|
What is the origin of Frank Thomas NNOF?
Has anyone ever figured out where these cards actually went to? Did they go to packs, complete sets, dealer exclusives, promotional items, retail team sets?
I only ask this because I just bought a collection from a man who was a regional manager for Friendly's in the late 80's/early 90's. I have heard "East Coast distribution" in the same breath as the Thomas No Name many times, but never and concrete examples. There are plenty of claims/stories on the internet about the origin but they will remain theories until they are proven. Friendlies operates exclusively on the east coast, fitting into the lore. So in this large, mostly oddball collection. I found a box of about 50 unmarked sealed packs. I opened 3 packs so far, as seen in the scan. The cards are absolutely MINT. Each pack contains 3 of the same player and a Friendly's promo contest flyer with an August expiration date. A "collect X number of coupons" based promotion usually goes for a few months and the cards had to be made prior to the packaging. This leads me to believe the cards were produced early in the year. Did I find what could be "IT" or am I getting excited for nothing here? Someone with some some verifiable knowledge please chime in. https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4691/3...499dedd9_b.jpg https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4693/2...b0a0f5fd_b.jpg |
I'm certainly not saying you won't find the unicorn in there but I would think that if something as specific as Friendly's packs were a reliable source we would have heard about it by now. Just rip them and find out.
Arthur |
Greg-- if you have not seen it, there is a very long thread on the Thomas card, how it occurred, other cards impacted by the defect, and theories on distribution, on the PSA CU board. If you have not seen it I can try to post a link to it.
|
|
Thank you, Sir Arthur
|
It's a long read but it's one of the most enjoyable card related threads I've ever followed closely. Definitely worth the time!
|
Yep, that's a critical thread. I don't remember ever hearing of the promotion from Friendly's being related to the Thomas NNOF rookie though.
Can you send me one/couple of the Friendly's coupon cards though? I have a lot of fun memories as a kid eating their ice creams. I will send you back something cool as a thank you. |
Yes, in the annals of cardboard threads, that Thomas one is a first ballot Hall of Famer. Just a wonderful read for anyone that loves the hobby and discovery.
Arthur |
So far there are no verified reports of any NNOF in anything regular wax packs. Not cello, not jumbo, rak, factory sets, vending, or to my knowledge, Friendly's promotional packs. I think we would have heard about that. Sorry! Might as well crack them all open anyhow!
|
I saw the link to this in a previous thread, but here is a video of a guy pulling a NNOF Thomas card from an unopened pack.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbWZQAWbAJ4 |
Quote:
Arthur |
I hate that video, they are just trying to sell overpriced jumbo packs. There are so many fake NNOFs out there as well as a ton of misinformation about the actual provenance of the card.
|
By the way, welcome aboard Mr West. Tell us what you know
|
|
Does anyone know when the 1990 Topps Thomas NO Name was first reported ? By chance I'm looking at a Oct, 1991 Beckett Monthly featuring Frank Thomas cards and there is no mention of it in the article or in the price guide.
If it was in packs etc. early in the production run it should have been reported in late 1989 or early 1990 in the hobby publications and later listed in price guides. I'll continue to check my publications. |
Quote:
Quote:
The rumors of an east coast distribution are very accurate as it seems 95% came from there, though I have seen a report of someone pulling the Thomas in Las Vegas. I'll also say that the other 13 errors seem to be exceedingly rare as every year goes by and none of them surface. One would think that the Biggio and Carlton Fisk especially will gain quite a bit of value to registry collectors of those particular players as they are both a pop 3 or less on PSA. I know that the person - Joe (RookieWax on CU) - that pulled the 5 NNOFs in the Collector's Universe thread has at least 1 each of the blackless Biggio and Fisk that are BGS graded. I'm also aware of one other person, in 2014/2015, that got a Thomas NNOF, Biggio, Fisk, Hart, Morris and Russell out of 10 wax cases (that's 200 boxes for those counting). Those are the ONLY NNOF/blackless errors pack pulled out of all the 1990 Topps since 2009, that I'm aware of. "Rare" does not even begin to cover the odds. "Saucywombat" on CU has several of the blackless errors and Ross, the creator of the thread, has the Biggio at least. I've been trying to find these cards either through buying unopened or hunting them down on any online marketplace. Buying unopened is probably the worst way to go about it, and has resulted in a massive amount of kindling for my woodstove. |
Great info. Thank you Mr West
|
From the CU board:
http://www.billripken.com/bucket/nnofsheet.jpg |
I forgot to mention, there is a user named Gigfy on CU and freedomcardboard that has a few of the blackless including the Biggio and the Thomas. All ungraded so not in a pop report. Guy pulled them out of packs in NY in 1990 sometime. Biggio total pop is probably around 6. 3 on PSA, 2 on Beckett, 1, maybe 2 raw copies. I know Ross sent his copies of the blackless in and PSA screwed up and labeled them normal '90 Topps, not sure if he ever got it corrected, so it wouldn't show up in the pop report.
