Thanx for trade offer, but I recently received the Harris card I was looking for to complete my 2005 White Sox Team set!
otherwise I would have accepted the offer you made...
thanx anyways
Doug
I collect Seattle Pilots autographs, 1969 Topps autographs, Signed Mickey Mantle Home Run History cards and have a JC Martin collection (he was my college Baseball coach) Doug
Last night after trying several times to get all 289 cards shipped at once, I broke down and did it in groups of 4. Shipping UPS was a cheaper option so I entered my work info in case I have to sign for something. After clicking submit for the 4 orders I realized I used my home zip code instead of my work zip code. I immediately called Topps this morning and they really weren't much help. This is UPS, not the postal service, I still should get my cards right? Anyone have any options on how to proceed?
Live in Garland work in Dallas. They border each other. 75043 vs 75251.
I called UPS and customer rep I spoke to (much better than the 'dude' at Topps) said that if they get a shipment with the wrong zip, they attempt to correct it. That should work since I just typed my work address into mapquest with the wrong zip and it corrected it.
<< <i>You should be able to call UPS once you get a tracking number and advise them. >>
Will we get tracking numbers shipping with UPS? The dude at Topps 'wasn't sure.' If so, can I expect an email or should I be checking my Topps Million card website account everyday? Anyone else ship with UPS?
Here are the two I got today from Topps. Condition on the 52 is pitiful. 53=ok. The 52 has a heavy crease all the way through the card. The 53 is crease free. The centering is about 90/10 L/R and 50/50 T/B on both of them. The corners are beat on the 52. The 53 corners are meh.
kshorton says: i gots an Empire State Building card... seeking advice.. is this better and worth more than my psa 3 franco harris 1973 topps card which i defouled by trying to make a baby with ? Please advise. the franco card is graded.. the ESB card is not yet, and I do not want to have a baby with the ESB card.
ALL MY CARD PICS ARE GONE AT THE TOPS SITE. HAPPENING TO OTHERS AS WELL. JUST ANOTHER PROBLEM....IN A STRING OF MANY. THIS PROMOTION IS GOING DOWN HILL QUICK AS THE BAD QUALITY OF THE GIVEAWAY CARDS CONTINUES TO BE REPORTED.
<< <i>Here are the two I got today from Topps. Condition on the 52 is pitiful. 53=ok. The 52 has a heavy crease all the way through the card. The 53 is crease free. The centering is about 90/10 L/R and 50/50 T/B on both of them. The corners are beat on the 52. The 53 corners are meh. >>
And what exactly did you have staked in the card? You opened a pack of 2010 Topps put in a code and got a 52, pretty cool if you ask me. Nowhere in the promotion did it say we guarantee you 50s cards that will grade in the 6 to 8 range.
I don't want to sound rude, but I love the promotion and the "free" cards. The stuff from 52 to around 75 is probably going to show some signs of love. Is it worthy of being graded and in your registry set, probably not; is it a nice piece of history that would look good in a binder, that cost you the pack of cards and $1.50 in shipping, yes. Being 31 years younger than that card, I'd love have it in my collection.
<< <i>Here are the two I got today from Topps. Condition on the 52 is pitiful. 53=ok. The 52 has a heavy crease all the way through the card. The 53 is crease free. The centering is about 90/10 L/R and 50/50 T/B on both of them. The corners are beat on the 52. The 53 corners are meh. >>
And what exactly did you have staked in the card? You opened a pack of 2010 Topps put in a code and got a 52, pretty cool if you ask me. Nowhere in the promotion did it say we guarantee you 50s cards that will grade in the 6 to 8 range.
I don't want to sound rude, but I love the promotion and the "free" cards. The stuff from 52 to around 75 is probably going to show some signs of love. Is it worthy of being graded and in your registry set, probably not; is it a nice piece of history that would look good in a binder, that cost you the pack of cards and $1.50 in shipping, yes. Being 31 years younger than that card, I'd love have it in my collection. >>
I'm very surprised that Topps is going down this road purely from a PR standpoint. Granted, I expect the quality to improve as the cards get newer, but do you really think the buzz generated won't turn decidedly negative if most of the vintage cards are Vg-Ex??
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
I think while most collectors want a better conditioned card, I don't think most collectors have PSA graded cards in their collection. Maybe I'm way off. But if you're doling out free cards I don't think you're in a position to gripe about condition. Just my 2 cents.
Matt, I appreciate your enthusiasm and collector spirit, but there are always more than one way to view a situation. I can respect both. I don't think it was unrealistic of me to expect the cards to be in decent condition. Did I expect razor corners on a card from 1952? No. Did I expect the card to be crease free. You bet I did. I'm fine with the 53. I think it has nice eye appeal and is in respectable condition. I quite disappointed in the 1952 b/c of the large crease.
kshorton says: i gots an Empire State Building card... seeking advice.. is this better and worth more than my psa 3 franco harris 1973 topps card which i defouled by trying to make a baby with ? Please advise. the franco card is graded.. the ESB card is not yet, and I do not want to have a baby with the ESB card.
