Unnumbered 2006 Bowman Sterling Gold and Black Refractors

[Bob Loblaw]

ah okay. wonder why extras that weren't machine stamped were even made? that's really weird.

Is the lie that "Beckett states the print run is..."? I'm confused.

the pack issued cards were serial numbered out of the packs


beckett didn't tell anyone squat about these cards, its a clear name drop and a lie

They weren't machine stamped because they would have been machine stamped had a replacement come in.

You pull 6/50 and it's half eaten. You send it to Topps, they shred it, take an unnumbered gold refractor from the shelf, and stick it in the numbering machine.. .voila, 6/50 gem mint.

I don't see why people are so up in arms. They're backdoored. People are being less than truthful. Use an iota of common sense and you know that they're backdoored. However, if it was of a prospect I wanted, I would be bidding on these unnumbered cards.

 

[UMich92]

The Sterling Gold Refractors were numbered to 10. I have now seen 3 unnumbered Verlanders. If the unnumbered cards were truly for replacements, why do the potential replacements account for at least 30% of the print run?

Alex

 

[Bob Loblaw]

The Sterling Gold Refractors were numbered to 10. I have now seen 3 unnumbered Verlanders. If the unnumbered cards were truly for replacements, why do the potential replacements account for at least 30% of the print run?

Alex

Don't know.

Perhaps 20-30-50 were overprinted and cut by mistake? Topps threw out the extras? Perhaps these are slightly different in some way than the packed out cards - missing gloss, or missing something to where Topps decided to scrap this print run, make a change, and reprint? And instead of these being trashed...here they are?

Where's cardcop when you need him?

 

[cgilmo]

after seeing the process that printers go through when we printed the FCB cards

I would guess that there is a ton more printed than distributed

 

[Sly]

The Sterling Gold Refractors were numbered to 10. I have now seen 3 unnumbered Verlanders. If the unnumbered cards were truly for replacements, why do the potential replacements account for at least 30% of the print run?

Alex

Don't know.

Perhaps 20-30-50 were overprinted and cut by mistake? Topps threw out the extras? Perhaps these are slightly different in some way than the packed out cards - missing gloss, or missing something to where Topps decided to scrap this print run, make a change, and reprint? And instead of these being trashed...here they are?

Where's cardcop when you need him?

Damn Jeff, you've pulled out Rich G. (RIP), and now Cardcop in the span of a week...two names I have not heard in a LOOOOONG time!

 

[matchpenalty]

Has to be some 2006 Bowman Sterling experts. Were all the pack issued one's found in the sealed uncirculated cases on these gold and blacks that are indeed serial #.

If I was collecting one of these guys I would be all over these not numbered versions as well.

 

[cgilmo]

Has to be some 2006 Bowman Sterling experts. Were all the pack issued one's found in the sealed uncirculated cases on these gold and blacks that are indeed serial #.

If I was collecting one of these guys I would be all over these not numbered versions as well.

they were all serial numbered

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

We can cry and pout all we want, but Topps clearly defines what their cards are called, not us.

If Topps decides that they are only gold refractors if they are numbered, who are we to argue with them? After all, they made the things...

If Topps said the gold refractors were all numbered ie "gold refractors numbered out of 50", then only those with numbering are gold refractors by definition. In this case those without numbering would clearly NOT be gold refractors...they would simply only look like gold refractors.

Trying not to be condescending here, but if a card is made with chrome technology, and is gold, and refracts, it is, in fact, a gold refractor. Whether it is #ed to 50 or not is another issue. In this case, there's no doubt that both the #ed and un#ed refractors ARE gold refractors. The question is the origin of the unnumbered refractor.

On the other hand if Topps has only said there are "50 gold refractors produced" or "50 sets produced" there should be an explanation from Topps as they never said anything about numbering.

Its all about the semantics.

I believe Topps' standard line is "50 serially numbered gold refractors" or something like that.

