They may still want to use the mechanical error beyond the 14 day.
Obviously I agree that you want to clarify everything before sending the cards. In the past I had to do a Mechanical error for something that was done months prior. They gave me a prepaid insured label to return the item to them for the review and after ot was fixed they covered the return shipping.
This is a good topic for a separate thread! Cool to know finally put some dates to each set of his art. Itās also impressive because Mewtwo is pretty similar between both versions.
For label errors, there is no time limit. The 14 days is mainly for damage in transit or authenticity issues
Solid, then he answered you based on what you asked. He made the distinction on the JP release side of things. Well done. You might just still want to put him in the loop on why you asked and share the link to this thread.
As far as being actively used as material for a magazine, this may be technically correct on his part. However as we see in the thread, coro-coro magazine showed off play test card images in 1996. Whether he knows about this or not, I donāt know. Whether he considered them as valid āfirst appearanceā in a clear way or not is what I think is actually at play here. His big push was to get the best and most clear images of the sugimori ādefaultā art preserved in the highest possible fidelity, and importantly, the right settings. infamously the early designs were published in the western media and game guides with crappy shifted colors, and messed up hues, and blown out brightness resulting in the loss of detail. He and others were able to source for the first time, at least to the english speaking world, quality images.
Just some background on his contributions. And yeah, he kicked bulbapedia in the pa-toot over this, having really crap tier low quality images.
thatās just how I remember it off the top of my head anyhow. 
Oh yeah I know of him! If has done some great work. Iāll put him in the loop when he gets back to me. Could you send me the playtest card images from corocoro so I can show him? Thanks!
EDIT:
Seems he knows lol
|x.com
Iāll copy-paste my misery in this thread as well to share some thoughts and experience.
Some were sold privately at first, but I was the first one to win a publicly sold playtest, Alpha Bulba 9 on Goldin for 29.5k. Had a TCG card shop owner to bid for me (cause I bought a crap ton from him, he agreed to help me out for a museum project I have here in Croatia) after paying a 6k deposit. We donāt know what to do now, I guess since itās such big money he would pursue his best to retrieve it back and cost of lawyers would be justified by the eventual refund.
So one of the cards dear pfm had posted above says āprinted July 1996ā, but Alphas were first advertised as āMarch Playtestsā. 4 months difference? Weird. Seems like the guy who forged them tried to play smart by adjusting the printer (if thatās even possible), but wasnāt āeducatedā about month of creation suggested by (who else but) Akabane. Someoneās full of shit here, or to be more polite, someone needs to go to the toilette - instead of which they used printers to wipe their greedy asses with.
CoroCoro with Beta presentation Mewtwo came out in September which means that BP card should have been designed by August the latest, so how would you go from Alpha Playtest (printed July), through Beta Playtest (and where is Gamma Playtest? Seriously?), then Delta Playtest, then Alpha Presentation and then Beta Presentation (August)? Seems like too many (4) steps in only a month.
Also, my Clefairy Beta Presentation (the first BP ever sold, for 12k on Fanatics) is much darker than Clefairy Betas you now see on eBay - those are lighter than a guy from Finland who spent a couple of years stuck on a glacier. When I first saw color shade differences between two Clefairy and two Mewtwo Beta Presentations of the very same kind, I knew these were fake. Not checking printer at least has 1% chance of justification (we were just uneducated or careless), but to call 2 different colors the same type of card is ultimate disgrace.
Just realized how stupid I was not to see in CGC Pop Report that in Alphas thereās only 1-2 Abra, 1-2 Nidoking, 1-2 Beedril etc, but 7-8 Pokemon Trades, 7-8 Energy Retrievalsā¦Why is there always much more trainers and just 1-2 Pokemon? Who split all the Alphas this way?
Spent 40k on 7 cards. If I raised a lawsuit, would probably spend 10k suing from Europe and achieve nothing. Dad entrusted me with some of savings. If he knew, Iād be better off under a cold stone in warm earth which is kinda how I feel like. If we all got refunded amounts which included premiums and taxes, still not worth it, first because of sadness theyāre not real at all and then cause we all could have invested in something else and made money.
For this reason, I really hope there is hell. Thereās nothing people wouldnāt try do to, disgusting.