Definitely less out there of the Fisk. Pop 1 on PSA, 1 on BGS, and that's all I know of. The blackless cards are of more interest to me than the Thomas. The Thomas is out there, it's a known quantity (A BGS 8 ended tonight for $4500). In 1990-1991, Thomas became a star in short order. Because his cards were popular early on, and the NNOF being an obvious oddity and hobby sensation by 1993, meant that probably at least 50% of the total NNOF print run were saved from the trash heap or the attic. I don't think you can say that for the other 13 errors. It makes total sense that they would be so rare. Because so many of those cards from that era are worthless, they get thrown away all the time. That's why I find them so interesting, because probably only 10% of the original print run of those cards is out there. And probably more get thrown away every year. I would guess the original print run of the NNOF and related errors was 600 sheets. 600 cards of each error. I base that population on the existing pop reports of PSA, BGS and SGC graded NNOFs (around 290 combined), subtracting 10% for crack/resubmits. I figure another 200 NNOFs never saw the light of day - either thrown out by moms, lost by kids, destroyed by water damage, fire or accident, or just stuffed in a box and forgotten about by someone who didn't read Beckett. I'd guess the remaining 150 NNOFs are out there in raw form. I see about 2-3 per year pop up on EBay. People often estimate the total NNOF population at around 200-300, but the population reports already show that many, and I don't think there are that many crack and resubmits on the NNOF. It's just too coveted a card (I don't think everyone is comfortable cracking open a holder) and I feel like the crack/resubmit game is more for vintage cards. I also feel that people always underestimate the massive size of the 1990 Topps print run. Chances that there is still a NNOF out there lurking in a wax pack? I'd put them at less than 50%. |
I feel like grandpa Biff Tanner saying this, but, one day, someone's going to be offering 1990 Topps unopened that they themselves have pulled Thomas NNOF cards from. It's going to look like a solid opportunity and they may even have a decent reputation. Stay away. The collation of 1990 Topps is like a Swiss watch. If you know the sequence, you can pull a Thomas rookie 6 or 7 cards out. Meaning, even if you're actually opening legit blackless packs, your odds of getting a Thomas are very low. Got it, buttheads?
Arthur |
Well, lowpopper sent me 5 unopened packs of these when I only asked for the Friendly insert card, so I really appreciate it. I got two packs of Randy Johnson and three commons. Now I have to figure out something I think he will like as a return piece of the trade... it will be mailed tomorrow. Thanks!
|
I wish I still had the letters we received from collectors in 1990-91 who received the Thomas out of the pack while we were working on exactly what that card was.
