Do Pre-War Collectors buy Modern Cards Featurin Game Used Items of Pre-War Players

[packs]

Originally Posted by 68Hawk

Firstly, most 'collectors' aren't looking for what they can sell the card for.
That's the 'investors'. Or card shops whether brick or online looking to flip stuff.
Collectors are the kids and adults who love to put together stuff they enjoy looking at and discussing with eachother and friends. Waaaay more collectors than investors, but most people seem to focus on the flippers.

Here's one link talking about a very direct link taken by Leaf in a partnership with the Ruth Estate directly to bring product to market.
https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...oxes-for-sale/

Another refers to Shoeless Joe bat used in 2001 UD product....I'd need to look further to try to find better info..
https://www.sportscollectorsdigest.c...f-joe-jackson/

If you're interested, contact UD, Topps and Leaf directly if you'd like further info...

The Ruth deal was for his likeness. It does not mention purchasing any items from the family.

The Joe Jackson article simply states that they "procured a bat". From who? From where? It does not say, just as I suspected.

That's kind of the point. Where does the stuff come from and why is so out of the question to tell your consumers how you acquired the materials you're selling to them?

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by packs

The Ruth deal was for his likeness. It does not mention purchasing any items from the family.

The Joe Jackson article simply states that they "procured a bat". From who? From where? It does not say, just as I suspected.

That's kind of the point. Where does the stuff come from and why is so out of the question to tell your consumers how you acquired the materials you're selling to them?

If you could do your argument the solid and contact the companies I mention, ask them if they could supply just a couple examples of how and where they sourced their material, including whether they might share some pictures of the items in question, you might be pleased with the endeavour.

It's been years since I looked, but I can remember at least two big purchases announced and imaged in the media of card companies buying Ruth or Gehrig material for their products. One was for 400K+ if I remember correctly.

I can't see how it's fair to just presumptively make your claim without doing so.

[packs]

It's not a claim, it's reality. The cards do not tell you where the items come from. They all have a similar statement on the back congratulating the person who pulled the card on their pull. It would take no extra effort to include acquisition information. It's not very realistic to say it's on the consumer to find out where the materials came from when the manufacturer can make the information available on the product. You would expect that information from any other retailer of game used memorabilia, so why not card manufacturers? What's different about them?

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by packs

It's not a claim, it's reality. The cards do not tell you where the items come from. They all have a similar statement on the back congratulating the person who pulled the card on their pull. It would take no extra effort to include acquisition information. It's not very realistic to say it's on the consumer to find out where the materials came from when the manufacturer can make the information available on the product. You would expect that information from any other retailer of game used memorabilia, so why not card manufacturers? What's different about them?

Uhh, I think you're now just wanting to argue to be right.
I don't ask Stickley to provide pictures of them assembling my piece of furniture, I trust their label as proof of their sincerity and action.
Same with my Mercedes that I'm trusting is not a re-badged KIA, and my Boar's Head Tavern Ham not being moose meat.
You've decided you're owed some special convincing and proof, and I don't think they owe you anything.
Feel free to not buy the product, but you're accusing them of lying and cheating the public when they visibly state that game used material by the player is being used. That'd be a serious offense in the law courts and they'd be subject to being sued for every dollar ever expended in the pursuit of falsely labelled material. Bring the action yourself and prove it and you'll never have to work again.
Big charge, and you're not willing to email them to set your heart and mind at ease as well as bring an end to your accusations.
Gotta love a message board.

[packs]

How is asking for the information to be made available on the product an accusation of anything? I think it's more than fair to want to know how the game used materials you're buying in products was sourced. As I said, it is the same information you would ask for from any one single person who sold you an item described as game used. The signed insert cards feature statements about the card being signed in the presence of a representative of the company. The game used materials do not carry the same kind of assurance of authenticity.

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by packs

How is asking for the information to be made available on the product an accusation of anything? I think it's more than fair to want to know how the game used materials you're buying in products was sourced. As I said, it is the same information you would ask for from any one single person who sold you an item described as game used. The signed insert cards feature statements about the card being signed in the presence of a representative of the company. The game used materials do not carry the same kind of assurance of authenticity.

Because it is understood the signatures of living players did not cost the company too much per auto, that the players make their money by repeating a squiggle 500 times in 75 minutes of visiting time, and collectors can value them accordingly as not inherently rare or valuable. They have social status for their playing era, but you are not buying limited resources.
If UD announced they bought a Mantle jersey for $5K and not the $30K we'd imagine, then each card carrying cloth could surely not be all too valuable....and thus - who will pay the big bucks to purchase those 4 card packs?
Keeping the number and history vague allows collectors to simply imagine a perceived value and spend accordingly, regardless of whether the jersey was only used in a pre-season game rather than when the shot was heard around the world.
Also, by keeping total numbers and availability to themselves we don't know whether it should be considered scarce and highly collectable or just part of a stream of available material.
It's why the modern stuff is fairly valueless outside of low number rookie stuff with it's accompanying patch.

Speaking of, I have only 11 memorabilia cards amongst my collection but I love this one:

[68Hawk]

https://www.cardboardconnection.com/...orabilia-cards

[Chris-Counts]

Game used cards with their various slivers and swatches are sports memorabilia's time shares.

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by Chris Counts

Game used cards with their various slivers and swatches are sports memorabilia's time shares.

It isn’t really Chris because time shares don’t break up the property, they just share ownership of it. These cards tear up historic pieces which can never be put back together again. If you like this then you should also love cutting up the constitution into little pieces to be put in cards, or cutting up the Mona Lisa to be in cards. To go further, why not cut up rare cards to be in cards so everyone can own a sliver of a Baltimore News Ruth or a T206 Wagner. I think to own cards like this shows an utter disregard for history and I would never own one.