The final word on the 2010 Bowman Wrapper Redemption

[Crash Davis]

I do understand the complaints being made by the investors here, weither it be the armchair flippers, large bust prospectors, or distribution chains / stores, ect... But I just do not think it's fair to put that blame on Topps squarely. Sure, they could have limited the product to accomidate a more traditional balance of value per box, but the demand was so high, why at that point limit production when your the only game in town, at the possible cost of neglecting possible customers?

The bottom line here is that the whole Bowman, Bowman chrome, and Bowman Chrome Draft were in concept made to fill a specific nitch, and a specific production model. Once that balance was skewed by investor demand, and the subsiquent supply by Topps, it watered down a flagship product to such an extent that we are now seeing the backlash. And again, I think Topps should have done something to equalize that out. What? I dont know..... What I do know is that this year, for Topps and collectors alike, is new territory where a sole company is tasked to supply the Hobby as a whole for MLB licensed baseball cards. Add to that a once in a generation kind of hype helping to promote "investment", an abundance of greed(on both sides), and a unwillingness for those who locked in to assume any responsability for there own actions, and we have a mess on our hands.

Clearly mistakes were made, but considering the circumstances, I believe they were unavoidable and even happenstance based on the specific outcome of many possabilities and variables that added to the flux of things that were just unforseeable. Now, do I think Topps is responsable in that they did a premeditated, harmful, and neglectful thing to our hobby on purpose and should be held accountable? Ofcourse not. But as BG overstates, I do think they have the responsability, as sole providers of MLB baseball cards, to do what they can to ease the pain of oversealous buyers, and figure out a way to prevent this from happening again. And I have little doubt that this is exactly what they are doing.

I really think lessons were learned here all the way around. And I dont think Topps shuld be held accountable for this as a 'lone shooter'.

I kinda just spelled that out a few posts before. They stripped 100 blue refractors (250-150) out of the product just on the base set alone. That would have added 33,000 more blue refractors across the production run which would have put a minimum of 3 more blue refractors in each case. The 277 refractors (777-500) that were cut from the prospect set would have netted another 30,470 numbered prospect refractors across the run meaning another 3 prospect refractors per case. Just these 2 decisions alone would have been significant. Now add in the Xfractor at /399 and you'd add 131,670 more hits just in the base set alone. That would have put 13 more hits in a case, basically another nice colored parallel per box. Up it to /499 and you'd have 16 more hits per case. These are simple solutions that would have added significant value without a huge jump in Topps mfg cost and they wouldn't have killed the secondary market's value for those cards. If they're production costs are really in the $18-20 per box range and they were selling for $52.13, then they had plenty of room to add these without eroding a tremendous margin by very much. Then add in what an Xfractor Auto parallel would have added to the hits per case...it's significant. And I left out the effects on the other inserts. Simple decisions would have made a world of difference.

Well said Jim!

 

[bballcardkid]

I really don't like the idea of manipulating the parallel print run to maintain the integrity of case value.

 

[BowmanChromeAddict]

I really don't like the idea of manipulating the parallel print run to maintain the integrity of case value.

Manipulating what? The Blue Refractors in 2010 Bowman were /250. The Refractors in 2010 Bowman were /777. All I said was don't DECREASE the number of parallels when you are about to CRANK production. And bringing back the Xfractor after only 1 release without them surely wouldn't have been looked at as manipulation.

 

[bballcardkid]

I really don't like the idea of manipulating the parallel print run to maintain the integrity of case value.

Manipulating what? The Blue Refractors in 2010 Bowman were /250. The Refractors in 2010 Bowman were /777. All I said was don't DECREASE the number of parallels when you are about to CRANK production. And bringing back the Xfractor after only 1 release without them surely wouldn't have been looked at as manipulation.

Um, the blue refractors were numbered to 150, then they moved them to 250, then back to 150 (they were even /99 in 08 Draft). The refractors WERE numbered to 500, then they moved them to 777, then back to 500. To me, that's manipulation and it can be a tad confusing to see 3 different parallels (including the Xfractors and the various print runs they have had) that for the longest time have had the same print run suddenly fluctuate up and down every single year just to accomadate for the influx or eflux of preorders.

