February 8, 2011

Here's your sign.

Every so often we like to post eBay idiots on here. Well, I like nothing better than to procrastinate homework by rummaging eBay looking for nonsense items. Today was no exception.

Here is our first bozo. This auction claims to have a "foil error". No, it's just poor quality control but thanks for playing. Here's your sign.

Next up will be a card that you will hate/love if you collect Stephen Strasburg. It's cool if you like having an obscure card in your collection, it's not so cool if you aren't willing to pay $20+ for a base insert.

Now these are interesting. There are a bunch of these no foil variations floating on eBay and I honestly can't remember if I saw any like this in the case. I really didn't look at any of the base cards at all. If anyone ended up with a sparkle card or a no foil card, please let us know. I'd be interested to see what really ended up coming out of that case.

I think the better question is why are they calling them variations? We all know how they ended up like that, but I don't see that as worth listing on eBay for $5.00 when I could get the actual card for a quarter.

I'm sure I will have more tales to share later. I am waiting on another offer rejection (Some people apparently think Cano autographs /50 are worth $150) for a card I reallllllyyyy want so I am sure I will troll around eBay looking for something else.


  1. I remember paying $5 or so for "no foil" versions of some early 90s commons of players that I collected... but that was back when you could actually still obtain every card produced of the guys that you collected.

    Now, I don't really see the point.

  2. And that makes it's a 1/1 of right?

  3. I agree, if there were only a couple of cards of a guy each year it would make sense. I can't afford to buy every mistake card out there, but I would buy one or two for my collection if the right ones presented themselves.

    And of course they are 1/1's, the seller must have made a mistake in the listing.

  4. I collect Strasburg, and I have zero desire to have that card. As of now it has 3 bids though, so someone out there wants it.

  5. Unfortunately, I got about 100 cards out of my jumbo box today that was missing foil from the front of the card like that Morneau you posted. Pretty frustrating, because I see them as worth even less than a common card, which was already worthless to me.

  6. It's very inconsistent in how error cards are chased in this hobby. There's no telling when or why one type of error will be just a worthless mistake, and which ones will have some sort of demand.

    What exactly separates a 1990 Frank Thomas NNOF error (which basically just missed the black ink in the printing process) versus the Strasburg mentioned here, when it, in turn, seems to just have missed the foil application process?

    Why isn't the Strasburg considered a 'NNOF' error? Therefore, to gain that status, what is the ideal population number that would turn it into a desirable 'variation' rather than a worthless defective?