Monday, July 26, 2010

What does a serial number REALLY mean?

By which I mean let's compare these two cards:
They are the exact same CC jersey from the UD Divisional Artifacts series with one notable exception: the top card is numbered /199, the one on the bottom has the rough spot where a serial number would go but does not carry a number. 

Which then leads to a bothersome question if you place a lot of value on serial numbered cards: if there are print overruns, whether intentional or unintentional, that mean a card numbered to /199 is actually, say, unofficially to /400, how does this change the value of the card, if at all? And if not, why even place a premium on these cards? If a certain company were to do this intentionally it'd be pretty easy. Not with 1/1s to be sure, but with /25 or /50 cards. Heck, Salvador Dalí was infamous for signing running off 1000 prints of a given painting, numbering the series /100, then signing ten 1/100, ten 2/100 and so on. He he could do it, why not card companies?

That said, don't forget to check out the 2010 t206 group break over here. Lots of great teams available.

Have a good one everybody and goodnight Pumpsie Green, wherever you are!


  1. Just Upper Deck deceptive practice policy

  2. The top one looks more gold than the gold one. So weird.

    But yeah, drives me nuts! So many of Seneca Wallace's cards do this - add a little type here, maybe shift the color a slight bit, and all of a sudden a common base becomes a /500 serial becomes a /100 serial. Ridiculous stuff.

  3. they aren't exactly the same. Carl crawford is written in a different color and the bottom one has GOLD scrawled on top of the american league symbol. But if you ask me, this should be a crime. It's like plagiarizing. They should be forced to change a certain percentage of the card before they can consider the two versions different. Say, use a different picture of crawford, with a completely different color scheme for the card layout, and a different shaped window for the swatch; then you can consider them different cards

  4. We're on the same page. I did a similar post last Saturday,