I think what I was expecting was along the lines of the quality that we got in the 2001 (IIRC) inserts - Ex-ExNm for the most part. Solid eye appeal is very closely tied to customer satisfaction.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
wheres the free cards, if you knew just how much i spent on this set, you would even gasp,,, ,, but on the other hand they are the cards your mom threw out so i guess you have to expect a little chile sauce on some,,, right, bj
Looks like there are two creases in the 52 the angled crease on the front and then another about 3/4 up on the back? NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY wants creased cards
<< <i>Matt, I appreciate your enthusiasm and collector spirit, but there are always more than one way to view a situation. I can respect both. I don't think it was unrealistic of me to expect the cards to be in decent condition. Did I expect razor corners on a card from 1952? No. Did I expect the card to be crease free. You bet I did. I'm fine with the 53. I think it has nice eye appeal and is in respectable condition. I quite disappointed in the 1952 b/c of the large crease. >>
Here's the thing though. The Wehmeier is the last card of the 1952 series 1. Tough card to find in good condition, like the Pafko. I'm guessing since it isn't a highly publicized card like the Pafko/Mantle/etc Topps figured they could get away just buying back the one regardless of condition. Does it suck? Absolutely. But if you go back a bunch of pages, someone (zep33 I think) unlocked a '77 checklist that was all marked off. And from the looks of a lot of the scans on the MCG site, condition isn't exactly the best thing to clamor about with the giveaway.
Topps could have done a better job of picking out better condition cards, but they didn't. I don't know if they got a cut rate deal from a few dealers or what, but you know whoever they got the cards from was not going to sacrifice high quality cards at a discount.
This is also the first time that everyone got a chance to get something decent from Topps, unlike in years past where the buy backs were like 1 in 100000 packs.
Out of curiosity, was the scan on the MCG website that card? Could you see the crease in the card on the site?
Don't kid yourself, it's all about the big bucks - Topps is rolling in it right now. If anyone should care about the giveway cards its Topps - they produced the cards in the first place. It is their promotion. So if they give out junk - it's a one time thing and they won't be able to do it again. Based on this go around - don't expect series two to be any different.
These giveaway cards aren't free - you did have to buy something (their product), and add on to it you have to pay over 50 cents for each card just to get it (after the first card). So how many cards are you going to ask to be shipped to you if they are worse than poor quality? For me, not many. I would rather spend the extra bucks and get a decent card than waste it on Topps giveaways that turn out to be junk - if that is the case overall. Topps is only going hurt their own reputation when this is all said and done - they could help themselves if the contest prizes are decent. Time will tell.
<< <i>Don't kid yourself, it's all about the big bucks - Topps is rolling in it right now. If anyone should care about the giveway cards its Topps - they produced the cards in the first place. It is their promotion. So if they give out junk - it's a one time thing and they won't be able to do it again. Based on this go around - don't expect series two to be any different.
These giveaway cards aren't free - you did have to buy something (their product), and add on to it you have to pay over 50 cents for each card just to get it (after the first card). So how many cards are you going to ask to be shipped to you if they are worse than poor quality? For me, not many. I would rather spend the extra bucks and get a decent card than waste it on Topps giveaways that turn out to be junk - if that is the case overall. Topps is only going hurt their own reputation when this is all said and done - they could help themselves if the contest prizes are decent. Time will tell. >>
Which is another point someone alluded to weeks ago. From a business perspective it's brilliant. Get people to crack hundred upon hundreds of packs. Give them low quality cards as redemptions. maybe less than 5% actually get shipped. Topps now has all these extras to use as give aways when the redemption/shipping period expires.
<< <i>Matt, I appreciate your enthusiasm and collector spirit, but there are always more than one way to view a situation. I can respect both. I don't think it was unrealistic of me to expect the cards to be in decent condition. Did I expect razor corners on a card from 1952? No. Did I expect the card to be crease free. You bet I did. I'm fine with the 53. I think it has nice eye appeal and is in respectable condition. I quite disappointed in the 1952 b/c of the large crease. >>
Here's the thing though. The Wehmeier is the last card of the 1952 series 1. Tough card to find in good condition, like the Pafko. I'm guessing since it isn't a highly publicized card like the Pafko/Mantle/etc Topps figured they could get away just buying back the one regardless of condition. Does it suck? Absolutely. But if you go back a bunch of pages, someone (zep33 I think) unlocked a '77 checklist that was all marked off. And from the looks of a lot of the scans on the MCG site, condition isn't exactly the best thing to clamor about with the giveaway.
Topps could have done a better job of picking out better condition cards, but they didn't. I don't know if they got a cut rate deal from a few dealers or what, but you know whoever they got the cards from was not going to sacrifice high quality cards at a discount.
