1989 UD Griffey Variations?

bsfastball

Hi all-

I've heard (I think) that there are a few variations of the 1989 UD Griffey card, and I was wondering if anyone can confirm this. I just bought a big lot of PSA 9's (about 40) and I noticed that one of the cards has a definite darker color or tint to it. See below:



The card on the left is definitely darker, or bluer, than the card on the right. Every other card in the lot I have looks like the card on the right. I've heard there is a "purple hat" variation for this card, is that true? Anyone have a scan of a "purple hat" griffey? Do any of you out there have UD griffeys that look like the card on the left?

ThaSneakster

Hmmm...that's pretty normal...I've opened about 3 cases of the 89 Upper Deck and some of the Griffeys are darker than the other...Not sure if it's a variation or not...maybe just the ink or printer...

MeteoriteGuy

Someone will chime in on the variation. I think it had to do with the "OF"? Can't recall correctly at this moment. I think there is also a hologram variation.

nightcrawler

Sorry I gotta jump in and say how much I hate that card.


Gawd, of all the great action shots UD could've used instead.

Stingray

I thought it had do with something being more of a purple color on the card, like his hat or something like that??

RedHeart54

I think the variations have to do with the hologram. Some Griffeys (like many '89 UDs) were printed with some or all of the hologram missing. Some people have tried to sell this as a RARE variation (a la a '58 Poncho Herrera) but I don't think anyone bought into the idea.

RoarIn84

i hate the card too..... well over a million of them, and tho he's better than Andy Pafko (if you get me drift), it's value is unjustified.....

BunchOBull

Right, the infamous "purple hat" varation. While there is a certain percentage of the print run that has this coloration, it can't be said if they were a product of a certain print run or just random variations in the transfer of cyan and magenta plates.

To me, it really doesn't follow the rules of a variation because every card has random variations like this.

DavidPuddy

<< <i>Right, the infamous "purple hat" varation. While there is a certain percentage of the print run that has this coloration, it can't be said if they were a product of a certain print run or just random variations in the transfer of cyan and magenta plates.

To me, it really doesn't follow the rules of a variation because every card has random variations like this. >>

jackstraw

Yes there is a "Purple Hat " variation. I see them from time to time but they are hard to pick up from a scan.
I think the 90 Upper Deck has the harder to find error/variation. It has no trademark written line on the back.
This is about the best I can come up with for the purple hat vs blue hat comparision. Very subtle like I said.


90 Upper Deck> The one without the Trademark Line is impossible.

1989FleerBillRipkencollector

Does Griffey have a TM/R variation?

TM or R by team logo/Star Rookie on front.

I have heard cards 2-99 and heard 1-26,28-100 (error cards 13,72 only came one way)

anyone?


*edited to add /Star Rookie

jackstraw

<< <i>Does Griffey have a TM/R variation?

TM or R by team logo on front.

I have heard cards 2-99 and heard 1-26,28-100 (error cards 13,72 only came one way)

anyone? >>



Yes there is an variation of that for his card. It is about impossible to figure it out by a scan though?
Its in the grass by the Star Rookie logo.
BMW cards had a hologram mismatch Griffey card for a couple grand on their
site a few years ago but would never show me a scan so I left it alone.

1989FleerBillRipkencollector

I wonder what hologram was used. I've read alot about 91' holo variations, but none for 89. Only missing etc.

BunchOBull

I never knew about the 1990 variation.

edited to add:

The cards at the top are both TMs.

jackstraw

The 90 variation only affects cards 101 > 200 and was during the high number print run. I
I heard it was caught early making them some what tough. I have only seen 2 in my time. The one I own thanks
to a collector here (Donato) and one on ebay in a PSA 10 holder. I ask for a scan of the back every so often but
have not hit the jackpot yet.

Barfvader

<< <i>The 90 variation only affects cards 101 > 200 and was during the high number print run. I
I heard it was caught early making them some what tough. I have only seen 2 in my time. The one I own thanks
to a collector here (Donato) and one on ebay in a PSA 10 holder. I ask for a scan of the back every so often but
have not hit the jackpot yet. >>



Your correct on the being caught early. I have an article on it somewhere in my mess but I'd never be able to find it.

Got a stack of 70 of them (no Griffey's) that includes McGwire, 3 Mattingly's and a few other stars of the time but mostly commons.

It's also easy to use an eraser on these and make your own (it's very detectable).

digicat

<< <i>i hate the card too..... well over a million of them, and tho he's better than Andy Pafko (if you get me drift), it's value is unjustified..... >>



To start with, it's all cardboard. What factors do you think justify a card's value?

mtcards

Ive had a few 89 Griffeys graded lately. I have one of the rare "Back surface wrinkle" variations if anyone is interested.

1989FleerBillRipkencollector

<< <i>The 90 variation only affects cards 101 > 200 and was during the high number print run. I
I heard it was caught early making them some what tough. I have only seen 2 in my time. The one I own thanks
to a collector here (Donato) and one on ebay in a PSA 10 holder. I ask for a scan of the back every so often but
have not hit the jackpot yet. >>



In my notes I have 101-199 affected. Hmm..