I have no doubt from my memory that these cards are legit, were put into packs, and more importantly it was just a printing fluke which make the NNOF. Since we were a publishing company in those days, we had tons of people with printing experience. I still remember we showed one of our pre-press managers the card and he said the error was a printing mistake and was absolutely legit. Rich |
Quote:
An educated opinion from someone with pre-press or plate making experience would be very helpful as I am always looking for more opinions on these cards. One thing I might note on the print variation vs. printing defect discussion. Many people have termed the NNOF and the other blackless errors a "short run print defect". When I think of print defect, I think of fisheyes, ink run, solvent drips and the like. The most convincing theory that I have seen put forth regarding the cause of the error contends that the error was the result of a bad plate, which in my opinion is quite different from a print defect. According to those with printing experience, that is the only way that this error could be exactly reproduced in quantities in the hundreds. The cause of the plate production error is still in dispute. The most likely hypothesis that I've seen (from forum member Steve B) is that a piece of tape or paper blocked the negatives from being exposed onto the black printing plate when the plate was made. This theory makes a great deal of sense to me given the conditions required to produce an exact replica of the error over a print run of 400-1000 sheets. Also, when looking at the physical shape of the error, it appears that tape or paper could very well be the culprit. Looking at different examples of errors in the "Show me your...print variations" thread that were caused by solvent or water drips, this fact becomes fairly indisputable. I wholeheartedly agree that the error was indeed a printing mistake and not an intentional move by Topps to recreate the Fleer FF fiasco or generate buzz. At the same time, I think that knowledge of exactly how this error occurred is beneficial to collectors who want to reach an understanding of what constitutes a simple print defect (fisheye, etc), a print variation (an actual change in the printing plates, such as the different Fleer FF versions) or a print error (the player's name mispelled, wrong team, etc). If we accept the conclusion that the error was produced with its own set of printing plates, and then had to be corrected by producing a new set of plates, I would be inclined to characterize the NNOF and the other dozen errors as true printing variations (not just a random "print defect"), worthy of their inclusion in the PSA registry. |
Well, it's limited but I do have experience in most of the departments of a small print shop.
I worked in one in High school. While I was technically there to do cleaning, the place had us do other tasks after our regular work was done, sometimes before if things were busy enough. So I got cross trained in everything eventually. To them it was handy to have extra help available if someone was hurt or sick. Generally though the other guys would slide into the tougher jobs, and I'd get into one of the easier jobs. I had a piece of art I did made into a small poster, so I've done original art. (After the yearbook company cut it in half :mad::mad::mad: ) I helped a couple times in the camera room. - Yes, literally a camera that was room sized. Lighting and original art on a large sliding holder, camera in the wall, and darkroom behind the camera to develop the huge negatives. Other than the size and ability to scale the size of the resulting negative it's just like operating most other cameras. When the camera guy drank a bit too much and "cleaned" the camera room stirring up a ton of dust just before shooting a big job, I got to spend a few days fixing the masks with some special whiteout or tape. Interesting stuff, semi transparent red scotch tape that would block the light used to expose the plates. I helped a couple times in the platemaking room, another biggish job and even essentially untrained I helped get it done a bit quicker. Made probably 5-6 plates? My last week one of the press operators got hurt and I got to run a 35" Heidelberg sheetfed press. They didn't expect I'd be as fast as the regular guys, and told me to just concentrate on quality. By the end of the week I was doing pretty well on speed too. I got to do a lot of stuff in the bindery. That was "my" area to keep up with (and the stockroom, but that's not anything fancy) I didn't get to do any setup work, but ran a bunch of the machines. The only ones I didn't get to run were the cutters, but they're simple and I was around them every day for a bit over 2 years. In a later job I ended up going back there and repairing one of the cutters (I did 11 years of hydraulic repairs) Also did a bit of shipping/receiving, plant maintenance, carpentry, painting.... But no front office work, like cost estimating or sales etc. (I don't count the hour watching the phone while the office people had a meeting about something. It didn't ring, so it was pretty much just sitting there. ) Topps I think farmed out some of the printing at the time, and was more of a high production lower quality sort of shop. They also did FAR more proofing than we did. The handful of proofs I saw at our place were basically photo mockups of booklets done from the masks and hand folded/stapled. Steve B |
Hi Steve
From everything I've read, Topps subcontracted printing until around 1983-'85 and then brought most if not all of it in house from then until the early-mid-90's (haven't researched beyond '93 and have no interest to). Because of this, and the clear evidence of an east coast distribution, I believe the Thomas NNOF was printed at the factory in Duryea. The biggest challenge has been trying to figure out if it was a first run error or something that occurred in the middle of the press run. I've gotten first hand reports of the NNOF being pulled from a pack as late as April 1990 which would have been well into the press run if it had come straight from Duryea to the retail display rack. But it very well could have been sitting in a store room for 5 months before the pack was purchased. |
I'm not entirely sure what Topps ever printed in Duryea but would love to find out. Len Brown once said in an interview they did so "much later" (referring back to the beginning in '66 there) but they would have had to reconfigure the plant to do so and late 80's/early 90's were a time of economic issues for Topps. I do know a lot of the lithographers they used historically were out of business by 1984 or so, some a lot earlier than that. It's a bit of a mystery what they may have printed themselves vs third parties after they lost their long time printers.
