Frank Thomas error card - HELP ?!?

[shocker]

I have a 1990 Topps *ERROR* #414 Frank Thomas.
It isn't the regular version OR the other error variant which has his picture and is just missing his name. This card is a COMPLETELY BLANK FRONT - with regular stats and card number printed on back. It also has been slabbed and graded by WCG as a Gem-Mt 10.

HELP ?!?

I can't find this card anywhere in order to get a real value for it. Does anyone know ? Or is it just considered the same as the NNOF card ?

[EricDavis]

A card like that and you don't get it graded at BGS?!?!? I've never heard of a card like that but I think it's possible to get a card regraded. Do that and they should give you more info.

[DaClyde]

That's not an error, that's just a printing defect. Granted blank fronts are less common that blank backs, but it's not an error any more than a card with bad centering. I wouldn't put much faith in their grading if they didn't at least tell you that.

[EricDavis]

I just got ask. How is "No Name on Front" not going to be considered a printing defect. I mean, unless there is a definition of "error" I've never heard of this sounds like an error. Obviously it's a printing defect but it seems to be more closely related to NNOF than it does to being off-centered. I'm not saying it should be worth anything, and I'm sure the graders sucked, I'm just saying... Give me more of a reason to relate it to being off-centered.

[AutographCollector]

I have a 1990 Topps *ERROR* #414 Frank Thomas.
It isn't the regular version OR the other error variant which has his picture and is just missing his name. This card is a COMPLETELY BLANK FRONT - with regular stats and card number printed on back. It also has been slabbed and graded by WCG as a Gem-Mt 10.

HELP ?!?

I can't find this card anywhere in order to get a real value for it. Does anyone know ? Or is it just considered the same as the NNOF card ?

Can you post a scan of it please?

[shocker]

Here are the scans of the card.







B.T.W. Isn't a printing defect an error ?

[EricDavis]

Please tell me you didn't buy this on ebay for $275 http://cgi.ebay.com/2-1990-TOPPS-FRANK-THOMAS-ERROR-RCS-BLANK-FRONT-NAME_W0QQitemZ230082738205QQihZ013QQcategoryZ44834 QQcmdZViewItem without knowing more about it.

[DaClyde]

That's what I was referring to as a printing defect.

[shocker]

No. That definitely was not me purchasing on Ebay. I acquired this card as part of a package buy that I made about 5-6 years ago. I just can't seem to find anyone that knows anything about this card. The link to that auction that ended back at the end of January is the first one I've seen like it anywhere on the internet. Highest best offer was $75 BTW. ;)

[DaClyde]

A quick check of Google shows several blank front cards from 1990 for Topps, in baseball, football and hockey. Aside from the Thomas, none of them were going for more than $5 on eBay. Several online dealers had blank front cards listed for $20+, but no indications that they've actually sold any for that kind of money.

Honestly, I don't know why these don't regularly bring big money like coins, but traditionally, anytime you see the question asked in a magazine, the answer is always "it's a printing defect that commands no special premium in price." I'd be very surprised if there were even 100 blank fronted or blank backed cards of any player in a given year. It might be interesting to try to assemble a set of them, but it's unlikely that many blank sided cards exist for such a project.

[shocker]

Apparently, the answer to my original question is:

"I'd be very surprised if there were even 100 blank fronted or blank backed cards of any player in a given year."
"it's a printing defect that commands no special premium in price." (according to 'a magazine') Which magazine ?!? And why ?!?

http://cgi.ebay.com/2-1990-TOPPS-FRA...QQcmdZViewItem - Same item sold on Jan 26 2007 for $75.

Again, I ask: Is this considered #414B ?!? Why doesn't anyone in the baseball card community even acknowledge this card ?


IMO -
This card should be considered something different.

- It isn't the regular card (#414).

- It isn't the card that was printed in every way perfect except the name in the banner at the bottom of the card was missing. (#414A - NNOF).

Even if it is less worthy than a #414B - NNOF. More or less worthy. That point is moot.

This card exists. My scans and http://cgi.ebay.com/2-1990-TOPPS-FRA...QQcmdZViewItem proves that.

My point is that the trading community (Beckett and CardPricer.com) and anyone else that considers themselves a 'true' sportscard trader; should consider evaluating ANY error cards that exist - (and ALL cards for that matter). All cards - regular, variant, error or otherwise - should be assigned a #. My card isn't a #414. It isn't a #414A. And yet; not even the most 'experienced' collectors even KNOW what something like this IS; let alone know how to categorize it.

[baseball_83]

It's just considered a blank-front error. There are a good deal of blank-front and blank-back error cards from the 80s and early 90s. Even if a particular player has a limited number of blank sided cards, that type of card is not exactly rare. Like all collectibles, the market sets the price for "oddball" cards like your error card. It's worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it.

It's too hard and space-consuming to keep track of them all, so rather than price guides listing every error card, they're just considered "blank-front" or "blank-back". The only reason why some error cards are listed is if they have less conspicuous errors, like a misspelling or NNOF.

[DaClyde]

Apparently, the answer to my original question is:
"it's a printing defect that commands no special premium in price." (according to 'a magazine') Which magazine ?!? And why ?!?


Take your pick...Beckett, Sports Collectors Digest, Tuff Stuff, Baseball Card Magazine, Price Guide Magazine, etc. The question was asked at least once in every magazine and always answered the same. Can I quote issue numbers? No. But I did read a ton of collecting magazines back when collecting was big. Blank fronts/backs just aren't traditionally considered an variation any more than a horribly miscut card. They're basically just something that was missed in the quality control process as the cards were being printed.

But like I said before....I don't know why they're not more sought after, and with the current trend in gimmick cards, maybe their popularity will pick up. Like baseball_83 said, "Like all collectibles, the market sets the price for "oddball" cards like your error card. It's worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it."

The reason they're not recognized by the pricing folks is that there's not a big enough market for them to be listed.