I have no doubt that RookieWax has an interesting theory on the packs. My point is that there's no way to "guarantee" that blackless cards reside in said packs. There's a difference between believing the packs contain blackless cards to some degree of certainty and being able to prove or guarantee that they do.
Facts = irrefutable "take my word for it" = not a fact
I agree with you whole heartedly; its not a fact until it's proven. My point is, the market will respond with the same assessment and despite the potential of HUGE reward, its a gamble because what "should be" isn't guaranteed in the cardboard world.
<< <i>That partial box of error packs ( which may be the only ones in existence) is not for sale. However, if I were to ever sell it to someone who would be interested in opening the packs, I can guarantee that it contains the Blackless errors. >>
Why not just open the packs? You would be better off in every single possible way. To my knowledge, you didn't pay a blackless price for them, so you don't need to recoup cost. You will never sell them as blackless packs because you can't prove that they are, and even if you somehow did sell them, you can most likely get more for the blackless singles that you may pull than you can get for the actual packs. So... why are you holding, if not to hedge your bet in case there are NO blackless cards in the packs? You are hoping for a sale so that you don't have to take the risk, is what seems is going on here.
I mean, there is something significantly awesome about knowing your rip is virtually guaranteed an desirable outcome; once it's ripped, it can't be ripped again. There is a sentimental aspect to collecting after all. If selling were the goal, certainly opening would be the best bet, but if not, hold on to the novelty factor I guess.
<< <i>I am missing something. What is it about that box that tells you it's the error box? I see nothing different on it >>
All wax packs obviously look the same. Here is what I do know about those 30 packs(if you missed it above): A second wax box that I bought at the same time from the same guy yielded a No Name Thomas card as well as 5 other blackless cards. And there weren't any non-errors in that box - in other words, all potential blackless errors were the error version. Then, from the first 6 packs from the second box, I pulled one of the blackless errors as well as a Kenny Rogers that had a distinguishing mark I have associated with being from a blackless error sheet. So, I am fully confident that any potential blackless error card pulled from that second box will indeed be the error version.
IF I WERE to ever sell those packs, I would obviously still need to back up my confidence with a money-back guarantee if any non-errors are pulled.....and the buyer would obviously need to be willing to open them on the spot of purchase, otherwise such a transaction would never work. Again, I am confident that these enclosed wax boxes present a different situation than the first error packs I opened back in 2009. Those came from a display case of over 600 loose packs, none of which were in an enclosed wax box. It looked like something that needed to be packed by hand. That I believe explains why I pulled a few No Name Thomas cards, a few partial blackless Thomas cards, and a few normal Thomas cards from that case.
I received a couple PMs asking about what the special "mark" is on the Kenny Rogers card I have associated with being from a 1990 Topps error sheet. It is a slanted light blue stripe that can also be seen on the blackless Kevin Tapani cards posted earlier in this thread. There are several cards with this distinct stripe that I have now pulled from both the error wax case and error wax box I opened. Below are scans of several of these cards.
Note: My other Tapani cards that have only a very small amount of missing black ink have a much more faded version of this stripe (like the SECOND Kenny Rogers shown below - which was also pulled from the wax case). So, these such cards with a more faded stripe are likely not from a fully affected NNOF Thomas blackless sheet.
Was the "sister" box that yielded the aforementioned cards videoed or somehow documented (witness) to prove the cards were actually pulled from the box?
Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps - uncut
Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
<< <i>Was the "sister" box that yielded the aforementioned cards videoed or somehow documented (witness) to prove the cards were actually pulled from the box? >>
It was not videotaped. I was just ripping packs from that wax box with some neighbors on the day I got it, not thinking there was much of a chance of pulling any errors. Like I said, before that box, I figured the errors only made it into the wax packs that went into the retail display cases like the one I opened back in 2009.
That does not surprise me. I had posted quite a while ago that there are few reasons why these cards can't approach the value of a Mickey Mantle rookie. It is an iconic Topps rookie card of a first-ballot HOFer, and with just over 200 known to exist, they are certainly much more scarce than the Mantle card.
I can't read the 46 pages right now. So, what are the specifics of this card? Were they evenly distributed thru out the year. Or did they catch the error in time and it's just in the early prints? I guess I'm asking do I still have a chance of finding one if I bought a box. Were they just in retail, although i still don't have a handle on that and wouldn't know how to go about insuring it's a retail box. What are the odds? Easier to buy one, price, availalbility?