Has anyone ever seen anything from the 1980's or 90's indicating where they printed cards? I think they closed Duryea in 1996, or at least drastically cut back their lease space at that time, although a nearby plant in Scranton remained (and remains) open but I think they just made candy products there. It makes Ring Pops today apparently. |
I've seen evidence of some of the less mainstream stuff (usually products associated with motion pictures) being printed in Ireland. The rest of the sports product from the 1980s that I've seen came from Duryea.
|
Quote:
I got the feeling the items Len Brown was talking about were the "new" cards made from 1994 onward but could be mistaken. When you say they came from Duryea, if you are referring to the copyright on the wrapper, that does not indicate where they were printed but rather where the packs were assembled with cards, gum and wrapper coming together. Some products would still have a Brooklyn address after they switched almast all the wrappers to Duryea in mid '69 but nothing was packaged there after 1966. For some products, it would seem using NY as their legal address meant more sense than PA, maybe due to licensing or regulatory concerns. |
From 1982:
"Space creature helps unemployment Aug. 27, 1982 DURYEA, Pa. -- Topps Chewing Gum Inc., riding the success of the year's most popular space alien, says it will delay seasonal layoffs and recall other workers to meet the demand for 'E.T.' bubblegum cards. Topps Chairman Arthur Shorin said Thursday the firm also plans to market other products related to the successful Steven Spielberg film later this year. 'We knew the movie had every chance to be a hit, but we didn't know how big of a hit,' Shorin said. 'We're delighted to see how it turned out.' Topps spokesman Norman Liss reported 'excellent sales' of 'E.T.' cards, which it markets in 30-cent packets of 10 that also include a slice of gum and a sticker. Liss said 25 employees who had been furloughed by the firm's Duryea plant will return to work Monday and the company will delay its usual seasonal layoffs to keep up with the demand. The plant, which employs 675 people, makes the bubblegum sold with the 'E.T.' cards and the firm's more famous baseball and football cards. Liss said the 'E.T' cards are printed 'in different places, which we don't say for security reasons.' Shorin said Topps will introduce an 'E.T.' sticker album in the fall and plans to market plastic figures filled with candy by Christmas. Other products, which Shorin declined to describe, are on the drawing board. 'We have a good ability to maximize on a property such as this,' he said. 'At this point, we think good combinations are possible.' Neither Shorin nor Liss would comment on how much revenue the company expects to realize from its 'E.T.' product line. Shorin said the company obtained the bubblegum card rights to 'E.T.' long before the motion picture's release, 'but we had a great deal of faith in Steven Spielberg and his organomething America needs. It's a refreshing character.' " |
The "Tiffany" Sets were all printed in Ireland as were the Traded sets and I think 1-2 other products. So in the 1984-91 realm there are definitely two different printing places (if not more).
Rich |
In Topps' earliest annual report available online (1997), under "Production", they detail there that:
'High-quality paperboard is sent directly to outside printers by the Company's suppliers." http://getfilings.com/o0000812076-97-000007.html Annual reports are available for every year since Topps went public in 1987. If someone were to acquire a report for any of the years from 1987-1994, it should detail their production methods in the same manner in which it did in 1997. |
Frank thomas nnof
Ok so does anybody have a DEFINITIVE answer on what packs the error cards made it into?