This is also the first time that everyone got a chance to get something decent from Topps, unlike in years past where the buy backs were like 1 in 100000 packs.
Out of curiosity, was the scan on the MCG website that card? Could you see the crease in the card on the site? >>
All valid points, but somehow in 2001 they managed to insert nice cards. The 50's I got in those inserts (not buybacks, inserts) were 6's.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
Exactly! The key is how stupid will the public continue to be if the giveaways all turn out to be really awful. If the giveaways turn out to be really bad overall - it absolutely will hurt the public's buy in to future promotions. So if Topps is smart, they won't ruin what is/was a brilliant idea by sending out awful cards.
<< <i>Exactly! The key is how stupid will the public continue to be if the giveaways all turn out to be really awful. If the giveaways turn out to be really bad overall - it absolutely will hurt the public's buy in to future promotions. So if Topps is smart, they won't ruin what is/was a brilliant idea by sending out awful cards. >>
I didn't buy anymore Topps packs this year than I have in the last 4. I bought 300 of these cards off Ebay. How did Topps make money on that. It comes down to simple economics, if you don't like it, stop buying. I don't forsee Topps fixing their already 'stellar' customer service. And I realize they weren't free that's why I put that word in quotes, and also said $1.50 shipping plus a pack of cards was your cost.
Also I've seen 2 cards that have been redeemed, shipped, and received. That is .0002% of the cards in the redemption. Why don't we hold off judgement until alot more come back...
Exactly, if you don't like it - don't buy. That's why from purely a business perspective if they give out bad cards, Topps only hurts themselves in the long run - why - because the public will only be stupid for so long. If you don't care -fine. Buy all you want. Everyone has a right to their own motive and opinion. But keep this in mind, who has the exclusive to MLB now? - right - Topps. So there is a lot more at stake with this promotion if it turns out that it makes the public unhappy. Maybe the contests will be good and maybe overall the cards are decent - time will tell.
<< <i> I've seen 2 cards that have been redeemed, shipped, and received. That is .0002% of the cards in the redemption. Why don't we hold off judgement until alot more come back... >>
I'm about to redeem 130 1956 Topps singles, so we'll get a better sampling then.
kshorton says: i gots an Empire State Building card... seeking advice.. is this better and worth more than my psa 3 franco harris 1973 topps card which i defouled by trying to make a baby with ? Please advise. the franco card is graded.. the ESB card is not yet, and I do not want to have a baby with the ESB card.
<< <i> I didn't buy anymore Topps packs this year than I have in the last 4. I bought 300 of these cards off Ebay. How did Topps make money on that.
SOMEONE bought more than normal so they could sell the giveaway cards to you. >>
I don't think so. I doubt Topps sold any more or less than previous years. I bought mine from TNTNorthJ. He always has tons of stuff to crack. Topps just made an insert tons of people were interested in more than usual.
To Wem1472, about 2/3 of the ones I redeemed were pre 1972 as well. I will scan mine in as well. And we can all have the collective look.
I don't think so. I doubt Topps sold any more or less than previous years. I bought mine from TNTNorthJ. He always has tons of stuff to crack. Topps just made an insert tons of people were interested in more than usual. >>
well I bought some and never did in the last 20 years so make that ONE person you are 100% wrong about.... Not since topps heritage has there even been mention of new product on these boards. Redemptions went from 1$ to 4$ each OVERNIGHT yet you claim it had no effect of sales? Jumbo cases went from a $450 to now OVER $700. So possibly topps didnt sell any more than usual, if you think they sell out every year, but certainly there was more buzz about this 2010 BASE product than in the last 20 years of a new topps regular issue set. If tons of people are interested inn wouldnt that spike sales, or at least prevent them from dumping unsold product into the ocean?
Now send me some trade offers!
Marv Rickert 1952 Marv Rickert / Outfield / Chicago White Sox Card Number: 50A
Jim Russel 1952 Jim Russel / Outfield / Brooklyn Dodgers Card Number: 51
<< <i>I don't think so. I doubt Topps sold any more or less than previous years >>
Never said people that don't buy new stuff or don't normally buy cards bought some of course they did and of course that spiked prices on your end but that doesn't change how many were originally produced. We saw a spike in sales in 2007 because of that stupid Jeter card. And I agree that if I get a ton of beat up cards I'm definately holding back in series 2 (or if they are $4 a card). I just want to give Topps the benefit of the doubt, thats all I'm saying....
Matt now you are saying the production numbers, not the sale numbers. I dont think they let the press run any longer, but I think the hype sold tons of product and dealers and retailers ordered more and more. I am just banking on a 50's run when series two come out, I would think sunday being opening day might have some nice cards pop too!
Got my '67 Clendenon in the mail today. I am very pleased with the card, much better than I thought it would be. I traded the 2001 Archives Curt Simmons auto that might have brought $8-$10 on ebay for it. It looks to be a 7 and avg. VCP on a 7 is $42.83.
