[JustinD]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

I have the Jackson. There are other blank back autoless cards with black borders. You could be right about scrap or they could be like the 84 Encased. I think they could be scrap in a sense too, an early rejected design. I have a “set” of those on an uncut sheet. But who knows. I like having the Jackson, whatever it is… or isn’t ��

Fred, who wrote the description above is eccentric but not a fraud. He sold a lot of legitimate 82 Blackless, 84 Encased and 85 Minis on eBay in years past. He thought very highly of his cards and priced them accordingly. But his descriptions always give me a chuckle. I could picture him at a carnival attraction

It’s definitely a great card and I would love one, I was was just speaking to his statement that they were not proofs as there are numerous proof stages with preliminary being as a sample to the customer to get final approval of format and design. I am not badmouthing him or calling him a fraud ( different opinions never deserve such undesirable language unless you are currently Gen Z, lol), just stating the singular proofing method he describes ignores all steps of the approval process and encompasses only checking run pieces while in process.

Technically the 85 Minis (which are my favorite modern issue) are seemingly a combo of proofs and scrap as they were a sample of something not meant for production and swiped from the dumpster and hand cut. I feel like the encased have to be a similar story, likely an early run that was dumped after failing initial approval. I have bought so many fun oddities that all seem to arrive from a 40 mile circle of Duryea, PA.

I do give him copywriter credits on creating the term has “design test issue variation” as opposed to a sample proof.

Maybe it’s that I personally love the scrap title and honestly think it implies a far rarer card and want it to get the respect it deserves for its rarity and incredible luck to survive the trash pile and endure.