History of Hockey- Discrepancy b/w Sneak Peak + Actual Cards?

[theboxbreaker96]

This is no different than UD saying that there will be crosby/lemieux dual auto in 10-11 the cup and not putting it in. or panini putting crosby/someone else dual auto redemptions in 10-11 certified and not making it.

ITG actually put the card in. I never saw it said that it would be a higher grade card or a lower grade card. I did however see that it will be in the product. Im not a huge fan of ITG but I see nothing wrong. Panini and UD took a lot of heat for what they did and deserved it because they stated that those cards will be in there. ITG does not deserve to take heat because they produced the card like they stated and never stated what the card condition was.

As stated above mock-ups are not the real deal. I think this is very silly and as always appreciate that Brian Price is here to take whatever is given and explain.

[RGM81]

UD Uses mockups, with a fake signature and everything... the cards in the "sneak peak" were actually real cards, and as another member mentioned- were even on display at the expo advertising the product... little did we know that those would not actually be included in the product, which is silly.

RGM- I took the preview pictures as more of a UD Pre-The Cup Pack out pics instead of a "Mockup", which I believe was the intention of them. (and as the DR. mentioned likely was as the decision to switch to beckett was made late.... In that case the cards shown are actually the ones packed out.


Thanks for chiming in Dr., however I dont agree with leading collectors on thinking they have a chance at a mint vintage rookie when in fact your throwing in crappy mid-grade replacements.


Dave

Dave, I would suggest that you read again what Miro81 said. To facilitate this, I copy-pasted what he said for you: "ITG actually had these cards on display at the expo and the cards in the advertisement looked identical to the actual cards." So that should pretty much take care of that.

You assumed that the mockups were scans of the actual cards. That was false. It's not the end of the world, we've all been wrong before. But to say that he's misleading people because you incorrectly interpreted "the intention" of the mockups is disingenuous at best, and defamation at worst.

Would anybody ever accuse UD of attempting to mislead customers because they put a mockup Carey Price signature on a Cup preview card only to see that Carey Price's actual signature looks nothing like what's on the preview? I severely doubt it. Price's autograph hasn't looked like it does in UD preview pics since 2006, yet every preview they still use that very dated autograph.

It's as silly as getting worked up over something like this:

[comfortably9numb]

[MatsSundin13Rocks]

This is no different than UD saying that there will be crosby/lemieux dual auto in 10-11 the cup and not putting it in. or panini putting crosby/someone else dual auto redemptions in 10-11 certified and not making it.

ITG actually put the card in. I never saw it said that it would be a higher grade card or a lower grade card. I did however see that it will be in the product. Im not a huge fan of ITG but I see nothing wrong. Panini and UD took a lot of heat for what they did and deserved it because they stated that those cards will be in there. ITG does not deserve to take heat because they produced the card like they stated and never stated what the card condition was.

As stated above mock-ups are not the real deal. I think this is very silly and as always appreciate that Brian Price is here to take whatever is given and explain.

This is my favourite post of the thread! UD and Panini have done worse. All companies have issues yet people still buy cases and boxes and singles.

All the issues with the hobby have taken the fun out of it for me. Also that fact I don't have the money for it anymore.

[Habitforming]

Dave, I would suggest that you read again what Miro81 said. To facilitate this, I copy-pasted what he said for you: "ITG actually had these cards on display at the expo and the cards in the advertisement looked identical to the actual cards." So that should pretty much take care of that.

You assumed that the mockups were scans of the actual cards. That was false. It's not the end of the world, we've all been wrong before. But to say that he's misleading people because you incorrectly interpreted "the intention" of the mockups is disingenuous at best, and defamation at worst.

Would anybody ever accuse UD of attempting to mislead customers because they put a mockup Carey Price signature on a Cup preview card only to see that Carey Price's actual signature looks nothing like what's on the preview? I severely doubt it. Price's autograph hasn't looked like it does in UD preview pics since 2006, yet every preview they still use that very dated autograph.

It's as silly as getting worked up over something like this:

I understand the point you're trying to make but having an auto look the same as a mock up and the cards condition are two completely different things. Imagine being the lucky guy to pull the Gretzky auto you posted above (for sake of argument we'll say its a 1/1), but the corners are rounded and there are creases in the actual card and zero possibility of getting it replaced.