I have no problems with extra cards being printed for replacements. I don't know if others do. I think it's pretty clear that these went out the back door.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

We can cry and pout all we want, but Topps clearly defines what their cards are called, not us.

If Topps decides that they are only gold refractors if they are numbered, who are we to argue with them? After all, they made the things...

If Topps said the gold refractors were all numbered ie "gold refractors numbered out of 50", then only those with numbering are gold refractors by definition. In this case those without numbering would clearly NOT be gold refractors...they would simply only look like gold refractors.

Trying not to be condescending here, but if a card is made with chrome technology, and is gold, and refracts, it is, in fact, a gold refractor. Whether it is #ed to 50 or not is another issue. In this case, there's no doubt that both the #ed and un#ed refractors ARE gold refractors. The question is the origin of the unnumbered refractor.

On the other hand if Topps has only said there are "50 gold refractors produced" or "50 sets produced" there should be an explanation from Topps as they never said anything about numbering.

Its all about the semantics.

I believe Topps' standard line is "50 serially numbered gold refractors" or something like that.

I have no problems with extra cards being printed for replacements. I don't know if others do. I think it's pretty clear that these went out the back door.

No, the end user clearly defines what it is. May I present exhibit A, "The Rookie Card".

Where did Topps make a public statement and say the shiny gold refractory thingies are not "Gold Refractors"?

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

The MLBPA helped clear up that mess and its starting to work, eventually the old-school prospectors and minor league enthusiasts will naturally stop using old terminology as they die out or fade away. Besides, its to their benefit to do so to begin with.

Topps could call what are now gold refractors yellow refractors in 2010, and 2010 yellow refractors are what they'd be called.

Instead of calling you Jeff I could call you... Ralph. Some folks might think I were crazy if I actually called you Ralph, and they'd be right.

Consumers have much less pull or control than you would like to believe here...after all, we're only talking about baseball cards...any manufacturer can call their products whatever they want to.

No, the end user clearly defines what it is. May I present exhibit A, "The Rookie Card".

Where did Topps make a public statement and say the shiny gold refractory thingies are not "Gold Refractors"?

 

[matchpenalty]

So on the completed prices of these, how have they fared vs the serial numbered version. People pay less or more for the not numbered versions?

 

[matchpenalty]

Also any of serial numbered versions ever found not in uncirculated cases?

 

[Rickzcards]

I seem to remember something a few years ago about Terry(bigboydscards) selling resealed boxes. Correct number of packs, just no hits. And there was more than just one person hosed with those resealed boxes. Epic thread on the old beckett boards. So this wouldn't be out of his character.

 

[matchpenalty]

anyone going for some tonight

 

[Flashmelo]

I thought to bid on some,

but I got little confused after reading this thread.

what should i do?

 

[011873]

I really cant believe what Im reading here. Do you guys understand that unless Topps says otherwise, these are STOLEN. Stolen merchandise by someone.

Just like its against the law to buy a stolen car or be in possesion of one. Big difference here is that WE ALL KNOW THE CARDS ARE STOLEN.

By bidding or buying these cards, you just give the thief more incentive to do it again.

 

[JEA2880]

I seem to remember something a few years ago about Terry(bigboydscards) selling resealed boxes. Correct number of packs, just no hits. And there was more than just one person hosed with those resealed boxes. Epic thread on the old beckett boards. So this wouldn't be out of his character.

Damn straight, epic thread on BMB started by ME! He sold me a junk box of 05 UD Reflections (the first box I purchased to get back into collecting) and I called him out. I'll never trust his business practices.

 

[matchpenalty]

Verlander went cheap compared to last one. Anybody win some of these. I won a couple for less than $5 total.

 

[UMich92]

I watched the Verlander auction but couldn't justify the purchase. I have a numbered gold refractor that isn't well centered and have wanted to find another to get graded. Just decided I'd rather have the real deal.

Alex

 

[matchpenalty]

Already got mine in hand from last batch. Cards were gem and super fast shipping. Anyone going for unnumbered Bowman Chrome gold versions out now.