Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, January 04, 2022

Fanatics acquires Topps trading cards for $500 million

Michael Rubin’s e-commerce company Fanatics has acquired Topps trading cards, sources close to the deal confirmed to CNBC on Monday night.

Terms of the agreement were not available, but industry sources put the deal at roughly $500 million. It will include only Topps’ name and sports and entertainment division, not the company’s candy and gift cards line, one source said.

Fanatics and Topps declined to provide comment but an announcement is expected on Tuesday.

The agreement comes after Fanatics captured Major League Baseball’s trading card rights last August. MLB renewed its deal with Topps in 2018, and the existing deal ends in 2025. But with this agreement, Fanatics will obtain MLB’s trading card rights immediately.

Fanatics will also obtain rights for Major League Soccer, UEFA, Bundesliga, and Formula 1. Those leagues also have active agreements with Topps.

RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: January 04, 2022 at 12:24 AM | 57 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: baseball cards, topps

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. The Duke Posted: January 04, 2022 at 10:03 AM (#6059555)
So Topps continues on but with new management
   2. Ziggy: social distancing since 1980 Posted: January 04, 2022 at 10:10 AM (#6059556)
This was such an obvious move, it just had to happen. Fanatics had zero experience with trading cards, Topps had no future without the license.
   3. DL from MN Posted: January 04, 2022 at 10:18 AM (#6059558)
So the end result is Topps keeps printing cards but with a more expensive license because they were out-bid by Fanatics? Was this just a leverage play to reduce the price to acquire Topps?

I am a little surprised that people keep buying sports cards but I'm also not sure why people like buying vinyl records.
   4. Rally Posted: January 04, 2022 at 10:35 AM (#6059564)
I kind of assume the plan is to phase out printed sports cards and sell NFT baseball cards.

Kids these days are well trained to spend real money to get virtual items.
   5. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: January 04, 2022 at 10:38 AM (#6059567)
I am a little surprised that people keep buying sports cards

Modern "collecting" is more like playing Powerball where everyone is chasing the Big Hit of any pointless ultra-rare card (This Mike Trout 1-of-1 has a red border! This otherwise identical Mike Trout 1-of-1 has a blue border! This otherwise identical Mike Trout 1-of-1 has a pink border! This otherwise identical Mike Trout 1-of-1 has an orange border! etc) that is essentially no different than last year's crop of rare cards nor next year's offerings. And if you do hit big, then the race is on to ship it to PSA for grading and slabbing (with rates currently starting at $100/card), praying for the almighty 10 grade, then getting it onto eBay and hoping there's a bigger fool out there waiting to lay down 4, 5, or even 6 figures for it.
   6. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: January 04, 2022 at 10:42 AM (#6059568)
I kind of assume the plan is to phase out printed sports cards and sell NFT baseball cards.

eTopps was an idea 22 years ahead of its time. If only they had the vision to cut out the physical cards altogether. Thank goodness for our new Fanatics overlords to lead us into this brave new virtual world.
   7. Ziggy: social distancing since 1980 Posted: January 04, 2022 at 10:52 AM (#6059571)
One interesting twist is that MLB itself has a minority position in Fanatics.
   8. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: January 04, 2022 at 11:22 AM (#6059573)



One interesting twist is that MLB itself has a minority position in Fanatics.


Yea, so MLB has a stake in Fanatics. Topps was valued at $1.3 billion before they lost their licensing deal. Topps loses the licensing deal with MLB, Fanatics/MLB buys Topps at a reduced price. Seems legit.


I am a little surprised that people keep buying sports cards


Because baseball isn't popular, or because collecting isn't lucrative? I think most people collect just cause they like baseball, right?
   9. jmurph Posted: January 04, 2022 at 11:38 AM (#6059574)
I think most people collect just cause they like baseball, right?

I don't think so. Pat Rapper's Delight description of how it works in post 5 is not an exaggeration.
   10. villageidiom Posted: January 04, 2022 at 11:46 AM (#6059576)
So the end result is Topps keeps printing cards but with a more expensive license because they were out-bid by Fanatics? Was this just a leverage play to reduce the price to acquire Topps?
Yes.