<< <i>Ever notice that the guy Frank Thomas is tagging has no face? >>
I'm sure that's because it's a college photo and Topps didn't have the rights to sell a card with that player's likeness. >>
Yup. It's a player from Tulane Univeristy, but I've only been able to narrow it down to one of 5 players. If I ever find out who, I'm doing a TTM auto request, then getting Frank to sign it.
<< <i> Yup. It's a player from Tulane Univeristy, but I've only been able to narrow it down to one of 5 players. If I ever find out who, I'm doing a TTM auto request, then getting Frank to sign it. >>
That'd be really cool. Have you gone through the Tulane baseball publications for the right years? Looks like a pretty skinny guy (although I guess everyone is skinny next to The Big Hurt!)
Anyone know why this SGC 88 graded NNOF Thomas does not show up in the population report? Their website shows only one graded...and it was was a SGC 92.
<< <i> Anyone know why this SGC 88 graded NNOF Thomas does not show up in the population report? Their website shows only one graded...and it was was a SGC 92. >>
I've also never seen an SGC holder that didn't assign a 1-10 grade underneath the 1-100 grade.
Before SGC admitted PSA to be the industry leader, there slabs were without the equivalent grade. It's an older slab is all, and I seem to remember some older slabs falling off of the population report after a website change...but I could be mistaken.
The statistical analysis was interesting but I would say that a conservative estimate would be that production of 1990 Topps is easily 5 times that of 1989 Upper Deck. That would produce some truly staggering figures based on his numbers.
Always looking for 1993-1999 Baseball Finest Refractors and1994 Football Finest Refractors. saucywombat@hotmail.com
I seem to recall being aware of the NNOF Thomas very early on, though I did work full time in a baseball card store around that time. Does anyone else remember it differently? This article indicates that it wasn't really known until 1993, but maybe that was not true in "hardcore" hobby circles, even pre-internet.
I am buying and trading for RC's of Wilt Chamberlain, George Mikan, Bill Russell, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, and Bob Cousy! Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
<< <i>The statistical analysis was interesting but I would say that a conservative estimate would be that production of 1990 Topps is easily 5 times that of 1989 Upper Deck. That would produce some truly staggering figures based on his numbers. >>
Yeah, I agree, if anyone can find any information on exact production runs, he'd love to hear about it.
<< <i>I seem to recall being aware of the NNOF Thomas very early on, though I did work full time in a baseball card store around that time. Does anyone else remember it differently? This article indicates that it wasn't really known until 1993, but maybe that was not true in "hardcore" hobby circles, even pre-internet. >>
You're absolutely right; I was a small child and I knew about it very early on; that said, it didn't reach mainstream consciousness until Beckett featured it in 1993. There are still collectors who have never seen a copy in the flesh.
I'm young (33 last month) and remember hearing first about the Thomas NNOF in 1994. As a kid I wanted the card so badly because of how valuable it was (I don't remember exact numbers, but what were they trading for around 1994?)
As I've gotten older and learned more about the hobby I've come to appreciate this card more than any other in sports. This is, hands down, my favorite card, my Holy Grail, White Whale.
<< <i>The statistical analysis was interesting but I would say that a conservative estimate would be that production of 1990 Topps is easily 5 times that of 1989 Upper Deck. That would produce some truly staggering figures based on his numbers. >>
The other problem with the statistical analysis is that he uses the (supposed) total number of "known" copies but uses the (supposed) total number of cases produced. Obviously, there's still a gargantuan amount of 1990 Topps cases still out there unopened so the math is immediately incorrect. It simultaneously supposes that there are no other Thomas NNOF left to be discovered in the very process of supposing how much money you would need to spend and how much time it would take to pull one from a pack.
I'd also be willing to bet that the total number of existing raw copies, as well as any copies destroyed or lost, surpasses the total number of currently graded copies.
I figured this info best belongs in this thread, rather than the other thread currently running. Ross, that was an interesting article you posted from your website in that other thread. As to whether the errors occured in the early, initial printings...here is what I can add to that. I haven't been able to find any info on whether those 6 digit numbers Topps printed on the outside of the wax cases are sequential or not. If they are, then it is highly likely that the errors were from the first print run and corrected very quickly. I say this because I have been checking the photos from every wax case auction that has appeared for sale in the past 5 years looking for that 6 digit number. The 6 digit number on my error case has been lower than any others I have seen. Also, I have purchased 2 other wax cases whose 6 digit numbers were less than 50 units higher than my error case...and neither contained any errors.