Your assuming that I am saying "when case production runs increase, don't add value to keep consistancy." That would be an incorrect assumption.

If there is an increased demand for a particular product like BC, I would like for Topps to maintain a constant production run year in and year out but I know that will never happen, but alternatively what they should do is add additional parallels while keeping the standard parallels the same (and please bring back the xfractors including the autos as a STANDARD parallel, meaning that it is in every product each and every year with the same print run. Thanks a million for all the complainers wanting that taken out, fantastic idea.). Better yet, add a few innovative insert sets that could be a trademark and potentially start a tradition, adding more value to each case in subsequent years.

Jacking around the print runs on parallels is entirely confusing, and I understand that is what you want because your a case breaker and looking to recoup as much funds as possible, but there are other ways Topps can add value as I just outlined that would keep a little consistancy in this brand without making it complicating things every other year by messing around with print runs.

That's JMO.

 

[BowmanChromeAddict]

I really don't like the idea of manipulating the parallel print run to maintain the integrity of case value.

Manipulating what? The Blue Refractors in 2010 Bowman were /250. The Refractors in 2010 Bowman were /777. All I said was don't DECREASE the number of parallels when you are about to CRANK production. And bringing back the Xfractor after only 1 release without them surely wouldn't have been looked at as manipulation.

Um, the blue refractors were numbered to 150, then they moved them to 250, then back to 150. The refractors WERE numbered to 500, then they moved them to 777, then back to 500. To me, that's manipulation and it can be a tad confusing to see 3 different parallels (including the Xfractors and the various print runs they have had) that for the longest time have had the same print run suddenly fluctuate up and down every single year just to accomadate for the influx or eflux of preorders.

Your assuming that I am saying "when case production runs increase, don't add value to keep consistancy." That would be an incorrect assumption.

If there is an increased demand for a particular product like BC, I would like for Topps to maintain a constant production run year in and year out but I know that will never happen, but alternatively what they should do is add additional parallels while keeping the standard parallels the same (and please bring back the xfractors including the autos as a STANDARD parallel, meaning that it is in every product each and every year with the same print run. Thanks a million for all the complainers wanting that taken out, fantastic idea.). Better yet, add a few innovative insert sets that could be a trademark and potentially start a tradition, adding more value to each case in subsequent years.

Jacking around the print runs on parallels is entirely confusing, and I understand that is what you want because your a case breaker and looking to recoup as much funds as possible, but there are other ways as I just outlined that we can keep a little consistancy in this brand without making it complicating things every other year by messing around with print runs.

That's JMO.

I'm asking for consistency. In 2010, the numbers had been set. I just wanted them to go with it. It was illogical to revert back. As for consistency, look across the past. There isn't really any consistency. Refs /300, Refs /500, Refs /777, Unnumbered Refs, Xfr /150, Xfr /250, Xfr /399, Blue Ref /150, Blue Ref /199, Blue Ref /250, etc. Even Gold Refs had more than 50 in 2003 BC. Red Ref /1, Red Ref /5. Yada yada yada.

 

[bballcardkid]

I really don't like the idea of manipulating the parallel print run to maintain the integrity of case value.

Manipulating what? The Blue Refractors in 2010 Bowman were /250. The Refractors in 2010 Bowman were /777. All I said was don't DECREASE the number of parallels when you are about to CRANK production. And bringing back the Xfractor after only 1 release without them surely wouldn't have been looked at as manipulation.

Um, the blue refractors were numbered to 150, then they moved them to 250, then back to 150. The refractors WERE numbered to 500, then they moved them to 777, then back to 500. To me, that's manipulation and it can be a tad confusing to see 3 different parallels (including the Xfractors and the various print runs they have had) that for the longest time have had the same print run suddenly fluctuate up and down every single year just to accomadate for the influx or eflux of preorders.

Your assuming that I am saying "when case production runs increase, don't add value to keep consistancy." That would be an incorrect assumption.

If there is an increased demand for a particular product like BC, I would like for Topps to maintain a constant production run year in and year out but I know that will never happen, but alternatively what they should do is add additional parallels while keeping the standard parallels the same (and please bring back the xfractors including the autos as a STANDARD parallel, meaning that it is in every product each and every year with the same print run. Thanks a million for all the complainers wanting that taken out, fantastic idea.). Better yet, add a few innovative insert sets that could be a trademark and potentially start a tradition, adding more value to each case in subsequent years.

