Ken griffey jr no name 89 UD rookie

[cardsfan73]

Pretty sure these are fake. From what I remember you could use a pencil eraser to remove the names. Welcome to the forum!

[Shoebox]

I would be very skeptical that they are authentic.

[mrmopar]

Scary! I just made one in a couple of minutes. I can tell if I hold it up at an angle to the light that some rubbing occurred. In fact, i missed a spot of his last name that you can see in the scan. It is obvious if you are looking for it, but I also know that I did it and am looking for it specifically. Someone not looking closely could probably be fooled. This was a quick try based on the comments above. I'm guessing someone could perfect this method over time on junk cards and then work up a Griffey or other better card for big bucks!

[mrmopar]

Card is now on ebay with a BIN of $20 just to see what happens!!

[mrmopar]

KIDDING, OF COURSE! Now it is a rare voided, black logo 1/1!!

[ALR-bishop]

This was fascinating

[jacksoncoupage]

Originally Posted by cardsfan73

Pretty sure these are fake. From what I remember you could use a pencil eraser to remove the names. Welcome to the forum!

100% absolutely fake. As others have said, the erasing of the black ink on these cards and the 1990 cards was fairly common back then during the height of the error craze. These cards are almost always just missing the names on front. I mistakenly purchased a 1990 Dale Murphy recently. Found a 1989 Tony Gwynn in a giant lot too, both altered by eraser.

Gary Carter and Gary Sheffield are the only two missing black ink (on back, 1990 issue) Upper Deck cards that I can confirm as legit, non-erased/tampered. A solo copy of a 1991 Don Mattingly missing his stats on back has floated around online and the owner confirms that is is not rubbed off and gloss is intact.

[ALR-bishop]

Brings up again the issue of whether fakes have any collectible value in themselves. If for, example you have the Thomas no name, or the 58 Herrer, the Campos Black Star, or partial black star, the 57 Bakep , or the real 89 Griffey, or the Fleer 59 Ted Signs, or the many versions of the Rypken FF, do you add known fakes to your collection, labeled as such. I have done that for some of these and other cards.

[jacksoncoupage]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Brings up again the issue of whether fakes have any collectible value in themselves. If for, example you have the Thomas no name, or the 58 Herrer, the Campos Black Star, or partial black star, the 57 Bakep , or the real 89 Griffey, or the Fleer 59 Ted Signs, or the many versions of the Rypken FF, do you add known fakes to your collection, labeled as such. I have done that for some of these and other cards.

I think so. To a degree, at least. I would love to own a copy of the obvious fake 1990 Frank Thomas NNOF that circulated during the late 90's early 00's (the one with the black box intact around the name), as it looks very close and is a confirmed fake. But these cards that are created via damage are absolutely NOT collectible to me. Supposing someone were to reprint the griffey to an exact likeness without his name on front, I would definitely find it an interesting novelty and of some worth.

[DaClyde]

Originally Posted by jacksoncoupage

Supposing someone were to reprint the griffey to an exact likeness without his name on front, I would definitely find it an interesting novelty and of some worth.

We should all be thankful that McWilliam didn't think of printing up a few thousand NNOF variations while he was reprinting all the regular Griffeys and reverse negative Murphys.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by DaClyde

We should all be thankful that McWilliam didn't think of printing up a few thousand NNOF variations while he was reprinting all the regular Griffeys and reverse negative Murpheys.

.....and French Hockey.

[jacksoncoupage]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

.....and French Hockey.

Such a bummer. But oh how I love opening those boxes today!