Fake 1991 Upper Deck or manufacturer error?

[gophergirl23]

Hi all,
Recently picked up some 1991 Upper Deck in a trade and discovered a few of the 1991 Upper Deck sent were...defective? It's really strange. As we pulled them out of their individual penny sleeves to put with the set, several were revealed to be two pieces - a thin card stock front with white back and a thin card stock back with a white front. They were paired to appear as if a complete card when placed in the sleeve. They have the hologram intact. Not sure if this was a manufacturer defect or some kind of facsimile. Bizarre. Any ideas about the history of these?

 

[t.rooster]

That's rather bizarre, I've never seen nor heard such a thing. Occasionally you will come across or see a blank front or back, which are either test runs or where the plate skipped printing, but this is rather strange.

 

[Loyalty32]

Could the separation be from lack of being in a climate controlled environment? Maybe a combo of that and poor QC at the factory?

If the cards all separated clean like those pictured, some player/team collectors around here may be interested in their player/team.

Thanks
Craig

 

[gophergirl23]

Could the separation be from lack of being in a climate controlled environment? Maybe a combo of that and poor QC at the factory?

If the cards all separated clean like those pictured, some player/team collectors around here may be interested in their player/team.

Thanks
Craig

That's an interesting suggestion - about the environment. They all were already separately, cleanly inside the sleeves when we got them. But even when you place the two together, the thickness is still quite a bit thinner than the original cards. Maybe there was supposed to be a filler between the two sides?

 

[Mike121]

Were these in a binder? If you say they're still thinner than a normal card, it makes me wonder if maybe the previous owner printed those off and put them in there as fillers until he could get an actual copy of the card to replace it with.

If the cards came apart, why would someone just toss out the center piece of cardboard and keep the outside pieces? If that happened to me, especially on a base card, I'd at least attempt to somehow glue them all back together. Maybe he did try it, though, and could never find a suitable way to fix them so just did that instead.

 

[cjay101]

They created SO much of those products in not one or two printings, but 10's of printings. I'm sure certain lots of card stock weren't up to par and somehow the stock layers came apart over time. It is odd there were more than one card, but in all honesty, there was so much of that product back then, even the counterfeit idea seems pretty far off.

 

[dragonfire613]

I can't see them being counterfeit, that just seems like way too much work for the tiny return. Humidity can do strange things to paper, that is a possibility.

 

[gophergirl23]

Yeah, thanks for the comments. I agree that this doesn’t seem like a counterfeit production. The yield couldn’t have been worth the ink used. And also the holograms are perfect. They are SO thin, though. I’m not sure they could ever have been the thickness of the original 1991 Upper Deck cards. A mystery for sure!

 

[easy mike]

Hi all,
Recently picked up some 1991 Upper Deck in a trade and discovered a few of the 1991 Upper Deck sent were...defective? It's really strange. As we pulled them out of their individual penny sleeves to put with the set, several were revealed to be two pieces - a thin card stock front with white back and a thin card stock back with a white front. They were paired to appear as if a complete card when placed in the sleeve. They have the hologram intact. Not sure if this was a manufacturer defect or some kind of facsimile. Bizarre. Any ideas about the history of these?

After reading all the possibilities , who knows.
I had a ton of them at one time. Still have a few lying around so if you want to send me a few numbers and I will try to send you a few #s for you to compare. lmk. Mike