Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Did you not see Mike's scan of what the real cards look like?
I have "real" cards as well. The only difference is that the pack-pulled variety are hand numbered to 10. If I were to put fake hand numbers on my cards, that would be fraud. I cannot fathom how it would be fraud to offer the cards for sale exactly as I received them and exactly as they left the factory.
COMC does not list these as having a print run of 10. Beckett says "STATED PRINT RUN 10 SERIAL #'d SETS". That is what the manufacturer stated when the cards were issued. That there were 10 serial numbered sets.
It seems to me there are 2 possible scenarios:
* The manufacturer printed 10 sets, but some of the cards were not numbered and not distributed in packs.
* The manufacturer printed more than 10 sets, and mis-stated the print run to Beckett.
Either way, Beckett contains incorrect information, and it would be up to Beckett to make a correction if they are so inclined.
A separate issue is, "what are the cards worth?" Beckett offers no opinion on the matter and cops out with their standard "not priced due to scarcity" canard. So the asking price is a matter of the seller's opinion. Well, in my opinion, the 1990's Wild Card 1000 Stripes (another scarce issue where undistributed cards show up in clumps on eBay) guide for 120 times base, and the 1999 Score Artist's Proofs (serially numbered to 10) guide for 120 times base, so I figure a multiple of 100 times base is fair value.
And back in 95-96 you would have paid $200-$300 for the card. The reason they are easier to find now is because UD dumped them in a foreign version of Collector's Choice overseas, likely 1 per pack.
Thank you. I was wondering about that. I would point out, though, that Beckett still hasn't adjusted their price structure on that set, though they've had many years to do so.
I think your train just left the tracks!
Not really. Feel free to actually read what I wrote. People have collected valuable items for thousands of years. Sometimes, an item is not what it is represented to be. Sometimes, the perceived value of an item will change. However, such an item might still have value. I can point to countless examples in the card world. An entire book was written about the Gretzky T206 Honus Wagner, the entire thesis of which was that the card was not pack pulled, and was in fact, hand trimmed from an uncut sheet. The 1933 Goudey Nap Lajoie was not pack pulled, and was only available to people who complained to the company that they didn't get card #106. The 1990 Frank Thomas No Name On Front card is fishy in origin. It's likely that no example of the card was ever pack pulled. Yet, the card has value.
You are aware that each cards is serial numbered and that the sets involved for each shows was even more limited?
I am fully aware of that. However, these cards seem to show up in clumps on eBay, in the hand of relatively few dealers, which was the knock you have against my cards. There's one dealer on COMC that has a couple hundred "1 of 1" overprints from a particular show. Somehow, my cards are "illegitimate" because a kid in Podunk, Alaska couldn't pull one from a pack at their local card shop. Yet, these show overprints are just as unobtainable to anyone who didn't attend the show. I'm not knocking your cards, BTW. I'm just trying to show why it's unreasonable for you to be knocking mine.
The problems is they are not the same and should not be listed as the same thing.
They are precisely the same card, other than the lack of a serial number. At best, this is a minor variation, worthy of a short condition note on COMC. If Beckett thinks the variation is worthy of a notation, they should make a note of it. If Beckett thinks the price should be $x, $y or $z, then they should list these as being worth $x, $y or $z.
You were comparing these to fake autographs, calling them stolen and illegal, and using them as your #1 example of a card that should be removed from the site. Yet, these were actually produced by the manufacturer. You cannot cite an actual crime where they were stolen (when, by whom, from whom). You cannot cite an actual law that has been violated (misstating a print run to Beckett? Failure to serial number a card? Illegal collation? What?)
Under COMC's listing policy they are not supposed to be listed since they are not in Beckett's database, but it is their discretion.
Which is it? They have discretion to list, or they have no discretion to list? I could point out 10,000 examples of cards on COMC which are not listed in Beckett. COMC's policy is to only list cards which are LICENSED, which these cards clearly are.