[y2hood]

Thought that just occurred to me, how are they going to quote book value on a card that still hasn't been fulfilled, basically doesn't exist?


Of course it plummeted in value, everyone sold off their redemptions tired of waiting.

[ZSDOne]

As far as value is concerned, unfortunately, I have to say that Topps is right - what you paid for the redemption is immaterial for present replacement value. To use what collectors originally paid for the card would be unworkable, ripe for abuse, and frankly completely unfair to collectors who submit redemptions from packs - since if card companies replaced redemptions for what you originally paid for the card, if you pulled the card yourself you'd only be entitled to the value of the original pack. Indeed, original pack value would probably quickly become the replacement value for all redemption cards due to the likelihood that many collectors would no longer possess after three years the records of what they paid for a card.

Now you might have a legitimate complaint as far as what Topps is claiming to be the value if you can show comparable Jimmy Graham cards that are live. That would be arguably a much better measure of value of what the card would be worth if it existed than what the likely now expired, now likely to never be filled redemption card is trading for.

Topps is completely wrong to not let you pick getting another Saints card as a replacement. Quite simply, card companies should ask collectors (regardless of the value of card) at least what team they want - that is absolutely ridiculous to not let people make that choice.

[bojesphob]

As far as value is concerned, unfortunately, I have to say that Topps is right - what you paid for the redemption is immaterial for present replacement value. To use what collectors originally paid for the card would be unworkable, ripe for abuse, and frankly completely unfair to collectors who submit redemptions from packs - since if card companies replaced redemptions for what you originally paid for the card, if you pulled the card yourself you'd only be entitled to the value of the original pack. Indeed, original pack value would probably quickly become the replacement value for all redemption cards due to the likelihood that many collectors would no longer possess after three years the records of what they paid for a card.

Now you might have a legitimate complaint as far as what Topps is claiming to be the value if you can show comparable Jimmy Graham cards that are live. That would be arguably a much better measure of value of what the card would be worth if it existed than what the likely now expired, now likely to never be filled redemption card is trading for.

Topps is completely wrong to not let you pick getting another Saints card as a replacement. Quite simply, card companies should ask collectors (regardless of the value of card) at least what team they want - that is absolutely ridiculous to not let people make that choice.

I don't quite agree. They shouldn't value what the redemption is worth now, since it's worth nothing (he isn't going to be signing it, therefore there is no value to it). They should replace what the value was when the redemption was still a viable concern - ie, if the value was 30 dollars when the product came out and people felt it was going to be fulfilled, then that is what they should go off of. The reason I say that is that had the redemption been fulfilled back when it was still looking like it would be, the value of that card would probably still be about 30 bucks (one would think). Topps says it's not worth anything now, but the reason it's not worth anything now is because Topps can't be bothered to follow through with the redemption. The problem falls squarely on Topps, both because they allowed a product to go out with redemptions, AND because they don't make the players actually sign what they said they would. Because they couldn't do either of those things with this card, they then turn around and say that the redemption isn't worth them going through the effort to give anything of value for it. That's 3 fails on Topps for this situation.

[durfeecoach1]

Topps and Panini are being run by wall street people that don't give two Shts about collectors and are all numbers. That's why there are so many products and prices are so high and quality is so low. Its basic capitalism at it's best, corner a market, raise prices, and decrease costs and investments to increase prices. If people have no other outlet really other than Topps and Panini then they says what happens. That's why I'm hoping Leaf keeps around and starts making a dent in the monopoly, because atleast it's run by a collector that listens to it's customers. Hell Leaf's CEO Brian Gray had to fight just to get into the hobby's national convention, because Topps and Panini didn't want him to come. Since when does Topps and Panini say what happens and doesn't happen at the national.

How is it legal to market an item and then not produce it and replace it with something that the person has no say in. Isn't that the definition of "Bate and Switch", which is illegal.

