips" at my monitor and cringing everytime the box cutter is run along the edge of the pack....

[bnorth]

Anyone here watching this live? I'm yelling "Tin Snips" at my monitor and cringing everytime the box cutter is run along the edge of the pack....

No don't have the facebook. Hoping to watch the youtube link later when posted.

[deweyinthehall]

I won't give anything away - only that it was a nail biter as the PSA packaging was slowly chipped away...

[jakeinge]

I won't give anything away - only that it was a nail biter as the PSA packaging was slowly chipped away...

HAHA! I learned a (luckily) cheap lesson!! I will be much better prepared next time (and there will probably be a next time). I pulled a Darrin Jackson partial blackless to boot! Video link is below:

https://www.facebook.com/503196138/videos/10157730769741139/

[bnorth]

HAHA! I learned a (luckily) cheap lesson!! I will be much better prepared next time (and there will probably be a next time). I pulled a Darrin Jackson partial blackless to boot! Video link is below:

https://www.facebook.com/503196138/videos/10157730769741139/

That was extremely painful to watch. Your hoodie more than made up for it though.:)

EDIT: to add thanks for sharing.

[slidekellyslide]

Thanks for posting this. Love the Ripken FF hoodie!

[steve5838]

HAHA! I learned a (luckily) cheap lesson!! I will be much better prepared next time (and there will probably be a next time). I pulled a Darrin Jackson partial blackless to boot! Video link is below:

https://www.facebook.com/503196138/videos/10157730769741139/

Thanks for sharing! This was great and exciting to watch.

[jakeinge]

It appears as though a new mystery and a new discovery were made with the opening of this pack. I was chatting with someone on Facebook who watched the video and is the guy on Youtube who opened 8 packs and pulled 2 of the blackless cards. The Darrin Jackson I pulled has a crease in the bottom center that loops up along the I in Darrin and bends left up just under the jersey button. Wouldn't you know it he has a blackless Darrin Jackson with the IDENTICAL CREASE. I believe it is safe to say the crease is correlated to the ink issue in some way. All of the printing experts out there are free to chime in. The mystery deepens....

[hockeyhockey]

that was awesome, congrats on the jackson. great card.

[HalfNipponese]

It appears as though a new mystery and a new discovery were made with the opening of this pack. I was chatting with someone on Facebook who watched the video and is the guy on Youtube who opened 8 packs and pulled 2 of the blackless cards. The Darrin Jackson I pulled has a crease in the bottom center that loops up along the I in Darrin and bends left up just under the jersey button. Wouldn't you know it he has a blackless Darrin Jackson with the IDENTICAL CREASE. I believe it is safe to say the crease is correlated to the ink issue in some way. All of the printing experts out there are free to chime in. The mystery deepens....

Congratulations on your pull. Make sure to join the 1990 Topps Partial Blackless Facebook group.

[HalfNipponese]

It appears as though a new mystery and a new discovery were made with the opening of this pack. I was chatting with someone on Facebook who watched the video and is the guy on Youtube who opened 8 packs and pulled 2 of the blackless cards. The Darrin Jackson I pulled has a crease in the bottom center that loops up along the I in Darrin and bends left up just under the jersey button. Wouldn't you know it he has a blackless Darrin Jackson with the IDENTICAL CREASE. I believe it is safe to say the crease is correlated to the ink issue in some way. All of the printing experts out there are free to chime in. The mystery deepens....

Congratulations on your pull. Make sure to join the 1990 Topps Partial Blackless Facebook group.

[ALR-bishop]

Hope it does not make the news that there is a Blackless Facebook group :-)

[jakeinge]

Hope it does not make the news that there is a Blackless Facebook group :-)AL wins the internet today.

[HalfNipponese]

Hope it does not make the news that there is a Blackless Facebook group :-)

That took me a minute. Thinking man's humor...I love it.

[West]

It appears as though a new mystery and a new discovery were made with the opening of this pack. I was chatting with someone on Facebook who watched the video and is the guy on Youtube who opened 8 packs and pulled 2 of the blackless cards. The Darrin Jackson I pulled has a crease in the bottom center that loops up along the I in Darrin and bends left up just under the jersey button. Wouldn't you know it he has a blackless Darrin Jackson with the IDENTICAL CREASE. I believe it is safe to say the crease is correlated to the ink issue in some way. All of the printing experts out there are free to chime in. The mystery deepens....