Jacking around the print runs on parallels is entirely confusing, and I understand that is what you want because your a case breaker and looking to recoup as much funds as possible, but there are other ways as I just outlined that we can keep a little consistancy in this brand without making it complicating things every other year by messing around with print runs.

That's JMO.

I'm asking for consistency. In 2010, the numbers had been set. I just wanted them to go with it. It was illogical to revert back. As for consistency, look across the past. There isn't really any consistency. Refs /300, Refs /500, Refs /777, Unnumbered Refs, Xfr /150, Xfr /250, Xfr /399, Blue Ref /150, Blue Ref /199, Blue Ref /250, etc. Even Gold Refs had more than 50 in 2003 BC. Red Ref /1, Red Ref /5. Yada yada yada.

And that's exactly what I'm asking for. Keep the damn numbers the same each and every year.

 

[Jaypers]

I'm asking for consistency.

Then you're basically asking for the moon.

The minds behind the formulae for these products change as often as the wind.

 

[Leaf]

I may have been a touch high, but here are estimates:

Bowman chrome - print run $6 mil
Losses (25% min) $ 1.5 million
(most of this is still sitting in warehouses
Around the country).,,,

Topps chrome - print run $4 mil
Losses (25% min) - $1 million

That's $2.5 million before topps Update..
Bg

A "touch" high? LMAO!

You said $4-5 million and now it's down to $2.5 million. Basically your numbers were MONUMENTALLY off. If you were in a political debate, your credibility would've been shot from that point forward.

Frankly, I find it humorous that you are calling out Topps for anything considering your track record with Razor.

Why don't you enlighten us as to how many of your baseball releases are selling below dealer cost. Did you offer restitution to the dealers or collectors who got their asses handed to them for Letterman or any of the other disastrous Razor prospect products that you released? How about all the collectors who bought tons of your products and lost their shirts? Did you see reps from Topps or UD or Panini come on these boards and call you out? Nope.

It's like the pot calling the kettle black.

I know that I will get flamed for this and that's fine. But there needs to come a point where some of these discussions do not involve owners of competing card companies.

Shoot, even President George W. Bush declined to trash President Obama when given a golden opportunity during his sit-down interview last week, and we all know that there is certainly no love lost between those two men.

Surely if Bush can refrain from calling out Obama, then BG can stop playing Monday Morning QB with Topps.

First, My guess was at dinner on my cell phone.. just a guess..
PLEASE READ WHAT I WROTE ABOVE. I said $2.5 PLUS TOPPS UPDATE BB (WHICH IS ANOTHER $700K-1.0 MIL LOSS)... TOTAL $3.2-3.5 MILLION...
This is VERY close... The fact is the losses are massive and VERY real...

Yes, Im calling out Topps. As a consumer, I have been lied to and value massively diluted.
As a fellow manufacturer, they are screwing up an industry I love.
Regardless, by the money Ive spent and time Ive dedicated to this industry, I deserve to be heard.
FEEL FREE TO FOE ME AND NOT READ MY POSTS, JUST LIKE I HAVE THE RIGHT TO FOE YOU IF I DONT WANT TO READ POSTS BIASED TO TOPPS' BENEFIT.....

On the issue of my products, more of my products are above cost in the last 3 years than Topps (on a percentage basis).. 100% fact! I dont expect every product to be a winner, as Ive had a few losers myself.
However, I do expect them to tell me before a product comes out if they are NOT inserting the most exciting element.
They knew about it and they lied by omission.

I have given Topps credit MANY times (Panini, ITG and others as well when deserved)...
This time criticism is deserved. I think they did a few really good things this year (I liked Bowman, TTT and Ginter)...
These 3 products (the 2 chromes and update) (never mind Topps UFC 4 which they printed 2000 too many cases of also) are a disaster!
(Not to mention at their distributor meeting in Vegas yestrday, they basically told the distributors tough tamales.

