Is this a PSA mistake or do you think the 1st stamp is added to the image? Take note of the 0 seller feedback.
Back in the 5 million days I hadn’t designated the shadowless yet so it could simply be a labeling mistake…or not lol. See below.
Also he sold another card from the 5 million series, a bkastoise, that was designated properly. The Blastoise one though is way undersized for the PSA case. And the back is the same as the other cards back.
1 Like
Look at where the card is positioned in the case from the picture of the front to the back. The pic of the back has a huge gap between the top of the card and the top interior border that is supposed to hold the card in place. Triple suspect.
2 Likes
Nice catch, that’s actually a crazy big gap.
Smh you n00bs
Back in the day when PSA didnt have PSA fitted cases for Pokemon cards because they were mainstream yet for grading.
So they put the cards in a tin plastic baggy per say, to prevent the card from moving around, and then placed them in those style cases.
Plus, this thread could easily be answered by just asking the seller for more pics. I asked about his blastosie he had and he happily sent over more photos for me
2 Likes
The issue is the first pic the alakazam is close to the top of the PSA case’s (guards?). In the back pic there’s a big gap.
2 Likes
If I didn’t make the thread though, I would not have gotten this great history lesson 
What’s the process of getting this card fixed? Is it just a matter of sending in the card to PSA for review? Do you have to pay for more than just shipping to do this?
1 Like
@zap2 The photo of the card reverse was reused from his/her Blastoise listing that was sold. It also matches the Blastoise case front.
I think its probably just a PSA error (referring to the missing 1st edition designation). And I’m not at all surprised to see one from that grade era. You don’t see those older numbers too often 
1 Like