I have the following to deal, I am looking for New York Mets, Brooklyn Dodgers, 1963's-1964's-1965's, Casey Stengel, Don Zimmer, Tom Seaver, Etc. Make me an offer!
Wilmer Mizell 1954 Pitcher / St. Louis Cardinals (Have to be wowed to deal)
Ernie Oravetz 1956 Outfield / Washington Nationals
Marty Keough 1963 Outfield Cincinnati Reds
Bobby Richardson 1964 Second Base / New York Yankees (Need a decent name to deal)
Hank Fischer 1964 Pitcher / Milwaukee Braves
New York Mets Team Card 1972
Cleon Jones 1975 Outfield / New York Mets
Bud Harrelson 1978 Shortstop / New York Mets
Dan Briggs 1979 Outfield / Cleveland Indians (Any 60 or 70 card if interested)
Ed Kranepool 1980 First Base / New York Mets (will take any 60s or 70s Mets for this card if interested)
and
Ron Darling 1985 Pitcher/New York Mets (will take any 60s or 70s Mets for this card if interested)
I just spoke with Topps customer service. There seems to be a problem with their image server - so it is on their end. If you ARE seeing your cards you are seeing what is cached in your browser. You aren't seeing the images as they would be currently delivered by their server. So if you clear your temporary Internet files in your browser or turn on/off your computer, then log in, you'll see that you can't see your card pics right now. In any event, Topps is aware and is working on it. Hope that helps.
I have a 1952 Topps #210 Dick Fowler available for trade. Looking for Cincinnati Reds and additional cards from other teams (preferably pirates, cards, mets, yanks, dodgers, and red sox) to bring the value up to fair trade value.
Prefer most of the trade value coming from pre-1960 first or secondly pre-1970 cards. a trade containing a bunch of modern cards as throw-ins in addition to the trade value will also receive priority.
Just redeemed 4 and got: 1987 Dennis Eckersley - Pitcher - Chicago Cubs 1976 Larry Bowa - Shortstop - Philadelphia Phillies Card Number:145 1959 Hal Naragon - Catcher - Cleveland Indians Card Number:376 1960 Bill Henry - Pitcher - Cincinnati Reds Card Number:524
saw a bunch of 50's and 60's showing up so I gave it a shot
IS ANYONE ON THIS THREAD HAVING A PROBLEM SEEING THEIR CARDS AT THE TOPPS SITE? MANY OF US STILL CANT SEE OUT CARDS. THEIR TERMS OF SERVICE SEEMS TO SAY IF YOU CANT SEE THE IMAGE OF A CARD YOU DONT HAVE A CARD SO FOR NOW IM NOT UNLOCKING ANYMORE OF MY CODES. I'VE CALLED THEIR CUSTOMER SUPPORT AND I GOT THE RUN AROUND BIG TIME. WHAT ARE OTHERS EXPERIENCING?
<< <i>IS ANYONE ON THIS THREAD HAVING A PROBLEM SEEING THEIR CARDS AT THE TOPPS SITE? MANY OF US STILL CANT SEE OUT CARDS. THEIR TERMS OF SERVICE SEEMS TO SAY IF YOU CANT SEE THE IMAGE OF A CARD YOU DONT HAVE A CARD SO FOR NOW IM NOT UNLOCKING ANYMORE OF MY CODES. I'VE CALLED THEIR CUSTOMER SUPPORT AND I GOT THE RUN AROUND BIG TIME. WHAT ARE OTHERS EXPERIENCING? >>
I am still seeing them including seeing the new redemptions as well as new trade offers. Can't be the internet cache because I see new and old...
edit to say:
OK as of right now 11:51 AM I am no longer seeing cards... in my collection or in trades...
<< <i>I have a 1952 Topps #210 Dick Fowler available for trade. Looking for Cincinnati Reds and additional cards from other teams (preferably pirates, cards, mets, yanks, dodgers, and red sox) to bring the value up to fair trade value.
Prefer most of the trade value coming from pre-1960 first or secondly pre-1970 cards. a trade containing a bunch of modern cards as throw-ins in addition to the trade value will also receive priority. >>
How Does this work for you? 1959 Tom Acker 201 Cincinnati Redlegs Pitcher 1960 Bill Henry 524 Cincinnati Reds Pitcher 1964 Dick Radatz 170 Boston Red Sox Pitcher 1964 Jay Hook 361 New York Mets Pitcher 1965 Larry Bearnarth 258 New York Mets Pitcher 1966 Bobby Klaus 108 New York Mets Infield 1967 Al Luplow 433 New York Mets Outfield 1968 Bill Singer 249 Los Angeles Dodgers Pitcher 2009 Ian Snell 343 Pittsburgh Pirates Pitcher 2006 Mike Timlin 158 Boston Red Sox Pitcher 2002 Joe McEwing 422 New York Mets Outfield 2000 Ed Sprague 83 Pittsburgh Pirates Third Base 1994 Ryan Thompson 98 New York Mets Outfield 1994 Brian Dorsett 688 Cincinnati Reds Catcher 1993 Bernie Williams 222 New York Yankees Outfield 1989 Pete Rose 505 Cincinnati Reds Manager
Ken edit to change modern cards to preferred teams
Looking for 1959's through the Topps giveaway - have many cards to trade - too many to list here. Let me know the team, player, years, etc you are looking for - I may have it. Tks.
