1989 Upper Deck Hologram On Front

[peterose4hof]

I came across this Mark Davidson #577 and the hologram is placed on the front.
There isn't a hologram on the back.

Has anyone seen this anomaly before?
I didn't see any on ebay?


Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

[notfast]

$10k eBay 1/1 error


Aka just an example of 80’s print issues

[NYBBFAN]

The rare occasion that the hologram is intact… it’s on the wrong damn side.

[ReggieBush22]

Assuming it's a legit error, that's actually pretty cool. What are the odds of that happening?

[towerymt]

Originally Posted by ReggieBush22

Assuming it's a legit error, that's actually pretty cool. What are the odds of that happening?

50/50

[PuddleMonkey]

ebay the crap out of it

[peterose4hof]

Originally Posted by notfast

$10k eBay 1/1 error


Aka just an example of 80’s print issues

I know printing errors are common for the era,
but it's odd to me no other ones have surfaced, as far as I can tell.

Originally Posted by ReggieBush22

Assuming it's a legit error, that's actually pretty cool. What are the odds of that happening?

On the back, where the sticker is supposed to be, there is no residue or signs of tampering.

[DynaEtch]

It’s a cool error..I feel like print errors like this get more attention in nonsports and pokemon than in sports.

Since errors often affect whole uncut sheets (assuming in this case a sheet was turned over when applying the holo), you could figure out at a minimum which others were affected if you found the sheet which had this Mark Davidson on it (and most pertinently- whether Griffey is on the same sheet).

The biggest problem when valuing these is people think very rare or unique implies worth a gold mine (see typical ebay high price error listings). This is totally not the case…especially in sports, it needs to have something else to draw people in- a star player for example, or a famous error like the Thomas NNOF. So while it’s a neat error, I’d be surprised if it got all that much a boost in price. You can find errors of 89 UD on ebay all over the place- perhaps not this, but very egregious double prints, blank fronts, or otherwise misplaced holograms…and asking prices tend to be like $10-20 for many of them. There are a slew of listings that have 2 holos, misplaced, like the below. Asking price of the below is $15 on ebay.

[asujbl]

Blowout has officially become Facebook

[ReggieBush22]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

It’s a cool error..I feel like print errors like this get more attention in nonsports and pokemon than in sports.

Since errors often affect whole uncut sheets (assuming in this case a sheet was turned over when applying the holo), you could figure out at a minimum which others were affected if you found the sheet which had this Mark Davidson on it (and most pertinently- whether Griffey is on the same sheet).

The biggest problem when valuing these is people think very rare or unique implies worth a gold mine (see typical ebay high price error listings). This is totally not the case…especially in sports, it needs to have something else to draw people in- a star player for example, or a famous error like the Thomas NNOF. So while it’s a neat error, I’d be surprised if it got all that much a boost in price. You can find errors of 89 UD on ebay all over the place- perhaps not this, but very egregious double prints, blank fronts, or otherwise misplaced holograms…and asking prices tend to be like $10-20 for many of them. There are a slew of listings that have 2 holos, misplaced, like the below. Asking price of the below is $15 on ebay.

I checked those out too. I think they are all from the same seller. I mean specifically the two hologram errors you pictured, which leads me to believe some shenanigans and perhaps not legit.

[ReggieBush22]

Originally Posted by peterose4hof

I know printing errors are common for the era,
but it's odd to me no other ones have surfaced, as far as I can tell.



On the back, where the sticker is supposed to be, there is no residue or signs of tampering.

Yeah, hard to say as i just never heard about this before. But if legit, pretty cool. It's got to be very rare but rare doesn't equal valuable.

[REGGIE206]

eBay 1/1

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by ReggieBush22

I checked those out too. I think they are all from the same seller. I mean specifically the two hologram errors you pictured, which leads me to believe some shenanigans and perhaps not legit.

Certainly a possibility. You’d have to question why do it for total commons though, when you could just do it for stars or even a cheap raw Griffey RC, for a heckuva lot more attention.

Either

-they are somehow pack pulled legit errors (I’ve seen before at least in marvel where an entire pack had all the same type of error, or even most of a box with it- depends how the cards were randomized and packed out).

-Some type of test/proof error obtained in bulk somehow. I notice some other same sellers have a ton of doubleprinted 89UDs. Again, not sure what’s going on there. Possible a ton of errors backdoored at once from the company or something

-actual shenanigans changing a card, but I’m at least somewhat skeptical since it does look pretty clean at least from the pic, and why do it for all these commons vs stars.

What’s actually going on, who knows

[ReggieBush22]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

Certainly a possibility. You’d have to question why do it for total commons though, when you could just do it for stars or even a cheap raw Griffey RC, for a heckuva lot more attention.

Either

-they are somehow pack pulled legit errors (I’ve seen before at least in marvel where an entire pack had all the same type of error, or even most of a box with it- depends how the cards were randomized and packed out).

-Some type of test/proof error obtained in bulk somehow. I notice some other same sellers have a ton of doubleprinted 89UDs. Again, not sure what’s going on there. Possible a ton of errors backdoored at once from the company or something

-actual shenanigans changing a card, but I’m at least somewhat skeptical since it does look pretty clean at least from the pic, and why do it for all these commons vs stars.

What’s actually going on, who knows

Yeah, just cause one guy has all these doesn't automatically mean shady. Like you said, maybe a pack or box contained all these errors. Or he bought bulk. And if he wanted max money, why not do it for stars? And yeah, they do look clean too.

Just no way to know without holding the card and inspecting. And even then, no guarantees.

[jeff152380]

years ago I sold Paul O'neill like this for $50+ on ebay... you just have to find somebody who cares.

[atk825]

If this were Griffey or even a HOF I think you could actually probably get a good get.

[ReggieBush22]

Originally Posted by atk825

If this were Griffey or even a HOF I think you could actually probably get a good get.

Absolutely, especially if graded. Imagine a Griffey with a pop of under 5.

[PuddleMonkey]

C'mon Upper Deck. The precious metals community shouldn't be doing holograms better than us. Argor Heraeus has been doing holograms on gold bars since 1993.

[LittleJimmies]

Originally Posted by PuddleMonkey

C'mon Upper Deck. The precious metals community shouldn't be doing holograms better than us. Argor Heraeus has been doing holograms on gold bars since 1993.

I didn't know until know that I need to add a piece of gold to my collection. That hologram'ed gold is awesome.

[PuddleMonkey]

Originally Posted by LittleJimmies

I didn't know until know that I need to add a piece of gold to my collection. That hologram'ed gold is awesome.

I think it's pretty cool. Not enough market movement for the prospector card types. An ounce of gold or a mid to low tier Bowman Chrome rookie card? I'll take the gold but most on this forum would rather take the Pitcher PowerBall Ticket and pay 3+k for it.