Very cool finds! However, the wrinkle does not have anything to do with the causation of the error.

[jakeinge]

Very cool finds! However, the wrinkle does not have anything to do with the causation of the error.

What leads you to that conclusion? Not here to argue, but two blackless with identical creases would be indicative of there being correlation. I suppose I should open a box to see i a normal Jackson has the same crease though. I'm far from an expert here...

[West]

What leads you to that conclusion? Not here to argue, but two blackless with identical creases would be indicative of there being correlation. I suppose I should open a box to see i a normal Jackson has the same crease though. I'm far from an expert here...

It defies the theories put forward by multiple printing experts on this thread and the main one on the CU forum. My best advice is just to read both of those threads. You don’t even have to leave this site, just go back one page. Every printing causation theory is discussed ad nauseam right on this thread. Finding a similar wrinkle on two cards is fairly interesting but not that uncommon and definitely not related to the cause of the errors.

[hockeyhockey]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/133788361747?hash=item1f26686413:g:tL0AAOSwbSdgxlL 0

now apparently sammy sosa is part of all this :eek::rolleyes:

[bnorth]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/133788361747?hash=item1f26686413:g:tL0AAOSwbSdgxlL 0

now apparently sammy sosa is part of all this :eek::rolleyes:

LOL, thanks for the laugh. It is sad to see people with a decent ebay history pulling these type of scams. They should leave them for the zero feedback sellers.

One of my favorites was when a seller was selling missing red ink cards when the cards weren't missing the red ink.

[ALR-bishop]

Darn, you mean these are not true redless cards :)

https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/jj555/Bishop539/.highres/img030.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds

[hockeyhockey]

Darn, you mean these are not true redless cards :)

https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/jj555/Bishop539/.highres/img030.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds

:D

that's a great nolan ryan though!

[slidekellyslide]

Bought a 3000 count box today of 1990 Topps and found the Curt Ford blackless. :)

[slidekellyslide]

Still sorting and found two more error cards - The Leibrandt partial blackless and checklist #1 missing the "Continued" text.

[ALR-bishop]

You are on a roll Dan :)

[slidekellyslide]

You are on a roll Dan :)

And having fun with cards again thanks to you guys and your error/variation hunt that got me hooked when I was stuck at home. Going to keep this batch of cards separate from the rest of my collection so I can go back as I learn of more error/variations in the 1990 set since this box seems to contain an early run of the cards. Not a single Thomas in the box, but almost all other star cards are present except for Griffey.

[TheAck]

And having fun with cards again thanks to you guys and your error/variation hunt that got me hooked when I was stuck at home. Going to keep this batch of cards separate from the rest of my collection so I can go back as I learn of more error/variations in the 1990 set since this box seems to contain an early run of the cards. Not a single Thomas in the box, but almost all other star cards are present except for Griffey.

lol me too.. spent 2 hours last night going through a box of mix 80s junk looking for 1990 cards. No variations (yet!)

[butchie_t]

I'm gonna have to go through mine now too. I opened a fair amount of wax of 90's. Of course no Frank's NNOFs to speak of at all. But one never knows if something else could be in the mix.


……later that day…..

I got a rock. Zilch, zip, nada. I even have a partial case left over and am not gonna bother gripping and ripping them open because that was what I pulled from to begin with.

[slidekellyslide]

A few weeks back I purchased a 3000 count box of 1990 Topps locally and while perusing I discovered some blackless cards I did not know about. I also found a checklist error card that is missing the "Continued on Checklist 2". When googling the Curt Ford card I found another collector had discovered the same green sheet partial blackless cards that I had found too so they are not a one off.

[lowpopper]

HOF RC NNOF

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/GAsAAOSwwMdhqhQT/s-l1600.png

[ALR-bishop]

The Baines variant was highlighted sometime back in this thread

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=299880&highlight=fleer+1981

[West]

A few weeks back I purchased a 3000 count box of 1990 Topps locally and while perusing I discovered some blackless cards I did not know about. I also found a checklist error card that is missing the "Continued on Checklist 2". When googling the Curt Ford card I found another collector had discovered the same green sheet partial blackless cards that I had found too so they are not a one off.


