How rare is this error?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by lowpopper

I know this is a known error but I don't see it listed on any checklist.


1967 Topps Juan Marichal #500 Incomplete name on back

Your card also is missing the "li" in list in the second line. I have seen that on other Marichal cards.

They are printing flaws as i have seen the "li" slightly faded to completely gone.

[lowpopper]

thanks ben. The last sale on VCP is 925 for an SGC 88. Is there any other documentation?

[lowpopper]

[swarmee]

7(OF) for the bad registration if you decide to grade?
You'd have to get it truly checklisted with Beckett or someone in order for PSA to even consider adding it as a variation.

[swarmee]

*double post*

[lowpopper]

Any other recorded sales or similar info?

[bxb]

Greg, I own 2 of these, both look like yours. Bought both about 5 years ago.

One I picked up at a card show for $1 (the seller had no idea what it was), the other on the bay for $20. Both are mid grade.

I have been waiting for PSA to accept this variation, then I will send them in for grading.

Wait has become longer than expected....

[irv]

Originally Posted by bxb

Greg, I own 2 of these, both look like yours. Bought both about 5 years ago.

One I picked up at a card show for $1 (the seller had no idea what it was), the other on the bay for $20. Both are mid grade.

I have been waiting for PSA to accept this variation, then I will send them in for grading.

Wait has become longer than expected....

I wonder how many cards people own that are also looking for them to be recognized as variations and I wonder how long they have been waiting?

Anyone know the last card(s) that finally received that designation?

I would have thought by now that PSA, and/or the others, would have recognized the 52 Topps Yellow Tiger House by now.

I believe, Lemke, had tried or was thinking of trying but that is the last I have heard about it.

When people own cards like these, I assume they write or call PSA and the others to enquire?