Wander Franco Rookie Card Debate (2021 Bowman's Best vs. 2022 RC logo cards) - Page 82

rfgilles · 01-13-2022, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaveMeTheGum

This magnitude? It’s card numbering. It’s only become an issue because some people hoarded Best to make a quick buck by making up this rookie card issue. Wait until 2025 when Jason Dominguez has rookie cards (if he ever makes the majors that is).

Yes "this magnitude" The prospects were intentionally interspersed in the checklist, they weren't numbered at the end and are simply missing a prefix. Topps people chose to put Wander Franco at 50 (hence BB50), Topps people chose to put Torkelson at 100.

Topps has 350 employees and has been making sets for 70 years. They know exactly what is required to include prospects in a set.

You realize Topps was royally screwed by the MLBPA right?

zworykin · 01-13-2022, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StateEx

The back and forth in this thread is awesome.

It’s worth noting that BB21 was “legacy” Topps’ last set before the Fanatics acquisition closed. Everything else, including Bowman Heritage, will have to have been approved by someone at the new company (even if the design was done pre-acquisition).

So whether you believe it’s a RC or not, it’s definitely the last legacy Topps card for everyone in the set.

Also, just to point out, if folks at legacy Topps wanted to go out with a bang, this would have been a great way to do so. Especially since it’d be counterproductive for MLBPA, for example, to take legal action against “new” Topps since they’re part owners of the venture.

It’ll be very interesting to see what happens with Bowman Heritage. If I were new Topps, I’d renumber or can the release and proceed as if BB21 didn’t happen.

Well, just to correct the central tenet of your post - the Fanatics acquisition has not closed. It likely won't close for months. Fanatics currently has no control whatsoever over anything Topps does (including Bowman Heritage).

brewtown107 · 01-13-2022, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zworykin

Well, just to correct the central tenet of your post - the Fanatics acquisition has not closed. It likely won't close for months. Fanatics currently has no control whatsoever over anything Topps does (including Bowman Heritage).

Interesting... Cite? I just did a Google search, and everything I saw said it was a done deal, though nothing had any details.

In any case, if this is correct, then if Topps wants the deal to close, it's logical that they're going to do as Fanatics tells them. In that sense, Fanatics has some control over what Topps does.

Robague · 01-13-2022, 07:02 PM

I put almost all my card $ into Bowman and Bowman Draft. For me, Wander Franco's must have card is the 2019 Bowman, and being specific an autographed serial # card. Being really specific, the 2019 Bowman Refractor Auto /499. The next card of his I'd pick up will be the 2022 Bowman RC.

Shankweather · 01-13-2022, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brewtown107

Maybe, but I'm ignoring that part because we have no evidence to support the idea that the MLBPA would have approved, which is necessary for that clause. I'm just tackling the assertion that this section somehow codifies what a RC is, when it's simply talking about taking steps to avoid having people mistake prospect cards for RCs.

Codify is too strong of a word, I shouldn't have said that. There has been a lot of doubt expressed about the traditional RC definition I and others have put forth. Words like imaginary, outdated, and unnecessary were used. This agreement at least puts in writing and recognizes that standard and shows that they were trying to follow that standard even as they created a new one. That encourages me to stick with the old standard since the new standard also tries to stick with it. The new standard is the old standard + the RC logo. The traditional hobby rules and the RC logo can coexist and have coexisted, as long as the agreement is followed.

jhssketchcards · 01-13-2022, 07:42 PM

It’s amazing that all of our efforts in this discussion center around a player that could very well be a bust. He hasn’t even played a full year

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Shankweather · 01-13-2022, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhssketchcards

It’s amazing that all of our efforts in this discussion center around a player that could very well be a bust. He hasn’t even played a full year

Don't worry, Yoelqui Cespedes is a sure thing.

bn2cardz · 01-13-2022, 08:13 PM

The market has already spoken. IF the hobby considered the Franco a RC, then every prospect card in the base set would be a RC. We don't see the overly inflated price for the other prospects.