Correct, this was me, I pulled all of the green sheet errors from a case of 1990 Topps, the case was mailed out on March 8, 1990 I believe so it was definitely not an early print run.
My case contained the Chris Speier error which had the largest missing blackless area. Nice to see you found a clean Curt Ford, mine had a very unfortunate scuff straight out of the pack that I've seen on many cards in the 1990 set.
Another point of interest - the green sheet cards from my case, also bore the distinctive blue plate scratch that was present on the orange sheet containing the Frank Thomas NNOF. I don't believe that to be a coincidence. I've opened up thousands of 1990 Topps packs from all kinds of sources, and I would say there were perhaps 3 other instances of finding noticeable plate scratches, and none came close to being as distinctive as the plate scratches that ran the length of both the orange and green sheets containing the blackless cards.

Speier:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6027503/uploads/editor/w1/axan25ildqt3.jpg

Ford:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6027503/uploads/editor/4b/pbgbeqq1ayfw.jpeg

Here is how the cards would line up on an uncut sheet:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6027503/uploads/editor/cl/g4q9893u1f79.jpg

[slidekellyslide]

My stash of cards did not have a Speier card at all and the Santana, Meadows and Martinez cards were all normal. Now how do we get PSA to recognize these green sheet PB errors?

The Frank Thomas partial black is sitting in Goldin Auctions right now at $8,101 with the juice.

https://goldin.co/item/1990-topps-error-partial-blackness-414-frank-thomas-rookie-card-psa-mipr73r

[Cliff Bowman]

At least two cards at the top of the A* Blue Sheet have the print flaw, John Smiley and Dan Pasqua. I suspect more cards on the top row may have also been affected.

[Cliff Bowman]

At least one other card is part of the E* Green Sheet print flaw, Lance Johnson, which is two cards away from the others. It seems Sammy Sosa should have also been affected but I have never seen or heard of one missing part of the border line.

[GoldenAge50s]

Can someone provide a list of all the card #'s affected by the "missing ink" & "white areas" so I can check mine out?

[slidekellyslide]

Cliff, when did you discover those extra missing black cards? Is there a definitive list somewhere of these cards?

[Cliff Bowman]

Cliff, when did you discover those extra missing black cards? Is there a definitive list somewhere of these cards?

I wish I did discover them, richtree posted the Smiley and Pasqua on page 22 of the CU thread nearly three years ago and I ran across the Lance Johnson listed on eBay about a year ago. I would say without a doubt that Jay Howell and Candy Maldonado were also affected and possibly more on the top row of the A* Blue Sheet, the other cards on the top row are Ramon Martinez, Ricky Jordan, Andre Dawson, Stan Javier, Benito Santiago, Mike Witt, and Todd Burns.

[GoldenAge50s]

Cliff--

Do you have a list by card number, not name??

Anybody??

[jacksoncoupage]

I wish I did discover them, richtree posted the Smiley and Pasqua on page 22 of the CU thread nearly three years ago and I ran across the Lance Johnson listed on eBay about a year ago. I would say without a doubt that Jay Howell and Candy Maldonado were also affected and possibly more on the top row of the A* Blue Sheet, the other cards on the top row are Ramon Martinez, Ricky Jordan, Andre Dawson, Stan Javier, Benito Santiago, Mike Witt, and Todd Burns.

I pulled a few of the dark blue border blue cards from holiday factory sets around 2007-2008. The only one I can recall with clarity was Doug Drabek with the blackless portion over the team name on front, like the Smiley.

None of them had the full, missing black ink like the Lance Johnson, Speier, but more like how the Smiley looks with a bit of gradient/fog to it.

All of the blackless green borders I found came from random collections and lots purchased in the PNW, I never pulled any from sealed product, unfortunately.

[hockeyhockey]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/384672072649

far from an expert on these, but the bidding suggests this may be legit.

[bnorth]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/384672072649

far from an expert on these, but the bidding suggests this may be legit.

Someone is going to be sad when they get that. Hopefully they figure out it is bad while they can still get their cash back.

[Cliff Bowman]

Someone is going to be sad when they get that. Hopefully they figure out it is bad while they can still get their cash back.

I am wary of any eBay seller who doesn't at least take the time and effort to crop out their bare feet in the pics :eek:.

[ALR-bishop]

Send seller a question asking if the auction includes everything shown in the pictures

[hockeyhockey]

Lol

[West]

My stash of cards did not have a Speier card at all and the Santana, Meadows and Martinez cards were all normal. Now how do we get PSA to recognize these green sheet PB errors?