When Topps cuts sheets do you think they load up say 250 into feeder and then it cuts them all or one at a time? I am assuming however many they load is how many there are?
This used to be my favorite thread, but the continuous banter about the theoretical box has brought it down.
I have an oyster. I once saw a pearl come from a similar oyster. I think my oyster has a pearl in it. I will sell it for a premium based on no real evidence that it has a pearl inside. I will not open it myself. I will mention this oyster many more times. You cannot disprove that there is not a pearl in my oyster.
<< <i>This used to be my favorite thread, but the continuous banter about the theoretical box has brought it down.
I have an oyster. I once saw a pearl come from a similar oyster. I think my oyster has a pearl in it. I will sell it for a premium based on no real evidence that it has a pearl inside. I will not open it myself. I will mention this oyster many more times. You cannot disprove that there is not a pearl in my oyster. >>
Funny that someone who claims to be "tired of the banter" would perpetuate it with such an ill-intended post...and so long after the banter had faded. People like yourself are the ones who need to apologize to Ross for such posts in his thread. And, clearly, the truth is that you are yet another jealous #@*% trying to convince me to rip that box. Nice try.
Completely fake, the scissors aren't making any noise cutting thru the wrapper, in fact, it looks like he moved it closer to the pack right at the beginning. Cutting thru rack packs or these jumbos, you can't help but hear the wrapper!
They said they had been filming all night, but it happens to be in in the middle of this pack that they decide they would be "boring the YouTube watchers" by naming every player as they go through the pack? That is the dead giveaway that this is the only pack they videotaped and it was totally a set up.
I remember seeing Jake Roberts push a cobra at Ultimate Warrior and watching the de-fanged serpent latch its gums onto his steroid assisted bicep, while blood seeped out from under the snake's mouth, while the camera faded in perfect synchronicity with the Warrior's fade to unconsciousness..... and that was more real than that video.
I am buying and trading for RC's of Wilt Chamberlain, George Mikan, Bill Russell, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, and Bob Cousy! Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
Jumbo Pack theory:: check Mid East theory:: check Have friend record feel good story:: check Open one pack:: check Show 1990 Topps NNOF :: check Show case of multiple packs:: check Sell remaining packs on eBay for $100 each
It's obviously staged but I've never seen a fake or reprint that has the borders that look like that. I'm sure there are and it's hard to get a good look at the card in the video. But if he's using a real one to pull off this video he's an idiot as well as a bad actor.
FYI - Ebay has two listings for 1990 Topps jumbo packs mentioning a possible nnof error but they are listed cheap so I doubt there's a connection between the listing and this guy.
The thing is, the jumbo packs aren't confirmed to contain NNOFs; no one has ever claimed that and proven it. These packs have been on eBay for years now; originally at HIGH prices, but falling because they aren't from the right production.
<< <i>The thing is, the jumbo packs aren't confirmed to contain NNOFs; no one has ever claimed that and proven it. These packs have been on eBay for years now; originally at HIGH prices, but falling because they aren't from the right production. >>
It's been almost 25 years so my memory is fuzzy but I still maintain that I got mine out of a wax pack.
I'd say the only real giveaways are the fact that you can hear every crinkle on camera but no noise is being made when the pack is being cut. Then oddly there are no other orange sheet cards in pack (AS WE KNOW THESE RELATED ERRORS ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO FIND) and you can see that the NNOF has a corner ding which is not present on the other cards in the pack.
I'd say to the casual observer this would seem very legitimate.
Always looking for 1993-1999 Baseball Finest Refractors and1994 Football Finest Refractors. saucywombat@hotmail.com
Comments
Facts = irrefutable
"take my word for it" = not a fact
<< <i>That partial box of error packs ( which may be the only ones in existence) is not for sale. However, if I were to ever sell it to someone who would be interested in opening the packs, I can guarantee that it contains the Blackless errors. >>
Why not just open the packs? You would be better off in every single possible way. To my knowledge, you didn't pay a blackless price for them, so you don't need to recoup cost. You will never sell them as blackless packs because you can't prove that they are, and even if you somehow did sell them, you can most likely get more for the blackless singles that you may pull than you can get for the actual packs. So... why are you holding, if not to hedge your bet in case there are NO blackless cards in the packs? You are hoping for a sale so that you don't have to take the risk, is what seems is going on here.
