Should BBCE have offered another box to Jabs Family?

I am sure many of you have seen the YouTube video of jabs families very unsuccessful opening of a BBCE wrapped 1979 was box. No Ozzie or HOFers. He was vocally upset on the video. He called Steve and was offered a second box for $1000. Steve watched the video and stood by his original opinion that the box was in fact unopened and that he simply got a box cut from only one sheet. I think this could potentially open up a hornets nest for BBCE when people get bum, but legit boxes. I don't think Steve should have caved. We all have been unlucky before.

«134

Comments

  • doubledragondoubledragon Posts: 1,804 ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 25, 2019 7:00AM

    Reminds me of lottery scratch off tickets. The man behind the counter at my local convenience store has taken all he can take. The customers complain all the time he says. Not everybody is going to win. He has stopped the free slurpee giveaways. He has become bitter. I don't blame him. It's a game of chance.

  • brad31brad31 Posts: 808 ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 25, 2019 7:05AM

    Steve should offer refunds or credits on unlucky boxes when people start sending him a check every time they get two of the key rookie out of a single box.

  • jay0791jay0791 Posts: 2,687 ✭✭✭

    It is what t is.

    A game of chance.

    For what I have heard on these boards Steve is completely honest.
    No Ozzie. Stop the whining.

    Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets
    1948-76 Topps FB Sets
    FB & BB HOF Player sets
    1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
  • FINESTKINDFINESTKIND Posts: 303 ✭✭✭

    One bad box out of how many over all these years ?

  • BPorter26BPorter26 Posts: 3,271 ✭✭✭

    Steve's a stand up guy and when something is wrong with a box or pack he takes care of you. I think this was just a bad box that was put together at the factory by Topps. Below is Steve's statement on the 79 box on a group page on FB called Vintage Wax & Packs.

    "In 1975, Topps must have had a bunch of extra sheets lying around containing cards 1-264. They cut them up and placed them in vending boxes, put them vending cases and sold them. We know this because we have seen more than one of these cases come through the Baseball Card Exchange. The cases were from one of the major baseball card distributors in the 1970’s who was known to be offered year end closeouts from Topps. The good news about this situation was that the top two rookie cards in the set were George Brett (#228) and Robin Yount (#223).

    A few other instances in which Topps “recycled” their unused material:

    They used 1975 Topps Baseball display boxes for 1977 Topps Baseball wax boxes.

    They used 1976 Topps Hockey wrappers for 1977 Topps Hockey packs.

    They used 1979 Topps Football display boxes for 1981 Topps Football wax boxes.

    They used 1979 Topps Football wrappers for both 1980 and 1981 Topps Football packs.

    The used 1981 Topps Baseball display boxes for 1985 Topps Baseball wax boxes.

    The used 1981 Topps Football display boxes for 1983 Topps Football wax boxes.

    Over the years we have seen many crazy things come from Topps. 1984 Topps Baseball Rack Packs containing part Football Cards. 1980 Topps Baseball Cello packs that contained half Football cards.

    1979 Topps Baseball Vending case that contained only cards from the A, B and C sheets. We’ve seen many vending cases with crazy iterations over the years. (Vending, not Cut-Card which is an entirely different monster).

    Thursday evening on YouTube, Jabs Family, opened a wax box of 1979 Topps Baseball that had been authenticated by Steve Hart at Baseball Card Exchange. While it is difficult to determine through a video some of the tell-tale signs of tampering, we firmly stand by our authentication of that box. We do that for a few reasons. The print on the wrappers appears to be similar throughout (this is not always the case, but to have them all similar, would indicate that it was a true box). The centering and print on the cards was fairly consistent throughout. And finally, every single card in that box was from sheet C. The bad news about the “C” sheet is that it is probably the worst sheet of that year with no star power and no real Hall of Famers. While we cannot say for certain what happened that day back in 1979, it appears as though they had a bunch of extra “C” sheets laying around, and decided to distribute them through wax boxes. Some people have said we should of put a disclaimer on the box that it only contained sheet “C” cards. Now how in the world would I have any idea of that??

