Perhaps the most unethical thing I've seen in our hobby. Topps should be ashamed

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

As far as the big card companies are concerned, I did miss a few decades, but what have they ever done where they deliberately misled the consumer like this? That's about as bad as it gets.

I would have to say this is not even in the top 10 worst things Topps has done.

Topps test Super Refractor sheets leaving by the truck load. Although Beckett giving # grades to handcut cards that are from those sheets is also pretty slimy.

Accidently releasing more than 1 1/1 card, this happens fairly regular.

Topps not serial #ing cards so they can release more that stated.

Topps not honoring redemptions because the person never signed the cards.

Seriously this list could go on and on. Plus anybody paying more than $20 for a card from a new product get what they deserve. When you can buy a nice Mickey Mantle card for less than a guy that has never played a Major League game you know someone is getting it without the aid of Vaseline.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I would have to say this is not even in the top 10 worst things Topps has done.

Topps test Super Refractor sheets leaving by the truck load. Although Beckett giving # grades to handcut cards that are from those sheets is also pretty slimy.

Accidently releasing more than 1 1/1 card, this happens fairly regular.

Topps not serial #ing cards so they can release more that stated.

Topps not honoring redemptions because the person never signed the cards.

Seriously this list could go on and on. Plus anybody paying more than $20 for a card from a new product get what they deserve. When you can buy a nice Mickey Mantle card for less than a guy that has never played a Major League game you know someone is getting it without the aid of Vaseline.

I agree that the redemptions not being honored really stinks, but they are supposed to substitute with a card of equal value. Not that it matters, because you might have bought the redemption for a certain player. And you should get that player. I don't know if that's unethical, though. Bad business practice? Yes. Unethical. Maybe. They shouldn't release a player as being part of a set unless they guarantee to sign.

Ya, I guess that is unethical now that I think of it. But I don't think it's as bad as knowingly pushing the 2014 Chrome cards when you have 2013 cards waiting in the wings that will completely destroy the value of the 2014 cards. That's theft, imo.

[Section103]

I wont necessarily get into details, but anyone who is buying cards from packs and expects those packs to be fairly, equally, and randomly distributed should give pause to think. I can not speak for every card company, but I can speak of one certain company which specifically did NOT distribute 2007 NFL Rookie auto cards (numbered to 10) in a fair manner. You can believe me or not. Im just here to warn you.