When a 1/1 isn't really a 1/1

[G1911]

It's bad and something should be done to address it for the people holding a not 1/1, but I'm not horribly upset or anything. It doesn't seem to be a sleazy tactic, but a simple human screwup this year as Topps is going through a lot of internal changes. Topps usually does what it advertises.

What gets me is when it looks like there is corruption, malice, or intended sleaze. Usually it's Panini offending there. Topps has had some much larger problems than this though. Like that Star Wars set where the 4 biggest hits weren't actually packed out and were held back or backdoored.

The Fanatics version of Topps is doing some dumb meme crap that's worse than an error. I don't like like Taco Bell commercials on rare hits and cards with negative serial numbers and fake Babe Ruth first Bowmans. Gimmick absurdity.

[gunboat82]

Manufactured scarcity turned me off of modern cards. My first taste of cynicism was the 1996 Leaf Signature Series, where they released the same exact cards with bronze, silver, and gold embossed logos with increasingly lower print runs. I was at an age where I was thrilled to get any player's autograph, but I found it incredibly stupid that there was no difference between the images and the signatures that would make a gold card more desirable than a bronze.

Now it's grass background, cosmic background, rainbow in paper, rainbow in Chrome, wavefractors, shimmerfractors, sparkefractors... even tacofractors. It's mentally and visually exhausting.

But more to your point, my opinion of the industry finally hit absolute rock-bottom last year, when I read a thread about how Topps kindly replaced someone's 1/1 by simply printing up a new one.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by gunboat82

Manufactured scarcity turned me off of modern cards. My first taste of cynicism was the 1996 Leaf Signature Series, where they released the same exact cards with bronze, silver, and gold embossed logos with increasingly lower print runs. I was at an age where I was thrilled to get any player's autograph, but I found it incredibly stupid that there was no difference between the images and the signatures that would make a gold card more desirable than a bronze.



Now it's grass background, cosmic background, rainbow in paper, rainbow in Chrome, wavefractors, shimmerfractors, sparkefractors... even tacofractors. It's mentally and visually exhausting.



But more to your point, my opinion of the industry finally hit absolute rock-bottom last year, when I read a thread about how Topps kindly replaced someone's 1/1 by simply printing up a new one.

I'm with you. Why can't they change the image? It's not like they don't have a mountain of photographs at their fingertips. I've never chased a rainbow.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[packs]

I really don't understand why there's all this hate about "manufactured rarity". I collect records. There's the standard store bought version, then there are tour versions and colored vinyl versions and alternate covers and all kinds of different variations of the same thing, all collectible in their own way.

Is there anything different about a colored vinyl version of a record and a refractor card?

[butchie_t]

It is nonsense such as this example that makes my decision to stop collecting sets at 2000 a very wise decision on my part.

So sad what has become of this hobby. Strike that, things like this make it not a hobby.

I'll stick to the Hobby Years of this hobby.

[gunboat82]

Originally Posted by packs

I really don't understand why there's all this hate about "manufactured rarity". I collect records. There's the standard store bought version, then there are tour versions and colored vinyl versions and alternate covers and all kinds of different variations of the same thing, all collectible in their own way.

Is there anything different about a colored vinyl version of a record and a refractor card?

For me, the overproduction of sets (and manufactured rarity within each set) is a turnoff because it makes it practically and financially difficult to collect even the base cards of a favorite player(s). If you happen to be a completionist with an unhealthy compulsion to chase rainbows, forget it. The only winning move is not to play.

I'm also disappointed that we've moved from a "junk wax" era of overproducing everything to a "junk rainbow" era of giving the appearance of limited production by playing with the color palette and releasing countless subsets. Last year, we had Bowman, Bowman Chrome, Bowman Chrome Sapphire, Bowman Draft, Bowman Draft 1st Edition, Bowman Draft Sapphire, Bowman Chrome X, Bowman Platinum, Bowman Sterling. And that's before we even get to plain ol' Topps, with regular, Chrome (Platinum, Cosmic, Black, Logofractor, Sapphire, Ben Baller), Inception, Heritage, Archives, Gold Label, Gallery, Gilded, Museum, Opening Day, Rip, Ginter (regular, Chrome, X), etc. etc. etc.

