[Kypros]

miketaylor72 Wrote:I think it's misleading if someone adds RC to the title if it is not one.
You can ding them with feedback as it is an issue with accuracy of listing.

If someone listed a movie as a Blu_ray, and when you get it it's only a special edition regular DVD, you'd ask for a refund.

THANK-YOU!!!  Someone that finally understands the obvious.  I see some bad posts above telling me it's from their rookie year so the posting is "a bit deceptive."  Wrong.  It's flat out a lie - pure deception.  True rookie cards often have much higher value than inserts.  Plain and simple.  The tag "RC" means Rookie Card.  To us investors, the term "Rookie Card" is a big deal and quite often is the difference between obtaining a card or not. 

Although I agree that I should have "done my homework" and "been more educated before spending my money" yadda yadda yadda, I also have to say that when a seller says that they're selling you ground beef but you're actually getting beef with pork mixed in it, then you're being scammed and lied to (which, by the way, is something very commonly done in grocery stores!). 

I will say, however, that I did make an honest attempt to make sure that these were rookie cards but fell short in my research.  The only problem is when you have 10 sellers at once all placing the notation of "RC" beside the same item you can't assume all 10 of them are lieing, can you? I'm also hearing that the definition of a rookie card changes from time to time. 

Anyhow, at this point I just want to fix the problem.  I'll be selling my non-RCs and buying actual RCs.  I went through my entire collection of RCs (around 400 of them) and found 6 cards that I'm doubting are RC's when I thought they were.  They are:

1995-1996 Pinnacle Zenith Edition Rookie Roll Call Daniel Alfredsson #10 of 18
2006-2007 SP Game Used Authentic Rookies Evgeni Malkin #G8VA
2002-2003 Upper Deck Premier Collection Premier Signatures Jasson Spezza #S-SP
2007-2008 SP Xtreme Sam Gagner #X63
1995-1996 Parkhurst Program of Excellence Daniel Briere #SE261
2006-2007 Upper Deck Young Guns Phil Kessel #250 (Checklist on the Back)

Can somebody tell me if any of these are actually RCs?  Some of them seem obvious, such as the Alfredsson and Kessel card (although I would never know it while bidding on it because I only noticed it when I received it.  They never mentioned the checklist on the back).   I'm buying a Beckett now, 100%.  That's the only way to truly find out if something is an RC before I bid on it.  I guess I can't trust 10 different sellers at once.  I have to assume that multiple people lie about the same thing simultaneously on E-bay.

[jbmmadman]

bled11qb Wrote:

jbmmadman Wrote:

bled11qb Wrote:It migh not be a "true" RC but it's still from his RC year. So, it's a RC year card. So, I don't see how you can ge upset about someone putting RC in the auction (but I know everyone will have their own opinion on this, so please don't think I'm bashing you). You just have to know what you're buying if you're looking for a "true" RC card which is part of the base set.

you can't be serious...everything you've stated is a contradiction in terms. get educated man

How about you get educated. Everytime I read one of your replies in regards to someone stating their opinion you just blast them. I've been collecting & selling sportscards for over 20 years. I think I know a little bit about this industry. Everyone has an opinion, especially on a subject like this. It's all subjective, so there isn't a difinitive answer as to what is right or what is wrong.

when they're wrong, like "you" for instance, I do blast them (gently)  you say subjective when it comes to the term RC ?...there's no gray area here, it's black and white, part of a regular base set from a licensed card manufacturer. There is no acceptable alternative when it comes to what is and what isn't an actual RC.  more than 20 years eh ?...I'm not impressed with your expertise.

[thecooker24]

Ok, I have read some things here that are false. Also, I have some info to add.

1- A rookie card is NOT a rookie card just because it is a card produced in a players rookie year. There are many inserts and such that are produced in a players rookie year but that does not make that a rookie card.

2 - A parallel version of a rookie card is NOT a rookie card.

3 - A 1/1 is not a rookie card.

4 - A true rookie card is something with a print run of at least 99. Anything with a print run under 99 is NOT a rookie card.

5 - Ebay sellers use the term "rookie card" and "RC" often, even if it is not a true rookie card. So yes, there is a lot of false advertizement out there. However, a good amount of research should be done to avoid such things.

My 2 cents.

