Shadowless vs First Edition Base

General
,
21

It’s my understanding that the 1st edition stamps were an afterthought and applied after the print run(s) were completed. I saw mention by WotC that there were multiple print runs of the shadowless cards (which includes the 1st edition cards). This is where it gets confusing to me from a logical standpoint. Did WotC print all shadowless cards (through multiple print runs) then go back and 1st edition stamp only some of them?

I think the more likely scenario was they had something like 3 initial print runs for shadowless. (purely my speculation)

  • 1st run was shadowless and later had 1st edition (thick) stamps applied to it.
  • 2nd run was shadowless and had a change in the 1st edition stamp (thin) leftover cards were allocated to unlimited print run.
  • 3rd run was shadowless and packaged as unlimited.
  • Nintendo steps in and requests modifications to the cards (and packaging).
  • remainder of 3rd print run gets new packaging.
  • 4th print runs reflects changes Nintendo requested (shadowed) and is packaged in new packaging as unlimited.

and so on for many many more print runs.

22

Is there a reason you think thin stamps came first? If anything I’d think it was the other way around. Thick was first and applied to all cards, holo and non-holo. Then there was a need for more holo 1st ed cards (maybe there was an initial underestimation or pull rate was altered from the initial ratio) and they changed the design of the stamp and applied thin stamps to a bunch of holos (maybe these were intended to be just unlimited shadowless thus creating an explanation for the perceived rarity of shadowless holos?). And maybe a few non-holos also got the thin stamp to just fill up the last few packs (looking at that thin-stamped wartortle). All sets after base use the thin stamp so this makes more sense to me. But keep in mind this is a story I’m pretty much pulling out of my ass here lol :blush:

3 Likes
23

Actually I confused those, revising my original post now.

24

Both theories lead to Shadowless being an ‘unintentional’ set made by WOTC. Either they overprinted and sell the leftover as Shadowless or they printed Shadowless because they needed to satisfy demand at the time and to bridge the lack of supply from 1st ed to unlimited. This information is gold to the community and if we are able to locate Gene the Powerseller, we might be able to know more about the mysterious Shadowless set.

1 Like
25

I’ve actually bought 1st ed base cards from a seller named Gene with really old certs…

could it be…?

1 Like
26

I wouldn’t necessarily say unintentional. Rather, Wizards was very flexible and very frugal. They may have initially though unlimited and 1st edition would have the same artwork. When shadowless was discovered the first theory was that shadowless was simply excess sheets from an initial printing (or series of printings) that Wizards wasn’t about to trash. Wizards had this kind of flexibility with Magic cards, which is why products like Edgar (Summer Magic) and Alt. 4th Edition exist.

As for the variations in the 1st edition stamp, I think that the different versions were printed simultaneously. To digress, the heavy duty printing on cards is typically done in-line, using as many color stations as are necessary - up to the maximum capacity of the specific print equipment used. But little specialty priting, such as gold foils, promo and prerelease markings, are often done after the card has been otherwise printed, and on a different piece of equipment.

For example, it is not unusual to include one or more print stations on a machine that can emboss a surface and / or can cut sheets down to strips or individual cards for packaging (packaging, in packs or boxes, can be incorporated as well). Such machines are used to customize small batches of products (like customized decks of playing cards with the name of a company or event).

My guess is that the 1st edition stamp was added after the cards were otherwise printed, and was done simultaneously on more than one machine. The printing differences could have been as simple as the result of how the same original 1st edition stamp looked as it was applied using different equipment. In general, the idea of the 1st edition stamp being applied in a separate process helps explain the numerous ink transfers that lightened the 1st edition stamp on card faces and left a ghosted image on card backs (this effect is not noted on any of the other colors). In this context, shadowless could have simply been a pallet or two of cards that weren’t delivered to the packaging press while the 1st edition stamp was set up. Or shadowless was a portion of the initial run delivered and initially processed (and packaged) without the 1st edition stamp.

In my area, NJ east of Philadelphia, 1st edition cards were the only ones delivered in the first month or two. Any store that got any was sold out immediately. Zany Brainy, where my kids played, saved their Pokemon product for kids playing in their league. For the first few months they would limit anything remaining to 2 boosters or 1 starter per customer. The leagues were on Friday night, and I had to bring my sons back first thing on Saturday Mornings to see if they could get more.

As for Gene, all I remember is that he was from somewhere out west (I want to say Oregon), he was active at least through 2006 or 2007, and I think his last name began with an S or a T. His Ebay name was his real name. I’ll see if I can dig up any of my purchase or corrospondence records from the time, but it would be a miracle if I had anything that far back.

2 Likes
27

I’m like 90% sure this is the guy I recently bought from. He has a lot of feedback but nothing for sale except a few auctions, all 1st ed base with really old cert #s. He was from the West coast. I’m not going to post his ebay name publicly here out of courtesy, message me if you’re interested.