[ZSDOne]

I don't quite agree. They shouldn't value what the redemption is worth now, since it's worth nothing (he isn't going to be signing it, therefore there is no value to it). They should replace what the value was when the redemption was still a viable concern - ie, if the value was 30 dollars when the product came out and people felt it was going to be fulfilled, then that is what they should go off of. The reason I say that is that had the redemption been fulfilled back when it was still looking like it would be, the value of that card would probably still be about 30 bucks (one would think). Topps says it's not worth anything now, but the reason it's not worth anything now is because Topps can't be bothered to follow through with the redemption. The problem falls squarely on Topps, both because they allowed a product to go out with redemptions, AND because they don't make the players actually sign what they said they would. Because they couldn't do either of those things with this card, they then turn around and say that the redemption isn't worth them going through the effort to give anything of value for it. That's 3 fails on Topps for this situation.

the proper present valuation still would be what comparative live cards are going for today - that is the only fair approximation of what a card which has not been produced would be worth today. Locking in the "value" of a card when its hot is likely to result in the absurd result where the unfulfilled redemption card is actually worth much more than the card would have been had it been actually produced. And of course, the opposite would also be likely to happen with relatively unheralded players who become stars.

[bojesphob]

the proper present valuation still would be what comparative live cards are going for today - that is the only fair approximation of what a card which has not been produced would be worth today. Locking in the "value" of a card when its hot is likely to result in the absurd result where the unfulfilled redemption card is actually worth much more than the card would have been had it been actually produced. And of course, the opposite would also be likely to happen with relatively unheralded players who become stars.

I can see that. But from what it sounds like, the replacement isn't from the value of comparable Jimmy Graham autos, but comparable autos from what the redemption is right now. So, if the redemption is worth 5 bucks, they're saying they will only give 5 bucks for it, not the 20-30 bucks that a comparable Graham auto would probably get.

y2hood, does that sound like the gist of what happened?

[ZSDOne]

I can see that. But from what it sounds like, the replacement isn't from the value of comparable Jimmy Graham autos, but comparable autos from what the redemption is right now. So, if the redemption is worth 5 bucks, they're saying they will only give 5 bucks for it, not the 20-30 bucks that a comparable Graham auto would probably get.

y2hood, does that sound like the gist of what happened?

I agree completely that if Topps is saying that the redemptions are only trading for $5 and a comparable card was $20-30, than $20-30 would be the proper figure that Topps shoudl provide.

I think that if the original poster wants to make a case that Topps is valuing the redemption at an inadequate, he should conduct some research into what comparable live Jimmy Graham autographs are going for and use that as the proper figure as the best way to approximate what the card would have been worth it was redeemed.

That is likely to be his best argument for a higher valuation figure.

[y2hood]

I had to file bankruptcy last year and to raise money to pay our attorney I sold a LOT of Jimmy Graham autos so I know about the market for them, and it is not what Topps is quoting.

Their response to me showing them every Topps product I've owned through out my life ("I'm a Topps collector") was met with one sentence:

"Do you want to wait for the card or do you want a replacement?"

It seems this customer service rep is done with me and ready to move on.

I appreciate everyone's insight on the subject I'm making notes of each opinion and using them to guide me in my next move, be it email or calling them. My lawyer friend that did my bankruptcy is aware of this card situation (from my social media rants) and he does do consumer rights but we're not sure we want to start a war over less than 100 bucks.

[y2hood]

I got the redemption today.

A Giovani Bernard 5 star rookie #'d to 130. Last eBay sales are no where near what I paid for the Jimmy Graham redemption.

Or as I put it on Facebook:

In 2013 I purchased a football redemption card of (then Saints tight end) Jimmy Graham. I went to Topps' website and punched in the serial # and waited. And waited. And waited. In mid 2015 I started correspondence with a CSR at Topps in regards to getting a substitute since Graham was no longer a Saint and it had been TWO years since I submitted the serial #. I politely explained I'm a Saints fan, Frank Thomas (white sox Hall of Famer) fan, and a few other individual players to give them options. Nope, "you have to accept what we select or continue waiting." I went off and irrationally photoed every single Topps product in my room, made the pictures email sized, and spammed the **** out of the CSR like the 5 year old big baby that I am, in theory showing what a loyal customer I am. 6 weeks ago I emailed the generic address again to state my displeasure with still waiting and I'll just take whatever ****ing substitute they have. Today I got it. A rookie card, autographed, of the 2nd string running back of the Cincinnati Bengals. Last two sales on eBay were $6.99 and $4.99. Excuse me while I go pick a fight over cardboard.

[y2hood]

I was reached on Facebook by another collector who agreed to trade me an awesome card in exchange for this one.

Happy Ending! (I'll post scans once both ends have reached destinations)