I’ve not been following the story at all but I believe it was originally thought that BGS had assigned the same certification number to two cards with the same grade - not sure if that’s been disproven, but I believe the certs around that one are also the same card with very similar grades.
Edit: Looks like the same cert applied to two cards theory has been disproven as the person who graded that card (and the 2 others) replied to the Blowout thread.
I’m leaning towards that they’re fake slabs - there’s another Luka one found and the fake slabs exhibit one common discrepancy, the “.” on the patent number. Another thing I observed myself is that the sub grades text seem bolder?
Here’s some info for E4 folks so everyone can know how to detect these fakes!
Curious others’ thoughts: if there is a failure in adequate security features (to protect consumers) with an older iteration of slabs/labels for a grading company, and they later improve these features. Is there any onus on the company to reimburse the cost of re-casing for consumers with the older slab product?