Are redemptions in trading card products a scam being perpetrated on consumers

[sportscardtheory]

And, can anyone explain to me how a company using promissory notes to help sell products, only to later say (after their product has sold out and they have made off with their profits), "Sorry, but we will not be honoring these promissory notes that you have already pulled or bought, here's a fraction of what the note was once worth on the open market." and who puts 6 month to 2 year expiration dates on ones they may have in their possession so that they don't have to honor them in the near and distant future so they can keep them to do with as they wish, ISN'T a scam?

 

[gmsieb]

Depends on if they make the card an how long. If they could make the card and have it shipped in 4-6 months. I don't have a problem with it. It's when the card never gets made, and they sell the product as having the card, that is hurting the hobby. As a grown up we have leared to expect it and probably won't leave the hobby, but imagine being a kid and pulling a harper chrome auto and auto the excitement and he ends up with a few ortiz and gary carter autos. That kid could leave and never look back.

 

[mancini79]

The worst is when the card is depicted on promotional material to give the perception that the card actually exists. That is deceptive. The problem is that the industry isn't large enough for lawyers to get involved in any class action. If Apple gave away redemptions for Ipad Air's but ended up shipping regular Ipad's stating "due to production problems beyond our control, we hope you enjoy the regular Ipad", there would be a sh%t storm. Lawyers will jump on the opportunity to cash in on a billion dollar company to represent the thousands of customers opting in on a class action lawsuit. Problem is that the lawyers will make hundreds of thousands, if not millions, on a settlement while the consumer gets a $25 itunes gift card. But in the end Apple would make sure they have the product on their next redemption promotion.

 

[rsmath]

I choose option 4 - depends on if there is a signed contract in place before the redemption card is packed out.

If there is a signed contract, there is a high percentage the card will be made eventually.

If there is no signed contract, it's topps or the manufacturer taking advantage of the hype of an athlete or ASSuming there will be a contract eventually of a desirable athlete in order to sell product and the chances of the card being made are much lower, thus a scam to me.

Too bad topps doesn't offer collectors or the secondary market any transparency as to whether a redemption card was made due to a contract in existance before packout.

 

[Kennesawsportscards]

Even though, in many instance, it is a huge scam to promise something and not follow through; keep in mind the underlining current. It is a brilliant marketing tool( getting customers names and addresses so that the card company can market directly to you). Vital to them, especially at the rate card shops are closing... As a former shop owner( over 20 years owning shops) this was one of my pet peeves.

 

[predatorkj]

Is it a scam? Not unless it could be proven they never had intentions to make the card. Or did nothing to ensure the card gets made. But how can we prove that? We'd need someone on the inside to be forthcoming with that information. As it stands now, it's a brilliant business strategy. Quite a big safety net, with careful replacement policy wording, and it allows the hyping and selling of the product without them being forced into making the card.

From an ethical standpoint, it's terrible.

 

[smapdi]

A better poll option would be,"Do you think Topps's methods for product planning and fulfillment are so screwed up that they give the impression that they are trying to scam collectors?"

 

[rsmath]

Is it a scam? Not unless it could be proven they never had intentions to make the card. Or did nothing to ensure the card gets made. But how can we prove that?

Could one sue Topps over that premise (that they are inserting redemptions that aren't intended to be made) and then access Topps' athlete auto contracts through lawsuit discovery to prove the basis the suit? Or do you need more ironclad proof before lawsuit filing so it doesn't look like a fishing expendition or illegal way to gain access to Topps records?

 

[predatorkj]

Could one sue Topps over that premise (that they are inserting redemptions that aren't intended to be made) and then access Topps' athlete auto contracts through lawsuit discovery to prove the basis the suit? Or do you need more ironclad proof before lawsuit filing so it doesn't look like a fishing expendition or illegal way to gain access to Topps records?

I'm not a legal expert. But even if you have paperwork showing that topps doesn't have a contract with whatever athlete, I'd think you'd have to provide proof they had no intention of signing the athlete or making the card. Which is tough proof to provide for anyone other than the upper echelon folks at topps. Like I've said, the only time this would happen is if a disgruntled employee gets the axe and decides to blow the lid off of this stuff. But even that is not likely as a lot places have you sign something stating you keep your mouth shut in the event you leave one way or another. Which should be illegal as should selling a product without the means to immediately produce it.