    We are certain that this is not the answer that anyone was wanting to hear. However, we are standing by the authenticity of the box that it is not resealed or been tampered with. We do not take authentication lightly at all. It is a very serious part of our business and service to the hobby."

    "EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE WALL" - JACKIE MOON
  • I trust Steve and BBCE's opinion 100%.

    Jabs bought and received an original unopened 1979 Topps Box. There are no guarantees as to what is in an unopened box and that is the risk the buyer takes if they decide to open it.

    Now, say if they opened the box and pulled all sheet A cards (which has the Ozzie Smith RC), would they then write to Steve and offer to pay him more money for the box since it was so great?

  • coinspackscoinspacks Posts: 528 ✭✭✭

    if the box had only been from ozzie smith sheet, everyone would be happy. its just the way these things are. bbce shouldnt offer anything other than that perfect response.

  • steel75steel75 Posts: 1,267 ✭✭✭

    Opening packs/boxes are a gamble...….sometimes you win & sometimes you lose. You can't EXPECT great results....you HOPE for great results.

    1970's Steelers
  • ndleondleo Posts: 3,125 ✭✭✭

    If this becomes the standard, Panini will go out of business for all the crap boxes they put out.

    A 6th round defensive lineman in National Treasures? Thanks Panini!

    Mike
  • Only if Steve felt he provided an incorrect opinion on the authentication.

    Joe

    We had this janitor named Mr. Larry. He was held back so many times, they just made him a janitor. His trick was to come in while you're at the urinal and pee over you.
  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,089 ✭✭✭✭✭

    "Should" Steve have given them a discounted box? Well, that depends on what point of view you're looking at it from. In a purely right vs. wrong sense of it, Steve committed no wrong and was therefore no obligated to do so. I, personally, don't believe Steve "should" have given them a discounted box.

    However, when you're running a business, it doesn't matter what is right and what is wrong, there is only public perception. Steve totally understands this and it's one of the reasons why nobody really has anything bad to say about him. As a business, you don't use an set of circumstances like this to argue the merits of right vs. wrong, you will always lose. Even if the majority of people agree with you, there will be a contingent that doesn't and they're the loudest and have the longest memories.

    So Steve will be out hundreds of dollars on the second box but he completely avoids ANY kind of PR issue and probably even picks up some business from people for "doing the right thing." In the grand scheme of things, this was the most cost-efficient and cost-beneficial move Steve could make as a businessman. Steve is good at this stuff. Steve is wicked smaht.

    This doesn't open up Pandora's box because the set of circumstances are probably close to unique -- a box full of entirely same sheet cards that is also a complete "bad sheet" AND the entire rip is recorded on video AND it's an older, expensive box. Anyone want to calculate the odds of that happening again?

    Right vs. wrong is for people with no financial risk vested in the outcome to argue about on message boards. If e're going to talk about right vs. wrong, let's talk about how Jabs should never have even asked for another box.

    Arthur

  • softparadesoftparade Posts: 8,490 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I think that bad luck was culprit here. I wouldn't put it past Topps of that time to push through excess same sheet lots for distribution given many other examples of fiscal like frugality they did before and after the time period in question. I am also fully aware that some of the hobby's most knowledgeable people may disagree so nothing is ever 100% with things like this.

    ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw
    3, 5, 34, 60, 100, 103, 153, 213, 240, 263, 279, 294, 302, 328, 347, 376, 389, 416, 443, 452, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 576, 579, 580, 581, 584, 606, 609, 622, 634, 642, 654, 673, 678, 682, 724


    ISO 2019 Topps Heritage HIGH NUMBERS BASE CARDS I NEED
    512, 515, 527, 538, 548, 555, 556, 580, 591, 608, 613, 615, 640, 648, 653, 654, 679
    SP's I NEED
    700, 702, 707, 709, 713, 719, 724

  • PorkinsPorkins Posts: 509 ✭✭

    Very nice (although not surprising) of Steve to offer a detailed explanation and discount.

