Topps' Solution to the AFLAC Autograph Problem in 2011 BDP

[Jaypers]

Curious to find out what the turnaround time for these will be.



TOPPS ANNOUNCES AFLAC PSA AUTHENTICATION PROGRAM

The AFLAC High School All-American Autographed cards that were inserted into packs of the recently-released 2011 Bowman Draft Picks & Prospects did not get sequentially numbered. The seven subjects included Archie Bradley, Dylan Bundy, Larry Greene, Travis Harrison, Francisco Lindor, Robert Stephenson and Blake Swihart.


To ensure the autographed card’s authenticity, Topps has teamed with PSA on a program that allows collectors to have their card certified and graded free of charge.


Collectors holding any of the seven different cards pulled from packs of 2011 Bowman Draft Picks & Prospects should send their card and return information to the address below. Each card’s autograph will be examined for authenticity as well each card will be graded on PSA’s standard scale (1-10). In addition, all graded cards will feature language on the descriptor tab that is exclusive to this program.


Only AFLAC cards pulled from packs of 2011 Bowman Draft Picks will be accepted. The Topps/PSA program offer is good until July 1, 2012.


AFLAC Certification Program

c/o Topps

1 Whitehall Street

NY, NY 10004

 

[Bob Loblaw]

How do they prove it's pack pulled rather than purchased on eBay or obtained at the game and signed IP?

 

[beefycheddar]

How do they prove it's pack pulled rather than purchased on eBay or obtained at the game and signed IP?

They can't, if you had a staedler and know one of the players and can get their stash of the cards you could probably make a ton.

 

[Erich]

What a crock of ****. Who wants a AFLAC in a PSA case.

 

[Crash Davis]

This is a poor attempt by Topps to cover up one of their many recent blunders.

The worst part is that they have basically placed a 7-month shelf life on their 2011 AFLAC inserts. What if I bust a case in August, 2012, and pull a Dundy AFLAC auto. I am shyt out of luck.

At the very least, they should put the same expiration on the AFLAC PSA deal as their autograph redemptions.

Anyone who is holding cases of this product, make sure you dump them before this program expires.

They **** up and then make this piss-poor attempt to reconcile with collectors?

AND THE WORST PART - PSA will assign a number grade to the card, as well. Well, maybe collectors don't want a number grade. So, if you pull an AFLAC from 2011 DPP prior to expiration, you're given one of two options:

1) Send to PSA and hope they come back authentic within a 10 slab, worst case a 9; or,
2) Refuse to send to PSA and now own a card with "Questionable" authenticity, even though you pulled it from a sealed pack.

Imagine if your card comes back a PSA 7? Many of the Stephenson autos I've seen are horribly off-center. PSA 7 could be a long shot on some of them. I'd be pretty pissed if that happened.

If there was no number grade assigned, at least the chances of devaluing the cards would be far less. There's a good chance that many cards will be worth far less than if they had just frackin' serial-numbered them!

This is a horrendous attempt to cover up a careless mistake.

 

[Exposfan]

This is a poor attempt by Topps to cover up one of their many recent blunders.

The worst part is that they have basically placed a 7-month shelf life on their 2011 AFLAC inserts. What if I bust a case in August, 2012, and pull a Dundy AFLAC auto. I am shyt out of luck.

At the very least, they should put the same expiration on the AFLAC PSA deal as their autograph redemptions.

Anyone who is holding cases of this product, make sure you dump them before this program expires.

They **** up and then make this piss-poor attempt to reconcile with collectors?

AND THE WORST PART - PSA will assign a number grade to the card, as well. Well, maybe collectors don't want a number grade. So, if you pull an AFLAC from 2011 DPP prior to expiration, you're given one of two options:

.

1) Send to PSA and hope they come back authentic within a 10 slab, worst case a 9; or,
2) Refuse to send to PSA and now own a card with "Questionable" authenticity, even though you pulled it from a sealed pack.

Imagine if your card comes back a PSA 7? Many of the Stephenson autos I've seen are horribly off-center. PSA 7 could be a long shot on some of them. I'd be pretty pissed if that happened.

If there was no number grade assigned, at least the chances of devaluing the cards would be far less. There's a good chance that many cards will be worth far less than if they had just frackin' serial-numbered them!

This is a horrendous attempt to cover up a careless mistake.

My guess is they may just slab them as "authentic" not give them a grade because that "service" is not being paid for

 

[Jaypers]

Anyone who is holding cases of this product, make sure you dump them before this program expires.

I'm no fan of the deadline either, but remember that the odds of pulling one of these is about 1:4 cases as I recall, so the future value of this entire product doesn't hinge on AFLAC autos. In addition, even after the deadline expires, you could still submit your cards for authentication by either PSA or BGS, although you would have to pay for it, and it wouldn't contain the special language on the descriptor tab.

 

[Crash Davis]

This is a poor attempt by Topps to cover up one of their many recent blunders.

The worst part is that they have basically placed a 7-month shelf life on their 2011 AFLAC inserts. What if I bust a case in August, 2012, and pull a Dundy AFLAC auto. I am shyt out of luck.

At the very least, they should put the same expiration on the AFLAC PSA deal as their autograph redemptions.

Anyone who is holding cases of this product, make sure you dump them before this program expires.

They **** up and then make this piss-poor attempt to reconcile with collectors?

AND THE WORST PART - PSA will assign a number grade to the card, as well. Well, maybe collectors don't want a number grade. So, if you pull an AFLAC from 2011 DPP prior to expiration, you're given one of two options:

.

