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

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

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.

Yes Wander is just an anomaly. We won't go through this when Witt, Torkelson, or Ruschman make their debuts later in the year.

The 21 BB bubble has burst.

You realize BB has been out for 2 weeks right and that all of the "30 prospects" with the exception of Wander haven't made their MLB debuts?


A new one for the list:

-Only Wander cards are overinflated and their is no interest in the other prospect cards.

[ThoseBackPages]

damn, does this thread really need a sheep gif?

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

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.

Jasson Dominguez
https://www.ebay.com/itm/28459514266...0AAOSwReVh1PwG

Bobby Witt Jr
https://www.ebay.com/itm/33428947424...QAAOSw8xZh35nA

Marcelo Mayer
https://www.ebay.com/itm/29472322957...IAAOSw1CRh4ORK

[theshowandme]

When was the last time a thread in January had this level of traction?

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

Yes Wander is just an anomaly. We won't go through this when Witt, Torkelson, or Ruschman make their debuts later in the year.

The 21 BB bubble has burst.

You realize BB has been out for 2 weeks right and that all of the "30 prospects" with the exception of Wander haven't made their MLB debuts?


A new one for the list:

-Only Wander cards are overinflated and their is no interest in the other prospect cards.

A player doesn't have to make a debut for this 2021 card to be considered a RC if the Franco is considered a RC. All the prospect cards in the Best base set are identified as RC by Beckett. That is what started all of this.

So either Franco's isn't a RC, or every prospect in the set is a RC. You can't have it both ways. Those buying up Franco don't realize this and so their ignorance is inflating the price of his cards in relation to the other prospect "rookies" in the set.

[Bcr]

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.

A few more to add to the list:

- I work in medical advertising so I know more than you
- Topps can't make mistakes

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

A player doesn't have to make a debut for this 2021 card to be considered a RC if the Franco is considered a RC. All the prospect cards in the Best base set are identified as RC by Beckett. That is what started all of this.

So either Franco's isn't a RC, or every prospect in the set is a RC. You can't have it both ways. Those buying up Franco don't realize this and so their ignorance is inflating the price of his cards in relation to the other prospect "rookies" in the set.

They are all RCs.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by Bcr

A few more to add to the list:

- I work in medical advertising so I know more than you
- Topps can't make mistakes

You are finally catching on.

[StateEx]

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).

Source please? Everything I've seen indicates the transaction closed (see the Fanatics press release, for example, at https://www.fanaticsinc.com/press-re...ibles-business).

[speedyjg13]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

They are all RCs.

So much truth here

[zworykin]

Originally Posted by StateEx

Source please? Everything I've seen indicates the transaction closed (see the Fanatics press release, for example, at https://www.fanaticsinc.com/press-re...ibles-business).

Could be right, I hadn't seen that one. Pretty unusual that they'd only announce the acquisition after it closed, and that news of it would not have leaked during the time between signing the deal and closing it, but maybe.

[StateEx]

Originally Posted by zworykin

Could be right, I hadn't seen that one. Pretty unusual that they'd only announce the acquisition after it closed, and that news of it would not have leaked during the time between signing the deal and closing it, but maybe.

Out of my lane, but these things often get announced before closing in anticipation of an antitrust review. That wouldn't seem to be an issue here since Fanatics is just entering the market. If Fanatics wanted to acquire Panini or UD in the future, it'd be harder to keep under wraps.

Note, the folks working on something like this would have been under pretty heavy NDAs. That said, folks probably could have seen the writing on the wall, which is why I don't think it'd be surprising if legacy Topps made the intentional choice to go out in a blaze of glory.

[imbluestreak23]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

They are all RCs.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by StateEx

Out of my lane, but these things often get announced before closing in anticipation of an antitrust review. That wouldn't seem to be an issue here since Fanatics is just entering the market. If Fanatics wanted to acquire Panini or UD in the future, it'd be harder to keep under wraps.

Note, the folks working on something like this would have been under pretty heavy NDAs. That said, folks probably could have seen the writing on the wall, which is why I don't think it'd be surprising if legacy Topps made the intentional choice to go out in a blaze of glory.

It would be interesting to know how much time elapsed between the Fanatics/MLBPA/MLB deal and the talks for Fanatics buying Topps.

Did Topps realize the Fanatics purchase was an option when it was decided to release BB in its controversial state? I'm guessing no.

