I will not disagree with what anyone has said. I completely agree that the T206 set is bazaar in the way a print anomaly can be turned into big money and yet other sets it is looked at as a scarlet letter.
Like I said before, I have been looking for another Archer for about 4 years with the same print defect. The odds I would see it in a HLC back when the other was on a Pied 25 are astronomical. Two anomalies on two different backs makes it more than debris on a plate or a random smudge.
I think these little defects are priceless for us collectors. Look at the plate scratches on the T206. It has ebnabled us to determine what an actual sheet may have looked like and helps us understand so much more. Just this Archer defect alone shows that there was a single plate used on multiple backs and corrected at some point. Reminds me of the Wilhelm missing r, Moran stray line, Mathewson 1 loss, The Beck variations, Latham Variations and so on.
__________________
Andrew
Member since 2009
|