1) Send to PSA and hope they come back authentic within a 10 slab, worst case a 9; or,
2) Refuse to send to PSA and now own a card with "Questionable" authenticity, even though you pulled it from a sealed pack.

Imagine if your card comes back a PSA 7? Many of the Stephenson autos I've seen are horribly off-center. PSA 7 could be a long shot on some of them. I'd be pretty pissed if that happened.

If there was no number grade assigned, at least the chances of devaluing the cards would be far less. There's a good chance that many cards will be worth far less than if they had just frackin' serial-numbered them!

This is a horrendous attempt to cover up a careless mistake.

My guess is they may just slab them as "authentic" not give them a grade because that "service" is not being paid for

No they are assigning a grade. That's what the Press Release explicitly states.

 

[daveyou]

i like the plan

id def be comfy enough to pick up some lindors and bundys soon and hope for a 9 or 10

dave

 

[bradical]

What a catastrophe for Topps.

An absolute embarrassment to the company and the MLB license.

 

[200lbhockeyplayer]

What a catastrophe for Topps.

An absolute embarrassment to the company and the MLB license.

How does this affect the MLB license or the MLB brand?

While it's another in a long line of Topps screw-ups from rushing or being lazy, it's hardly a catastrophe in any sense of the word.

Hopefully there was some sarcasm in the post.

 

[DaveH]

lol

 

[hofmichael]

What a catastrophe for Topps.

An absolute embarrassment to the company and the MLB license.

How does this affect the MLB license or the MLB brand?

While it's another in a long line of Topps screw-ups from rushing or being lazy, it's hardly a catastrophe in any sense of the word.

Hopefully there was some sarcasm in the post.

Exactly.This,along with the errors in BDP, are a direct result of this product being rushed to the market.It was probrobly rushed due to the stronger than anticipated response to Leaf.

 

[bradical]

What a catastrophe for Topps.

An absolute embarrassment to the company and the MLB license.

How does this affect the MLB license or the MLB brand?

While it's another in a long line of Topps screw-ups from rushing or being lazy, it's hardly a catastrophe in any sense of the word.

Hopefully there was some sarcasm in the post.

No sarcasm at all.

It just goes to show how cavalier Topps has become with their products, which directly and indirectly reflects on the MLB as Topps holds the only license.

I am not trying to say that Bud Selig needs to run damage control over the situation because Topps has tarnished the MLB brand, I am saying that its an embarrassment for the MLB to have a company continually make mistakes and have issues in their products.

The cornerstone product of the Bowman line, and arguably some of the best inserts to pull from the product, Topps has seemingly removed all resale value and creditability for the pack-pulled versions of the AFLAC cards.

 

[200lbhockeyplayer]

What a catastrophe for Topps.

An absolute embarrassment to the company and the MLB license.

How does this affect the MLB license or the MLB brand?

While it's another in a long line of Topps screw-ups from rushing or being lazy, it's hardly a catastrophe in any sense of the word.

Hopefully there was some sarcasm in the post.

No sarcasm at all.

It just goes to show how cavalier Topps has become with their products, which directly and indirectly reflects on the MLB as Topps holds the only license.

I am not trying to say that Bud Selig needs to run damage control over the situation because Topps has tarnished the MLB brand, I am saying that its an embarrassment for the MLB to have a company continually make mistakes and have issues in their products.

The cornerstone product of the Bowman line, and arguably some of the best inserts to pull from the product, Topps has seemingly removed all resale value and creditability for the pack-pulled versions of the AFLAC cards.

So the "travesty" of the 2004 AFLAC Gold Refractor Redemptions were a result of what then?

Let's recall, we had Topps, Fleer, Upper and Donruss all in the market then did we not?

Topps has never, ever been known for quality control. That is not a result of their exclusive license, but a result of terrible management and systems.

And again, have they ever gotten the signed AFLAC cards correct? They were serial-numbered once, but even those appeared inconsistent.

As long as the checks clear, MLBP isn't going to get embarrassed by Topps.

 

[James52411]

It's a stupid mistake by Topps and this is the best solution they could have come up with. Topps would do well to develop internal controls and procedures for each type of card they decide to manufacture so that these mistakes will not happen.

 

[schmidtfan20]

Why do people think this is a catastrophe for topps? They could care less. They won't lose one cent on bowman
draft, they already sold of all of it. The real loser here are the ones who bought the cards and will pull these cards
after the deadline.

Topps has proven one thing over the years, the can F up a product BIG TIME, and still have idiots lined up next
year to buy it. They could of put pieces of sandpaper into pack, said woops, and still have everyone buying it
next year.

Why would you change anything when you can do that year after year? If anything this stunt was done so topps
could get people to buy more draft, even though once again that doesn't affect topps one bit. Do you honestly think they care about authentication? LOL

Kevin

 

[bradical]

So the "travesty" of the 2004 AFLAC Gold Refractor Redemptions were a result of what then?

No idea what the issue was here - long before I got back into collecting.

Topps has never, ever been known for quality control. That is not a result of their exclusive license, but a result of terrible management and systems.

This is exactly the problem. If they have such a terrible track record and horrible management - why are they allowed to have the exclusive contract.

And again, have they ever gotten the signed AFLAC cards correct? They were serial-numbered once, but even those appeared inconsistent.

2009 and 2010 - both years had serial numbered AFLAC autos.

As long as the checks clear, MLBP isn't going to get embarrassed by Topps.

Then potentially its our fault, as consumers, to continue to give Topps the funds to ensure the check clears.

 

[BBCgalaxee]

Its come to the point that im shocked topps remembers to put baseball cards in their basrball packs.

 

[cgilmo]

IMO..

It's better than nothing.