I've seen numerous Facebook group discussions lately about which colored chrome parallels are worth chasing (1st Bowman and RCs only, of course). These conversations are never about what's visually appealing, but rather about what will hold value for resale. The consensus seems to be that the "original" refractors like red and gold will hold their value, but it's best to flip the aqua-lava-shimmer-tacofractors soon after release to leave less savvy investors holding the bag.

It takes all the fun away when it's less about the artistry and more about finding the next mark. I understand that this is all inevitable whenever there's demand and the perception of scarcity, but modern collecting gives me Wolf of Wall Street vibes that make me feel dirty. Earlier this year, a breaker lit a Niko Goodrum 1/1 on fire for a customer who was upset that it wasn't a bigger name. At that point, it's no longer about sports collectibles at all; it's pure degenerate gambling. And the card companies fuel it by pricing their products so that third-party breakers are the only entry point for many, turning the hobby into an expensive raffle.

[packs]

I think nearly everyone is going to find base packs boring. The only exciting thing about, say a pack of 1963 Topps, is that it MIGHT have a card of someone good in good condition. But no one is going to find the same thrill in a pack of 2023 Topps full of a base cards.

Modern cards have such a huge audience because they’re exciting to open.

To bring things back to a pre-war perspective what would be more exciting to open? A pack of Piedmont or a pack of Uzit?

[deweyinthehall]

Originally Posted by gunboat82

For me, the overproduction of sets (and manufactured rarity within each set) is a turnoff because it makes it practically and financially difficult to collect even the base cards of a favorite player(s). If you happen to be a completionist with an unhealthy compulsion to chase rainbows, forget it. The only winning move is not to play.

I'm also disappointed that we've moved from a "junk wax" era of overproducing everything to a "junk rainbow" era of giving the appearance of limited production by playing with the color palette and releasing countless subsets. Last year, we had Bowman, Bowman Chrome, Bowman Chrome Sapphire, Bowman Draft, Bowman Draft 1st Edition, Bowman Draft Sapphire, Bowman Chrome X, Bowman Platinum, Bowman Sterling. And that's before we even get to plain ol' Topps, with regular, Chrome (Platinum, Cosmic, Black, Logofractor, Sapphire, Ben Baller), Inception, Heritage, Archives, Gold Label, Gallery, Gilded, Museum, Opening Day, Rip, Ginter (regular, Chrome, X), etc. etc. etc.

I've seen numerous Facebook group discussions lately about which colored chrome parallels are worth chasing (1st Bowman and RCs only, of course). These conversations are never about what's visually appealing, but rather about what will hold value for resale. The consensus seems to be that the "original" refractors like red and gold will hold their value, but it's best to flip the aqua-lava-shimmer-tacofractors soon after release to leave less savvy investors holding the bag.

It takes all the fun away when it's less about the artistry and more about finding the next mark. I understand that this is all inevitable whenever there's demand and the perception of scarcity, but modern collecting gives me Wolf of Wall Street vibes that make me feel dirty. Earlier this year, a breaker lit a Niko Goodrum 1/1 on fire for a customer who was upset that it wasn't a bigger name. At that point, it's no longer about sports collectibles at all; it's pure degenerate gambling. And the card companies fuel it by pricing their products so that third-party breakers are the only entry point for many, turning the hobby into an expensive raffle.

Gambling is right - given we've normalized vice, how long before Fan Duel, Draft Kings or someone else cross-promotes with cards to really make things seedy? If the leagues all love gambling, which they obviously do, it can only be a matter of time.

[swarmee]

Well, Fanatics is trying to do something. Basically the first person with one of the duplicated superfractors gets to get a big payday so they can take it off the market.

One sold on eBay for $1500 and can be redeemed for $25K.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by deweyinthehall

Gambling is right - given we've normalized vice, how long before Fan Duel, Draft Kings or someone else cross-promotes with cards to really make things seedy? If the leagues all love gambling, which they obviously do, it can only be a matter of time.

+1 it's a reflection on the slow breakdown of "society" where honest hardworking decent folks are marginalized and the "hustle" is embraced.