Comments
Thanx for trade offer, but I recently received the Harris card I was looking for to complete my 2005 White Sox Team set!
otherwise I would have accepted the offer you made...
thanx anyways
Doug
Doug
Last night after trying several times to get all 289 cards shipped at once, I broke down and did it in groups of 4. Shipping UPS was a cheaper option so I entered my work info in case I have to sign for something. After clicking submit for the 4 orders I realized I used my home zip code instead of my work zip code. I immediately called Topps this morning and they really weren't much help. This is UPS, not the postal service, I still should get my cards right? Anyone have any options on how to proceed?
What I'm selling
Building Sets, Collecting Texas Rangers, and Texas Tech Red Raiders
You don't live in Kansas and work in West Virginia or something, do you?
Only an idiot would have a message board signature.
Live in Garland work in Dallas. They border each other. 75043 vs 75251.
I called UPS and customer rep I spoke to (much better than the 'dude' at Topps) said that if they get a shipment with the wrong zip, they attempt to correct it. That should work since I just typed my work address into mapquest with the wrong zip and it corrected it.
<< <i>You should be able to call UPS once you get a tracking number and advise them. >>
Will we get tracking numbers shipping with UPS? The dude at Topps 'wasn't sure.' If so, can I expect an email or should I be checking my Topps Million card website account everyday? Anyone else ship with UPS?
What I'm selling
Building Sets, Collecting Texas Rangers, and Texas Tech Red Raiders
The 52 has a heavy crease all the way through the card. The 53 is crease free. The centering is about 90/10 L/R and 50/50 T/B on both of them. The corners are beat on the 52. The 53 corners are meh.
THIS PROMOTION IS GOING DOWN HILL QUICK AS THE BAD QUALITY OF THE GIVEAWAY CARDS CONTINUES TO BE REPORTED.
<< <i>Here are the two I got today from Topps. Condition on the 52 is pitiful. 53=ok.
The 52 has a heavy crease all the way through the card. The 53 is crease free. The centering is about 90/10 L/R and 50/50 T/B on both of them. The corners are beat on the 52. The 53 corners are meh. >>
And what exactly did you have staked in the card? You opened a pack of 2010 Topps put in a code and got a 52, pretty cool if you ask me. Nowhere in the promotion did it say we guarantee you 50s cards that will grade in the 6 to 8 range.
I don't want to sound rude, but I love the promotion and the "free" cards. The stuff from 52 to around 75 is probably going to show some signs of love. Is it worthy of being graded and in your registry set, probably not; is it a nice piece of history that would look good in a binder, that cost you the pack of cards and $1.50 in shipping, yes. Being 31 years younger than that card, I'd love have it in my collection.
What I'm selling
Building Sets, Collecting Texas Rangers, and Texas Tech Red Raiders
<< <i>
<< <i>Here are the two I got today from Topps. Condition on the 52 is pitiful. 53=ok.
The 52 has a heavy crease all the way through the card. The 53 is crease free. The centering is about 90/10 L/R and 50/50 T/B on both of them. The corners are beat on the 52. The 53 corners are meh. >>
And what exactly did you have staked in the card? You opened a pack of 2010 Topps put in a code and got a 52, pretty cool if you ask me. Nowhere in the promotion did it say we guarantee you 50s cards that will grade in the 6 to 8 range.
I don't want to sound rude, but I love the promotion and the "free" cards. The stuff from 52 to around 75 is probably going to show some signs of love. Is it worthy of being graded and in your registry set, probably not; is it a nice piece of history that would look good in a binder, that cost you the pack of cards and $1.50 in shipping, yes. Being 31 years younger than that card, I'd love have it in my collection. >>
I'm very surprised that Topps is going down this road purely from a PR standpoint. Granted, I expect the quality to improve as the cards get newer, but do you really think the buzz generated won't turn decidedly negative if most of the vintage cards are Vg-Ex??
