Some of these buybacks are a bit silly

[BobC]

It's kind of a bit on par with the cutting up of bats and jerseys to make limited edition cards simply for profit reasons. Many people find that practice reprehensible, as many also do the marking up of such buyback cards. Just another chapter in the ongoing saga of collectors versus investors it seems.

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by BobC

It's kind of a bit on par with the cutting up of bats and jerseys to make limited edition cards simply for profit reasons. Many people find that practice reprehensible, as many also do the marking up of such buyback cards. Just another chapter in the ongoing saga of collectors versus investors it seems.

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

[G1911]

If our primary focus is on how to manufacture value for a 50 cent card, and being frustrated if the card is not worth more because it was bought back by a company, that seems the realm of the investor and not the collector, as this is about creating money and not enjoying the card that is damaged and altered in the effort to manufacture said scarcity.

It's scarcity manufactured decades after issue. If people want to collect that, good for them. It seems silly to me. I don't think anyone is "really upset" by it, just don't see it as reasoned.

[Rich Klein]

I will also state that for the card companies, they are doing this to add "value" to their packs and if so, then you need to come up with a way to show the value is added. That is another reason why the stamping is needed in their eyes so they can show the value.

They also purchase these cards on the secondary market, usually from a specific dealer or two or so, and again that is a cost.

For them, the stamping on the cards makes sense because it shows what product (s) the cards are included with. And frankly if you don't like the stamping, there are tons of those 1971 Leader Cards with no stamping so just get one of those

And I'm sorry for those who don't understand some of the logic from the card companies point of view (and I talked to them back in the day about that) including what was in my opinion, the debacle of the 1991 buybacks.

But if I'm a card company and I purchase some 1982 Topps Card sets to put into 2022 packs (40th anniversary) I'm going to ensure the collectors know it is a special card. I will also state that either Cal Ripken card, because of the value and possibly the 1982 Topps Traded Ozzie Smith card would NOT be stamped because of the book value. That's what I mean by a market cap on stamping the cards. But if I get a 1982 John Tudor card with a stamp, I've just added to the value and have no compunctions about putting that stamp on that card nor purchasing it as a collector

And to repeat, if you really don't like them and have some, I'm happy to pay 10 cents each to take those cards off your hands

Rich

[G1911]

Disagreeing with something and not understanding why a company does that thing at all are two completely different things. We are well aware Topps does it to try and manufacture value and scarcity by altering a card to get people to think it’s special. That’s exactly what we’re objecting too. Good luck in your buy back investing.

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by G1911

Disagreeing with something and not understanding why a company does that thing at all are two completely different things. We are well aware Topps does it to try and manufacture value and scarcity by altering a card to get people to think it’s special. That’s exactly what we’re objecting too. Good luck in your buy back investing.

I call it playing because I don't spend silly money on these -- LOL

And that's why they need to put the stamp on the card and yes we can disagree on if it's something which should be done. But as I pointed out, if you pulled a 1989 common, which my friend did, in a 1991 pack and there was not stamp all he had was a nice memory and a 2 cent card. With a stamp he would have had a card worth something.

And yes stamping on the player's face is kind of annoying

Rich

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

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?

[deweyinthehall]

Not to mention it makes life tough for those of us who collect individual players - not enough that I need a guy's 1976 and 1977 Topps cards, now I need them in their buy back version, in Gold, Bronze and Silver stamped varieties over several years....argh!

[BobC]

Originally Posted by deweyinthehall

Not to mention it makes life tough for those of us who collect individual players - not enough that I need a guy's 1976 and 1977 Topps cards, now I need them in their buy back version, in Gold, Bronze and Silver stamped varieties over several years....argh!

And that's another example of how the card manufacturers have harmed the collector aspect of the hobby. So more often than not it isn't about the collectibility of the card or player anymore, it seems to be more about hitting the rare cards that can be flipped for more money.

[homerunderby]

Originally Posted by deweyinthehall

Not to mention it makes life tough for those of us who collect individual players - not enough that I need a guy's 1976 and 1977 Topps cards, now I need them in their buy back version, in Gold, Bronze and Silver stamped varieties over several years....argh!

Don't forget the blue and red versions, I think that was 2018? I collect Yankees and I have a respectable number of these in my collection (25-30). I get them when they are less than $1, usually in dime/quarter boxes at shows.

I don't bother trying to get them all because who even knows what the checklist is? As the years get older and as the originals get more valuable who even knows if all the players are covered, and then, in all the variations.

I'd guess that the 80's and later, they covered most/all of each set, but then again I haven't seen some of the keys like Mattingly RC, Ichiro RC, or Jeter RC covered in these sets. They might exist, but I haven't found them for sale. I do find stuff like 1987 Topps Paul Zuvella is pretty plentiful.

They are fun to collect and when I see them in a dime or quarter box I grab them (regardless of team) but I don't take them too seriously.