[Phillies_Joe]

This is one of the many reasons I could care less about pulling auto's, relics and patches. Topps should just be forthright and say "we will be producing cards not listed on the initial checklist which will be used as replacement autos for damaged pulled ones or redemptions which are not filled for whatever reason. These cards will be produced in very small quantities and each one will be graded by Beckett grading services. This is being done as a Thank You to the collector's of our cards who for whatever reason, did not receive what was promised.

They don't need to say who or what or how many.....sure better than somebody finding it out through sluth work.

Also....why didn't Beckett let it's subscribers know what was going on......I don't remember seeing anything in the news section or reading about it in a magazine. As the "most trusted source in collecting", I expect better.

Think it's really funny folks falling all over these cards for somebody who wasn't even the best rookie 3rd baseman in the NL last year........LOL (that should get a rouse out of everyone.....I'm half kidding guys and gals)

[jbissell]

Unfortunately, I am unable to read the article here at work. I appreciate your summary below, although I am confused about the whole process.

I turned in a redemption back in December 2015 for a 2015 Bowman's Best Green refractor Carlos Correa auto, and still havent received it. I havent been back into card collecting long enough to really understand the redemption process. (I have only pulled one other out of 2015 Stadium Club, and I got it back pretty quick. (Lone Star Signatures David Wright)

Am I going to be possibly affected by something like this? I keep wondering if Im going to get some sort of "equivalent" replacement card or something.

Thanks for any insight you (or anyone else) can provide.

To my knowledge nothing they did was illegal, only extremely immoral. They never advertised these specific cards to be in any product nor did they say how many would be inserted. This just looks REALLY bad. Could you get a class action law suit out of it? I think so. They are intentionally mis-leading buyers and setting aside large quantities of the top hits for reasons unknown. From Topps point of view they have ALWAYS held out a percentage of all cards for replacement purposes. The numbers here suggest they held 30% of the shimmers. But if that's true, what happened to the rest? Are they still sitting on a couple hundred thousand dollars worth of high end Chrome Bryant's? What does that do to market prices? It makes them nearly unattainable and with Topps submitting cards to Beckett for replacement purposes (they have been sending out graded replacements people), they are (falsely) driving up the values on high end cards to help reduce what they owe in redemptions. And how in the hell is it ethical or fare to submit cards for grading purposes that you produce? They are obviously going to cherry pick the best cards for themselves to maximize their redemption value and pack out the rest. What the *****? I don't know how many realized it but when Topps withheld the '13 Chrome Bryant auto's to put in '14 products it wasn't as an added bonus to the consumer. It was to ensure that everyone would buy their lesser products like Inception and Platinum. They increased their production because they knew they would sell. This sets an unbelievably dangerous precedent. They are intentionally producing ultra high end cards with no intention of releasing them, or at least not until a player takes off making an unfathomable amount of money. Who's to say they couldn't produce fakes? A player they originally didn't make a lot of cards for because he was never suppose to be anything becomes the next Trout and all of a sudden they decide to make an array of Chrome auto's and date them 3 years prior. Am I going to see Travis Shaw autos next year? Were they secretly going to back door the rest anonymously to an auction house and just rake in the extra hundreds of thousands? Is that their plan in the future? Holy crap there is so much wrong with this. Least of all is, what about the rainbow builder's and player collectors? What about the true gem collectors? This drives up pricing to a dangerous level. Unattainable for most.

[animie67]

Wow.... Just wow..... Makes me not want to buy Topps products anymore....

[Hofcollector]

Unfortunately, I am unable to read the article here at work. I appreciate your summary below, although I am confused about the whole process.

I turned in a redemption back in December 2015 for a 2015 Bowman's Best Green refractor Carlos Correa auto, and still havent received it. I havent been back into card collecting long enough to really understand the redemption process. (I have only pulled one other out of 2015 Stadium Club, and I got it back pretty quick. (Lone Star Signatures David Wright)

Am I going to be possibly affected by something like this? I keep wondering if Im going to get some sort of "equivalent" replacement card or something.

Thanks for any insight you (or anyone else) can provide.

To sum up your issue before I head home, there is and always has been the possibility of getting a redemption replacement. What that means is if your card isn't made, you become impatient waiting, or your actual redemption card you receive is damaged you will receive a card of equal value as a replacement. In some cases (high end replacements and/or kind customer service reps) you can request players you'd prefer as your replacement and if they have them available, they'll send them. The above article won't affect you. It's just in reference to some seriously shady business.

[roger rabbit]

Well, they've been advertising 2015 Topps Chrome Carlos Correa RCs, which obviously will show up somewhere other than 2015 Topps Chrome as that's already been out 6 months. They also pulled it with Conforto 2014 Chrome Draft autos in 2015 products. The whole Bryant ordeal was a dangerous precedent, but the challenge is that collectors aren't going to complain as much if they have the chance to pull another valuable card. FOr example, I pulled a 2013 Bryant refractor auto out of 2014 Chrome and was thrilled. As for hanging on to cards to use as replacements, it doesn't overly surprise me...where else are they going to get redemption replacements from if they're simply not making the cards they are advertising? Not cool, but not surprising.