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
What I'm selling
Building Sets, Collecting Texas Rangers, and Texas Tech Red Raiders
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
but on the other hand they are the cards your mom threw out so i guess you have to expect a little chile sauce on some,,, right, bj
<< <i>Matt, I appreciate your enthusiasm and collector spirit, but there are always more than one way to view a situation. I can respect both. I don't think it was unrealistic of me to expect the cards to be in decent condition. Did I expect razor corners on a card from 1952? No. Did I expect the card to be crease free. You bet I did. I'm fine with the 53. I think it has nice eye appeal and is in respectable condition. I quite disappointed in the 1952 b/c of the large crease. >>
Here's the thing though. The Wehmeier is the last card of the 1952 series 1. Tough card to find in good condition, like the Pafko. I'm guessing since it isn't a highly publicized card like the Pafko/Mantle/etc Topps figured they could get away just buying back the one regardless of condition. Does it suck? Absolutely. But if you go back a bunch of pages, someone (zep33 I think) unlocked a '77 checklist that was all marked off. And from the looks of a lot of the scans on the MCG site, condition isn't exactly the best thing to clamor about with the giveaway.
Topps could have done a better job of picking out better condition cards, but they didn't. I don't know if they got a cut rate deal from a few dealers or what, but you know whoever they got the cards from was not going to sacrifice high quality cards at a discount.
This is also the first time that everyone got a chance to get something decent from Topps, unlike in years past where the buy backs were like 1 in 100000 packs.
Out of curiosity, was the scan on the MCG website that card? Could you see the crease in the card on the site?
These giveaway cards aren't free - you did have to buy something (their product), and add on to it you have to pay over 50 cents for each card just to get it (after the first card). So how many cards are you going to ask to be shipped to you if they are worse than poor quality?
For me, not many. I would rather spend the extra bucks and get a decent card than waste it on Topps giveaways that turn out to be junk - if that is the case overall. Topps is only going hurt their own reputation when this is all said and done - they could help themselves if the contest prizes are decent. Time will tell.
<< <i>Don't kid yourself, it's all about the big bucks - Topps is rolling in it right now. If anyone should care about the giveway cards its Topps - they produced the cards in the first place. It is their promotion. So if they give out junk - it's a one time thing and they won't be able to do it again. Based on this go around - don't expect series two to be any different.
These giveaway cards aren't free - you did have to buy something (their product), and add on to it you have to pay over 50 cents for each card just to get it (after the first card). So how many cards are you going to ask to be shipped to you if they are worse than poor quality?
For me, not many. I would rather spend the extra bucks and get a decent card than waste it on Topps giveaways that turn out to be junk - if that is the case overall. Topps is only going hurt their own reputation when this is all said and done - they could help themselves if the contest prizes are decent. Time will tell. >>
Which is another point someone alluded to weeks ago. From a business perspective it's brilliant. Get people to crack hundred upon hundreds of packs. Give them low quality cards as redemptions. maybe less than 5% actually get shipped. Topps now has all these extras to use as give aways when the redemption/shipping period expires.
<< <i>
<< <i>Matt, I appreciate your enthusiasm and collector spirit, but there are always more than one way to view a situation. I can respect both. I don't think it was unrealistic of me to expect the cards to be in decent condition. Did I expect razor corners on a card from 1952? No. Did I expect the card to be crease free. You bet I did. I'm fine with the 53. I think it has nice eye appeal and is in respectable condition. I quite disappointed in the 1952 b/c of the large crease. >>
Here's the thing though. The Wehmeier is the last card of the 1952 series 1. Tough card to find in good condition, like the Pafko. I'm guessing since it isn't a highly publicized card like the Pafko/Mantle/etc Topps figured they could get away just buying back the one regardless of condition. Does it suck? Absolutely. But if you go back a bunch of pages, someone (zep33 I think) unlocked a '77 checklist that was all marked off. And from the looks of a lot of the scans on the MCG site, condition isn't exactly the best thing to clamor about with the giveaway.
Topps could have done a better job of picking out better condition cards, but they didn't. I don't know if they got a cut rate deal from a few dealers or what, but you know whoever they got the cards from was not going to sacrifice high quality cards at a discount.
This is also the first time that everyone got a chance to get something decent from Topps, unlike in years past where the buy backs were like 1 in 100000 packs.
Out of curiosity, was the scan on the MCG website that card? Could you see the crease in the card on the site? >>
All valid points, but somehow in 2001 they managed to insert nice cards. The 50's I got in those inserts (not buybacks, inserts) were 6's.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Exactly! The key is how stupid will the public continue to be if the giveaways all turn out to be really awful. If the giveaways turn out to be really bad overall - it absolutely will hurt the public's buy in to future promotions. So if Topps is smart, they won't ruin what is/was a brilliant idea by sending out awful cards. >>
I didn't buy anymore Topps packs this year than I have in the last 4. I bought 300 of these cards off Ebay. How did Topps make money on that. It comes down to simple economics, if you don't like it, stop buying. I don't forsee Topps fixing their already 'stellar' customer service. And I realize they weren't free that's why I put that word in quotes, and also said $1.50 shipping plus a pack of cards was your cost.
Also I've seen 2 cards that have been redeemed, shipped, and received. That is .0002% of the cards in the redemption. Why don't we hold off judgement until alot more come back...