Fanatics is probably paying $100 million more per year for the licensing than Topps was. By doing this, they:

1. knocked close to $1 billion off the purchase price of Topps;

2. eliminated any competition in the baseball card market for the next 20 years, as the Fanatics licensing deals are exclusive, while Topps' deals were not.

I kind of assume the plan is to phase out printed sports cards and sell NFT baseball cards.
They don't have to phase out printed sports cards to sell NFTs. And if Topps' valuation took a $1 billion hit when they lost the licensing, I'm guessing they are still making enough money on printed cards that it's worth their while to continue.

At this point Topps is probably selling 90% of printed cards to collectors and speculators. If they reduce their output by 1% each year they could probably increase the price by 5-10% each year and make more profit, since the speculators will gladly pay more for a more scarce supply.
   11. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: January 04, 2022 at 12:06 PM (#6059582)
I don't think so. Pat Rapper's Delight description of how it works in post 5 is not an exaggeration.
Yep. For modern/ultra-modern cards, anyway. It has nothing to do with baseball - it's an extension of the day trader/crypto bro scene.
   12. bfan Posted: January 04, 2022 at 12:13 PM (#6059583)
, then getting it onto eBay and hoping there's a bigger fool out there waiting to lay down 4, 5, or even 6 figures for it.


Substitute Sotheby's for e-bay, add some white wine, and you have described the rare art market.
   13. Ziggy: social distancing since 1980 Posted: January 04, 2022 at 12:47 PM (#6059590)
Modern cards are gross. Not just aesthetically, but their scene. The world has enough grubbing after money in it already.
   14. TJ Posted: January 04, 2022 at 01:03 PM (#6059592)
I think most people collect just cause they like baseball, right?

I don't think so. Pat Rapper's Delight description of how it works in post 5 is not an exaggeration.


It certainly isn't. Went to card show this past weekend (I'm a collector, not a speculator or a seller. I collect Hall of Famers for fun regardless of the year or the product). Overheard a dealer/customer conversation about a $1,700 card. The customer wanted the dealer to come down from $1,700 to $1,100 because "I can't sell it for a profit if I'm into it at $1,700." The discussion seemed to be getting a bit heated, so I returned to picking out about 250 HOFers from a 10-cent box to add to my collection, including a 1982 Donruss Alan Trammell that I didn't have.

So I have a 50-count box of 1987 Topps Barry Larkin rookies- big deal! Sure they aren't going to fund my retirement, but I'm into them for less than ten bucks, I like Barry Larkin, I like baseball, and no one gets into a hassle about price and profit. I have the stock market and my retirement funds for that sort of thing...

   15. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: January 04, 2022 at 01:22 PM (#6059596)
Overheard a dealer/customer conversation about a $1,700 card. The customer wanted the dealer to come down from $1,700 to $1,100 because "I can't sell it for a profit if I'm into it at $1,700." The discussion seemed to be getting a bit heated

So wait.... dealer has a short-print alternate-picture flipped-back green-border throwback-uniform card (or some such dizzying permutation) and wants $1700 for it, but Card Bro wants it for $1100 so Card Bro can be the one to flip it for $1700? Yeah, that sounds exactly like the mindset of the contemporary "collector."
   16. DL from MN Posted: January 04, 2022 at 01:24 PM (#6059597)
Okay, but are they actually making common cards anymore? Are you going to be able to find 10 cent Hall of Famers from the current era?

I have a few thousand cards sitting in a box in my basement. I used to like to go through them when I was listening to the game on the radio to get a picture of the player and their stats. I have meant to go through and purge most of that collection for approximately 20 years but never get time to open the box.
   17. oscar madisox Posted: January 04, 2022 at 01:40 PM (#6059599)
I with TJ. I went to a show this weekend and bought a 1964 Stengel with a slight crease for $2. Not because I want to sell it, but because I want to keep it. I don't care about the condition, Ijust like the image of the old man sitting on a bench with his Mets jacket on. Also bought cards of such luminaries as Vic Power, Mickey Vernon, Tony Kubek, Dale Michell, all for about 1 or 2 bucks. Give me the old stuff any day of the week. If I have any Mike Trout cards they're by accident**. What my kids do with my collection after I'm gone, I won't know. But the enjoyment I get out of my collection is immeasurable.

