Throwback or Throwaway?

[Archive]

Posted By: ErikV.

I want to get the board members opinion on something. It seems to me that several card companies today are realizing that there's a specific group of collectors that collect only vintage cards. Are sets like the TOPPS206 and 2004 Cracker Jack set targeted for these vintage collectors or are these popular sets being produced because they're well established sets in the hobby? Are these new sets throwbacks or throwaways?

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I'd say they are both. They include all the gimmicks of the new cards but most likely use the throwback design to lure in collectors would normally never buy a new card.

I like the Topps205 set, but I will awhile longer before I buy a box. By then, the price should have totally bottomed out by then. The key is to not buy them when they first come out and just wait it out until the price falls.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

I actually think that the "Throw Back" cards are a GREAT way of letting young kids know that VINTAGE cards even exist ... and hopefully to lead those youngsters into a lifetime of fascination with collecting the REAL T205's, etc.

When I was a kid collecting Topps cards in the 1970's ... I used to LOVE the cards that would come out and show OLD cards of Mickey Mantle or Hank Aaron back through their careers ... so I would have LOVED to see something EVEN OLDER!!



I never even knew back then that baseball cards existed before Topps came out in 1951 ... because Topps wanted it that way!!

[Archive]

Posted By: Gary B.

When I first saw these cards, I had two vastly different reactions:

1. These are kind of cool. A nice homage to a time when cards were so much more interesting - nice to have a modern card that's not a highly glossy plastic metallic holographic monstrosity.

2. These are rip-offs, and putting today's players on old style cards kind of cheapens the uniqueness and specialness of the original issues they were copying.

In the end, even this unusual trend or stunt still couldn't entice me to buy newer cards. I look at one and think, hey this card looks kind of cool and vintage, but it's, you know, Ichiro Suzuki, and I lose interest (no offense to Ichiro, but you get the point). Also, they're just as ridiculously expensive as any other pack of new cards is today - always a turn off.

Definitely both a throwback and a throwaway for me.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

If they are true to the designs of good sets. Unfortunately, most of the ones I've seen are "sort of" there as far as design. The "T206" cards, for example, are nowhere near as deep and lushly toned as the real deal. I do like the Upper Deck Vintage lines, esp. the 2001 set, which is patterned after my favorite set from my childhood, the 1971 Topps set. I had Shawn Green sign that one for me when I was at that charity thing, and I gave my nephew a 1943 Topps-style card to have signed. One thing I do not like are retro cards on modern glossy UV finished stock.

[Archive]

Posted By: pcelli60

More never seems to be enough for Topps. Its all too much. We need to show young collectors how to focus and watch a collection grow..This retro stuff is sad- aint nothing like the real thing baby!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

I like the retro new cards. I've picked up a pack here and there and the Topps C55 hockey got me going after a set of the originals. I bet the new Topps Crackerjack set spikes demand for the originals. I think I saw a big Kit Young buy ad in SCD just before they came out so perhaps Mr. Young was thinking the same thing.

Clearly they sell well or Tops and the others wouldn't keep issuing them and again, I beleive they direct attention to the original issues which is probably good for the hobby.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Kit Young supplies Topps with all the cards for their buy-backs. Watching what Kiy buys will tell you what Topps is up to next

Jay