ThaSneakster

<< <i>Ive had a few 89 Griffeys graded lately. I have one of the rare "Back surface wrinkle" variations if anyone is interested. >>



got a scan of the back????

jasoneggert

Back in 89 I pulled this super rare "extra black ink" variation. I am pretty sure it is a 1 of 1. worth about $10,000!

digicat

<< <i>Ive had a few 89 Griffeys graded lately. I have one of the rare "Back surface wrinkle" variations if anyone is interested >>



I once busted a box in which every single card was from the exclusive "back surface wrinkle" parallel set. Lucky me.

jackstraw

<< <i>

<< <i>The 90 variation only affects cards 101 > 200 and was during the high number print run. I
I heard it was caught early making them some what tough. I have only seen 2 in my time. The one I own thanks
to a collector here (Donato) and one on ebay in a PSA 10 holder. I ask for a scan of the back every so often but
have not hit the jackpot yet. >>



Your correct on the being caught early. I have an article on it somewhere in my mess but I'd never be able to find it.

Got a stack of 70 of them (no Griffey's) that includes McGwire, 3 Mattingly's and a few other stars of the time but mostly commons.

It's also easy to use an eraser on these and make your own (it's very detectable). >>



Jeff can you please send me the article if you ever find it?

lawnmowerman

Nice to see you John!

jackstraw

Thanks Matt I have really missed collecting and everything that goes along with it.
Message boards, submitting cards,Ebay, other sites that have cards and going to the mail box.
It has been such a big part of my life it was hard to put it down for almost two years.

Salinas

Yes Jeff, if you have the article, please pass it around. I just looked at the small stack of 90 UDs I have, and I have about 5 or 6 of those error/variations. Darrell Evans, Gary Sheffield, and a few others.

Barfvader

If I find the article I will scan and post it but the odds are not good.

TNP777

<< <i>

<< <i>The 90 variation only affects cards 101 > 200 and was during the high number print run. I
I heard it was caught early making them some what tough. I have only seen 2 in my time. The one I own thanks
to a collector here (Donato) and one on ebay in a PSA 10 holder. I ask for a scan of the back every so often but
have not hit the jackpot yet. >>



In my notes I have 101-199 affected. Hmm.. >>

There used to be a great error/variation thread on the old Buckett boards. I learned about the '90 UD copyright/no copyright variation there, and was happy to find the no copyright in my dupes box.

Salinas

well, do you recall if they are scarce? or just a variation? of any value? or just ordinary?

Barfvader

As I recall they were caught very early.

Are they scarce? I don't know. I would say they are harder to find then regular ones and the old Standard Catalog I have says no premium is attached to ones with the copyright or without it.

TNP777

If you're asking the question of me, I don't believe they're all that rare. From an admittedly small sampling of four dupes, I had one 'no copyright'. Either I got pretty lucky, or there are plenty out there. Out of the at-large collecting community, I don't think there are many folks that give a hoot about minute variations like this. I am definitely one of them, though.

jackstraw

I care about them but will agree most don't. From my exp. you got lucky because the ones without are boogers to find!

chromerookies

sorry to bump an old thread but I was just going through some boxes of cards at the WP show this past weekend and came across a couple 90' UD Griffey's and I remembered a thread discussing errors on his 89 and 90 UD cards. So after I got home I went here and did a search and came up with this thread and after checking the 2x 90 UD Griffey's and seeing copyright lines on both. i remembered I have 2 89 Griffey's that were both auto'd so I went and got them and here's what I found:
this one has a "TM" next to "Star Rookie"


and this one doesn't


so my question is, how Rare is the one without the "TM"?
any help appreciated,
Dan

sportscardtheory

<< <i>sorry to bump an old thread but I was just going through some boxes of cards at the WP show this past weekend and came across a couple 90' UD Griffey's and I remembered a thread discussing errors on his 89 and 90 UD cards. So after I got home I went here and did a search and came up with this thread and after checking the 2x 90 UD Griffey's and seeing copyright lines on both. i remembered I have 2 89 Griffey's that were both auto'd so I went and got them and here's what I found:
this one has a "TM" next to "Star Rookie"


and this one doesn't


so my question is, how Rare is the one without the "TM"?
any help appreciated,
Dan >>



These look the same to me.

jackstraw

The one with R circled is alot touher to find then the one with the TM but
as its been said here it probably has the same value because nobody but me and a couple others
care about them. On a side note PSA has started labeling the 90 without trademark line on the flips.
I am in the market for a Mcgwire without the trademark line if anyone has an extra they want to trade or sell.

chromerookies

These look the same to me. >>




Look next to the "Star Rookie" in the Green part you will see one clearly has "TM" while the other clearly doesn't.

On a side note I found 3 89' UD John Smoltz cards and 1 had the TM while the other 2 have the R,
Dan

sportscardtheory

<< <i>These look the same to me. >>




Look next to the "Star Rookie" in the Green part you will see one clearly has "TM" while the other clearly doesn't.

On a side note I found 3 89' UD John Smoltz cards and 1 had the TM while the other 2 have the R,
Dan >>



I don't even see where it says "Star Rookie". I only see Rookie, and the TM looks to be on both of them to the right of the word Rookie?

chromerookies

ok, next to the "Rookie" which is over a star (hence STAR ROOKIE) in a circle you will clearly see on the 2nd Griffey the it is CLEARLY NOT a TM. you have to look closely but it is CLEAR in the scans which I provided

richtree

although the 90's UD - no trademark were thought to be rare it seems that there are a ton out there due to the mass high number box print for retail stores.

90 high number wax boxes were reprinted for stores, ie kb, modells, and other "chains".

I have appx half or more of the "NO Trademark" cards. Some may be more rare than other, and that may be where the scarcity is because high number boxes often contained both with trademark and no trademark variations in the same box.


Upper Deck variations are printings seem so hard to explain from 89-92, i don't know why. ?

all the griffey minor flaws just seem to be printing extremely large quanties, especailly in an intro set....

cheers

majorflux

I think he is a little bit more tanned on the "star" variant.