** In December I bought a few packs of Topps Heritage cards (they look like the 1972 design) to put in stockings. We get a kick out of opening them. I got a Shohei Ohtani. Eh, I'd rather have the Stengel.


   18. Ziggy: social distancing since 1980 Posted: January 04, 2022 at 01:42 PM (#6059600)
Yes, they do (re 16). But the people who buy modern cards don't care about them. Those are the losing lotto numbers.

You can buy most of them on eBay (minus a Mike trout card or two) for a buck. They're worth less than that, but you gotta cover postage.
   19. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: January 04, 2022 at 01:47 PM (#6059602)
I guess what I'm asking is, what are my 12 Jim Walewander cards worth?
   20. Ziggy: social distancing since 1980 Posted: January 04, 2022 at 01:54 PM (#6059604)
My most recent pickup was a Sanella Ruth for $250. No doubt I overpaid, but with prices rising I was afraid I'd never get a Ruth card.

(I'd love to have a Goudey, but everytime I mention it, my wife looks at me with divorce in her eyes.)
   21. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: January 04, 2022 at 02:01 PM (#6059605)
Pat Rapper's description in #5 doesn't sound that different to what card collecting was like in the early/mid-90s, when I stopped collecting. I guess it's just gotten progressively worse since then, and the third-party grading has become a bigger thing.

I have a few thousand cards sitting in a box in my basement. I used to like to go through them when I was listening to the game on the radio to get a picture of the player and their stats. I have meant to go through and purge most of that collection for approximately 20 years but never get time to open the box.

I had a few thousand cards in my childhood bedroom that I also hadn't looked at in 20 years. When my parents downsized into an apartment I went through my collection and cut it down to a couple of shoeboxes worth of cards that I wanted to keep. I let one of the movers take the rest for free. He was super excited and said his son would love them.
   22. The Duke Posted: January 04, 2022 at 02:09 PM (#6059607)
Fanatics had no way to make or distribute cards so they needed Topps. Topps had no future biz model. I’m guessing the price they paid for Topps was slightly less than it would have cost them to tool up to make cards. I think Topps did really well - I was expecting the sale price to be 50-100 million.

If I understand the law, someone else could still make and sell cards but they couldn’t use team logos etc on the card outline. Seems to me a good biz opportunity - photography technology being what it is, somebody could probably put out a high quality set for not much money.
   23. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: January 04, 2022 at 02:22 PM (#6059608)
Pat Rapper's description in #5 doesn't sound that different to what card collecting was like in the early/mid-90s, when I stopped collecting. I guess it's just gotten progressively worse since then

Imagine the hype if there were only like 50 1989 Upper Deck Griffeys printed and people were offering thousands of dollars for them right out of the pack coupled with the pull of social media for all the valuable street cred you get from posing with a card like that. That's today's high-end Rookie Card scene.
   24. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: January 04, 2022 at 02:27 PM (#6059610)
If I understand the law, someone else could still make and sell cards but they couldn’t use team logos etc on the card outline.

IANAL, but MLBPA is also a party to the exclusive license with Fanatics, so a third party would not be able to issue trading cards of players in the union.
   25. TJ Posted: January 04, 2022 at 02:38 PM (#6059617)
I with TJ. I went to a show this weekend and bought a 1964 Stengel with a slight crease for $2. Not because I want to sell it, but because I want to keep it.


I love that card! It's right up there with my favorite manager cards along with the 1967 (I think) Topps Herman Franks yelling apparently at whomever happens to be holding the card and the 1972 Topps In Action card of Billy Martin arguing with an umpire...
   26. Walt Davis Posted: January 04, 2022 at 02:47 PM (#6059618)
I'm also not sure why people like buying vinyl records.

Well there are collectors. But the current boom in new LP sales is driven by (arguable) superior audio fidelity -- analog better than digital** -- and no doubt some hipster/fashion conspicuous consumption. (There are a lot of very stylish turntables out there these days.) Then there's the out-of-print situation ... it's improving some with sites like bandcamp but there's still a ton of small-label and just plain old stuff which, if it's available at all in digital format, is on one of those crappy mid-80s cds so finding a used LP is your best bet. (Note mid-80s LPs were usually pretty crappily made too.)