    Has the guy responded to the explanation?

  • I watched the vid live, it was brutal. However, you could tell after 5 or 6 packs it was gonna be a Topps issue, not someone resealed a box of crap. Ive seen vending boxes, from sealed case, be crap after crap. The BBCE offered him another box at a 50% discount, very generous.
    For those of you who are too young to have opened Topps products in the 70's and early 80's, this kinda thing is NOT uncommon. Topps had no interest in you completing your set by buying only one box. They were hard capitalists and squeezed every penny out of us kids by offering wax, rack, cello, vending machines, and Fun bags.

  • 2dueces2dueces Posts: 1,711 ✭✭✭

    Unopen wax has always been a crap shoot. I think Steve did what a good business man would do. Offer a replacement box and calm public opinion. Perception is reality.



    << <i>In Rememberance of James W. Brennan Sr. 1924-1982.
    Dad, Thanks for everything you did for me. >>

  • CoarsegoldCoarsegold Posts: 43 ✭✭✭

    He should call Topps customer service and complain. Now that would be a good video :D

  • ahopkinsahopkins Posts: 863 ✭✭✭✭

    @Francart said:
    It was an authentic box. You struck out. Stop whining like a baby.

    Where is the "hallelujah-praise-the-lord" button?

    Anyone with experience in opening wax, cello, rack boxes knows that this kind of stuff happens. I've watched a few more (older) Jabs videos recently, and similar collation issues occurred in those rips, but no one brought out the pitchforks and torches on those. The "tyranny of opinion" won out on this one.

    Andy

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 2,088 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @2dueces said:
    Unopen wax has always been a crap shoot. I think Steve did what a good business man would do. Offer a replacement box and calm public opinion. Perception is reality.

    Then why do they have two different words?

    (This is just a small joke. I hear this phrase all the time - it’s incorrect - but yes, I know what it means when it is said. No harm intended.)

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 3,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Obviously if the box is legit and it’s just a question of getting crappy cards, BBCE owes them nothing. I think the concern is that if the precedent is set that a box containing all C sheet cards can be ruled legit, it seems to leave a lot of wiggle room for declaring bad boxes to be OK. Individual packs are routinely rejected by Steve for having “wrong collation.” I would imagine that if the cards within these packs could have somehow been seen, the box likely would have been rejected by Steve based on this non-standard collation. So it seems kind of strange to declare it OK after the fact.

  • softparadesoftparade Posts: 8,490 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 25, 2019 10:12AM

    @PaulMaul said:
    Obviously if the box is legit and it’s just a question of getting crappy cards, BBCE owes them nothing. I think the concern is that if the precedent is set that a box containing all C sheet cards can be ruled legit, it seems to leave a lot of wiggle room for declaring bad boxes to be OK. Individual packs are routinely rejected by Steve for having “wrong collation.” I would imagine that if the cards within these packs could have somehow been seen, the box likely would have been rejected by Steve based on this non-standard collation. So it seems kind of strange to declare it OK after the fact.

    It seems to me that collation issues come up in discussion about rack and cello packs. Rarely with wax that I know about. But, I'm sure there are those that know wax pack collation too. That said, collation goes out the window if Topps indeed decide to rifle through excess stacks of C sheets for distribution. IF. It's plausible. Not for certain by any means.

    ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw
    3, 5, 34, 60, 100, 103, 153, 213, 240, 263, 279, 294, 302, 328, 347, 376, 389, 416, 443, 452, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 576, 579, 580, 581, 584, 606, 609, 622, 634, 642, 654, 673, 678, 682, 724


    ISO 2019 Topps Heritage HIGH NUMBERS BASE CARDS I NEED
    512, 515, 527, 538, 548, 555, 556, 580, 591, 608, 613, 615, 640, 648, 653, 654, 679
    SP's I NEED
    700, 702, 707, 709, 713, 719, 724

  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 3,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @softparade said:

    @PaulMaul said:
    Obviously if the box is legit and it’s just a question of getting crappy cards, BBCE owes them nothing. I think the concern is that if the precedent is set that a box containing all C sheet cards can be ruled legit, it seems to leave a lot of wiggle room for declaring bad boxes to be OK. Individual packs are routinely rejected by Steve for having “wrong collation.” I would imagine that if the cards within these packs could have somehow been seen, the box likely would have been rejected by Steve based on this non-standard collation. So it seems kind of strange to declare it OK after the fact.

    It seems to me that collation issues come up in discussion about rack and cello packs. Rarely with wax that I know about. But, I'm sure there are those that know wax pack collation too. That said, collation goes out the window if Topps indeed decide to rifle through excess stacks of C sheets for distribution. IF. It's plausible. Not for certain by any means.

    Collation patterns do exist for wax packs. And of course it’s possible that Topps packs could somehow have all C cards. It’s also possible that someone with a cut card case could have thousands of same sheet cards.

    It just seems like if we’re allowing for the possibility that such an aberrant box is legit, then rejecting cellos for having wrong collation is a bit inconsistent. I’d personally rather see a legitimate box or pack with non-standard collation rejected than see a bad pack or box approved.

  • softparadesoftparade Posts: 8,490 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 25, 2019 10:37AM

    @PaulMaul said:

    @softparade said:

    @PaulMaul said:
    Obviously if the box is legit and it’s just a question of getting crappy cards, BBCE owes them nothing. I think the concern is that if the precedent is set that a box containing all C sheet cards can be ruled legit, it seems to leave a lot of wiggle room for declaring bad boxes to be OK. Individual packs are routinely rejected by Steve for having “wrong collation.” I would imagine that if the cards within these packs could have somehow been seen, the box likely would have been rejected by Steve based on this non-standard collation. So it seems kind of strange to declare it OK after the fact.

    It seems to me that collation issues come up in discussion about rack and cello packs. Rarely with wax that I know about. But, I'm sure there are those that know wax pack collation too. That said, collation goes out the window if Topps indeed decide to rifle through excess stacks of C sheets for distribution. IF. It's plausible. Not for certain by any means.

    Collation patterns do exist for wax packs. And of course it’s possible that Topps packs could somehow have all C cards. It’s also possible that someone with a cut card case could have thousands of same sheet cards.

    It just seems like if we’re allowing for the possibility that such an aberrant box is legit, then rejecting cellos for having wrong collation is a bit inconsistent. I’d personally rather see a legitimate box or pack with non-standard collation rejected than see a bad pack or box approved.

    I feel your pain. It sucks seeing this happen and there be no way of knowing for sure what the real answer is. I'm always going to lean towards BBCE but they do make mistakes just like any other human being does. So, nothing is certain. It's a tough spot to be in for BBCE. But, they do authenticate so with the rewards come the headaches. Offering a 50% discount on the box was a little surprising as I thought they would just replace it being how rare something happening like this is. (All cards from one sheet). Another well respected dude brought up the cut case possibility as well in some chatter I had. That's a whole other topic for me. I always thought standard vending was for the dealer to make sets. But there was another version of this in "cut cases"? I didn't know.

    ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw
    3, 5, 34, 60, 100, 103, 153, 213, 240, 263, 279, 294, 302, 328, 347, 376, 389, 416, 443, 452, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 576, 579, 580, 581, 584, 606, 609, 622, 634, 642, 654, 673, 678, 682, 724


    ISO 2019 Topps Heritage HIGH NUMBERS BASE CARDS I NEED
    512, 515, 527, 538, 548, 555, 556, 580, 591, 608, 613, 615, 640, 648, 653, 654, 679
    SP's I NEED
    700, 702, 707, 709, 713, 719, 724

  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,089 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 25, 2019 10:57AM

    @PaulMaul said:

    @softparade said:

    @PaulMaul said:
    Obviously if the box is legit and it’s just a question of getting crappy cards, BBCE owes them nothing. I think the concern is that if the precedent is set that a box containing all C sheet cards can be ruled legit, it seems to leave a lot of wiggle room for declaring bad boxes to be OK. Individual packs are routinely rejected by Steve for having “wrong collation.” I would imagine that if the cards within these packs could have somehow been seen, the box likely would have been rejected by Steve based on this non-standard collation. So it seems kind of strange to declare it OK after the fact.