Franco is the card everyone picked up on and ignored the other possible rookies, which shows this is just a few people that are collecting this card as a RC based on the frenzy.

brewtown107 · 01-13-2022, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shankweather

Codify is too strong of a word, I shouldn't have said that. There has been a lot of doubt expressed about the traditional RC definition I and others have put forth. Words like imaginary, outdated, and unnecessary were used. This agreement at least puts in writing and recognizes that standard and shows that they were trying to follow that standard even as they created a new one. That encourages me to stick with the old standard since the new standard also tries to stick with it. The new standard is the old standard + the RC logo. The traditional hobby rules and the RC logo can coexist and have coexisted, as long as the agreement is followed.

Fair enough. In that case, we might actually be in agreement about the agreement!

What I found interesting---and perhaps we could agree is a tad frustrating for our purposes---is that we get only half of Section 15 in the copy of the agreement we are looking at.

We're looking at Section 15.(a), but Section 15.(b) is redacted. (It says "[INFORMATION SUBJECT TO A REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT]") Is the definition of "rookie" in that Section, hidden from our view? Context suggests that it is.
Is there anything in that Section that might address what happens if they fail to number prospect cards separately from base cards? Maybe.... we don't know!

pewe · 01-13-2022, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

The market has already spoken. IF the hobby considered the Franco a RC, then every prospect card in the base set would be a RC. We don't see the overly inflated price for the other prospects.

Franco is the card everyone picked up on and ignored the other possible rookies, which shows this is just a few people that are collecting this card as a RC based on the frenzy.

Or is this an untapped “investment” opportunity?!? Buy buy BUY!!!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rfgilles · 01-13-2022, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bcr

You don't know the process for anything at Topps so quit acting like you do. Oversights of any magnitude can and do occur in every business.

I work in medical advertising where we create content that is converted to printed materials. I'm the medical person who reviews and has to approve materials.

I know a lot more about the general process than you.

And I can tell you something of this magnitude could never happen. Numerous people had to agree to this and sign off on it.

oldgoldy97 · 01-13-2022, 08:20 PM

rfgilles · 01-13-2022, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brewtown107

Interesting... Cite? I just did a Google search, and everything I saw said it was a done deal, though nothing had any details.

In any case, if this is correct, then if Topps wants the deal to close, it's logical that they're going to do as Fanatics tells them. In that sense, Fanatics has some control over what Topps does.

You didn't realize that until now or consider the ramifications of this acquisition?

rfgilles · 01-13-2022, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhssketchcards

It’s amazing that all of our efforts in this discussion center around a player that could very well be a bust. He hasn’t even played a full year

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

30 players.

oldgoldy97 · 01-13-2022, 08:24 PM

Topps probably didn’t want Wander in Update because you can barely read the player name on that trash design.

pewe · 01-13-2022, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfgilles

I work in medical advertising where we create content that is converted to printed materials. I'm the medical person who reviews and has to approve materials.

I know a lot more about the general process than you.

And I can tell you something of this magnitude could never happen. Numerous people had to agree to this and sign off on it.

That’s right… costly bugs are always caught / corrected before release https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...urt-reputation

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

jhssketchcards · 01-13-2022, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shankweather

Don't worry, Yoelqui Cespedes is a sure thing.

There are definitely sure fire, can’t miss prospects in baseball.

Sincerely
Justin Upton
Matt Kemp
Jason Heyward

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

brewtown107 · 01-13-2022, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfgilles

You didn't realize that until now or consider the ramifications of this acquisition?

I'm saying I thought it was a done deal. This poster said it isn't, and I'm asking for a cite.

rfgilles · 01-13-2022, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

The market has already spoken. IF the hobby considered the Franco a RC, then every prospect card in the base set would be a RC. We don't see the overly inflated price for the other prospects.

Franco is the card everyone picked up on and ignored the other possible rookies, which shows this is just a few people that are collecting this card as a RC based on the frenzy.

Have you looked at the prices and how high should the prices be for players who were just drafted?