TheClockworkAngelCollection
<< <i>I am missing something. What is it about that box that tells you it's the error box? I see nothing different on it >>
All wax packs obviously look the same. Here is what I do know about those 30 packs(if you missed it above): A second wax box that I bought at the same time from the same guy yielded a No Name Thomas card as well as 5 other blackless cards. And there weren't any non-errors in that box - in other words, all potential blackless errors were the error version. Then, from the first 6 packs from the second box, I pulled one of the blackless errors as well as a Kenny Rogers that had a distinguishing mark I have associated with being from a blackless error sheet. So, I am fully confident that any potential blackless error card pulled from that second box will indeed be the error version.
IF I WERE to ever sell those packs, I would obviously still need to back up my confidence with a money-back guarantee if any non-errors are pulled.....and the buyer would obviously need to be willing to open them on the spot of purchase, otherwise such a transaction would never work. Again, I am confident that these enclosed wax boxes present a different situation than the first error packs I opened back in 2009. Those came from a display case of over 600 loose packs, none of which were in an enclosed wax box. It looked like something that needed to be packed by hand. That I believe explains why I pulled a few No Name Thomas cards, a few partial blackless Thomas cards, and a few normal Thomas cards from that case.
Note: My other Tapani cards that have only a very small amount of missing black ink have a much more faded version of this stripe (like the SECOND Kenny Rogers shown below - which was also pulled from the wax case). So, these such cards with a more faded stripe are likely not from a fully affected NNOF Thomas blackless sheet.
eBay link
Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007
Al
Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps
- uncut
Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
<< <i>Was the "sister" box that yielded the aforementioned cards videoed or somehow documented (witness) to prove the cards were actually pulled from the box? >>
It was not videotaped. I was just ripping packs from that wax box with some neighbors on the day I got it, not thinking there was much of a chance of pulling any errors. Like I said, before that box, I figured the errors only made it into the wax packs that went into the retail display cases like the one I opened back in 2009.
<< <i>Can't believe this PSA 9 sold for $6,800!!
eBay link >>
That does not surprise me. I had posted quite a while ago that there are few reasons why these cards can't approach the value of a Mickey Mantle rookie. It is an iconic Topps rookie card of a first-ballot HOFer, and with just over 200 known to exist, they are certainly much more scarce than the Mantle card.
I can't read the 46 pages right now. So, what are the specifics of this card? Were they evenly distributed thru out the year. Or did they catch the error in time and it's just in the early prints? I guess I'm asking do I still have a chance of finding one if I bought a box. Were they just in retail, although i still don't have a handle on that and wouldn't know how to go about insuring it's a retail box. What are the odds? Easier to buy one, price, availalbility?
Thx again for any help
<< <i>Ever notice that the guy Frank Thomas is tagging has no face?
I'm sure that's because it's a college photo and Topps didn't have the rights to sell a card with that player's likeness.
<< <i>
<< <i>Ever notice that the guy Frank Thomas is tagging has no face?
I'm sure that's because it's a college photo and Topps didn't have the rights to sell a card with that player's likeness. >>
Yup. It's a player from Tulane Univeristy, but I've only been able to narrow it down to one of 5 players. If I ever find out who, I'm doing a TTM auto request, then getting Frank to sign it.
Maybe we should have a show off NNOF thread
<< <i>
Yup. It's a player from Tulane Univeristy, but I've only been able to narrow it down to one of 5 players. If I ever find out who, I'm doing a TTM auto request, then getting Frank to sign it. >>
That'd be really cool. Have you gone through the Tulane baseball publications for the right years? Looks like a pretty skinny guy (although I guess everyone is skinny next to The Big Hurt!)
<< <i>Just posting my NNOF I purchased last year.
Maybe we should have a show off NNOF thread >>
Anyone know why this SGC 88 graded NNOF Thomas does not show up in the population report? Their website shows only one graded...and it was was a SGC 92.
<< <i>
Anyone know why this SGC 88 graded NNOF Thomas does not show up in the population report? Their website shows only one graded...and it was was a SGC 92. >>
I've also never seen an SGC holder that didn't assign a 1-10 grade underneath the 1-100 grade.
http://www.bighurthof.com/#!1990-topps-variations/c1gda
I'll edit the draft and link it on my menu in the next few days, but I figured I'd share it here first.