    It seems to me that collation issues come up in discussion about rack and cello packs. Rarely with wax that I know about. But, I'm sure there are those that know wax pack collation too. That said, collation goes out the window if Topps indeed decide to rifle through excess stacks of C sheets for distribution. IF. It's plausible. Not for certain by any means.

    Collation patterns do exist for wax packs. And of course it’s possible that Topps packs could somehow have all C cards. It’s also possible that someone with a cut card case could have thousands of same sheet cards.

    It just seems like if we’re allowing for the possibility that such an aberrant box is legit, then rejecting cellos for having wrong collation is a bit inconsistent. I’d personally rather see a legitimate box or pack with non-standard collation rejected than see a bad pack or box approved.

    I think the major difference between the two is the ambiguity in a cello's seal vs. the near certainty in a wax pack's seal. When authenticating the two, the cello doesn't have roller marks like a wax pack does so we need to rely on other, more circumstantial, information when making a decision. Always tending to the side of caution, using which cards are showing on top and bottom is a valuable clue in determining a cello's authenticity.

    I think that's why collation is so much more important with cellos (and racks, for that matter) than wax.

    Arthur

  • Stone193Stone193 Posts: 23,881 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 25, 2019 11:47AM

    Was this the video? I posted this on the new purchase thread for anyone to view if they have the time?

    I commented in the other thread that this is the worst box I've ever seen.

    Mike



  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 3,268 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 25, 2019 11:23AM

    @softparade said:
    Another well respected dude brought up the cut case possibility as well in some chatter I had. That's a whole other topic for me. I always thought standard vending was for the dealer to make sets. But there was another version of this in "cut cases"? I didn't know.

    Dave and Adam’s used to have this explanation on their site:

    “What is a cut card case?
    One of the least common and misunderstood packaging options in trading cards, cut card cases were utilized by Topps and O-Pee-Chee throughout the 70s and 80s as a way to closeout year-end stock. These cases were not made available to regular candy wholesalers like wax, cello, and rack, but to a select few companies that specialized in buying excess inventory in bulk.

    A typical cut card case consists of 8,650 cards, and may or may not have been sealed with glue or tape when it left the factory. After all, these cases were not meant to be resold in its current form. The contents of a case varied greatly when compared to its much more common counterpart, the vending case. In a vending case, Topps would randomly package 12,000 cards (500 cards to a vending box) from a particular sport/year, therefore ensuring the expectation of being able to make a certain quantity of sets. With a cut card case, a single sheet or combination of sheets are cut down to individual cards, then packed in bulk (without 500 count boxes) into a case that holds approximately 8500-9000 cards.

    In order to determine what cards are available in a cut card case, one must determine what cards come on a particular sheet. For example, on the back of the 1987 Topps Barry Bonds rookie #320, the code found on the card indicates that it was cut from the "C" sheet. Therefore, in a cut card case with only the "C" sheet of cards, one can estimate there will be 65 of each card from the 132 card sheet (8,650 divided by 132 cards on a sheet = approximately 65.)”

  • Stone193Stone193 Posts: 23,881 ✭✭✭✭✭

    We opened a box at the national - group rip - a few years back.

    No Oz, no Ryan e.g.

    Another thing I think about.

    The box in the video was not FASC - that could make a difference also.