|
If someone had a definitive answer I wonder if they would share it on a sports card chat board or just be out buying those cases, boxes and packs :)
|
Quote:
I completely agree but the answer is out there somewhere. The cards have been out for 27+ years now and there is only maybe 100-200 of them. I am beginning to think that they may not have come out of packs and could have easily been found in a Topps scrap pile....just a thought. Moreover, if there was over 100 finds so far, why is there no written account of a pull from a pack/set type of medium? The Bush-Yale card never came from packs.... If possible, someone please cite an exact documented account of a true NNOF find. |
"I completely agree but the answer is out there somewhere. The cards have been out for 27+ years now and there is only maybe 100-200 of them. I am beginning to think that they may not have come out of packs and could have easily been found in a Topps scrap pile....just a thought. "
I will reiterate (And I wish I still had the letters) --we got more than enough letters at Beckett to verify these cards from packs. Now what type of packs or when they were in packs is a different issue but they were truly in packs. I was the E&V guy so I read those letters. Rich |
Quote:
I will echo what Rich said. As I mentioned before, they were found only in wax packs. I have spoken to several people who can attest to this directly, not to mention the person in the CU boards who pulled 5 of them and documented it in that thread. As for population, there are already some 250-275 graded NNOF and I estimated the original print run at 400-1000. |
Nnof
I am currently on page 11 of 21 on the long CU thread...wish there was a spark notes version. :(
|
Nnof
OK I read the whole thing. :D
The CU board reports various Blackless errors coming from "retail wax packs" and "holiday factory sets". The only claims specifically for the orange sheet errors have been from the wax however. I cracked open a holiday set and I can confirm there are blackless examples in there. I found these: Sheet A https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4658/3...0724dd01_b.jpg Sheet B https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4676/3...2ea0cb55_b.jpg |
You could ask the Tim Wallach hoarder whether or not they have additional "blackless" 1990 cards. He has about 500 of them.
http://timwallach.blogspot.com/2011/02/1990-topps.html |
There is a confirmed source. To the person that said no one would be posting it on a message board, you are correct.
Arthur |
The Wallach collector's address is a legal office. Wonder if his firm specializes in Monopoly defense work.
Arthur-- is it true that the confirmed source is on Red Reddington's Blacklist ? |
Quote:
The NNOF Thomas (orange sheet blackless) absolutely did NOT come from factory sets. That was an angle by sellers in the mid 90's to move surplus. But as you've seen, there are plenty of other near or partial blackless cards from other sheets to be found in them. I pulled that same Drabek out of one years ago. These cards have been pulled from packs in the last 10 years, but shy of live videos of a sealed case being broken that contained them, you won't find 100% guaranteed evidence of it. From my memory, a guy on the CU boards named "RookieWax" had pulled at least one at the time of that thread. I believe he is still active on that board. He had the accompanying/connecting ones to go with it. The thread had been derailed because he decided to start offering packs for sale from the batch of retail/grocery display packs he pulled his from. |
A couple things to keep in mind with these cards.
There exists other degrees of missing black ink on the affected area subjects. Thomas missing little chips and pieces of his name, Marcus Lawton with small blackless pieces, etc. So there was some type of transition between the original plate/print flaw and correction. Or perhaps the minor missing-black cards were a precursor to the famous ones. The green sheet subjects are also prone to missing black ink. Chris Gwynn, Roger Salkeld, Jerome Walton are a few I have pulled (from junk boxes/hand collated sets, not sealed product). These, like the orange sheet cards, are not faded or "going blackless" but missing smaller sized areas of the card's black print. And last year a seller on ebay had found (on ebay) a full, uncut, blackless "dark blue" border sheet. No black ink whatsoever. He had them cut and sold off singles. I believe a Dale Murphy was the big name on that one. He may have a few commons up for sale still. Oh and this is 100% second-hand information from almost 20 years ago but I was working in card shop and whenever the subject of errors or odd cards stuff came up, one of our regulars would tell a story about how he bought out a local arcade's vending machine stock of cards. He described them as machines that dispensed cards for $0.25 or $0.50 (don't recall qty or exact price). Anyway, he bought these cardboard boxes filled with junk, mostly 1990 Topps. He had sorted through them looking for Thomas and Juan Gonzalez, eventually he came across a Thomas and was "disappointed" to discover that it had most of his name printed on front. He described it as either missing the beginning or ending of his name (FRANK THOM ), I do not recall, but remember trying to visualize it. I've grilled him about this over the years and he claims it was never sold and sits buried in a box in storage. |
Quote:
The obstructing object, whatever it was - and I'm thinking it was some tape- was removed from the platemaking machine, but not as well as it should have been, leaving a few bits behind. Not at all a stretch --- Hey, that black plate you made is a mess, we need a new one NOW! Later on, maybe a lot, maybe a little they realize the new one isn't great, and get another. In between the platemaker has really cleaned the machine, (and probably the whole work area, nobody likes getting in trouble over stray tape) And the next plate is just fine. |
Pretty good notes and stories here. Many of you have already seen these but I'll throw in some scans to match names to faces. The "partial missing black" run has been mentioned as a "precursor" or perhaps more accurately, a "postscript" to the NNOF error run.
