Some of these buybacks are a bit silly

[G1911]

If our primary focus is on how to manufacture value for a 50 cent card, and being frustrated if the card is not worth more because it was bought back by a company, that seems the realm of the investor and not the collector, as this is about creating money and not enjoying the card that is damaged and altered in the effort to manufacture said scarcity.

It's scarcity manufactured decades after issue. If people want to collect that, good for them. It seems silly to me. I don't think anyone is "really upset" by it, just don't see it as reasoned.

[Rich Klein]

I will also state that for the card companies, they are doing this to add "value" to their packs and if so, then you need to come up with a way to show the value is added. That is another reason why the stamping is needed in their eyes so they can show the value.

They also purchase these cards on the secondary market, usually from a specific dealer or two or so, and again that is a cost.

For them, the stamping on the cards makes sense because it shows what product (s) the cards are included with. And frankly if you don't like the stamping, there are tons of those 1971 Leader Cards with no stamping so just get one of those

And I'm sorry for those who don't understand some of the logic from the card companies point of view (and I talked to them back in the day about that) including what was in my opinion, the debacle of the 1991 buybacks.

But if I'm a card company and I purchase some 1982 Topps Card sets to put into 2022 packs (40th anniversary) I'm going to ensure the collectors know it is a special card. I will also state that either Cal Ripken card, because of the value and possibly the 1982 Topps Traded Ozzie Smith card would NOT be stamped because of the book value. That's what I mean by a market cap on stamping the cards. But if I get a 1982 John Tudor card with a stamp, I've just added to the value and have no compunctions about putting that stamp on that card nor purchasing it as a collector

And to repeat, if you really don't like them and have some, I'm happy to pay 10 cents each to take those cards off your hands

Rich

[G1911]

Disagreeing with something and not understanding why a company does that thing at all are two completely different things. We are well aware Topps does it to try and manufacture value and scarcity by altering a card to get people to think it’s special. That’s exactly what we’re objecting too. Good luck in your buy back investing.

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by G1911

Disagreeing with something and not understanding why a company does that thing at all are two completely different things. We are well aware Topps does it to try and manufacture value and scarcity by altering a card to get people to think it’s special. That’s exactly what we’re objecting too. Good luck in your buy back investing.

I call it playing because I don't spend silly money on these -- LOL

And that's why they need to put the stamp on the card and yes we can disagree on if it's something which should be done. But as I pointed out, if you pulled a 1989 common, which my friend did, in a 1991 pack and there was not stamp all he had was a nice memory and a 2 cent card. With a stamp he would have had a card worth something.

And yes stamping on the player's face is kind of annoying

Rich