Hacker News Reader

Comment by kabes | Hacker News Reader

From what I understand in the topic the original Pokemon card inventor is involved in this as is a renowned card grading company (knowingly or not I leave out of the question).

So if this stirs up a large controversy, it might actually make the fakes, especially the signed ones, collectibles as well. Probably never the value they first had, but I hope the wistle blower can recover some of his losses.

View on HN

Yes imagine if Andy Warhol were alive and involved in selling forgeries of his own work... is it still a forgery then?

If he said he painted them in the 70's, yes.

Well, it works for Damien Hirst (allegedly).

You can tell they're fakes because they're the Facebook logo in different colours.

The whole point is that they were supposed to be genuine prototypes from the 90s.

Real-deal forgeries of old prototypes sounds even more exclusive than just old prototypes. They'll be worth a lot in the future.

An old employee using his home printer in 2024 to print up old mockups sounds more exclusive than actual prototypes from the 90s? What is your reasoning there?

Old employee prints out old mockups, fools everyone when he has them graded and sold at auction is also an exciting and rare story. Rare and interesting enough to make the rounds beyond the pokemon scene (as evidenced by us talking about it).

I'd agree that original prototypes would be cooler and more exclusive, but these cards are also unique thanks to the events around them. They are not just any contemporary printouts

The story is rare and interesting, sure. And you get to attach that story to 1-5 lots of cards before it gets real old and the value of those cards craters.

With legitimate prototype cards, you can have thousands of them retain value.

Well, depends on how many there are, who made them, if there's anything unique about them, and if the process is repeatable. If it's repeatable then that exclusivity goes out the window.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com