There was an article in a 1997 Baseball Beckett about the then new concept of 1/1 inserts. The author was wondering what could top that and jokingly(?) suggested using $100 bills as random inserts. I guess Topps ran with that idea, huh?
PS: If anyone knows which Beckett that article is from I'd sure appreciate it.
Sound insert for Topps, I can see them doing this with all their high end products now. Nothing like paying $250 for a box of Topps Sterling and pulling a Kevin Maas Auto Letter Patch, a redemption card for Prospect #30 and the big hit, a $100 bill insert card.
<< <i>A insert that is guaranteed to not drop below $100 >>
I wouldn't guarantee that.
Unfortunately, I cannot elaborate as some may view it as a political comment and I don't wanna go *poof*
So that's all I got to say about that.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
Wouldnt pulling cash out of a pack violate some kind of gambling law?
Buying packs of cards has basically been gambling for almost 20 yrs now, but since cards have no actual value, it really didnt matter. But real currency?
<< <i>Wouldnt pulling cash out of a pack violate some kind of gambling law?
Buying packs of cards has basically been gambling for almost 20 yrs now, but since cards have no actual value, it really didnt matter. But real currency?
Legal experts, let me hear you. >>
That's an interesting point, since "cards have tangible monetary value" was the card industry's defense when they were challenged in court over their practice of inserts and "chase" cards several years ago. Now that they're putting actual cash inside, that defense goes out the window. I suppose it could still be viewed as a sweepstakes, similar to when Pepsi put cash inside winning cans of soda a while back.
Comments
I'll give you un peso
Shane
PS: If anyone knows which Beckett that article is from I'd sure appreciate it.
D's: 50P,49S,45D+S,43D,41S,40D,39D+S,38D+S,37D+S,36S,35D+S,all 16-34's
Q's: 52S,47S,46S,40S,39S,38S,37D+S,36D+S,35D,34D,32D+S
74T: 241,435,610,654 97 Finest silver: 115,135,139,145,310
73T:31,55,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,80,152,165,189,213,235,237,257,341,344,377,379,390,422,433,453,480,497,545,554,563,580,606,613,630
95 Ultra GM Sets: Golden Prospects,HR Kings,On-Base Leaders,Power Plus,RBI Kings
Kevin
Check it out!!
((lame))
I'd pay $100 even in a GEM coffin!
rd
Quicksilver Messenger Service - Smokestack Lightning (Live) 1968
Quicksilver Messenger Service - The Hat (Live) 1971
<< <i>A insert that is guaranteed to not drop below $100 >>
I wouldn't guarantee that.
Unfortunately, I cannot elaborate as some may view it as a political comment and I don't wanna go *poof*
So that's all I got to say about that.
Buying packs of cards has basically been gambling for almost 20 yrs now, but since cards have no actual value, it really didnt matter. But real currency?
Legal experts, let me hear you.
<< <i>Wouldnt pulling cash out of a pack violate some kind of gambling law?
Buying packs of cards has basically been gambling for almost 20 yrs now, but since cards have no actual value, it really didnt matter. But real currency?
Legal experts, let me hear you. >>
That's an interesting point, since "cards have tangible monetary value" was the card industry's defense when they were challenged in court over their practice of inserts and "chase" cards several years ago. Now that they're putting actual cash inside, that defense goes out the window. I suppose it could still be viewed as a sweepstakes, similar to when Pepsi put cash inside winning cans of soda a while back.