    Mike



  • DavidPuddyDavidPuddy Posts: 3,376 ✭✭✭

    Opening a box like that is a total crap shoot. Especially opening a Not FASC box.
    If someone did break a "cut card' case and reseal a box, they did a fantastic job. The box was pristine, and the packs looked great. It's probably just another example of Topps' end of year shenanigans.
    Jabs asking for a replacement in the video was a mistake IMO.

    "The Sipe market is ridiculous right now"
    CDsNuts, 1/9/15
  • lahmejoonlahmejoon Posts: 1,500 ✭✭✭

    Has Jabs publicly asked again for a replacement box after Steve’s explanation?

  • VagabondVagabond Posts: 69 ✭✭✭

    I think a $1000 credit was fair. That box was highly suspicious. Not putting blame onto BBCE but even sometimes, everyone gets it wrong.

  • Rttrffg2012Rttrffg2012 Posts: 232 ✭✭✭

    @Vagabond said:
    I think a $1000 credit was fair. That box was highly suspicious. Not putting blame onto BBCE but even sometimes, everyone gets it wrong.

    Jabs is also highly suspicious.
    Plenty of threads on blowout can highlight his shadiness.

  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,089 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Vagabond said:
    I think a $1000 credit was fair. That box was highly suspicious. Not putting blame onto BBCE but even sometimes, everyone gets it wrong.

    What was suspicious about it?

    Arthur

  • ahopkinsahopkins Posts: 863 ✭✭✭✭

    @Vagabond said:
    I think a $1000 credit was fair. That box was highly suspicious. Not putting blame onto BBCE but even sometimes, everyone gets it wrong.

    It wasn't suspicious. And he didn't get it wrong.

    Andy

  • ArtVandelayArtVandelay Posts: 165 ✭✭✭

    I've always wondered about Jabs. He has fans for some odd reason and every week they send him cards. Many times it's 80's and 90's garbage but other times I have seen people give him real nice cards (1960 Clemente in great shape etc.) Also, I once watched his live stream and in less than 20 minutes people had gifted him well in excess of $200. People just throw the guy money. Now to the question.

    Why?

  • Stone193Stone193 Posts: 23,881 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Vagabond said:
    I think a $1000 credit was fair. That box was highly suspicious. Not putting blame onto BBCE but even sometimes, everyone gets it wrong.

    Do explain?

    Mike



  • jtala18jtala18 Posts: 107 ✭✭

    The simple answer is NO. I’m sure none of us have ever been to Vegas, lost our wallet and then in turn complained to the pit boss because red came up 12 times in a row on the roulette wheel and you had your money on black. Now in regards to these “super-chats” where viewers generously donate money to have their chat read out loud is one of the biggest mysteries I’ve ever seen. It’s a good hustle if you can get it I guess... the whole thing is just shady. This guy better come correct come tax time

  • Can someone save me from watching the video...how did this guy ask for a replacement box? Did he do it during the live break, sort of demanding/threatening that BBCE better make it right or else? I already know he didn't just ask Steve, he made it a PR issue first.

  • vintagefunvintagefun Posts: 1,952 ✭✭✭

    Well, we now know what BBCE offered its “customer”, which I think was fair...and came with an opinion and explanation. Does anyone know what Jabs has offered his “customers”?

    52-90 All Sports, Mostly Topps, Mostly HOF, and some assorted wax.
  • DavidPuddyDavidPuddy Posts: 3,376 ✭✭✭
    edited August 25, 2019 4:01PM

    He told his viewers that he was going to ask for a replacement box moments after opening the last pack. Watch from about 1:19 if you want to avoid the packs themselves.

    "The Sipe market is ridiculous right now"
    CDsNuts, 1/9/15
  • 19541954 Posts: 2,768 ✭✭✭

    Steve is a great guy and does so much for the hobby. I don't know if I would have been so generous.

    Looking for high grade rookie cards and unopened boxes/cases
  • VagabondVagabond Posts: 69 ✭✭✭
    edited August 25, 2019 4:05PM

    @Stone193 said:

    @Vagabond said:
    I think a $1000 credit was fair. That box was highly suspicious. Not putting blame onto BBCE but even sometimes, everyone gets it wrong.