[Hofcollector]

Well, they've been advertising 2015 Topps Chrome Carlos Correa RCs, which obviously will show up somewhere other than 2015 Topps Chrome as that's already been out 6 months. They also pulled it with Conforto 2014 Chrome Draft autos in 2015 products. The whole Bryant ordeal was a dangerous precedent, but the challenge is that collectors aren't going to complain as much if they have the chance to pull another valuable card. FOr example, I pulled a 2013 Bryant refractor auto out of 2014 Chrome and was thrilled. As for hanging on to cards to use as replacements, it doesn't overly surprise me...where else are they going to get redemption replacements from if they're simply not making the cards they are advertising? Not cool, but not surprising.

Well, several Topps Chrome Correa's including 2 reds and a black, along with a bunch of 2016 Gypsy Queen auto's were mysteriously posted for sale on blowout. The Correa's were supposed to be released in '16 Chrome. The problem is the cards were 100% legit and neither 2016 Topps Chrome nor Gypsy had been released. Topps is supposed to be investigating but basically it's known they walked right out the door with an employee.

[kerryandbeth]

I've been discussing this all day with friends...
http://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/mys...s-surface/

I read the article and everyone's comment, and it brings up several thoughts...
One, this is why I do not chase the 'big pull' as I worry about the sudden market events such as this.
Two, I collect Bowman every other year but 2016 was the 1st year I actually purchased a box of Topps, and was mostly disappointed. This article will probably put me back into avoidance mode.
Three, every business experiences internal theft, but most of the time it does not directly affect others outside of the company; when card companies are robbed, it affects every card collector whether we know it or not as the values are based on scarcity, popularity, and trust in the product...Topps just lost on all these accounts!
Finally, I am sure Beckett could not comment on this as their bread and butter is their relationship with the card companies.

[hckydv7]

My take on this different. I mostly collect UD hockey and see them put autographs from previous products in newer products all the time. I think that instead off put redemption in the product the just wait til they get them in and include them as inserts in a later product. For example the 2015 Correra Chrome autos that will be in the 2016 Chrome.

Would you rather get a redempion for the card in the 2015 Chrome, or a live card in the 2016?

[Hofcollector]

I read the article and everyone's comment, and it brings up several thoughts...
One, this is why I do not chase the 'big pull' as I worry about the sudden market events such as this.
Two, I collect Bowman every other year but 2016 was the 1st year I actually purchased a box of Topps, and was mostly disappointed. This article will probably put me back into avoidance mode.
Three, every business experiences internal theft, but most of the time it does not directly affect others outside of the company; when card companies are robbed, it affects every card collector whether we know it or not as the values are based on scarcity, popularity, and trust in the product...Topps just lost on all these accounts!
Finally, I am sure Beckett could not comment on this as their bread and butter is their relationship with the card companies.

Yeah, I can't really put any responsibility on Beckett on this one. At the time of submission they had no way of knowing what Topps was up to. For all they knew it could have been some sort of promotional gig or contest/future giveaway. It could have been a multitude of other things that wouldn't cause anyone to raise an eyebrow. Furthermore Beckett had no way of knowing that Topps had not placed the remaining Bryant's in their products. Had Beckett called attention to the situation merely for Topps submitting cards and blown the whistle falsely it would have destroyed their image and reputation. Topps has been submitting cards to get graded to send out as redemption replacements. Why would Beckett have any reason to believe something wasn't right? On a side note, Beckett did right an article for their newest magazine in regards to the Correa situation that does not put Topps in a good standing.

---

My take on this different. I mostly collect UD hockey and see them put autographs from previous products in newer products all the time. I think that instead off put redemption in the product the just wait til they get them in and include them as inserts in a later product. For example the 2015 Correra Chrome autos that will be in the 2016 Chrome.

Would you rather get a redempion for the card in the 2015 Chrome, or a live card in the 2016?

Right, but those were stolen by an employee. I think we'd all like that if it were legit and we could trust that was really going to happen. As it stands now you have THE major attraction (hits) for '16 Chrome being taken from production, screwing the collectors and being sold before the product is ever released.

[kerryandbeth]

Yeah, I can't really put any responsibility on Beckett on this one. At the time of submission they had no way of knowing what Topps was up to. For all they knew it could have been some sort of promotional gig or contest/future giveaway. It could have been a multitude of other things that wouldn't cause anyone to raise an eyebrow. Furthermore Beckett had no way of knowing that Topps had not placed the remaining Bryant's in their products. Had Beckett called attention to the situation merely for Topps submitting cards and blown the whistle falsely it would have destroyed their image and reputation. Topps has been submitting cards to get graded to send out as redemption replacements. Why would Beckett have any reason to believe something wasn't right? On a side note, Beckett did right an article for their newest magazine in regards to the Correa situation that does not put Topps in a good standing.

---

Maybe my wording was not correct as I am not implying Beckett knew something but did not report it. Someone else commented that Beckett should do an article as they are supposed to be the pulse of the hobby; I was answering that comment.
Either way, good point.

Right, but those were stolen by an employee. I think we'd all like that if it were legit and we could trust that was really going to happen. As it stands now you have THE major attraction (hits) for '16 Chrome being taken from production, screwing the collectors and being sold before the product is ever released.