To all the people who wrote you have to know how to protect the card, that is absolute BS.  This card would have faded no matter what.  Just like UD knew the cards in 2007 were using a terrible leather and also terrible pens.  Topps knew the odds of faded cards if inferieor pens were used.  That’s why they only use Staedler pens now for autographing purposes.

Here is the bottom line for Topps, they should (along with other companies) note on the package, autographs may deteriorate over time, some autographs contained in this box may have autographs which may have faded.  Some kind of disclaimer, they know their boxes may sit on a shelf for years (or even decades), there needs to be warning labels on the boxes.  If not they should be held responsible for faded autographs.

I was considering buying a box of older Topps products that contained guaranteed autographs, but was over 5 years old.  How can I buy it now that I know if the card has a faded autograph, I’m screwed.  For all you who this this is a sunlight related problem, you couldn’t be more wrong, I can show you signed baseballs and footballs I have as well as signed cards, that haven’t seen the light of day in many years.  Some of them the autograph seeped into the card, or ball and some have completely disappeared altogether.  It is not a sunlight or UV damage issue.

Late today I will post some of my faded cards and memorabilia that have been in boxes for the past 15 – 20 years.  It’s the pen and the material and almost never sun damage.  What Topps did to the poor guy was just lame.  Two packs of minor league cards sucks, why even bother?  Someone said to send a blaster, I think that would have been a good idea, maybe a mini pack of Finest.  By sending the 18 cards of crap they did, it was nothing more than rubbing the guy’s face in crap and for all intents and purposes, the reader whose card it is is no longer buying anything Topps.  Just a shitty response to shitty problem caused by a shitty pen, that Topps representatives used.

Just my two cents.  Do you think card companies should put disclaimers on the card boxes, if they are going to disenvow themselves from compensation after one year?

6 responses »

  1. Jt says:

    As a person who deals with warnings and disclaimers for a living (products liability attorney), i can tell you from experiance that the warnings will do little. They will not be read. They will be in the fine print- like that on the side of topps blasters alongside the math problems for canadians. Warnings are not the remedy, better products are the answer.

  2. jj says:

    No disclamier, like I said in my orignal response no issues with 91 Donruss elite signatures, no issue with any Hero’s auto’s in UD from 1990 to 1993, 1996 signature series no issues, and I have seen Topps autos pulled from early 2000’s with no issue. This guy put this card in a air tight bank vault, any ink needs to breath, as far as 2007 UD sweet spot, yes that is a big issue with the leather they used, but you watch youtube you know not to buy that product. They do have a disclamier on boxes about the value of there cards not being worth value in the future, covers all aspects of the cards.

  3. Paul says:

    How many companies “stand behind” an 11-year-old product?

    Yes, it stinks that the autograph faded. Yes, it may have been an issue with the paper and/or pen used to sign the card. It also may have been a storage issue. Unless you find other examples of that card fading, I’m going to believe it was probably a storage issue. If it was really a bad pen or bad card stock, there should be other faded examples out there.

  4. Dwain Hensley says:

    I don’t think a disclaimer is in order on card packages. Do bread packages have a disclaimer that the bread may be stale after ten years? Buyer has to use a little common sense, and know that if you buy a ten year old product, it might not be in the pristine condition it was ten years earlier.

  5. bamlinden says:

    I wouldn’t think a disclaimer is necessary. What percentage of the autos become faded? 5%. 1%.

    Once it hits maybe 10 or 15%, then act on it.

  6. Offy says:

    So they used the bad pen for just this one card and then switched back to a good pen for the rest? 2007 Sweet Spot is a problem with the whole production run. That’s something that Upper Deck is responsible for. For this card, this is the only example that I’ve seen of this card being faded. There are plenty of example of this card for sale online with perfect autos. Saying that this is the fault of Topps is denying the facts at hand. It’s a lot more likely that the conditions of how this was stored were a factor of the auto fading because it’s most likely the only thing different from this card and all of the other cards out there.

    Topps giving this guy what they did wasn’t insulting. He didn’t deserve anything at all. I contacted Topps about bad collation in two boxes of this year’s Chrome Baseball and they sent me more than they sent this guy because they acknowledge that is something that they did incorrectly. Even then, I got two full boxes of product as promised so they didn’t have to send anything, but they did.

    Also, remember that this guy bought this card from someone else if I’m remembering the story correctly. There’s no way of knowing how that first person treated the card. Also, you’ve yet to state how this card was stored in the vault. If you want to put the fault of this squarely on Topps’ shoulders, you need a lot more proof than you’ve given here. You just sound like someone with an axe to grind.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s