<< <i>I finally got around to writing an article about these cards for my website; this is a rough draft, but I think an interesting argument.
http://www.bighurthof.com/#!1990-topps-variations/c1gda
I'll edit the draft and link it on my menu in the next few days, but I figured I'd share it here first. >>
Well done!
saucywombat@hotmail.com
Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
<< <i>The statistical analysis was interesting but I would say that a conservative estimate would be that production of 1990 Topps is easily 5 times that of 1989 Upper Deck. That would produce some truly staggering figures based on his numbers. >>
Yeah, I agree, if anyone can find any information on exact production runs, he'd love to hear about it.
<< <i>I seem to recall being aware of the NNOF Thomas very early on, though I did work full time in a baseball card store around that time. Does anyone else remember it differently? This article indicates that it wasn't really known until 1993, but maybe that was not true in "hardcore" hobby circles, even pre-internet. >>
You're absolutely right; I was a small child and I knew about it very early on; that said, it didn't reach mainstream consciousness until Beckett featured it in 1993. There are still collectors who have never seen a copy in the flesh.
As I've gotten older and learned more about the hobby I've come to appreciate this card more than any other in sports. This is, hands down, my favorite card, my Holy Grail, White Whale.
<< <i>The statistical analysis was interesting but I would say that a conservative estimate would be that production of 1990 Topps is easily 5 times that of 1989 Upper Deck. That would produce some truly staggering figures based on his numbers. >>
The other problem with the statistical analysis is that he uses the (supposed) total number of "known" copies but uses the (supposed) total number of cases produced. Obviously, there's still a gargantuan amount of 1990 Topps cases still out there unopened so the math is immediately incorrect. It simultaneously supposes that there are no other Thomas NNOF left to be discovered in the very process of supposing how much money you would need to spend and how much time it would take to pull one from a pack.
I'd also be willing to bet that the total number of existing raw copies, as well as any copies destroyed or lost, surpasses the total number of currently graded copies.
one at a time? I am assuming however many they load is how many there are?
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
I have an oyster. I once saw a pearl come from a similar oyster. I think my oyster has a pearl in it. I will sell it for a premium based on no real evidence that it has a pearl inside. I will not open it myself. I will mention this oyster many more times. You cannot disprove that there is not a pearl in my oyster.
<< <i>This used to be my favorite thread, but the continuous banter about the theoretical box has brought it down.
I have an oyster. I once saw a pearl come from a similar oyster. I think my oyster has a pearl in it. I will sell it for a premium based on no real evidence that it has a pearl inside. I will not open it myself. I will mention this oyster many more times. You cannot disprove that there is not a pearl in my oyster. >>
Funny that someone who claims to be "tired of the banter" would perpetuate it with such an ill-intended post...and so long after the banter had faded. People like yourself are the ones who need to apologize to Ross for such posts in his thread. And, clearly, the truth is that you are yet another jealous #@*% trying to convince me to rip that box. Nice try.
Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps
- uncut
Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
<< <i>Looks like one was pulled recently...
Seems a little strange that he has a friend recording just this pack? Then never shows the back? Seems a little strange but good for him.
1992 Collectors Edge Football case?
Work in progress - Unopened Racks/Cello/Wax with star power for Baseball, Football and Basketball
Collecting unopened 80's boxes and graded packs
I may be hoarding too much 80's junk wax but I like it!
Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
Jumbo Pack theory:: check
Mid East theory:: check
Have friend record feel good story:: check
Open one pack:: check
Show 1990 Topps NNOF :: check
Show case of multiple packs:: check
Sell remaining packs on eBay for $100 each
FYI - Ebay has two listings for 1990 Topps jumbo packs mentioning a possible nnof error but they are listed cheap so I doubt there's a connection between the listing and this guy.
<< <i>The thing is, the jumbo packs aren't confirmed to contain NNOFs; no one has ever claimed that and proven it. These packs have been on eBay for years now; originally at HIGH prices, but falling because they aren't from the right production. >>
It's been almost 25 years so my memory is fuzzy but I still maintain that I got mine out of a wax pack.
I'd say the only real giveaways are the fact that you can hear every crinkle on camera but no noise is being made when the pack is being cut. Then oddly there are no other orange sheet cards in pack (AS WE KNOW THESE RELATED ERRORS ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO FIND) and you can see that the NNOF has a corner ding which is not present on the other cards in the pack.
I'd say to the casual observer this would seem very legitimate.
saucywombat@hotmail.com