A partial missing black Frank Thomas: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/1J...=w608-h1008-no A properly authenticated BGS "partial missing black" owned by Joe: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/XN...=w787-h1166-no 3 known cards affected by the partial missing black error run (I believe the Magrane could possibly be a 4th): https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/88...=w1616-h721-no Notice that the Tapani has a very faint, vertical/slightly diagonal blue line running up the card that passes through the middle of his face. Check out an actual blackless Tapani with the exact same blue line which tells you the printing plates are directly related: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/qg...=w875-h1166-no A run of different Marcus Lawton errors pulled from the same case by Joe (RookieWax). L to R, a blackless Lawton from NNOF run, a partially missing black from the related error run, and a partial missing black variation: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/xK...=w1023-h507-no A slight correction to the post about green sheet errors only containing border breaks. Here are two (of 4 known) partial blackless Chris Speier that I own: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/F7...w1616-h1058-no Other partial blackless from green sheet: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/YL...=w823-h1166-no https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/E1...=w822-h1166-no A normal Leibrandt (left) and a Leibrandt with border breaks (right): https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/ik...w1616-h1100-no |
Quote:
|
Gotcha, that makes sense.
I do believe I have read that there are differences - in terms of the causation of the error - between the cards only missing border breaks vs cards that have both border breaks and cloudy/blackless areas in the photograph/nameplate/team name areas. Not versed enough in offset lithography to remember the differences, and I could be wrong. Either way, quite interesting to see the Drabek and related errors. Quality control on the factory sets couldn't have been great... |
Here's the link to the guy with the blackless dark blue sheet cards:
https://www.ebay.com/sch/m.html?_odk...topps&_sacat=0 |
Nnof
The purpose of this thread is to unveil which packs/sets are producing
which errors....and ultimately where the NNOF might possibly be found. I got my A & B sheet partial blackless from this set here. The orange F sheet was basically unaffected. https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4759/3...82b1b6ef_b.jpg |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
There was discussion earlier about whether Topps farmed out printing to other print shops. We can now say with 100% certainty that the entirety of the 1990 Topps set was printed at the facility in Duryea.
------ "Only 100 cards were made, and they were all presented to President Bush,'' Topps spokesman Ken Liss said. Yet Hull said he found one in a wax pack. Liss said that was impossible, because the regular baseball cards were printed in Duryea, Pa., and the president's cards were printed in New York. Topps has demanded that Hull return the card, but he has refused. ------ http://community.seattletimes.nwsour...5&slug=1059335 |
On a side note; we discovered there were actually "200" George Bush 1990 Topps cards issued when another 100 emerged into the market a couple of years ago. They were printed a bit differently. I do think a few Bush cards snuck into packs.
Rich |
I'm not sure that rules out other locations. If the majority of the cards were printed in Duryea, there's no reason for Liss to qualify his statement by mentioning other places. He's making a general point and brevity is usually the go-to weapon of choice.
Also, I'd be surprised if Liss was with Topps in 1990. Arthur |
LISS *Was* the PR Person for Topps in 1990. The Liss family was not replaced till late 1991 early 1992 by Bob Ibach and Timm Boyle.
Regards Rich |
Quote:
The Topps Archives blog has done the best detective work figuring out who printed what for Topps. link- http://toppsarchives.blogspot.com/20...ters-link.html According to the blog, Topps had been doing some of its own printing in house starting in 1965. There were several outside printers that Topps used in the vintage era - Lord Baltimore Press in Baltimore, Zabel Bros in Philadelphia, Stecher-Traung in NY and CT, Chromographic Press and A. Hoen & Co in Baltimore. Chromographic went under in 1971. A Hoen in '81, Zabel in '82 and Stecher-Traung in '85. Lord Baltimore was done with Topps by 1960. I have one source that says Topps began outsourcing printing in 1994 and their first annual report confirms that several years later. That gives us a window from the early '80s to 1994 where Topps could have printed the entirety of its product at the facility in Duryea. |
I'm not saying that Liss was lying. I'm saying that he wasn't being directly asked how many locations did they print the 1990 issue in. He was being asked about the Bush card so inconsequential information to the point he was addressing wouldn't have been brought up by him. His point was simply that the Bush card was printed in a separate place from the 1990 issue.