** analog is technically superior to digital, the "argument" is over whether humans can tell the difference with of course many claiming they can and some no-fun scientists claiming they can't. As for me, I have never been able to keep LPs in decent shape no matter how often I changed the stylus nor how much zerostat, cleaner, etc. I bought. Even if I could tell the difference, I'm not willing to put up with the hiss, pops, scratches -- my moral failing I'm sure.
   27. DL from MN Posted: January 04, 2022 at 03:00 PM (#6059621)
The overwhelming amount of new music produced today is created digitally. Some of it gets printed on big wax discs of various colors and put into a sleeve with artwork. It comes with a digital download code and the wax disc usually goes into a cardboard box and is never played.

I usually end up purchasing old CDs for a dollar or two. Pretty easy to get a dollar's worth of entertainment value from avoiding streaming advertising.

I might get that enjoyment from looking at old baseball cards except I can google any of them now and see the picture without purchasing.
   28. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: January 04, 2022 at 03:57 PM (#6059628)
If I understand the law, someone else could still make and sell cards but they couldn’t use team logos etc on the card outline. Seems to me a good biz opportunity - photography technology being what it is, somebody could probably put out a high quality set for not much money.
They would still have to get a license from the players' union in whatever sport (or from individual players) to use the names, likenesses, etc. Various manufacturers (notably Panini) have done exactly that and done fairly well, but there is a definite limit to the appeal of cards with no logos in the photos, no use of the team names, and tinted such that the team colors are not the same.
   29. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: January 04, 2022 at 04:01 PM (#6059629)
My most recent pickup was a Sanella Ruth for $250. No doubt I overpaid, but with prices rising I was afraid I'd never get a Ruth card.
Nice! I got back into collecting during the pandemic (like so many others) and decided to work on a HOF collection. The Sanella Ruth was one of my first purchases as well, for exactly that reason. Unless yours is in terrible shape, $250 is actually quite a good price at least from what I've seen recently on eBay.
   30. McCoy Posted: January 04, 2022 at 04:02 PM (#6059630)
Topps isn’t selling the whole company to Fanatics so it’s a little bit unknown whether they got a discount or paid a premium.

Sports cards were 55% of their business and it should be noted that it was Topps itself that was saying they were valuing themselves at 1.3 billion.
   31. SoSH U at work Posted: January 04, 2022 at 05:46 PM (#6059644)
I guess what I'm asking is, what are my 12 Jim Walewander cards worth?


Not as much as a vintage B1tchin' Camaro.
   32. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: January 04, 2022 at 06:10 PM (#6059649)

Sports cards were 55% of their business and it should be noted that it was Topps itself that was saying they were valuing themselves at 1.3 billion.


The SPAC had agreed to buy 46% of the company for $521 million, so that gets you to about $1.16 billion equity valuation. There was also about $150 million of net debt which gets you to $1.3 billion enterprise value. Here's their investor presentation if you're curious.

It's a little different from saying you have an agreement to sell the whole company for $1.3 billion in cash, but it wasn't just a made-up number. (In fact, the stock price went up quite a bit after the deal was announced...at one point the implied value was ~$2.3 billion.)
   33. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: January 04, 2022 at 06:59 PM (#6059653)
All I want to know is: How is this going to impact the value of the 1990 Donruss Dennis Lamp card I've been holding on to?

Notes:
1) It is at least NR MT (corners are pretty good)
2) It is signed by Kevin Romine (tried to get Lamp's signature, but Romine was closer to the stands, and...what are you going to do, right?)
3) Dennis Lamp finished 21st in the MVP vote in 1985, tied with Hall of Famer Kirby Puckett in that year's voting.
   34. O Tempura, O Morays ('Spos) Posted: January 04, 2022 at 07:20 PM (#6059654)

I just like the image of the old man sitting on a bench with his Mets jacket on.