Meanwhile, thanks to pfm, I do believe in heaven because youāve single-handedly saved me from buying additional 20k of smaller cards to create this story in my museum frame:
Seadra - the first Pokemon on a TCG artifact (proof of concept)
Nidorino - Alpha Prototype, the 1st Pokemon to appear in any artifact you could buy (Pokemon Red) and the first that appears in anime S01E01
Bulbasaur - Alpha Playtest, the first colored Pokemon card, the 1st in Pokedex, the 1st to be seen in anime intro to be caught in a PokeBall, the 1st hand drawn by Sugimori, the 1st publicly sold test/prototype
Rhydon - Beta Playtest, the 1st Pokemon ever created in concept with Red in a cave
Pinsir - Tajiri was collecting bugs which inspired him to create Pokemon and stag beetle was his favourite, so itās the first āconceptual archetypeā of Pokemon: stag beetle ride high in Japanese culture
Poliwag - the 1st Pokemon to be called a āfavoriteā cause he was Tajiriās all-time favorite
Mini-Skirt - the first card ever to feature humans/trainers, a bug-catcher (which is Tajiri) and a girl holding a PokeBall (also its first appearance); sheās kinda the bug-catcherās reason he gave up on Pokemon in high school and then came back to them like we all did; romantic and nostalgic, whatever you wanna call it
Pokemon Retrieval - the first image of a Pokemon being caught which is what the franchise and the logo are all about, gotta catchāem all; also a tribute to Gashapon figures/balls which inspired Tajiri
Pokemon Trade - two hands exchanging caught Pokemon as symbol of friendship, collaboration, mutual interest and development
Pokedex Handy505 - symbol of the first Pokemon artifact you could buy which is as technical as Nintendo and as red as pokemon Red; symbol of being systematic and achieving all of your goals by collecting and informing about Pokemon
Charmeleon - Delta Playtest, āprototypeā form of Charizard
Goldeen (signed by Akabane) - Akabane means āred, feather and beautyā depending on hiragana/katakana transcription which Goldeen has - red tail (āfeatherā) and itās an archetype of a beautiful goldfish in Gen 1. Pity Takumi means ācrafterā and the cards were literally crafted in someoneās basement. God took care of that pun for sure. Charmeleon and Goldeen are both the very first image of Pokemon you could ever see at all as a Japanese kid - a game battle screenshot from February 1996 CoroCoro.
Kabuto - the oldest standard Pokemon (stromatolites)
Porygon - the first man-made Pokemon and the first virtual/AI Pokemon: also the 1st Pokemon controversy/conspiration theory after the flashing epileptic episode and the one that got Gary into collecting who enforced the whole grading culture in the first place
Mewtwo - Alpha presentation, the 1st Pokemon you ever see in anime, the star of the 1st movie, the 1st Pokemon who was believed to be the most powerful and the 1st Pokemon to be physically created by humans
Clefairy - Beta presentation, was supposed to be the 1st mascot, appeared on the 1st Pokemon cardboard ever (phone card), on the 1st Japanese box, on the 1st page of Pokemon revelation in Feb 96 CoroCoro and it was the last playtest in CoroCoro to be shown (Clefairy Doll) before actual cards came out.
Iām the only to have the full Wotc Harry Potter legit testplay set and I got every version of MTG from Beta through Epsilon (and other variations) with all shades of colors and fonts. Pokemon would be cherries on top consiating of every proto/test/presentation type, every color shade and all 4 illustrators so Iād be the only to have every single wotc prototype version ever made for any game.
All that - ruined.
Quick Update:
Their representative confirmed that we should still submit under āMechanical/Errorā regardless of the submission date. However, Iām running into an issue adding the card, even though Iāve provided all the necessary information.
Most importantly, as I suspected, they wonāt provide a written guarantee for a refund if the card is determined to be fake. Instead, they pointed me to their CGC Cards Guarantee page, which outlines their coverage, including the following:
Remedies for Collectibles that are Not Genuine or (in the Case of Cards Only) Are Overgraded. If Guarantor determines, in its sole reasonable opinion, that
the Collectible (other than a sketch, print, or photograph) is not genuine (unless stated otherwise on the CGC label);
a designated witnessed signature on the Collectible is not genuine; or
the correct grade for the CGC-certified card is lower than the one assigned on the CGC label;
then Guarantor will offer one of the three remedies described below. The choice of remedy will be made by Guarantor in its sole discretion, and the remedies are subject to the further limitations set forth below. Current Fair Market Value is determined solely by Guarantor as described in each of the listed remedies and the āFair Market Valueā paragraph that follows.
For Cards Only: Guarantor shall (a) return the card to Owner encapsulated with a label indicating the newly established correct (lower) grade and (b) pay to Owner the difference between the current Fair Market Value of an accurately graded card at the original incorrect (higher) grade and the current Fair Market Value of the card at the newly established correct (lower) grade.