ThoseBackPages · 01-13-2022, 08:34 PM

i have an active buying thread in the BST section, to help with the panic sellers since, you know, these are "prospect" cards

rfgilles · 01-13-2022, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pewe

That’s right… costly bugs are always caught / corrected before release https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...urt-reputation

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They probably couldn't afford a proofreader like Topps.

pewe · 01-13-2022, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfgilles

They probably couldn't afford a proofreader like Topps.

Pretty sad that a business of multiple times the size and sophistication of Topps can’t afford QA people

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

redauto5 · 01-13-2022, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThoseBackPages

i have an active buying thread in the BST section, to help with the panic sellers since, you know, these are "prospect" cards

Great idea, these RC Logo peeps should just wash their hands of all 30 of these cards at Prospect Prices - ya know, put their mouth where their money is and all! Wish I'd have thought of that BST thread...

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

oldgoldy97 · 01-13-2022, 08:46 PM

CD PR underdelivered.

Topps overdelivered.

bn2cardz · 01-13-2022, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfgilles

Have you looked at the prices and how high should the prices be for players who were just drafted?

No. I didn't even think to look at sold prices before commenting on the values of the other prospect cards. How does one go about doing that? I will have to jot down that note for next time.

I would ask yourself this. If the hobby thinks these are going to be the only rookies for the prospects in the base set, then why are some of these prospects' 1st Bowman chrome base selling for more than the 2021 Best refractors for the same players?

The market is speaking, but people got so focused on one player and didn't realize that the market wasn't following for the rest of the players.

View Poll Results: Which Wander Franco "RC" are you planning to pick up?!
2021 Bowman's Best only	160	15.53%
2022 RC logo cards only	695	67.48%
Both	175	16.99%
Voters: 1030. You may not vote on this poll

01-13-2022, 08:13 PM	#2033
bn2cardz Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 2,103	The market has already spoken. IF the hobby considered the Franco a RC, then every prospect card in the base set would be a RC. We don't see the overly inflated price for the other prospects. Franco is the card everyone picked up on and ignored the other possible rookies, which shows this is just a few people that are collecting this card as a RC based on the frenzy. __________________ LOOKING FOR: 2002 Topps 206 Joey Votto Black Sweet Caporal Back Mini My collection (or at least what I have uploaded): https://www.flickr.com/photos/bn2cardz/

01-13-2022, 08:20 PM	#2037
oldgoldy97 Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 53,834	__________________ Truly riveting discussion: that’s what your wife/girlfriend/sheep said.

01-13-2022, 08:24 PM	#2040
oldgoldy97 Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 53,834	Topps probably didn’t want Wander in Update because you can barely read the player name on that trash design. __________________ Truly riveting discussion: that’s what your wife/girlfriend/sheep said.

01-13-2022, 08:34 PM	#2045
ThoseBackPages Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Long Island Posts: 91,383 ThoseBackPages	i have an active buying thread in the BST section, to help with the panic sellers since, you know, these are "prospect" cards __________________ Pumpers Paradise #YouCryIBuy Four things that we cannot change each others minds about: Politics, Religion, Third Party Grading, and 2021 Bowman's Best Rookie Cards

01-13-2022, 07:02 PM	#2029
Robague Member Join Date: Nov 2019 Posts: 215 ague71	I put almost all my card $ into Bowman and Bowman Draft. For me, Wander Franco's must have card is the 2019 Bowman, and being specific an autographed serial # card. Being really specific, the 2019 Bowman Refractor Auto /499. The next card of his I'd pick up will be the 2022 Bowman RC.

01-13-2022, 07:42 PM	#2031
jhssketchcards Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Louisiana Posts: 11,511 jhssketchcards2012	It’s amazing that all of our efforts in this discussion center around a player that could very well be a bust. He hasn’t even played a full year Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

01-13-2022, 08:46 PM	#2049
oldgoldy97 Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 53,834	CD PR underdelivered. Topps overdelivered. __________________ Truly riveting discussion: that’s what your wife/girlfriend/sheep said.