The Frank Thomas partial black is sitting in Goldin Auctions right now at $8,101 with the juice.

https://goldin.co/item/1990-topps-error-partial-blackness-414-frank-thomas-rookie-card-psa-mipr73r

I pulled all of the green sheet errors, including 3 Speiers and multiple Liebrandts, when I first discovered them in 2016. It was in a lot of 4 boxes and I had several Sammy Sosas that were all normal. Additionally, the Lance Johnson's were normal as well.

I believe the green sheet errors are significant because they occupy nearly the exact same locations on the uncut sheet as the orange sheet errors associated with the NNOF, and the blackless areas, although shaped differently, are sloped in a similar direction on the sheet.

Here they are with the sheets aligned:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AM-JKLVS317wvf1YlkJXC3aR1y-Y6up-6JCy-yzWUpceFQRdGjq8ESnFfD2n-eP7xTe63qkE_qfS6OUN03vQI7aMo0lS1Zg91_og4ISk3neG-3yzH3bauv6WFJqM6-w1alc6r5seOO1Q-jq9s7s-QctS8eshZA=w1350-h1384-no?authuser=0

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AM-JKLWC890CUIb0nXqa-qxx8cAnaNu7pLmx3NYeoNrsxggyL1M8WNQaaHGU3tswQ9QOrY7 qNCt6q4TtT4rMsq8Rh91Ddipb7Su-vnPIv0XUeSyxED6f_XUa13BYkezM-OVxdEMfgVED_UgglqXAzuwpGFCCwQ=w1304-h1384-no?authuser=0

If you look at the sheets as they would be fed through the presses, the Speier error is in the same location as the Tapani. Meadows error lines up with Lawton, Alomar=Darrin Jackson and Leibrandt=Franco.

The existence of the Lance Johnson error is an outlier but it has not been found in the same packs as the Speier/Ford/Leibrandt errors so I can't come to a conclusion either way on that. The Ford and Carmelo Martinez errors occupy the locations of the Robin Ventura and the Bob Knepper so those two do not exactly align with the orange sheet but since the general shape is the same, that could have been a simple variation in how the negatives were placed in the plate exposing machine. I'd say there's a decent change they are related but it's nothing you could prove.

I'm also not optimistic PSA would recognize the errors at this time. They haven't done it for the numerous other partial blackless errors from the 1980's Topps sets so I can't see them make an exception unless someone was able to prove it was related to the NNOF errors, which is probably impossible. Also, I have a 1990 Topps Roger Clemens blackless that is missing half is name. A near miss HOFer from the steroid era, with the exact same printing plate flaw that caused the NNOF but they only authenticated it as a normal card, PSA 6.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AM-JKLXtCRUJoBGLx7D0s01opZjHIj_Vl74IESAVW4VFBWoeRevvA ja4dZidEmOwFefgKzQQblYM9bfsdFHlXcxzeHlFH03GlLrXhp9 2yWn99sRtEdFCKK2c2SMelZ93qZ4ItqEOe5EaLuduFiRGHlDGK OX-Uw=w752-h1039-no?authuser=0

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AM-JKLWy6mI4v-h-vsO3ork5I_lkS0Z4qLJVsHliqPDdQWy0czTCZ05ltNUw8d65At ObcR8n7oEL2e_6mNSKXm45O0sTUR8jyvluSX79uY1xRchRDTNX d2lbzJdzY_VzfvUMM3ChlYgPcbebtb-zWGBhvIz9-g=w751-h1044-no?authuser=0

[slidekellyslide]

Good info. Thank you, West.

[jacksoncoupage]

Don't forget about the red-less orange sheet cards. The missing red ink may have only affected one sheet and was likely pulled from the dumpster when you consider the condition of each one that has turned up (I own the Thomas and Wade Boggs AS). The pattern of missing ink is very similar to the sort of haphazard, diagonal swaths of the blackless cards.

[bnorth]

Don't forget about the red-less orange sheet cards. The missing red ink may have only affected one sheet and was likely pulled from the dumpster when you consider the condition of each one that has turned up (I own the Thomas and Wade Boggs AS). The pattern of missing ink is very similar to the sort of haphazard, diagonal swaths of the blackless cards.

Please post a pic of the Boggs AS.

[jacksoncoupage]

Please post a pic of the Boggs AS.

