[ALR-bishop]

In my view they are no different than numerous print defects that are now being discovered daily due to internet scans being so readily available and a dedicated core group of people who scour them for just these differences. But, they were recognized early in the hobby and made it into catalogs and the registry. When that happens, people looking to complete master sets need to have them. Some can be quite common, apparently existing on many print runs. Others, like the Campos 52 black star and the 58 Herrer seem to be fairly scarce and in good condition command high prices. Check ebay now for "1952 Campos variation".

Also, back errors are harder to find or discover on ebay since sellers usually do not have back scans of their cards. One print defect, currently I think listed in both SCD and maybe the registry, is the 3d 1959 Haywood Sullivan variation. In one the circle around the copyright symbol on the back is missing. In the 3d the circle is present but there is a period missing after the A in U.S A.. A very tough card to find, both apparently because it is scarce and second because you have to see the back of the card.

The Herrer is a front variation/print defect in which various portions of his name on the front are missing. There are actually several versions of it depending on how much print is missing, but due to hobby history I think most people consider the set done in you get just one of the print defect versions

I think the Campos and Herrer in top condition bring more money than the Bakep because there appears to be significantly less of them out there. It remains to be seen with the Sullivan because it was more recently "discovered" and recognized, so demand and availability are still being sorted out

Also, people who edit the major catalogs are now being inundated with newly discovered errors, print defects and variations by folks hoping to make their finds more valuable through hobby recognition. That seems to have caused a reconsideration/redefinition among some editors about what should or should not get catalog recognition and many newly discovered print defects, some more striking than those we are discussing remain in hobby limbo