[netsinah]

With UD posting previews of the actual cards you can pull from the Cup, perhaps that's why many collectors assumed that ITG's previews of its cards would be the actual cards inserted into the wax. We now know that's not what ITG did. I think the rule established is that unless a manufacturer comes out and tells us that what you see is what you will get, we should assume otherwise. Lesson learned.

[flopfish]

I think everyone who were "mislead" by this really needs to give themselves a reality check. It's like saying there's no patch card that matches most of UD's or Panini's mockups. I don't see anyone getting mad at UD they didn't get the full Avalanche logo on their Landeskog RPA, or the centre of the Flyers' logo shrunk for a patch on both a Max Couturier and Matt Read Dual Patch card (Yes, Max, and these were done a month before release).Also it's not like the cards are in that bad of shape, they aren't 100% perfect corners (and good luck finding them for that), but they are in pretty good condition.

For the argument that you can buy the main chase cards for the price of a case, you can do the same for The Cup as well. In fact, you can buy the majority of case hits for the price of the tin, if not cheaper.

Calling this "false advertising" pales in comparison to UD's double packout of The Cup because not EVERY card was included in the initial release. Remember when all of Landeskog's or Hodgson's cards were redemptions and then became live magically halfway through release? It means one or the other of:
A) Didn't put in every single card into the product (False advertising)
B) They put more than the stated print run in the product (false advertising)

That's a much bigger problem of false advertising, if you are going to accuse the mockups of History of Hockey as misleading, then you have to accuse all of the products of false advertising.

Also, the cards are pretty dang close to what I saw at the Expo, like many others have said. The corners are not perfect, but they are pretty stinking close to what the actual one is from the same scan.

[jonpop]

I think the issue with the Richard rookie is that it wasn't a mock design, the damn card has been in circulation for years, some designer didn't sit down and create it last month for a preview of a product. It was right there at the display for all to see apparently, and lo and behold out popped something else. That's . Like the 1/1's in this product where there are a near identical 9 other cards.

[Marko]

hey,

I am the one who pulled the Richard.
I was more then happy to do so and the condition was ok for me, I didn't see the advertisement and had
no expectation of a mint vintage rc.

but when reading this:

ITG actually had these cards on display at the expo and the cards in the advertisement looked identical to the actual cards. Not sure if someone is pulling your leg with that richard but something is definately wrong here

I am at least asking myself now:
what happened between expo and packout ?
why was the richard changed to a card in worse shape ?

I don't get the whole meanig of this:

The mock-ups were made in July 2012, long before we determined that the Rookie Cards would be Authenticated by Beckett. That decision was made in September 2012, three months before the product was released.

The mock-ups were replaced by the Beckett Authenticated cards as soon as the Beckett-slabbed cards were returned to us and long before the product was solicited.

We wanted Beckett to authenticate the Rookie cards to insure that none of the cards were forgeries or trimmed. There are many forged and trimmed Rookie cards in the hobby and that's why we wanted to Beckett to insure that any cards we acquired were not in either of these categories.

Brian Price

does this mean you shipped your cards to Beckett to authenticate them ?
if so... you sent a mint richard in and got a card with round corners back ?

or did you acquire new cards from beckett and kept the ones you already had out of the product ?

[bprice]

This statement was made by Jonpop:

"It was right there at the display for all to see apparently, and lo and behold out popped something else."

This is totally false and I would like Jonpop to come on these boards and confirm that he was at our booth, looked at our display and saw that the cards were not the ones in the product.

He has made this statement and now the collector (Marko) who actually got the card and was pleased with it makes the following comment based on Jonpop's post:

"I am at least asking myself now:
what happened between expo and packout ?
why was the richard changed to a card in worse shape ?"

Marko, the card you pulled was the one at the Expo on display.

I would like to hear direct from Jonpop exactly what he saw.

To say that we showed cards at the Expo one month before the product was released and then changed those cards is slanderous.

The mock-ups were done in July well before we determined to have Beckett slab the cards and are mock-ups. I hear posters loud and clear about identifying them as mock-ups in the future but to suggest we showed mock-ups at the Expo in November is another thing.

Jonpop you always have lots to say about our products, let's hear exactly what you saw at the Expo.

Brian Price