Blackless Glavine Bonds Acker others?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by strike-in

so i guess I will try and sell some of the weird cards on the ebay and see if I can recoup some of the money on the case.
Here is the thing... I don't want to mislead or have any issues, I always try to be on the up and up because of the up and up and it the right thing to do.

Since the cards are actually missing black ink would it be appropriate to list as blackless or should I list as simply "1990 Topps blackless? / missing black" ink?

JustinD you said "The errors that are well known are “partial blackless”. This is the complete absence of black on partial parts of certain cards due to a much hypotheticized printing error of some kind with an obstruction or a dirty litho blanket.

The errors you have found would not fall under the partial blackless label to me as they are “blacklessing” or light/fading ink. Likely due to much of the same reason that would have caused the partial blackless issue at root of the NNOF Thomas. "

So with that in mind, I think "blacklessing" might be best for the cards that have less black ink. However the cards that have swaths of white I was thinking of listing as "blackless" they look like the other cards that are called partial blackless.

I wonder where my cards were on the sheet during the print run?

I've gotten a case of 1988 topps that have every...every card of any value taken out and other boxes and packs that have been what I call skimmed. I just want to be on the up and up.

Times are very different from when I would take a binder of cards to my buddies house and we would trade cards.

Anyhow you all have been super on the input and thanks much!

I would just list them as print error and then describe the error in the description.

As to the case of 88 Topps it could be a couple things. It could have been searched and resealed or that case could have been made when they were pulling star players to sell in huge lots. I recently opened a box of 90 Topps with zero star players in it besides one Frank Thomas rookie.

It is free to list them on here for sale. I would bid the Jose Rijo up to $5 and there could be someone on here who wants it more than me.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I would just list them as print error and then describe the error in the description.

I agree with this.

As they are not the definition of blackless in any way, so you are making it too hard for buyer’s to find them and triggering searches for people looking for a different item. I would use print error in the title and mention “missing ink” and “solvent error” in your description for the white ones as they actually are solvent errors but non error folks won’t know that term. As an error nerd I can tell you it will come into my saved searches with “solvent error” though and I am not alone. You can add “light ink” and blacklessing if you want to the others in the description.

[strike-in]

Originally Posted by JustinD

I agree with this.

As they are not the definition of blackless in any way, so you are making it too hard for buyer’s to find them and triggering searches for people looking for a different item. I would use print error in the title and mention “missing ink” and “solvent error” in your description for the white ones as they actually are solvent errors but non error folks won’t know that term. As an error nerd I can tell you it will come into my saved searches with “solvent error” though and I am not alone. You can add “light ink” and blacklessing if you want to the others in the description.

very good that's what i will do
will be up in a day or two on ebay

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by strike-in

very good that's what i will do
will be up in a day or two on ebay

I have no interest in buying off eBay but others might so posting your eBay ID would be a good idea.