Insert Showalter joke here.
   35. Zach Posted: January 04, 2022 at 07:24 PM (#6059655)
So wait.... dealer has a short-print alternate-picture flipped-back green-border throwback-uniform card (or some such dizzying permutation) and wants $1700 for it, but Card Bro wants it for $1100 so Card Bro can be the one to flip it for $1700? Yeah, that sounds exactly like the mindset of the contemporary "collector."

It could make sense if Dealer sells mainly at card shows and Card Bro sells at retail.
   36. Zach Posted: January 04, 2022 at 07:30 PM (#6059656)
To the extent that any of this makes sense, I mean.

TJ's attitude makes perfect sense to me. He's paying a nominal amount and simply plans to enjoy his collection.

The idea of day trading baseball cards turned me off as a kid and still turns me off now.
   37. McCoy Posted: January 04, 2022 at 08:39 PM (#6059659)
I never bought cards to try and make a profit off them and the boxes my cards are stored in and the gas used to move them around the country probably cost more than the cards are worth but I was able to sell like 6 Magic cards for around 2500 bucks so I'll always have that.
   38. Howie Menckel Posted: January 04, 2022 at 08:55 PM (#6059661)
My first go-round at buying Topps baseball cards was 1968.

So I have the Johnny Bench rookie card, the Rod Carew, and the Nolan Ryan (!).

incredibly, Ryan was paired with Jerry Koosman on his card - so more than 500 MLB wins there.

but Bench had a nobody named Ron Tompkins (who pitched in 1965 for the KC A's in a cup of coffee and also some IP for the Cubs in 1971).

Tompkins previously was on a KC A's rookie card in 1966 (with OF Larry Stahl), but as he never panned out I decided as a youth to - wait for it, wait for it - fold the card in half in homage to Bench's greatness.

I chose poorly.

still have the cards, though
:)
   39. Ziggy: social distancing since 1980 Posted: January 04, 2022 at 09:15 PM (#6059662)
** analog is technically superior to digital,


No, it isn't. Given a band-limited signal and a sampling rate at least twice the frequency of the signal being sampled, the samples of your signal describe a unique function. The signal transmitted from your digital source to your amplifier (via a DAC) expresses that function. Moreover, anything you get on a CD will have a sampling rate way higher than you need to meet the sampling requirement. Here's a better explanation.


and no doubt some hipster/fashion conspicuous consumption.


That's why I buy them.
   40. TJ Posted: January 04, 2022 at 09:43 PM (#6059667)
TJ's attitude makes perfect sense to me. He's paying a nominal amount and simply plans to enjoy his collection.


Thanks, Zach- I wish my wife had the same level of understanding as you! (To be fair, she says at least I don’t waste money on cocaine and hookers…)
   41. oscar madisox Posted: January 04, 2022 at 10:11 PM (#6059671)
and the 1972 Topps In Action card of Billy Martin arguing with an umpire...



or the regular 1972 Martin where he's leaning on a bat, with middle finger extended!

   42. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 04, 2022 at 10:31 PM (#6059675)
I am a little surprised that people keep buying sports cards . . .
Yeah, eliminating the bubble gum in 1991 should have been the end for baseball cards.
   43. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: January 04, 2022 at 10:41 PM (#6059676)
(To be fair, she says at least I don’t waste money on cocaine and hookers…)
Exactly. Experiences are never a waste of money.
   44. SoSH U at work Posted: January 04, 2022 at 11:19 PM (#6059679)
The idea of day trading baseball cards turned me off as a kid and still turns me off now.


I assume you mean day trading in the sense of trying to make a little coin off those cards, rather than spending the afternoon with friends trading cards, which was awesome.
   45. Ron J Posted: January 05, 2022 at 08:19 AM (#6059695)
#43 George Best on why he was broke, "I spent a lot of money on booze, birds, and fast cars. The rest I just squandered."
   46. jmurph Posted: January 05, 2022 at 08:51 AM (#6059699)
With vinyl, the other thing is that even though I use the terrible streaming services just like anyone, sometimes I want to give bands/artists money in exchange for their goods and services, and records are more fun to buy and own than CDs (plus I don't actually own a CD player in my house anymore). It's also a fun and easy way to buy local and support your neighborhood record store.