The first one I encountered turned up on ebay way back when I was feverishly monitoring unlisted junk wax error cards (maybe 2004-2005ish) and it was another All-Star player in poor shape but I don't recall which one. If it were a star, I'd probably have remembered.

https://i.ibb.co/ZSFHZsp/90tredless.jpg (https://ibb.co/9h1wMXk)

[West]

That's a neat error - provided it isn't the result of weather damage/sun bleaching - I wonder how they made it out of the factory? Have you ever seen more than one copy of an individual card?
Really does look like it was salvaged from a dumpster! And the error areas do resemble the blackless errors somewhat.

[jacksoncoupage]

That's a neat error - provided it isn't the result of weather damage/sun bleaching - I wonder how they made it out of the factory? Have you ever seen more than one copy of an individual card?
Really does look like it was salvaged from a dumpster! And the error areas do resemble the blackless errors somewhat.

I am certain that it is not a sun damaged card due to the fact that the blue and yellow inks are entirely unchanged. Both colors remain vibrant while the red is missing or nearly missing in some spots.

To date, I have recorded just three total cards with the swaths of missing red ink, all orange sheet cards, all with damage. There could easily have been some that escaped me but I have only searched for them intermittently over the years.

[lowpopper]

Anybody got iron-clad proof of these coming out of packs?

Or just more highly doubtful stories?

[West]

Anybody got iron-clad proof of these coming out of packs?

Or just more highly doubtful stories?

The blackless cards and NNOF? There are dozens of first hand accounts of these coming out of packs on the internet. Not to mention a few Youtube and Facebook Live videos. If you don't believe this, what is your alternative theory and what is it based on?

[jacksoncoupage]

The blackless cards and NNOF? There are dozens of first hand accounts of these coming out of packs on the internet. Not to mention a few Youtube and Facebook Live videos. If you don't believe this, what is your alternative theory and what is it based on?

In the "old days" (well before the tsunami of covid flipper-collectors), these folks used to pop out every so often with this question, seeding this "just curious" doubt around boards and shows and almost always, they'd eventually reveal that they are sitting on factory sets and/or pushing that they come from factory sets.

Same would apply to the George Bush cards.

[West]

In the "old days" (well before the tsunami of covid flipper-collectors), these folks used to pop out every so often with this question, seeding this "just curious" doubt around boards and shows and almost always, they'd eventually reveal that they are sitting on factory sets and/or pushing that they come from factory sets.

Same would apply to the George Bush cards.


Yeah, the NNOF card has long attracted scammers due to it being a relative standout value wise among 1985-1992 produced cards.

However, I don't think Lowpopper is fishing for anything here. They started this thread and seem genuinely curious at getting at the facts. I'm just wondering why Lowpopper is still wondering at the truth when there are pages and pages of research here all pointing to a mostly wax distribution for these errors. And 3 seconds of search engine work away are two Youtube videos of Brian pulling a Fisk and Russell partial blackless from Joe Schembri's PSA wax packs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHdlU9HnYLc).

I just don't see how this is still a legitimate question at this stage in the research. Which makes me sad to see it still asked when I do love the thrust of the original thread.

[jacksoncoupage]

Yeah, the NNOF card has long attracted scammers due to it being a relative standout value wise among 1985-1992 produced cards.

However, I don't think Lowpopper is fishing for anything here. They started this thread and seem genuinely curious at getting at the facts. I'm just wondering why Lowpopper is still wondering at the truth when there are pages and pages of research here all pointing to a mostly wax distribution for these errors. And 3 seconds of search engine work away are two Youtube videos of Brian pulling a Fisk and Russell partial blackless from Joe Schembri's PSA wax packs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHdlU9HnYLc).

I just don't see how this is still a legitimate question at this stage in the research. Which makes me sad to see it still asked when I do love the thrust of the original thread.

Yeah, it is baffling to me, this whole pattern of "if I didnt see it, it isn't real." I have really only encountered it within the last two years, cardboard-wise.

Not sure if Lowpopper is the same guy who pops onto the Facebook group discussions for this card and always make the same-but-vague allegation but I've seen it few times recently.

[lowpopper]

A wise blind man one told me:

believe half of what you see, none of what you hear

[West]

A wise blind man one told me:

believe half of what you see, none of what you hear

This has been a very productive thread, and I will continue to contribute, but I won't be responding to your posts anymore.

[lowpopper]

Kaboom!

