View Single Post
  #18  
Old 01-02-2022, 05:44 PM
BobC BobC is offline
Bob C.
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Klein View Post
I am not an "investor" so I object to that term. I do believe the stamped cards are much scarcer than the base 1969 cards so there is some long-term value in them. But they are never got to put anyone through college it's just a $1 1969 Common might end being $5-10 with those stamps.

And for those who get really upset, I'll pay 10 cents each for any Topps buyback card with those stamps which upset you all so much

Rich
Rich, No one is saying you aren't a collector, but then you make the comment "I do believe the stamped cards are much scarcer than the base 1969 cards so there is some long-term value in them.", which is exactly the kind of thing you'd expect an investor to say. In the meantime, a collector actually working on a vintage 1969 set likely wouldn't want that buyback card because it now has some stamp on it. And that 1969 vintage collector wouldn't have been buying those packs in hopes of pulling one of those buyback cards to begin with either. So your comment about paying $0.10 for each stamped buyback card from such collectors makes no sense, because they aren't going to have them to begin with. But you making the sarcastic comment about buying them all for so little after saying they all could be worth $5-$10 one day, is also indicative of exactly what a card flipper or investor would say and do, not what a true collector would say or do. The true collector would rather have the original 1969 card, unaltered and unstamped, because that's what they collect.

And so what if a stamped 1969 card is going to be scarcer than a base 1969 card? What you've succeeded in doing is reducing the actual number of real vintage 1969 cards out there that a true collector could go after to complete their vintage 1969 set. If Topps wanted to create a manufactured rarity they could insert into packs to increase sales, that was based on their 1969 set, why not just create 1969 reprint cards and number them sequentially to some small amount, and create the scarce insert cards they wanted that way? Why did they have to basically destroy vintage 1969 cards to do this?

I wonder how much you'd get screamed at if you were making the same statements and comments in regards to the 2002 Topps 206 buyback inserts of T206 cards, if Topps had put some stamp or mark on them as opposed to the ingenious way they put them into those regular size card holders they came up with. Those T206 buyback cards are untouched and unaltered, and any T206 collector could easily break one out of those holders Topps put them in, and then put it with the rest of their T206 collection and have no complaints.

Now don't go telling me that it's different for 1969 Topps cards because they're worth so little compared to T206 cards. Because when you're talking about a true collector, it's not necessarily supposed to be about the money. But if that's an argument you'd try using then it would sure as heck sound like you're making it about money, which would certainly sound more like an investor than a collector to every normal person out there.

So you can go ahead and claim you're not an investor (which I never said you were), but then someone goes reading your comments where it seems to somehow keep coming back to having something to do with the money...............well, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck.............guess what?
Reply With Quote