Is this sun damage? A printing error? What do you think?
Here’s the link on PWCC: https://www.pwccmarketplace.com/items/3433685
Here’s the link on PWCC: https://www.pwccmarketplace.com/items/3433685
2 Likes
Some of these are thought to be genuine. The prob is they can be faked. If you tape it up you could get either the same or similar. Id love to think thats genuine but its something i stay away from.
Agreed. Reminds me of these fakes.
1 Like
We agree @dyl lol. It would take a lot of experimenting to know exactly whats possible and what isnt but its easier just to stay away from all things like this.
Now that adds a lot more credence to being a genine repeating error. Not 100 percent but a lot more than if it was only one. Seeing 2 feels more comfortable. I simply stay away from this for the reasons we know.
1 Like
It looks strikingly similar to the one up at auction. I’m willing to bet that this is a repeating error. I say you should grade the card and list it as an error. 
2 Likes
If you had the card in hand, it should be easy to see if it’s sun damage vs lack of ink right? Wouldn’t you be able to tell through the rosette pattern? (Or whatever ink pattern—not sure if Japanese cards use rosettes)
You would have to zoom into the rosette pattern. The fact that the cut/inking is the same across 3 cards should be enough evidence that this is a factory error
1 Like
Yeah, I just meant that it seems like a cut-and-dry case for error designation by CGC. And that if someone tried to replicate it by sun fading the border in a similar manner (by taping off or covering areas), I would think it should be easy enough to distinguish a replica through the rosettes. (Assuming you could find a normal, non-error card where the cut is so off).
Seems like nothing too controversial, contrast to the laminated/loss of ink cards we saw with @Dyl’s Charizard and in the other recent thread.