28

Ask him bro. Point him towards this thread if anything.

1 Like
29

I’ve sent the info to someone here who asked me for it. I believe they are attempting to get in contact.

1 Like
30

So I sent Gene the Powerseller an email about the Shadowless set and this is the reply I got.


Unfortunately no one knows the print run numbers, not even WOTC. What’s interesting is that Shadowless and 1st ed have the same amount printed, meaning either the there was only one print run and 1st ed and Shadowless share half that print run OR they had 1 run each.

Another interesting insight is that collectors used to think Shadowless cards were fake compared to the shadowes unlimited and threw them away/destroy them. Since there were Shadowless decks too, they were also played a lot back then. They are indeed rarer than the 1st ed, but not bearing the stamp, they would not mean much for cross-collectors.

16 Likes
31

I can say with certainty that WoTC employees know the print numbers… Its important to understand why the information hasn’t been released though. Many many WoTC employees employed during the reign of pokemon left with a bitter taste in their mouth after seeing what the corperation turned into. Many employees don’t don’t want to talk about it at all and consider their time there as a stain on their resume. For those who don’t know or couldn’t have known, WoTC is not shy to file suit over employees sharing confidential information. It has happened numerous times in their relatively short history… so as I said I can tell with certainly the information isn’t lost.

To append a comment to that statement… the information only serves those who are investors. What good would the information bring if made common knowledge? I don’t see any benefiet to the hobby other than mass buyouts, those which would eventually only hurt the collector base of the hobby.

5 Likes
32

This kind of information is why I love E4

Thank you for providing this!

4 Likes
33

@jkanly I see that point about helping investors. However I think print numbers provide confidence to everyone across the board. Newer collectors who see a card for high hundreds or 1k could have more confidence in the purchase knowing the print. I experience this with quantifiable Japanese promos & trophy cards. The ability to quantify the release provides consumer confidence.

7 Likes
34

Awesome info! Thanks for digging

35

I had a friend who’s dad thought the shadowed version was fake and so his whole collection is shadowless/1st ed.

Needless to say, I bought all the cards off him and thanked his dad :wink:

1 Like
36

So basically any Shadowless PSA 9 holos under $200 need to be purchased now before increasing.

37

Interestingly the shadowless fakes topic comes up a number of times in the 2000 chat logs:

  1. What about those Pokémon cards with copyright 95 96 98 and some have 95 96 98 99 are the 99 fake?
  • Nope, copyrights change on the cards as different print runs and dates pass.
  1. Are the base set cards that have a date of @1995,96,98,99 fake because they have 99 on them.
  • Nope there was a legal thing that Nintendo made us take off the 99 after many cards were already printed and distributed. In fact the ones with the 99 are a little older then the ones without the 99.
  1. If a card has a thin HP text and no shadow from the picture, and lightened background, (most people call it “second edition”) are they fake?
  • Nope, they are just from the early print runs of the cards before we darkened them, thickened the font, changed the copyright, and added the drop shadow. No, there was a slight color change between print runs.

Bonus quote:
167. How can you tell if a card is fake?

  • The light test is the best way. Hold the card between you and a light source. If you can see the printing on the back of the card through the front, it’s fake.
5 Likes
38

I understand that those numbers are important where ungraded values differe greatly between only 39 and 100-1000 copies (university Magikarp for example), but I personally don’t believe that revealing print numbers is beneficial to Base products. Consumer confidence was never an issue with WoTC Pokemon products, am I right?

WoTC/MF already set in place countermeasures against forgeries, so that’s not a problem. By and large the fake stamp issue is slowly fading through the growth of Shadowless in the past year. There are other reasons… but that’s my take on it :blush: hoping not to ruffle any feathers

To append another comment: Those who know the depth of the market frequently find ways to work things in their favor. The fact that the numbers are kept quiet actually protects us as collectors which ultimately keeps the hobby as a whole healthy.

1 Like
39

By the time Fossil came out there were some serious counterfeiting concerns. There were stickers that could be placed on cards to change a worthless card into a valuable card. The stickers were good enough to fool kids.

There was so little sealed product available that counterfeit product began pouring in from Asia. I remember visiting the New Jersey shore and the towns with boardwalk shops were selling ridiculous amounts of counterfeit boosters. They weren’t the best counterfeits (or the worst), but they were good enough to fool kids.

These problems, and the ensuing fights among kids playing casually (as to who was cheating), actually put Pokemon into a bit of a tailspin in my area.

As for production numbers, WOTC used to release them for early Magic sets. But Wizards learned from the demise of the baseball card meltdown that production data could topple the secondary market, as happened with Magic after overproduction of some bad early sets. By the time they were distributing Pokemon cards they refused to release any production data.

40

It may hurt collectors trying to obtain certain cards (if the print data instills confidence in less saavy collector’s, thereby increasing demand), but it would help collectors who already own the cards :blush: