If people are really concerned about this, just collect shadowless. I know people who collect Beta instead of Alpha because they’re worried about clipping.
I happen to think it’s very possible that a nearly indistinguishable method of 1st Ed. stamping cards will come into use. Key word, though, is ‘nearly.’ With a loupe, it should be detectable.
On a side note, one thing I’ve wondered is if 1st Edition vs shadowless cards are literally identical except for the stamp. There are actual very slight differences in the alignment of lettering/numbers on Alpha vs. Beta cards and that’s become the most reliable way to authenticate Alpha. Similar might be the case with 1st Ed. vs. shadowless.
Jesus that was an interesting 23 page read. What a wild ride and sounds like a huge headache to deal with. So if Im correct you ended up getting compensated the full price of a 1st ed psa 4 charizard and not the difference between a 1st ed and shadowless?
Please check out this link everyone. This is a card I had arrive today and I have a feeling the stamp is fake. If it is it’s very convincing and has been authenticated by PSA.
What makes me think it’s a fake stamp on a shadowless:
It seems a bit too low in position.
Also to the right side of the “1” there appears to be an indentation almost as if it’s caused by something the thickness of a pin, seems like an odd spot for that type of defect too.
Also there is discolouration to the right of the number 1, as if the black has faded exposing some blue.
The biggest thing for me is it also seems like a combination of the “thick” and “thin” stamp. The number one matches a “thick” stamp while the word edition matches a “thin” stamp.
Please let me know your thoughts everyone, I’m hoping it’s genuine of course as it will save me a lot of headaches. But I have so many doubts when I look at it.
@james1993, You’ve already posted a thread on that topic, so no need to make additional posts. Also, posts in threads with a last post of over two months ago are against the rules.