Beckett 20 Questions on … memorabilia cards

If a dirty game-used jersey card were untouchable (e.g., under acetate), then I would definitely be more interested in it. Otherwise, nothing stops an unscrupulous seller from getting it dirty before selling it.

As for hitless boxes if they stopped rookie photo shoot jersey/patch cards, why would the autos disappear as well?

Again, there is no reason for *new* memorabilia cards, whether game-used or event-used, not to include use dates and photos on the card. As a value proposition in the long run, these cards are only going to be good as their provenance. The card companies really need to demand this from their contract partners, whether it be the players or leagues. The stories of fake new memorabilia being sold to the card companies are too glaring to be ignored. If it means fewer jersey cards or bat cards, so be it. A little scarcity would be a good thing.

Such a shames. Not a single question on COA and whether we COLLECTORS feel it is important. You missed out a perfect opportunity to let the readers vote on what you say is “semantics”regarding the COA on the back of the memorabilia cards. Beckett, I hope your complacency on this matter is justified. Yeah, I am a little angry that you (Beckett) the voice of us collectors remain silent on this very serious matter. But hey I understand, job security.

I remember that. But why not continue to press the issue. You and every collector knows that the COA on the back is meaningless and if the companies are ever taken to court over this issue they would win because the COA is MEANINGLESS.

Chris – just to clarify, I’m not saying EVERYTHING should be game-dated. What I’m saying is that it should all be certified as game-used in an actual official game, even if the exact game cannot be identified (except, obviously, for items identified as manufactured for the product or event-used from rookie photo shoot). I would LIKE to see more stuff specifically associated with a specific game or period of time whenever possible, though. But the current standard COA on card backs really offers no assurances that items were even used in a real game.

I used to write a card collecting column for the papers I work for, and in the course of writing that column I talked to the president of one of the card companies (as a courtesy to him, I won’t say which, although I will say it wasn’t one of the current “big three”). I asked him about why his company’s cards didn’t offer a more specific COA at that time and he explained that the company makes a deal with the players and the players send them a jersey, but the company never knew where or when that jersey was used. It could have been a practice jersey, event worn or even a souvenir replica jersey for all they knew. All they knew for sure was that the player sent it to them. Now, chances are it was probably game-used, but there was no assurances of that. For me, that’s not good enough. Dating aside, if I get a supposedly game-used piece of memorabilia, I want to at least know it was really worn by that player in an official game – just like if I get an autograph I want to know that it was really signed by that player.

You have pictures of a lot of really cool stuff in the poll here and I can understand why many people enjoy collecting it. But to me and many other collectors, if it’s not guaranteed as being used in an official game, I have no interest. Dating it to a specific game or time period would simply raise my interest a lot more.