More Redemption Card Blues...

[Dalkowski110]

Once again, I got a bait and switch from Topps. Although the last time I got an improvement and a fair deal (instead of Brian Stokes, a AAA pitcher, I got Brian Bannister, a Major League pitcher...but it was a dupe and I traded it to MadHatter), this time I got what I believe to be the worst discrepency in value yet. I sent out a redemption card from a pack of 2007 Topps '52 Rookies for an Andrew Miller Special Edition Autograph. That's signed in red ink and serial-numbered to 52. Despite his recent struggles, Miller is still a high-ceiling guy who is considered to be a semistar, pricing-wise. I did indeed get a 2007 Topps '52 Rookies Special Edition Autograph in return today...of Chase Wright, a common literally worth half what Miller is worth and a Quad-A guy at best.

I did get some consolation in the card being hand-numbered 01/52 by Wright (which is pretty neat, but gives it no extra value), but would it be possible for Topps to just deliver the correct signature? Really, I wouldn't mind (say) a regular 2007 Topps '52 Rookies Miller auto (for which redemptions were not issued and that came in packs) if they can't find a Special Edition. Or even a sticker auto of Miller on a 2007 Bowman or 2007 Topps Chrome card. Or how about a player with the same book value, at least? I'm wondering what I'll get in return for the redemption card of the 2007 Bowman Chrome Draft Ross Detwiler auto I sent in. Really, this is quite disappointing.

[MadHatter]

Honestly - I don't really understand how they don't keep a supply of the cards that they send out redemptions for. Where are they going? What are they doing with those?

[xholdourownx]

That makes me nervous about a redemption card I put on in the mail today. It was a co-signers Jeff Francis/(blanking on name) Hirsh. I wouldn't really mind getting a different card instead but hopefully they don't send me something very unwanted.

[Zito75]

That makes me nervous about a redemption card I put on in the mail today. It was a co-signers Jeff Francis/(blanking on name) Hirsh. I wouldn't really mind getting a different card instead but hopefully they don't send me something very unwanted.

That'd be a sweet card. (Jason) Hirsh is a cool guy! I'd like to make you a trade offer for that card!

[xholdourownx]

That'd be a sweet card. (Jason) Hirsh is a cool guy! I'd like to make you a trade offer for that card!

I thin Francis is pretty cool, but we could probably work something out. Try to send me a pm every once in a while to help me remember you're interested and I'll be sure to let you know when I get.

[Dalkowski110]

"Honestly - I don't really understand how they don't keep a supply of the cards that they send out redemptions for. Where are they going? What are they doing with those?"

To answer your two questions, some cards that can be redeemed do actually make it into very late packs. These cards ensure that not enough redemption cards were printed. Others can't be redeemed simply because of circumstances beyond the control of the company. And sometimes, Topps simply prints up too many redemption cards.

Upper Deck is scheduled to transition to "nameless" redemptions in the 2009 product line. These redemption cards will be inserted and only promise a specific autograph or game-used item TYPE, and NOT an individual player. This is kinda odd, especially because UD has in my experience been far, far better than Topps on the redemption card front. Although nameless redemptions don't bring expectations up, the problem is also just that: that they don't bring expectations up. Say UD initially wants to put an autograph of Todd Helton into their set. Well, Helton doesn't become available. If his name had been on the redemption card, then UD would've been forced to give you a signed card of equivalent value; say of Matt Holliday. But now, they don't have to do that. Now they could throw an auto of Seth Smith your way and have no backlash. I think that's why Topps is avoiding this.

[xholdourownx]

"Honestly - I don't really understand how they don't keep a supply of the cards that they send out redemptions for. Where are they going? What are they doing with those?"

To answer your two questions, some cards that can be redeemed do actually make it into very late packs. These cards ensure that not enough redemption cards were printed. Others can't be redeemed simply because of circumstances beyond the control of the company. And sometimes, Topps simply prints up too many redemption cards.

Upper Deck is scheduled to transition to "nameless" redemptions in the 2009 product line. These redemption cards will be inserted and only promise a specific autograph or game-used item TYPE, and NOT an individual player. This is kinda odd, especially because UD has in my experience been far, far better than Topps on the redemption card front. Although nameless redemptions don't bring expectations up, the problem is also just that: that they don't bring expectations up. Say UD initially wants to put an autograph of Todd Helton into their set. Well, Helton doesn't become available. If his name had been on the redemption card, then UD would've been forced to give you a signed card of equivalent value; say of Matt Holliday. But now, they don't have to do that. Now they could throw an auto of Seth Smith your way and have no backlash. I think that's why Topps is avoiding this.

Topps may not be avoiding that, yet. Topps is a little behind on the redemption card hmmm...'idea'. They just started doing online redemptions with their Series 2 this year. The redemption I had was in a Co-Signers pack and was very frustrated to find out that just a few months later and I could just do everything online.

But I do see how a nameless redemption would be very helpful. To the company that is. No complaining from customers, no problem. I do kind of like the idea of a complete surprise, even if I do get a run of the mill auto rather than a 1/1 big name auto or something similar.