What I'm selling
Building Sets, Collecting Texas Rangers, and Texas Tech Red Raiders
SOMEONE bought more than normal so they could sell the giveaway cards to you.
<< <i> I've seen 2 cards that have been redeemed, shipped, and received. That is .0002% of the cards in the redemption. Why don't we hold off judgement until alot more come back... >>
I'm about to redeem 130 1956 Topps singles, so we'll get a better sampling then.
<< <i> I didn't buy anymore Topps packs this year than I have in the last 4. I bought 300 of these cards off Ebay. How did Topps make money on that.
SOMEONE bought more than normal so they could sell the giveaway cards to you. >>
I don't think so. I doubt Topps sold any more or less than previous years. I bought mine from TNTNorthJ. He always has tons of stuff to crack. Topps just made an insert tons of people were interested in more than usual.
To Wem1472, about 2/3 of the ones I redeemed were pre 1972 as well. I will scan mine in as well. And we can all have the collective look.
What I'm selling
Building Sets, Collecting Texas Rangers, and Texas Tech Red Raiders
Topps - "We're giving you back the cards your mom threw away - We went down to the dump and got them back for you"
<< <i>
I don't think so. I doubt Topps sold any more or less than previous years. I bought mine from TNTNorthJ. He always has tons of stuff to crack. Topps just made an insert tons of people were interested in more than usual. >>
well I bought some and never did in the last 20 years so make that ONE person you are 100% wrong about.... Not since topps heritage has there even been mention of new product on these boards. Redemptions went from 1$ to 4$ each OVERNIGHT yet you claim it had no effect of sales? Jumbo cases went from a $450 to now OVER $700. So possibly topps didnt sell any more than usual, if you think they sell out every year, but certainly there was more buzz about this 2010 BASE product than in the last 20 years of a new topps regular issue set. If tons of people are interested inn wouldnt that spike sales, or at least prevent them from dumping unsold product into the ocean?
Now send me some trade offers!
Marv Rickert 1952
Marv Rickert / Outfield / Chicago White Sox
Card Number: 50A
Jim Russel 1952
Jim Russel / Outfield / Brooklyn Dodgers
Card Number: 51
Virgil Stallcup 1952
Virgil Stallcup / Shortstop / Cincinnati Reds
Card Number: 69A
Dale Coogan 1952
Dale Coogan / First Base / Pittsburgh Pirates
Card Number: 87
Carl Scheib 1952
Carl Scheib / Pitcher / Philadelphia Athletics
Card Number: 116
Sam Zoldak 1952
Sam Zoldak / Pitcher / Philadelphia Athletics
Card Number: 231
Jim Wilson 1952
Jim Wilson / Pitcher / Boston Braves
Card Number: 276
Hal Newhouser 1953
Hal Newhouser / Pitcher / Detroit Tigers
Card Number: 228
Bill Norman 1953
Bill Norman / Coach / St. Louis Browns
Card Number: 245
Johnny Pesky 1954
Johnny Pesky / Second Base / Detroit Tigers
Card Number: 63
Frank Smith 1954
Frank Smith / Pitcher / Cincinnati Redlegs
Card Number: 71
Clem Labine 1954
Clem Labine / Pitcher / Brooklyn Dodgers
Card Number: 121
Bob Kline 1955
Bob Kline / Shortstop / Washington Nationals
Card Number: 173
Gale Wade 1955
Gale Wade / Outfield / Chicago Cubs
Card Number: 196
Al Kaline 1959
Al Kaline / Outfield / Detroit Tigers
Card Number: 360
Nellie Fox 1960
Nellie Fox / Second Base / Chicago White Sox
Card Number: 555
Tony Conigliaro 1965
Tony Conigliaro / Outfield / Boston Red Sox
Card Number: 55
<< <i>I don't think so. I doubt Topps sold any more or less than previous years >>
Never said people that don't buy new stuff or don't normally buy cards bought some of course they did and of course that spiked prices on your end but that doesn't change how many were originally produced. We saw a spike in sales in 2007 because of that stupid Jeter card. And I agree that if I get a ton of beat up cards I'm definately holding back in series 2 (or if they are $4 a card). I just want to give Topps the benefit of the doubt, thats all I'm saying....
What I'm selling
Building Sets, Collecting Texas Rangers, and Texas Tech Red Raiders
Wilmer Mizell 1954 Pitcher / St. Louis Cardinals (Have to be wowed to deal)
Ernie Oravetz 1956 Outfield / Washington Nationals
Marty Keough 1963 Outfield Cincinnati Reds
Bobby Richardson 1964 Second Base / New York Yankees (Need a decent name to deal)
Hank Fischer 1964 Pitcher / Milwaukee Braves
New York Mets Team Card 1972
Cleon Jones 1975 Outfield / New York Mets
Bud Harrelson 1978 Shortstop / New York Mets
Dan Briggs 1979 Outfield / Cleveland Indians (Any 60 or 70 card if interested)
Ed Kranepool 1980 First Base / New York Mets (will take any 60s or 70s Mets for this card if interested)
and
Ron Darling 1985 Pitcher/New York Mets (will take any 60s or 70s Mets for this card if interested)
LeagueLeader; IJustLoveCards; Recbball; msassin; leathtech; lsutigers1973; Bosox1976; Dboneesq; Aric; Bkritz
Prefer most of the trade value coming from pre-1960 first or secondly pre-1970 cards. a trade containing a bunch of modern cards as throw-ins in addition to the trade value will also receive priority.