For the sake of argument, let's say 85% of 1990 Topps was printed in Duryea and the remaining 15% wasn't printed in New York. There's no reason, and no reasonable expectation, for Liss to mention where that other 15% was printed in the context of the Bush conversation. Not to mention that he already proved his memory wrong with the 100 card statement. All I'm saying is that his comment serves to purpose in furthering or disspelling any theory. Arthur |
Posting scans here so folks can discuss.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1990-TOPPS-...D/372496340533 https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/6iwAA...Pr/s-l1600.jpg https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/8pYAA...PF/s-l1600.jpg https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/4twAA...P4/s-l1600.jpg https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/Q2sAA...TT/s-l1600.jpg Looks like a legit card to me. |
Quote:
You say "he proved his memory wrong with the 100 card statement". His memory was not wrong. Topps did not know about the other 100 cards until they surfaced later in the lawsuit. So Liss did not know. The only reason that statement was incorrect was because the 100 cards went straight to President Bush and the other 100 went out the back door of the factory or into wax packs unbeknownst to Topps. Liss can only comment on information that Topps makes available to him. All the circumstantial evidence pointed to Topps former printers going out of business in the early '80's and Topps taking their printing in house from the mid-80's to the mid-90's. We then have the mouthpiece of Topps say that the regular issue 1990 Topps cards were printed in Duryea. The statement, combined with the painstakingly gathered evidence from the last 4 decades indicate that there is a very high likelihood the NNOF was printed in Duryea. You are correct, it is not 100%. I appreciate a healthy amount of skepticism but this seems like quibbling to me. |
The 100 George Bush cards was what was officially noted in 1990 as being produced. The second hundred (sheet of 100) which surfaced were not known until they hit the market place and were produced differently than the 100 known Bush cards.
Now, Ken Liss and his family were not regarded as good PR people in 1990 BUT in this case, they accurately mentioned what Topps had told them. The Bush question is a good sideshow but not germane to the Thomas discussion at this time. Makes a better subject itself Rich |
Quote:
I can't explain it any better than my previous 85% analogy. This is certainly a significant piece of circumstantial evidence but it by no means puts the issue to bed, like you suggested earlier. Arthur |
Thanks for clarifying Arthur. Let’s push forward with our efforts aimed at digging for more clues.
|
Quote:
|
*double post; hate this computer*
|
West, is that your card? I would think it would need to be examined in-hand to really form a judgment. Tough to see the surface of a card in a scan or photo. The accuracy of the area is pretty good though.
Arthur |
Not my card. I have a partial blackless Thomas, the John Hart blackless error and the Jim Acker error so I am still looking for the Thomas and the 10 other errors.
Very true that the card would have to be examined by an expert under magnification to verify it has not been altered in any way. I'm guessing there are ways to recreate this error either by using a regular Thomas, a blank front or altering a NNOF, though the latter method would be questionable as the NNOF in what looks to be PSA 6 or 7 is already worth in excess of $1500. |
I'm sure someone could do it with carefully placed paper tape and the proper chemical. Just a matter of what the surface would look like after the procedure. I also don't know what a proper NNOF surface looks like under magnification. Did the process of leaving out the black ink also leave a different surface gloss? I imagine only someone who has examined one would know.
Arthur |
Quote:
I must correct the record on this. Tonight I spoke with a former Topps employee who wishes to remain anonymous. According to him Topps did NOT have printing capabilities at Duryea in 1990. They subcontracted out to other printers and had a company representative doing quality control at the printing house. The uncut sheets were then sent to Duryea to be cut up and assembled into packs, boxes and cases before being shipped out to retailers. Additionally, despite rumors to the contrary, this person did not believe that the NNOF was a "first run" printing error. His reasoning was that there was meticulous attention to detail for the first print run and more than a few people had to sign off on the first proofs. He believes that the error occurred sometime later in the production cycle as a result of some obstruction in the printing press. I didn't get into the finer details of the theory of the error causation (obstruction in the press vs. obstruction on the negative during plate exposure) as he was not directly involved in platemaking and printing. He estimated that quality control at the printers pulled a sheet once every 1000 sheets to check for errors. This may explain how 500-1000 NNOFs slipped out into packs. He did not remember the error itself which is not unusual considering the massive amount of production occurring. 1990 was probably one of the peak years in terms of total base set production run. Also, this person was employed at Duryea and the error would have been caught at wherever printing was occurring. The conversation was illuminating and it was quite interesting to speak to someone who was on the inside back then. This person gave me permission to share this information but otherwise wishes to remain anonymous and enjoy retirement and I will respect his wishes and not share any other details regarding him or his employment. |
Does anyone know which of the 1990 baseball packaging were distributed first/last in the production run?
