Resolved--T206 Expertise Needed: Is this a printer's mark?

[dougscats]

There's an old thread on this type of printer's mark [regarding factory numbers in the borders], I believe, but I've lost it.

Anyway, I bought this card in part because I thought it was a printer's mark in the left-hand border of the back, and I like such anomalies. But there seems to be some glue residue on the presumed 0, and it leaves me a little doubtful.

I originally thought I would soak the card to remove the paper-residue on the rest of the card, but I'm not so sure that I should, card in hand. I have my doubts that soaking will remove the paper/improve the card, as I might lose the ink in the process [that's what appears to have happened in spots on the back].

Whatever, I would like to know if there is such a printer's mark.

Thanks.

[Leon]

Others will know more but it looks like a printers mark to me. I am not sure I have seen one over there before. I would get some more opinions before you soak that one, if it were me. I would hate to soak off a cool printers mark.

[dougscats]

Thanks Leon.

I'm going to hold off soaking it, given your advice.

No one else has replied as to whether or not it is, indeed, a printer's mark; no expert opinions?

[drcy]

If it is a printer's mark it won't soak off. Printer's ink doesn't dissolve in water.

[Pat R]

Hi Doug, it's hard to tell if it's a printers mark, an errant glob of ink or
something that occurred after the printing process. I did look at quite
a number of Bender (with trees) SC350 cards and I didn't find any
with this mark but if you do find another one you will know that it
occurred during the printing process. drcy is correct if it's factory
ink it won't come off if you soak it.

[dougscats]

To my surprise [I had already looked at the card under my pocket microscope before posting], when I scrutinized the card in sunlight by a window, I could see that this was not a printer's mark, but rather some sort of detritus left on the card.

Sorry for the false alarm. It sure did look like a printer's mark.

It had also been mislabeled [as Bender, no trees, SC 350/460] by Probstein, so I returned it.
I mention this in case you see it again on ebay and wonder about it.

Thanks to Leon, drcy, and Pat R for responding.