Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Question about base sets

I am glad that this is finally confirmed. I knew that it was the same stamp with different pressure, the gray stamps are a dead give away.

I also wanted to add that we are analyzing this subject to the bone and I am sure that the person or people who were in charge did not observe the finished product as critically as we are. In fact, during the original release of the TCG in 1999, the cards sold 10 times more than the "initial projections". Basically their main goal was to get them on the shelves as soon as possible. This would make sense for why there are so many errors in the Base set.
 
Last edited:
smpratte said:
Like I said before, this is a hobby, not a necessity and if someone wants to pay for the difference between thick and thin, then that is no problem. However, I am more concerned than normal because the people insisting that it is a real thing were the ones who originally made the distinction years ago on ebay.
Click to expand...

Not sure if that is a knock or not on me cause I was the one to make that distinction years ago. I really never much cared what caused it. Kinda like the butterfree d. The appearance was different and it mattered little what caused it.
I guessed back then that it wasn't a pressure thing and I still believe that. A different plate with a different amount of ink would make sense which would rule out the different font theory I thought for years. But none of that was the reason behind my collecting and then marketing the "thick/thin" idea. Why did i do it then???

Well, DJG hit the nail right on the head. It was because of the print run that I separated the two back in 1999. If I recall right all my original 1st ed base boxes were thicks. Then a subsequent wave of boxes were thins so I separated them by that distinction and made no big deal out of it. Remember, back then it was less a collectible market than a players market though in no time at all that reversed. Yes, I socked cases of everything away myself but it was mainly to save for my sons to have later as momentoe's. As it turns out though all these cases and boxes have turned into much more than that;)

A quick word about the fake stamps. This was an issue in 2001 at PSA. There was a meeting called to address the issue as well as the gold stamp issue. There is a definitive way to identify the authentic stamp and that method is known by all graders.

Just a side note...what a GREAT job by all the posters on this issue. You've all been very thoughtful and expressive. Your dialogue is quite educational and entertaining.
 
Gary, I am very disappointed in PSA as they graded and authenticated two 1st edition base set cards that undoubtedly had fake stamps applied to real cards. The Charizard is on eBay right now marketed as a PSA 2 copy of a significant misprint. I'll post the link when I get to a computer.

The problem ia that they do not look at the stamp at all, they grade the card. I have sent in shadowless cards and labelled them as 1st edition on the grading page to see, sure enough they were graded 1st edition. That is why I believe the fake stamps made it through
 
cbd1235 said:
Gary, I am very disappointed in PSA as they graded and authenticated two 1st edition base set cards that undoubtedly had fake stamps applied to real cards. The Charizard is on eBay right now marketed as a PSA 2 copy of a significant misprint. I'll post the link when I get to a computer.

The problem ia that they do not look at the stamp at all, they grade the card. I have sent in shadowless cards and labelled them as 1st edition on the grading page to see, sure enough they were graded 1st edition. That is why I believe the fake stamps made it through
Click to expand...

Certainly mistakes are made and that is really a shame. But keep in mind they have recently passed the 20 million mark in cards graded. Funny thing is, mistakes never seem to be made on MY submissions IN MY FAVOR lol.
The card graders don't concern themselves with the labels. That's all done before they get them. Unfortunately that department makes more mistakes as witnessed by your shadowless submissions.

GIve me the info on the fake stamp card and ill get it fixed...
 
garyis2000 said:
Certainly mistakes are made and that is really a shame. But keep in mind they have recently passed the 20 million mark in cards graded. Funny thing is, mistakes never seem to be made on MY submissions IN MY FAVOR lol.
The card graders don't concern themselves with the labels. That's all done before they get them. Unfortunately that department makes more mistakes as witnessed by your shadowless submissions.

GIve me the info on the fake stamp card and ill get it fixed...
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to criticize the company but it's unfortunate that it happened. I know the labels have nothing to do with the graders but in my opinion that is a flaw that can lead to things like this:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1st-EDITION...307?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cccd8f4f3

This is the infamous Charizard, the same seller has a Mewtwo aswell
 
Gary, the comment about the distinction was just a point that was relevant to the discussion. Some people already had their minds made up about the thick/thin without any evidence which is why I said that.

There was discussion about the card above on UPCCC. I actually started the thread since the seller contacted me through ebay to see if I was interested in buying. I told him that it was not a legitimate stamp. I told the seller that he should try to get a refund processed, but they didn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top