Would Topps have released Heritage Chrome with the published checklist if not for the Fanatics acquisition? Possibly.

[Mazman2727]

Its very intriguing how this topic has brought so much discussion, analyzation, questioning, researching, etc. I just wish people took as much time and effort to discuss, analyze, question and research what is going on around you at this point in time around the world.

[imbluestreak23]

Originally Posted by Mazman2727

Its very intriguing how this topic has brought so much discussion, analyzation, questioning, researching, etc. I just wish people took as much time and effort to discuss, analyze, question and research what is going on around you at this point in time around the world.

Now that gets depressing REALLY fast

[Technochocolate]

Random observation that I had while sorting old cards. I had forgotten in 2019, when Topps numbered their Allen & Ginter incorrectly, skipped 301-350 on the checklist and went straight to 351-400.

So we have to be fair, really really dumb numbering mistakes have escaped Topps QA in the past. Again, I understand the conspiracy theories, but I don't like to assign malice to situations that can be easily explained by incompetence.

[StateEx]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

It would be interesting to know how much time elapsed between the Fanatics/MLBPA/MLB deal and the talks for Fanatics buying Topps.

Did Topps realize the Fanatics purchase was an option when it was decided to release BB in its controversial state? I'm guessing no.

Deals usually take some time to come together. In addition to negotiating the price, there's due diligence that has to be done, figuring out how to retain key employees, line up benefits, ensure the target isn't subject of massive litigation, etc. Even a small deal, with a big deal team can take months, so people at Topps almost certainly would have had the time to do something like this.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by Mazman2727

Its very intriguing how this topic has brought so much discussion, analyzation, questioning, researching, etc. I just wish people took as much time and effort to discuss, analyze, question and research what is going on around you at this point in time around the world.

Naah, it's more fun and important to make the same points over and over on this thread.

[StateEx]

Originally Posted by Mazman2727

Its very intriguing how this topic has brought so much discussion, analyzation, questioning, researching, etc. I just wish people took as much time and effort to discuss, analyze, question and research what is going on around you at this point in time around the world.

I do that as my day job. This is a good way to stay sane.

[imbluestreak23]

Guys, let's start from the beginning

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by StateEx

Deals usually take some time to come together. In addition to negotiating the price, there's due diligence that has to be done, figuring out how to retain key employees, line up benefits, ensure the target isn't subject of massive litigation, etc. Even a small deal, with a big deal team can take months, so people at Topps almost certainly would have had the time to do something like this.

Great thanks for the insight.

I guess I was wondering more whether or not Topps made the BB decision thinking that they would continue on without Fanatics.

In other words, would they have released 21 BB at all if they knew the Fanatics deal was an option or would they have done it (or did do it) anyway as a parting shot to the MLBPA?

[Bcr]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

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

Originally Posted by Technochocolate

Random observation that I had while sorting old cards. I had forgotten in 2019, when Topps numbered their Allen & Ginter incorrectly, skipped 301-350 on the checklist and went straight to 351-400.

So we have to be fair, really really dumb numbering mistakes have escaped Topps QA in the past. Again, I understand the conspiracy theories, but I don't like to assign malice to situations that can be easily explained by incompetence.

That can't be true, because I've been told that's impossible.

[pewe]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

It would be interesting to know how much time elapsed between the Fanatics/MLBPA/MLB deal and the talks for Fanatics buying Topps.

Did Topps realize the Fanatics purchase was an option when it was decided to release BB in its controversial state? I'm guessing no.

Would Topps have released Heritage Chrome with the published checklist if not for the Fanatics acquisition? Possibly.

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/fan...ps-11641261997

Rubin probably planned to try for Topps well before the MLB / MLBPA deal was complete in August. And according to WSJ quoting Rubin, he was already opening discussions with Eisner within weeks of the agreement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by Bcr

That can't be true, because I've been told that's impossible.

Well played sir.

The A&G mistake really isn't as big a mistake, as it seems though. The last 50 cards were short print and there was an oversight on where the SPs would pick up. It's a mistake no doubt, but one mistake in numbering.

If all of the prospect cards in 21 BB were numbered sequentially, I would entertain the possibility that it was a mistake. But the prospects were intentionally interspersed throughout. There was no intention to group the prospects as a separate insert set with distinct numbering as has always been done over the last 15 years.

Coupled with the Bowman Heritage list adding 150 prospects to the base set.
Coupled with the Fanatics/MLB/MLBPA deal.