You dont have to like me, but I speak what many are thinking.
BG

 

[200lbhockeyplayer]

The fact remains...Topps has lied and misled everyone this year regarding most of their baseball products.

Whether you choose to believe it or not is another story.

 

[rico08]

The fact remains...Topps has lied and misled everyone this year regarding most of their baseball products.

Whether you choose to believe it or not is another story.

Some people's inability to realize this is staggering, making this a 16+ page thread.

Topps was given a license to do whatever they wanted in 2010 and they basically did just that.

 

[chi_sportscards]

Has anyone heard when Topps will start sending the redemption packs out?

 

[rico08]

Has anyone heard when Topps will start sending the redemption packs out?

Personally, I'd guess after the deadline. But no, Topps hasn't said.

They need to make a few more product changes to the redemptions.

 

[bmc398]

I was one of those who was all...."Oh having UD and others out will be a good thing" people.

I can say at this point I was wrong. I don't know what I was thinking. Topps up to that point had been great with its Bowman brand and more on point with offering up what collectors wanted. All that changed when competition left town. They could have kept up with the status quo of delivering on their word...but they didn't...becasue they didn't hace to. Not including the USA buyback autos was the last straw for me. Topps has done a terrible job and taken full advantage of the customer while competition was sent away. I have voted with my wallet. But, nothing is going to stop me from busting baseball cards....its a passion and hobby of mine.

But, I have tossed tons of $$$ I would have spent on Topps baseball stuff (but didn't since after my first buy in it was crap and I moved on) to UD and Panini with Hockey products...and I like it.

 

[George_Calfas]

I am going to vote with my wallet as well.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=111313

 

[Crash Davis]

I may have been a touch high, but here are estimates:

Bowman chrome - print run $6 mil
Losses (25% min) $ 1.5 million
(most of this is still sitting in warehouses
Around the country).,,,

Topps chrome - print run $4 mil
Losses (25% min) - $1 million

That's $2.5 million before topps Update..
Bg

A "touch" high? LMAO!

You said $4-5 million and now it's down to $2.5 million. Basically your numbers were MONUMENTALLY off. If you were in a political debate, your credibility would've been shot from that point forward.

Frankly, I find it humorous that you are calling out Topps for anything considering your track record with Razor.

Why don't you enlighten us as to how many of your baseball releases are selling below dealer cost. Did you offer restitution to the dealers or collectors who got their asses handed to them for Letterman or any of the other disastrous Razor prospect products that you released? How about all the collectors who bought tons of your products and lost their shirts? Did you see reps from Topps or UD or Panini come on these boards and call you out? Nope.

It's like the pot calling the kettle black.

I know that I will get flamed for this and that's fine. But there needs to come a point where some of these discussions do not involve owners of competing card companies.

Shoot, even President George W. Bush declined to trash President Obama when given a golden opportunity during his sit-down interview last week, and we all know that there is certainly no love lost between those two men.

Surely if Bush can refrain from calling out Obama, then BG can stop playing Monday Morning QB with Topps.

First, My guess was at dinner on my cell phone.. just a guess..
PLEASE READ WHAT I WROTE ABOVE. I said $2.5 PLUS TOPPS UPDATE BB (WHICH IS ANOTHER $700K-1.0 MIL LOSS)... TOTAL $3.2-3.5 MILLION...
This is VERY close... The fact is the losses are massive and VERY real...

Yes, Im calling out Topps. As a consumer, I have been lied to and value massively diluted.
As a fellow manufacturer, they are screwing up an industry I love.
Regardless, by the money Ive spent and time Ive dedicated to this industry, I deserve to be heard.
FEEL FREE TO FOE ME AND NOT READ MY POSTS, JUST LIKE I HAVE THE RIGHT TO FOE YOU IF I DONT WANT TO READ POSTS BIASED TO TOPPS' BENEFIT.....

On the issue of my products, more of my products are above cost in the last 3 years than Topps (on a percentage basis).. 100% fact! I dont expect every product to be a winner, as Ive had a few losers myself.
However, I do expect them to tell me before a product comes out if they are NOT inserting the most exciting element.
They knew about it and they lied by omission.