I'm sure individual records/CD sales don't pay out a ton to the recording artist, either, but surely it's much better than Spotify and the like.
   47. salvomania Posted: January 05, 2022 at 12:23 PM (#6059720)
Here's a better explanation.

Come on, how can you take that article seriously when it has something like this in it:
To avoid aliasing, you must preserve the following condition: 1/T ≥ 2α, or 1/T ≥ 2BW.
   48. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 05, 2022 at 01:30 PM (#6059725)
The idea of day trading baseball cards turned me off as a kid and still turns me off now.

I did it Warren Buffett style: Assembled a set of 1953 Topps back in 1953, with little attention to condition. Total outlay maybe 10 bucks. Stopped collecting 3 years later, stashed them in a closet. Got out of college 11 years later, left home, thought they might be worth something someday, so "preserved" them in 5 albums only to find they were hopelessly stuck in there and couldn't be removed without damaging them. Kept the albums anyway, and 40+ years later got over $2000 for them in a local sports memorabilia auction.

Of course if I'd paid attention to condition and hadn't glued them into those albums, I probably could've gotten ten times that.** But WTF, you can't win em all.

** And if I'd invested those ten bucks in unopened wax boxes at 76 cents each per box, my wife and I could easily upgrade to a McMansion.
   49. Rough Carrigan Posted: January 05, 2022 at 02:11 PM (#6059733)
Am I the only one who clicked on this thinking I was going to read about some fanatic having paid $500 million for some baseball cards?
   50. TJ Posted: January 05, 2022 at 02:11 PM (#6059734)
I love hearing and sharing baseball card bad beat stories from days collecting as a kid. My best is I needed a 1969 Topps Ray Oyler to finish my beloved Detroit Tigers team set. I had a buddy who loved the Kansas City/Oakland A's because of their uniforms. He had an extra Oyler and he needed one card to finish his A's team set. You can see where this is going- I happily traded a Reggie Jackson rookie card to get my Ray Oyler...

Ah, the joys of life when you were still a little kid...
   51. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: January 05, 2022 at 02:15 PM (#6059735)
I had a buddy who loved the Kansas City/Oakland A's because of their uniforms.
That's funny - I've seriously considered starting a collection of '60s and '70s A's cards just because their uniforms were so great.
   52. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: January 05, 2022 at 02:33 PM (#6059739)
I don't remember what I traded for it, but c.1978 I traded with a friend down the street for a 1968 Casey Cox because I thought it would be cool to own a card from the year I was born AND from a team that didn't exist any more (Senators). Fast forward several years later and I realized what I had was the scarce version of the card with the team name in yellow letters instead of white. Last I looked, Beckett HI was around $100 so mine in its condition might fetch $10, but it's priceless to me.

Also traded away a 1977 Pete Rose for a 1977 Dan Frisella because I had recently read in one of my library book fair books that Frisella had died the prior off-season in a dune buggy accident. RIP.
   53. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: January 05, 2022 at 04:24 PM (#6059772)
When I was about 10 years old, there was a kid who I had to be "friends" with because our moms were friends. He also kind of collected baseball cards, and he had a Topps Mattingly rookie that was a big deal in 1987. He was also a bit gullible.

I had an old "Tom Seaver Price Guide" book from 1984 that had the Mattingly listed at like $1. Using the argument that "who would know more about the ability of hitters, and thus their card values, than Tom Seaver,"* I convinced the other kid to trade me the Mattingly and some other cards for a stack of 1987 Topps, mostly commons, that he needed for his set. If memory serves, later that afternoon he told his mom and she unilaterally rescinded the trade.

Now, I am not proud of this story today, but it does make for a memorable trade.


*Yes, I did eventually become a lawyer. Why do you ask?
   54. McCoy Posted: January 05, 2022 at 08:25 PM (#6059830)
Back in the day I bought my first M:TG starter pack and my rare was a Millstone. I traded it to my buddy who fleeced me giving me a bunch of nothing green cards. He then thought he was so slick because he went to the card shop and got 2 dollars in store credit for it. I would love to say the jokes on him because that card is now worth 300 dollars but it's worth about 2 dollars in cash now.