[bnorth]

This has been a very productive thread, and I will continue to contribute, but I won't be responding to your posts anymore.

That's not fair. You should checkout his raffle thread or his thread that he got a rookie Mantle stolen. Maybe your opinion of him will change.:D

[West]

That's not fair. You should checkout his raffle thread or his thread that he got a rookie Mantle stolen. Maybe your opinion of him will change.:D


Ha, it's all good. This has been one of the most informative NNOF threads. Happy to continue to add to it in productive ways.

[lowpopper]

I'll tell you where I'm coming from.

I start off being highly suspicious of this card's origins solely due to the
George Bush Sr. card. Those came from the same geographical location
as the NNOF allegedly did. Off the bat, I'm skeptical. No serious trail of
boxes/cases has ever been sniffed out. How has nobody has ever traced
back to a solid source when they pulled this from a pack in the early 90s?
Nobody went back for more all after they pulled the first one?

Something of this magnitude would have been sniffed out given the attention
it got. It seems far too coincidental that a big find has never been unearthed.
If 100 Bush cards can walk out the back door, a similar number printer's
scrap sheets with Thomas's name missing could do the same.

Now I could be completely wrong, and it's likely these cards were just a fluke
staccato in the printing timeline. I suspect these were at least partially
supplemented by a group of cards exiting the factory not via packs.

When I do make an organic find, I'll fully retract my skepticism. I live in New
York 5 minutes from the Bush Sr. find. I see way more packs, boxes, cases
than your average bear out here. If these were pack delivered, they will be
pack found...by me :cool:

Happy Collecting!

[steve B]

My comments in blue

I'll tell you where I'm coming from.

I start off being highly suspicious of this card's origins solely due to the
George Bush Sr. card. Those came from the same geographical location
as the NNOF allegedly did. Off the bat, I'm skeptical. No serious trail of
boxes/cases has ever been sniffed out. How has nobody has ever traced
back to a solid source when they pulled this from a pack in the early 90s?
Nobody went back for more all after they pulled the first one?

NY was a common place for Topps to do tests for years. That something odd would have been released there or would have snuck out there is no surprise. Heck, I lived in western Mass, in a place probably served by a wholesaler out of NY and got a pack of 75 Minis at one point.


Something of this magnitude would have been sniffed out given the attention
it got. It seems far too coincidental that a big find has never been unearthed.
If 100 Bush cards can walk out the back door, a similar number printer's
scrap sheets with Thomas's name missing could do the same.

Ah, but whenever something like that has happened, and it happened a lot in the late 80s- early 90's, the cards turned up in quantity, often in uncut sheets. Not one here one there like this card. The one I've seen in person was in the late 90's and came from a source in the Boston area. Now whether that source got it out of someone in NY I don't know. At the time I felt it was a printing error rather than a variation.

Now I could be completely wrong, and it's likely these cards were just a fluke
staccato in the printing timeline. I suspect these were at least partially
supplemented by a group of cards exiting the factory not via packs.

I'm not sure exactly what that means. It was a major print defect that affected one black plate used to print the cards, and it affected several other cards on the same sheet. Could some have left the factory not in packs? Of course they could have, but as above that stuff usually showed up in quantity , and these didn't
At the time I was buying cards from multiple sources, both hobby and retail, and in different pack formats. I've been interested in misprints since the 70's, and did get the occasional misprinted card. It would have never occurred to me to keep track of what sort of pack it came from, let alone what store I got that pack from. And it's general appearance is not something that looks like a plate problem. It looks more like a piece of paper or a peeled section of sheet got between the sheet and the inked part of the press. We know better now. AT the time if I'd found one I'd have stuck it in a toploader labeled as "obstructed print" and filed it with the rest of the transient printing mistakes. I would assume that it was not the error described in Beckett.

When I do make an organic find, I'll fully retract my skepticism. I live in New
York 5 minutes from the Bush Sr. find. I see way more packs, boxes, cases
than your average bear out here. If these were pack delivered, they will be
pack found...by me :cool:

Happy Collecting!

[hockeyhockey]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/125747663053

amazing how valuable this card has become, even in low grade condition

[deweyinthehall]

amazing how valuable this card has become, even in low grade condition[/QUOTE]



How in heck is that a 3??

[zogar]

Looks like a crease to the left of Frank's head. Other than that great eye appeal.

How in heck is that a 3??