I have given Topps credit MANY times (Panini, ITG and others as well when deserved)...
This time criticism is deserved. I think they did a few really good things this year (I liked Bowman, TTT and Ginter)...
These 3 products (the 2 chromes and update) (never mind Topps UFC 4 which they printed 2000 too many cases of also) are a disaster!
(Not to mention at their distributor meeting in Vegas yestrday, they basically told the distributors tough tamales.

You dont have to like me, but I speak what many are thinking.
BG

Firstly, your $4-5 million statement was for Bowman Chrome and Topps Chrome. You changed your story after Jeff N. challeneged your numbers.

Secondly, my statements were objective. I think Topps effed up royally on Bowman Chrome and Topps Chrome. I've said it many times on these boards; but that wasn't the point of my post.

You are not a typical consumer. You are an owner of a competitor. I don't work for any card company. You own one. I stand to make absolutely no financial gain whatsoever if Topps performs well or shyts the bed; however, you do.

So, you and and your opinion, especially in the context of this conversation, have an agenda.

 

[Crash Davis]

The fact remains...Topps has lied and misled everyone this year regarding most of their baseball products.

Whether you choose to believe it or not is another story.

They didn't intentionally deceive.

It's sort of like this:

All throughout junior and senior high school, I never studied very much - just enough to get myself to college. Once I got there, all of my BSing couldn't get me a passing grade so I had to actually do work to succeed.

That describes the situation with Topps.

They are in college right now and have yet to open the text books to study.

If those books remain closed, then they will fail out of school.

 

[rico08]

Firstly, your $4-5 million statement was for Bowman Chrome and Topps Chrome. You changed your story after Jeff N. challeneged your numbers.

Secondly, my statements were objective. I think Topps effed up royally on Bowman Chrome and Topps Chrome. I've said it many times on these boards; but that wasn't the point of my post.

You are not a typical consumer. You are an owner of a competitor. I don't work for any card company. You own one. I stand to make absolutely no financial gain whatsoever if Topps performs well or shyts the bed; however, you do.

So, you and and your opinion, especially in the context of this conversation, have an agenda.

His opinion is the same as the opinion of others who don't own a card company and therefore don't have an agenda.

 

[James52411]

Topps should be blamed for poor quality control on Topps Chrome but beyond that, I really cannot blame them. Topps Chrome is actually a very fun rip with the various inserts and the auto checklist is the best ever for that product, even though it was expanded. It has always been a lower end product that ends up selling for barely more than base Topps. If Strasburg doesn't get hurt, that product maintains its value and everyone is happy.

Bowman Chrome is a nice product that has a good auto checklist and is probably stronger than most recent Chrome offerings. The wrapper redemption is very strong for this product as well. Once again, if Strasburg is still healthy, this product is just fine.

Topps update is a very good product, probably the best update set since 2005. Great inserts and value with the Million Card Giveaway. The reason it failed is that everybody took a bath on Bowman Chrome and Topps Chrome and there isn't money to absorb Topps Update. Topps was stupid to release Bowman Chrome and this product so close to one another as it helped kill update.

As tons of people have said, the reason the print runs went way up is because Strasburg was carrying the hobby. Once he got hurt, that ended. If he stays healthy through the end of the year, no one is complaining about case prices dropping like a rock. It is all about Strasburg.

For the future, Topps needs to provide their direct dealers with 30 day billing to allow them to generate cash flow before paying for product. They've already moderated their practices for distributors. Hopefully they will realize that massive increases in print runs are a bad idea too, even in the middle of a hobby phenomenon.

 

[Leaf]

[quote="Crash Davis":1k6jrnwj]

I may have been a touch high, but here are estimates:

Bowman chrome - print run $6 mil
Losses (25% min) $ 1.5 million
(most of this is still sitting in warehouses
Around the country).,,,

Topps chrome - print run $4 mil
Losses (25% min) - $1 million

That's $2.5 million before topps Update..
Bg

A "touch" high? LMAO!

You said $4-5 million and now it's down to $2.5 million. Basically your numbers were MONUMENTALLY off. If you were in a political debate, your credibility would've been shot from that point forward.

Frankly, I find it humorous that you are calling out Topps for anything considering your track record with Razor.