Never did get another Millstone.
   55. Ziggy: social distancing since 1980 Posted: January 05, 2022 at 09:47 PM (#6059849)
My magic trades are too painful to recount. I'll leave them in that dusty bin of my mind that torments me whenever car payments are due.

But my favorite kid baseball card trade wasn't as disastrous. One kid in school had a card commemorating the 1973 World Series, the one with Willie Mays on it. I don't know how he got it (this was considerably after 1974), but I had to have it. Willie Mays! Can you imagine! It was by far the coolest card going around in my middle school. So, I traded him a pile of Frank Thomas and Ken Griffey Jr. cards for it. He later begged to undo the trade, but there was no way I was giving up Willie Mays. (I guess we didn't have a price guide - it's only worth a couple bucks.) And I've still got it.
   56. McCoy Posted: January 06, 2022 at 06:05 AM (#6059875)
For Magic I was a green player so I traded a lot of my non green cards away to get green cards. Fortunately the sought after cards in my group of magic players did not age well and so I was “stuck” with combi-lands while I traded off Shivan Dragons, Lords, and blue spells.
   57. jingoist Posted: January 06, 2022 at 03:19 PM (#6059982)
I had. 1952 Howie Pollet card as I was just beginning to follow the Pirates then and I thought Howie Pollet was a cool sounding name; not nearly as cool as Preacher Roe but cool nonetheless.
We used to “flip” cards face up or down with fellow card holders. You would say “match or unmatch” and would win the card if your call came true.
We’d also put the beat-up cards in the spokes of our bikes so when we rode along they made a chittering sound.
I began collecting in earnest by the mid 50’s and had boxes and boxes (shoe) but when I went into the Navy in 1963 mom pitched them out - without even asking- and that was that.
Baseball cards were our touchstones to the immortals.
We were never going to meet Willie Mays or Stan Musial so I daydreamed my young years away swooning at the accomplishments of my hero’s of the ballfield.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dingbat_Charlie
for his generous support.

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogHow Good Are Those Probabilities on the Apple TV+ Broadcasts?
(2 - 7:20am, May 27)
Last: Paul D(uda)

NewsblogMet Their Match? Infield Defense a Little Off
(4 - 6:14am, May 27)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)

Newsblog2022 NBA Playoffs thread
(1862 - 4:15am, May 27)
Last: The Honorable Ardo

NewsblogYankees sign infielder Matt Carpenter
(5 - 4:08am, May 27)
Last: The Honorable Ardo

NewsblogGammons: While outsiders wonder about the ball, MLB’s pitching coaches fret about finding enough innings
(6 - 4:01am, May 27)
Last: The Honorable Ardo

Sox TherapyOne Step Forward
(29 - 2:28am, May 27)
Last: Jay Seaver

NewsblogMLB, in memo, rebukes clubs for 'unacceptable' workplace facilities for women employees
(2 - 12:31am, May 27)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogOMNICHATTER for Thursday, May 26, 2022
(35 - 12:03am, May 27)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogAnalyzing the early returns from the Blue Jays’ unorthodox defensive experiment
(18 - 9:54pm, May 26)
Last: Paul D(uda)

NewsblogAt long last, a fun new tool at Baseball Savant. Pitch tempo
(2 - 8:17pm, May 26)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogJuan Soto trade rumors: Nationals may be 'motivated' to trade outfielder
(78 - 6:49pm, May 26)
Last: Tony S

NewsblogMLB teams will be allowed to carry 14 pitchers for four more weeks
(37 - 5:37pm, May 26)
Last: Cris E

NewsblogAnaheim City Council votes unanimously to halt the sale of Angel Stadium | LA Times
(18 - 4:06pm, May 26)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)

Newsblog3 years later, this trade has flipped in a BIG way
(6 - 3:25pm, May 26)
Last: SoSH U at work

NewsblogWho in MLB is must-see TV right now? This season's most watchable teams and players
(12 - 3:21pm, May 26)
Last: Karl from NY

Page rendered in 0.4911 seconds
48 querie(s) executed