[thecooker24]

Kypros Wrote:

Anyhow, at this point I just want to fix the problem. I'll be selling my non-RCs and buying actual RCs. I went through my entire collection of RCs (around 400 of them) and found 6 cards that I'm doubting are RC's when I thought they were. They are:

1995-1996 Pinnacle Zenith Edition Rookie Roll Call Daniel Alfredsson #10 of 18
2006-2007 SP Game Used Authentic Rookies Evgeni Malkin #G8VA
2002-2003 Upper Deck Premier Collection Premier Signatures Jasson Spezza #S-SP
2007-2008 SP Xtreme Sam Gagner #X63
1995-1996 Parkhurst Program of Excellence Daniel Briere #SE261
2006-2007 Upper Deck Young Guns Phil Kessel #250 (Checklist on the Back)

None are rookie cards.

[Kypros]

Thank-you Sir!  That means I've been ripped off for a good $60.00.

It's not so bad, I know I'll get it back when I sell them.  The Spezza card alone is short-printed out of 125 (Silver Edition) and it is autographed.  It's in Mint condition so I'm sure I can get around $40.00 for it on E-bay.

[Kypros]

How about this...I'm looking for a Carey Price RC.  A trade could be in order here.  Is anybody interested?

[thecooker24]

jbmmadman Wrote:

bled11qb Wrote:

jbmmadman Wrote:

bled11qb Wrote:It migh not be a "true" RC but it's still from his RC year. So, it's a RC year card. So, I don't see how you can ge upset about someone putting RC in the auction (but I know everyone will have their own opinion on this, so please don't think I'm bashing you). You just have to know what you're buying if you're looking for a "true" RC card which is part of the base set.

you can't be serious...everything you've stated is a contradiction in terms. get educated man

How about you get educated. Everytime I read one of your replies in regards to someone stating their opinion you just blast them. I've been collecting & selling sportscards for over 20 years. I think I know a little bit about this industry. Everyone has an opinion, especially on a subject like this. It's all subjective, so there isn't a difinitive answer as to what is right or what is wrong.

when they're wrong, like "you" for instance, I do blast them (gently) you say subjective when it comes to the term RC ?...there's no gray area here, it's black and white, part of a regular base set from a licensed card manufacturer. There is no acceptable alternative when it comes to what is and what isn't an actual RC. more than 20 years eh ?...I'm not impressed with your expertise.

Jim is right, here. There is no reason for someone to put "RC" in the auction title if it is not a true rookie card. "RC" means rookie card no matter who you slice it. Just because it is a card issued in the players rookie year, does not mean that you can tag it with "RC'' in an ebay auction etc... No doubt about it. Sellers who do this are wrong in doing so.

However, just a warning guys, I don't want this to get ugly with personal jabs and such. I don't want to issue any suspensions so lets not let this escolate ok? Cheers

[karl von]

I personally reference the OPG here for cards I bid on eBay. I'm indifferent to whose side I'm on in this case. Both the seller and buyer have faults in this case.
No need for mud-slinging.

[mrsteel]

thecooker24 Wrote:Ok, I have read some things here that are false. Also, I have some info to add.

1- A rookie card is NOT a rookie card just because it is a card produced in a players rookie year. There are many inserts and such that are produced in a players rookie year but that does not make that a rookie card.

2 - A parallel version of a rookie card is NOT a rookie card.

3 - A 1/1 is not a rookie card.

4 - A true rookie card is something with a print run of at least 99. Anything with a print run under 99 is NOT a rookie card.

5 - Ebay sellers use the term "rookie card" and "RC" often, even if it is not a true rookie card. So yes, there is a lot of false advertizement out there. However, a good amount of research should be done to avoid such things.

My 2 cents.

Weren't the cards from Titanium 01/02 considered true rc,s ( they were numbered to the players jersey) (conklin was 1/1 , Kovalchuk /17 etc..)

[nhl91]

mrsteel Wrote:

thecooker24 Wrote:Ok, I have read some things here that are false. Also, I have some info to add.

1- A rookie card is NOT a rookie card just because it is a card produced in a players rookie year. There are many inserts and such that are produced in a players rookie year but that does not make that a rookie card.

2 - A parallel version of a rookie card is NOT a rookie card.

3 - A 1/1 is not a rookie card.

4 - A true rookie card is something with a print run of at least 99. Anything with a print run under 99 is NOT a rookie card.

5 - Ebay sellers use the term "rookie card" and "RC" often, even if it is not a true rookie card. So yes, there is a lot of false advertizement out there. However, a good amount of research should be done to avoid such things.

My 2 cents.

Weren't the cards from Titanium 01/02 considered true rc,s ( they were numbered to the players jersey) (conklin was 1/1 , Kovalchuk /17 etc..)

Those are not RC's. card with less than 99 print run can't be RC