Skip to main content

That post cost me money

 
Yes, the same card topping consecutive posts. Sorry about that, but I wanted to discuss this card for just a minute. This will be a short post.

Bloggers, do you pull a card from your collection for a post and realize for the first time -- even though you've owned that card for decades -- that it's got issues????

That's what happened to me with the 1979 Topps Willie Stargell when I pulled it for my previous post.

It had never been apparent to me in all the times I've owned it, that it contains two significant creases at the bottom of the card, one in the bottom left corner and one in the right. I didn't even realize it when I took a photo of it for the post, nor when I uploaded it. But if you stare at it closely now, you can see them.


There, I circled them (badly) for you.

I didn't notice them until I was returning the card to its page in the 1979 Topps album. I put my fingers on the bottom corner edge and felt it give. Crap!

I have no idea when this card first came into my collection. It's very likely that I got it in 1979 and although I was taking care of my cards a little better then (I was 13), I still didn't have the ability to not stop touching them! So I could have creased them myself, or maybe added it in a trade where one of my friends or brothers couldn't stop touching them.

So, realizing that, I immediately went shopping and ordered a nicer copy. It's kind of silly because if I really looked at all the cards in my '79 set, I know I'd find lots of issues. But I had to rectify this one right now.

So that's the second Willie Stargell card I've bought in the last couple of days (I mentioned in the last post that while doing research for that post, I discovered a Stargell card missing from my complete set). That last post cost me like 6 bucks!

But I know it's not the first time that I've become aware of card issues because I pulled it for a post. In fact I've mentioned it in passing on previous posts.
 
I don't want this to become a habit. I've made money because of this blog. I don't want it to start costing me money!

So how about you, do you post a card and then feel compelled to get an improved copy?

Comments

I have a post coming up in the queue where I display a 1958 Topps Andy Pafko I recently acquired (that's pretty mangled) and mention that at some point I'd like to get a better copy. But normally, no, I don't do replacements as there are too many other cards I need.
Old Cards said…
Just a reader and commenter here. Sorry the post cost you money. It was a good post if the opinion of a reader counts for anything!
POISON75 said…
There's been times I have bought a card then realized I had it already cause I didn't check my list well enough or I don't buy a card then realized I do need it still or I buy a lot blindly & get multiples of a card within the lot so I can clearly understand the pain.
Matt said…
Absolutely. Especially if it's an older rookie card for my collection. Always need to upgrade
Anonymous said…
Not a blogger, but I know the pain. Have been reconciling my sets lately and have encountered this more than once (or cards just missing), and "79 was last night's surprise.
Big Tone said…
Yes, although I haven't been doing much card posting lately. I do regularly sort and look at them.
Nick Vossbrink said…
Have never felt the need to get a better copy but in my experience there's nothing like scanning a card to find out every single problem it has.
Fuji said…
I am almost positive that one of my posts has inspired an upgrade... but can't think of any examples at the moment.
GCA said…
Was just at the big Chantilly show and found some '65 high numbers (including SPs) for 50¢/$1. Figured I'd get a Claude Osteen even though I had one in my PC and the set - just in case they needed upgrading. Turns out it was an upgrade, but the ones I had weren't too terrible. If I had left it, I'm sure mine would have been beat up.
Jon said…
I've not had this happen with a card that I already owned, but have went to scan a purchase, or a traded card (when I was still trading on the TCDB, for the blog, and then noticed some flaw/issue that had escaped detection when I first got it.