-wax packs -cello packs -rack packs -factory sets |
The NNOF came out of wax. Have yet to hear of anyone getting it out of cello, rack packs or factory sets. As for the order of production I have to assume it was mixed throughout but I am unsure.
|
You have to love how eBay sellers are always looking for a moron.:D
It is technically a NNOF card. https://www.ebay.com/itm/323520872353 |
|
This is all you need to know: five of the six "frequently bought together" items for that listing are 1990 Fleer Jose Uribe cards.
Arthur |
Quote:
I wonder if the grading companies (assuming they determined it was authentic) steered away from it because they would have a difficult time deciding how to label it. I honestly think, if it's legitimate, they should give it it's own designation like 'faded name FNOF' just as the 1937 D 3 1/2 legged Buffalo is designated as such versus the '37 D 3 Legged Buffalo nickel (for anyone who collects coins). |
Quote:
I've looked at a bunch of stuff, and I think it's real too. I also have it on good authority that fading black without fading the surrounding ink is very difficult. I actually can't figure out for sure what caused it. The others are almost certainly from a big bit of debris, probably tape obstructing the plate while it was being exposed. If it wasn't then, the next likely problem is a bit of debris in the press preventing that part of the plate from being inked. But the most common of those would be a bit of paper, which of course gets inked, transfers, and looks totally different. Maybe a bit of saran wrap type stuff? That should take ink too, but might not. Usually to repel ink the obstruction has to also hold enough water. Most stuff like that is very transient, not usually hundreds or 1000+ impressions. If it's something blocking the inking, then this could be within the first few impressions. Maybe in the first 5? I have a card that has an additional 4 uninked impressions, so it can extend that many at least. But there doesn't seem to be a shadow of the border, which I'd think should be there. I can't think there was enough damage that a strip of plate got ripped out. With the pressure required, I'd think the underlying cylinder would have been inked but printed poorly. It could be a different blue plate that for some reason had the name on it when the rest didn't. That would be pretty strange, but then, it's Topps... Fortunately, the card has clues! There's a line from what's probably a plate scratch right near the left of the name plate. If it's an on-press obstruction, there should be cards with the same line. Unless the plate got changed right after the obstruction. And Topps wasn't great with registration, if the blue plates ever had the name on them, there should be cards misregistered showing a blue shadow of the name alongside the black printed name. |
Hey Steve,
Thank a lot for the response. Always like hearing from someone with printing experience. The line (plate scratch) you are talking about - are you referring to the dark line below where the "F" in "Frank" should be? Nearly all the regular NNOFs have this scratch, if that helps at all. You mentioned the number of impressions (population) of the NNOF. One person with 35+years in the printing industry said that the error was likely caught at the printers after 10 minutes. He speculated that this would have created 700-1000. He said that if it were a small number caught, say 100, then the sheets would have been pulled and sent to the bailer. What is consistent with this count is the former Topps employee told me that QC pulled uncut sheets every 1000 or so to check for mistakes and print quality. |
Quote:
It would be a very cool card to look at under a microscope and see what is going on with it. |
Quote:
Just because we can't imagine how, doesn't mean the how doesn't exist. Arthur |
Quote:
This card could be many different things but it is not a real 1990 Topps Frank Thomas card that was altered by just removing some black ink. PSA has put many altered/counterfeit cards in slabs. Getting something by them is really not that hard. They are better than nothing but far from perfect. EDIT: To ask, Arthur who are those people you watched reback cards? |
Quote:
If anyone can pull off something like that then please post some pictures. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:00 AM. |