Is a RC Auto Buyback still a RC?

[uniquebaseballcards]

A card previously released and then rereleased is still from the original set. The key is the word 'rereleased' which tells you which set it is really from.

My question is: what set would an auto card be from if the original auto card were cut up and placed as a cut sig into a new card?? We are sure going to see this more in the future - just like the 1993 DiMaggio Pinnacle autos were cut up and added into Prime Cuts.

 

[studioclint]

NO. It is not being issued to the public in the same year. Also, it is altered from its original state and if you looked it up in a Beckett it wouldn't be listed under the rookie year.

It is still the original card just altered. So technically it is a rookie card that has been altered.

Altered is such an ugly word,how about improved,modified

Haha I agree. I was just speaking on the simplest terms.

 

[fengzhang]

NO. It is not being issued to the public in the same year. Also, it is altered from its original state and if you looked it up in a Beckett it wouldn't be listed under the rookie year.

It is still the original card just altered. So technically it is a rookie card that has been altered.

It is a rookie card that has been altered...into a non-rookie card. It is now an insert.

This is not to say that people still won't treat it as a rookie card or that they won't pay rookie card prices for it. An autographed 1952 Topps Mantle rookie still gets a lot of money despite post-release altering. Orange, gold, blue refractors aren't technically rookie cards (but rather parallels) and they still get a lot of money (because they resemble the original base card with slight "altering). A 2001 Upper Deck Pujols RC might get a few dollars. But a buyback auto of a 2001 UD Pujols RC numbered 2/3 would get much more money. So, it's not really a question of value or desirability.

 

[bballcardkid]

NO. It is not being issued to the public in the same year. Also, it is altered from its original state and if you looked it up in a Beckett it wouldn't be listed under the rookie year.

It is still the original card just altered. So technically it is a rookie card that has been altered.

It is a rookie card that has been altered...into a non-rookie card. It is now an insert.

This is not to say that people still won't treat it as a rookie card or that they won't pay rookie card prices for it. An autographed 1952 Topps Mantle rookie still gets a lot of money despite post-release altering. Orange, gold, blue refractors aren't technically rookie cards (but rather parallels) and they still get a lot of money (because they resemble the original base card with slight "altering). A 2001 Upper Deck Pujols RC might get a few dollars. But a buyback auto of a 2001 UD Pujols RC numbered 2/3 would get much more money. So, it's not really a question of value or desirability.

Agreed

 

[Topnotchsy]

I personally do not view them in the class of RC Auto's (though I do consider them a nice option for a player who has no RC Auto.)

My reasoning is simple; the lure of a rookie card is that after his rookie season, they can never again make more rookie cards. I feel similarly about rookie autograph cards. Once the rookie season passes, they can no longer make RC autograph cards. Just my opinion of course. It's clear from the market that some of these (1997 SP Arod Auto) become huge cards, while others garner less interest.

 

[matfanofold]

I go with the overwhelming majority, and say it's still a RC. I could split hairs over ground rules as to what can make it not a RC, or how it's still a RC, but I think of it this way... 50 years from now, topps put's a '84 TT Gooden RC auto'd in there product. Or next week, someone pulls a 51B Mantle as a box topper. Both origonal and both hand signed. Would I think they are still RC cards? Yes, thus my answer.

 

[DRav87]

Yes I think it is. It doesn't matter if you take someones rookie card and get it autographed, it's still their rookie card. I don't see how you can do something to a rookie card and then all of a sudden it not be a rookie card anymore. It's a rookie card regardless of what you do to it.

And while we are on the subject this is one of my favorite cards in my collection:

 

[Topnotchsy]

Yes I think it is. It doesn't matter if you take someones rookie card and get it autographed, it's still their rookie card. I don't see how you can do something to a rookie card and then all of a sudden it not be a rookie card anymore. It's a rookie card regardless of what you do to it.

I translated the original question slightly differently (maybe incorrectly.) In my mind, there's a "rookie autograph" and a "rookie card that was autographed." Of course the latter is a rookie card, but I don't consider it a "rookie autograph." Just my opinion.

 

[matfanofold]

Yes I think it is. It doesn't matter if you take someones rookie card and get it autographed, it's still their rookie card. I don't see how you can do something to a rookie card and then all of a sudden it not be a rookie card anymore. It's a rookie card regardless of what you do to it.

I translated the original question slightly differently (maybe incorrectly.) In my mind, there's a "rookie autograph" and a "rookie card that was autographed." Of course the latter is a rookie card, but I don't consider it a "rookie autograph." Just my opinion.

Ah, I see what your saying.

And I agree, in no way would it be a true RC auto. And I really do not think it's even a question here. But indeed, I do think it's still a RC unless horridly altered.

 

[MattinglyAlexander]

If Ford repurchased some old Pinto's and and had Henry Ford's ghost/zombie sign them, would that make them anything more than an old Pinto signed by Henry Ford's ghost/zombie? I think not.

It's still a Rookie Card.

 

[MattinglyAlexander]

My one and only (pull of my lifetime, anyway) Came with a COA card, and matching hologram sticker, so they did alter the back of the card in addition to the signature on the front.

That is frackin' purty. How many produced?