1987 Dennis Eckersley - Pitcher - Chicago Cubs
1976 Larry Bowa - Shortstop - Philadelphia Phillies Card Number:145
1959 Hal Naragon - Catcher - Cleveland Indians Card Number:376
1960 Bill Henry - Pitcher - Cincinnati Reds Card Number:524
saw a bunch of 50's and 60's showing up so I gave it a shot
Ken
LeagueLeader; IJustLoveCards; Recbball; msassin; leathtech; lsutigers1973; Bosox1976; Dboneesq; Aric; Bkritz
THEIR TERMS OF SERVICE SEEMS TO SAY IF YOU CANT SEE THE IMAGE OF A CARD YOU DONT HAVE A CARD SO FOR NOW IM NOT UNLOCKING ANYMORE OF MY CODES. I'VE CALLED THEIR CUSTOMER SUPPORT AND I GOT THE RUN AROUND BIG TIME. WHAT ARE OTHERS EXPERIENCING?
<< <i>IS ANYONE ON THIS THREAD HAVING A PROBLEM SEEING THEIR CARDS AT THE TOPPS SITE? MANY OF US STILL CANT SEE OUT CARDS.
THEIR TERMS OF SERVICE SEEMS TO SAY IF YOU CANT SEE THE IMAGE OF A CARD YOU DONT HAVE A CARD SO FOR NOW IM NOT UNLOCKING ANYMORE OF MY CODES. I'VE CALLED THEIR CUSTOMER SUPPORT AND I GOT THE RUN AROUND BIG TIME. WHAT ARE OTHERS EXPERIENCING? >>
I am still seeing them including seeing the new redemptions as well as new trade offers. Can't be the internet cache because I see new and old...
edit to say:
OK as of right now 11:51 AM I am no longer seeing cards... in my collection or in trades...
LeagueLeader; IJustLoveCards; Recbball; msassin; leathtech; lsutigers1973; Bosox1976; Dboneesq; Aric; Bkritz
<< <i>I have a 1952 Topps #210 Dick Fowler available for trade. Looking for Cincinnati Reds and additional cards from other teams (preferably pirates, cards, mets, yanks, dodgers, and red sox) to bring the value up to fair trade value.
Prefer most of the trade value coming from pre-1960 first or secondly pre-1970 cards. a trade containing a bunch of modern cards as throw-ins in addition to the trade value will also receive priority. >>
How Does this work for you?
1959 Tom Acker 201 Cincinnati Redlegs Pitcher
1960 Bill Henry 524 Cincinnati Reds Pitcher
1964 Dick Radatz 170 Boston Red Sox Pitcher
1964 Jay Hook 361 New York Mets Pitcher
1965 Larry Bearnarth 258 New York Mets Pitcher
1966 Bobby Klaus 108 New York Mets Infield
1967 Al Luplow 433 New York Mets Outfield
1968 Bill Singer 249 Los Angeles Dodgers Pitcher
2009 Ian Snell 343 Pittsburgh Pirates Pitcher
2006 Mike Timlin 158 Boston Red Sox Pitcher
2002 Joe McEwing 422 New York Mets Outfield
2000 Ed Sprague 83 Pittsburgh Pirates Third Base
1994 Ryan Thompson 98 New York Mets Outfield
1994 Brian Dorsett 688 Cincinnati Reds Catcher
1993 Bernie Williams 222 New York Yankees Outfield
1989 Pete Rose 505 Cincinnati Reds Manager
Ken
edit to change modern cards to preferred teams
LeagueLeader; IJustLoveCards; Recbball; msassin; leathtech; lsutigers1973; Bosox1976; Dboneesq; Aric; Bkritz
Only an idiot would have a message board signature.
1952 Willard Marshall (Braves)
1960 Raul Sanchez (Reds)
1962 Joey Jay (reds)
1963 Jerry Lynch (Reds)
1963 Ron Piche (Braves)
1973 George Foster (reds)
1976 Doug Griffin (Red Sox)
1979 Pete Vuckovich (Cards)
1987 Steve Garvey (Padres)
1988 Gary Carter (Mets)
1989 Wade Boggs (Red Sox)
1994 Andy Van Slyke (Pirates)
2000 Neifi Perez (Rockies)
2005 Ron Gardenhire (Twins)
2005 Luis Ramirez (Orioles)
2008 Geoff Blum (Padres)