Definately a red flag on this one. The scan of the number is nowhere near focused and the 11 sticks out more than the 10 does.
I think this card is fake. I have seen some #ed cards that don't start with the 0 before the 1 so it would be possible to add antoher 1 in a similar ink or foil.
Yes I have. I opened a box of 1995 Donruss Leaf Limited and found a Ken Griffey Lumberjacks card that was numbered above the lot number. I called Donruss and they said it was due to the machine, which does the numbering, was not reset from the previous run.
This is a simple mistake be the printer. I don''t think anyone is dumb enough to try to fake this card..I mean, come on, its a 3 dollar card anyways Kevin
Comments
Definite post of the day!
TFF
Bob C.
61 Topps (100%) 7.96
62 Parkhurst (100%) 8.70
63 Topps (100%) 7.96
63 York WB's (50%) 8.52
68 Topps (39%) 8.54
69 Topps (3%) 9.00
69 OPC (83%) 8.21
71 Topps (100%) 9.21 #1 A.T.F.
72 Topps (100%) 9.39
73 Topps (13%) 9.35
74 OPC WHA (95%) 8.57
75 Topps (50%) 9.23
77 OPC WHA (86%) 8.62 #1 A.T.F.
88 Topps (5%) 10.00
<< <i>No, but I have seen auctions for cards that are numbered 01/11 sold by sellers who don't understand how to flip a card over. >>
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
1955 Bowman Raw complete with 90% Ex-NR or better
Now seeking 1949 Eureka Sportstamps...NM condition
Working on '78 Autographed set now 99.9% complete -
Working on '89 Topps autoed set now complete
I think this card is fake. I have seen some #ed cards that don't start with the 0 before the 1 so it would be possible to add antoher 1 in a similar ink or foil.
Horrible scans though.
Kevin