Guarantor may purchase the Collectible from Owner. Guarantor will pay the lesser of
the Declared Value of the Collectible as stated by Owner on the submission form for Appearance Review;
the Fair Market Value of an accurately graded, genuine Collectible at the original grade; or
the amount actually paid for the Collectible by Owner in an actual armās length transaction, plus any postage, shipping or other incidental expenses incurred by Owner in submitting the Collectible for Appearance Review service.
If Owner was also the original submitter of the Collectible for certification, then the compensation, if any, will not exceed the Declared Value of the Collectible either when originally submitted for certification or when submitted for Appearance Review.
Alternatively, Guarantor may retain the submitted Collectible and provide to Owner in its place an equivalent Collectible that is genuine and has the same grade as originally assigned to the submitted Collectible.
Important Limitation: Under no circumstance will compensation be paid in instances where Owner has suffered no actual damages as a result of the error in certification or in reliance on the Guarantee.
The above are the exclusive remedies provided under this Guarantee. By making a claim under this Guarantee, Owner agrees to the exclusive remedies provided above and waives its right to all other remedies including, without limitation, through litigation.
Fair Market Value. Guarantor will determine, if and as necessary, and in its sole reasonably exercised discretion, the current āFair Market Valueā of the Collectible if it were to be sold. Guarantor will determine the current Fair Market Value of a Collectible based upon what Guarantor believes, in its sole reasonably exercised opinion, to be reliable current market information. Guarantor may use actual pricing and sales information available to it, including prices in the actual transaction history of the Collectible in question. However, due to the volatile nature of the market and Internet auctions/sales as well as the differences in buying habits of different individuals, such information may not necessarily represent the accurate current Fair Market Value of any particular Collectible, which again, will be determined by Guarantor in its sole reasonably exercised discretion. In determining the Fair Market Value, Guarantor will not be bound by the values included within any CGC Price Guide.
If Iām being completely honest, I feel like there are so many possible scenarios here. At this point, sending it in seems like the best next step so I can make more informed decisions based on their response after they make their own review.
I cannot speak for trading cards internal process but can compare to other hobbies.
Other hobbies have backups and it also pends how cheap they can make them. For the action figure industry, some companies would cast extra resin samples in case of damage or loss. If too costly they would make less of (Larger items). Trading cards are insanely low cost to mock up. So I can see a number of them being made.
The concept of play test is to prove viability and look. Just basic mock ups. They could make a number that they worked with. Some saved as back up. Some were possibly sent to other people as well.
Employeeās do forget over time certain things. Not every employee knows what the other employeeās are doing. A lot of times you can show a former employee something from a certain line they worked on decades agoā¦and they had no idea about it, because it was the other team memberās job though they knew each other.
I wonder what their āFair Market Valueā is?
Thatās a lot of words from them. They could have just simply written f you.
Do you think ALT would work with CGC to correct this error? Iām only asking as Iām UK based, but also purchased from ALT a few days before this was raised.
Iām hoping that as the card is still in their vault, Alt will be able to act as a middleman & send the card directly to CGC on my behalf as opposed to sending it out to the UK first!
Plus they donāt even ship internationally, so Iād need to get them to send it to a re-shipper firstā¦ whole things a headache!
This would potentially be one of many āqualitative standardsā cards would be required to adhere to if it was exhibited by all copies that passed the dot test. If true, cards would be required (not sort of nice to have) exhibit this feature or be considered a forgery.
Thanks for sharing the method to expose the dots.
I did this on my DITTO beta cardā¦ graded 10ā¦ alas i can not work if there are any significant dots to determine printing date ?
All help welcomeā¦
If you get the card to the UK, you should be able to hand deliver it to CGCās office in London. Iāve done this in the past.
I think you may need a higher res scan
Can someone create a video tutorial on how to do this?
shame neither professional grading company caught thisā¦
Lmao, yeah, PSA only decided not to grade them. They did catch this. Thats why they didnt grade them.
I was able to sort of contact ebay authenticators. I wasnāt given much assurance that they were going to do anything beside check the card and cert number against the database.
I was convinced the people checking it are knowledgeable about tcg and not just a random people but thereās not really a processes for a ālegitā already graded card. I believe they would try to catch resealed slabs etc but thatās not really the problem in this case.
I will relink this post for people looking at their beta cards.
Itās easier to tell the difference between LQ and HQ beta.
Itās an easier check.
in general, scroll around the thread. there are several other threads here on the cards besides this one too.