    Do explain?

    Well, Is it really not possible for a professional re-sealler to get by Steve? Most defintely. For the box to pull absolutely no real star power is impressive in itself. So was that a searched box. I don't know and neither does anyone else here and everything here is just a matter of opinion. But what I do know is that even PSA has made known errors over the years. Even as recent as cards being placed into it's holders that shouldnt have been with this whole recent PWCC scandal. So why not BBCE?

    Below is a comment from that video which really puts it into perspective of how bad this box was:

    "Not one of these were pulled:Ozzie Smith, Nolan Ryan, Willie Stargell, Dave Winfield,Reggie Jackson, Mike Schmidt, Steve Carlton, Jim Rice, Carlton Fisk, Carl Yastrzemski, Luis Tiant, Fergie Jenkins, Tom Seaver, Jim Palmer, Dennis Eckersley, Andre Dawson, George Brett, Lou Brock, Pete Rose, Keith Hernandez, Jim Hunter, Rich Gossage, Paul Molitor, Joe Morgan, Johnny Bench, Rollie Fingers, Tony Perez, Gary Carter, Steve Garvey, Alan Trammell,Gaylord Perry,Rod Carew, Dale Murphy, Dwight Evans, Ron Guidry,JR Richard. Team Cards/Checklists. Not to mention no Record Breaker, Leaders and Rookie Prospect cards. Not even a Bucky Dent. lol"

  • 80sOPC80sOPC Posts: 382 ✭✭✭

    There is a good and reasonable understanding on why those cards weren’t pulled, posted above.

    Does it really make sense that a resealed box would only have one sheet in it? Close to zero chance that would happen. As if he pulled out the Bucky Dents and Luis Tiants and Ron Guidry’s.

    Resealed boxes usually have cards that show age, or still have semi-stars. No chance a resealer has one sheet of cards on hand to load up a box.

  • grote15grote15 Posts: 27,181 ✭✭✭✭✭

    A retail 1979 Topps baseball wax pack contains 12 cards with a 6-card "split" in each pack. The first 6 cards from the back seal consists of cards from the A-B-C sheets and the last 6 cards leading up to the gum consist of cards from the D-E-F sheets. The Ozzie RC is from the A sheet, Ryan is from the B sheet. Most of the best cards in the 1979 set are from the A or B sheets. The header section in a 1979 rack pack is known as the "money" section for that reason.



    Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
  • @DavidPuddy said:
    He told his viewers that he was going to ask for a replacement box moments after opening the last pack. Watch from about 1:19 if you want to avoid the packs themselves.

    Thanks for the tip. I watched the last several minutes of the video and it did indeed satisfy my curiosity.

  • Stone193Stone193 Posts: 23,881 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Does anyone follow this guy?

    How much did he charge? How much did he make.

    If he's deriving a profit, then IMO he should "share" in the responsibility with Steve - if that's his thinking.

    This was "not" FASC - so anything is possible.

    If Steve offered a box @ 50% discount? That's more than fair.

    Watching the way the packs opened? They appeared clean to me.

    I'd defer to Tim/Grote who has way, way more knowledge and experience than I.

    The way this was organized? No one is out 2K (only collectively).

    The organizer - if he feels that the box stunk? Right now - he should start by giving all the members his profit back and then deal with Steve to get something fair IMO.

    Mike



  • dontippetdontippet Posts: 2,028 ✭✭✭

    I don't see how this box could be suspicious. So, someone opened a box of 1979 Topps, then replaced all the cards with only cards from one sheet, then resealed? Obviously, repacking only cards from one sheet would be quite difficult to do. And even if it could be accomplished, why would anyone do that? I don't see this any different than an X out box coming from a sealed case. Sure, it's not ideal, but it was totally Topps doing, nothing Steve could do about it.

    Thanks,

    Don

    myurl<
Sign In or Register to comment.