Why don't you enlighten us as to how many of your baseball releases are selling below dealer cost. Did you offer restitution to the dealers or collectors who got their asses handed to them for Letterman or any of the other disastrous Razor prospect products that you released? How about all the collectors who bought tons of your products and lost their shirts? Did you see reps from Topps or UD or Panini come on these boards and call you out? Nope.

It's like the pot calling the kettle black.

I know that I will get flamed for this and that's fine. But there needs to come a point where some of these discussions do not involve owners of competing card companies.

Shoot, even President George W. Bush declined to trash President Obama when given a golden opportunity during his sit-down interview last week, and we all know that there is certainly no love lost between those two men.

Surely if Bush can refrain from calling out Obama, then BG can stop playing Monday Morning QB with Topps.

First, My guess was at dinner on my cell phone.. just a guess..
PLEASE READ WHAT I WROTE ABOVE. I said $2.5 PLUS TOPPS UPDATE BB (WHICH IS ANOTHER $700K-1.0 MIL LOSS)... TOTAL $3.2-3.5 MILLION...
This is VERY close... The fact is the losses are massive and VERY real...

Yes, Im calling out Topps. As a consumer, I have been lied to and value massively diluted.
As a fellow manufacturer, they are screwing up an industry I love.
Regardless, by the money Ive spent and time Ive dedicated to this industry, I deserve to be heard.
FEEL FREE TO FOE ME AND NOT READ MY POSTS, JUST LIKE I HAVE THE RIGHT TO FOE YOU IF I DONT WANT TO READ POSTS BIASED TO TOPPS' BENEFIT.....

On the issue of my products, more of my products are above cost in the last 3 years than Topps (on a percentage basis).. 100% fact! I dont expect every product to be a winner, as Ive had a few losers myself.
However, I do expect them to tell me before a product comes out if they are NOT inserting the most exciting element.
They knew about it and they lied by omission.

I have given Topps credit MANY times (Panini, ITG and others as well when deserved)...
This time criticism is deserved. I think they did a few really good things this year (I liked Bowman, TTT and Ginter)...
These 3 products (the 2 chromes and update) (never mind Topps UFC 4 which they printed 2000 too many cases of also) are a disaster!
(Not to mention at their distributor meeting in Vegas yestrday, they basically told the distributors tough tamales.

You dont have to like me, but I speak what many are thinking.
BG

Firstly, your $4-5 million statement was for Bowman Chrome and Topps Chrome. You changed your story after Jeff N. challeneged your numbers.

Secondly, my statements were objective. I think Topps effed up royally on Bowman Chrome and Topps Chrome. I've said it many times on these boards; but that wasn't the point of my post.

You are not a typical consumer. You are an owner of a competitor. I don't work for any card company. You own one. I stand to make absolutely no financial gain whatsoever if Topps performs well or shyts the bed; however, you do.

So, you and and your opinion, especially in the context of this conversation, have an agenda.[/quote:1k6jrnwj]

First,With all respect, you have a relationship to Topps. I have it on very good authority.
Second, I was referring to the Topps Fiasco which is 3 (not 2) products.
Third, the $2.5 mil on the chromes was a MINIMUM LOSS, I suspect it will be higher.

Lastly, I am a consumer. The difference is I know what is happening behind the scenes. I know what the product cost to make and I know how Chrome is produced and why these cards are screwed up (bowed and bad surfaces).
THIS is why I'm pissed.

Crash, lets just disagree friendly.

I do not think Im the only one who is less than thrilled with this.
BG

 

[Leaf]

The fact remains...Topps has lied and misled everyone this year regarding most of their baseball products.

Whether you choose to believe it or not is another story.

They didn't intentionally deceive.

It's sort of like this:

All throughout junior and senior high school, I never studied very much - just enough to get myself to college. Once I got there, all of my BSing couldn't get me a passing grade so I had to actually do work to succeed.

That describes the situation with Topps.

They are in college right now and have yet to open the text books to study.

If those books remain closed, then they will fail out of school.

This is totally horse crap...
They stated the USA buybacks were in packs. They knew one week prior to ship they werent in there and said nothing.
Its a LIE by OMISSION. They're lucky there hasnt been a lawsuit........ yet.
BG