The biggest problem I have is that people refer to this as a Panini problem! It is not! UD had the same issues!
I can't understand why it is a big deal because it is an on card auto, but it is almost certain that if he got the actual card he redeemed, they would have been sticker autos which are rarely all on the sticker!
Considering Panini (the company) and the service manager (an emplyee of Panini) are the ones in question here then YES it is a Panini problem. If it was UD or Topps or any other company then it would be their problem. Fact is Panini sent Ang a dodgy card, simple as that really. Then to top it off they decide he's not worth the hassle to even respond to over the matter.
He didn't get the card he originally bought (it isn't even made yet after 12months) what he got was his 2nd choice and it is damaged. If I paid $800 for a card i'd damn sure want the autograph to all be on the card not half off the side.
No but I thought there was such a thing as quality control. Especially when you are sending out 1 card to someone, surely they looked at the card before packing it to send to Ang? What excuse do they have for not responding to his concerns about it?Maybe Panini should check every card he signs as he does it? Lol
That is where you are wrong Nick! He didn't pay $800 for a damaged card, that is just taking it out of context!
He paid $800 for 2 dual STICKER AUTOS. History shows that most sticker autos will have part of the auto off the edge, or if not, they will be cut off by the window on the card in thecase of Black Box and Gold Standard.
They did not make that card, so they are replacing it!
Now, they have sent him a Kobe NT Auto /35 which is a VERY expensive card NOW! Even taking into account the auto being off the side, and taking away the grading, it is a $1000 card, minimum.
At the moment, the dual auto he was waiting on would be worth $400 combined, so how is it a bad thing?? Sell the Auto, by a SIIIIIICK NT RAP and go home happy!!
No but I thought there was such a thing as quality control. Especially when you are sending out 1 card to someone, surely they looked at the card before packing it to send to Ang? What excuse do they have for not responding to his concerns about it?
Its garbage customer service (UD and Topps are no better)
If I buy a Commode Omega, but when it comes time to deliver it, they don't have any, so they send me a Clubsport with a scratch down the side, I am not going to complain! I am just going to sell the Clubsport for slightly less than market value and buy myself a Calais and drive around in comfort!
Nick, I generally agree with you about most things but in this instance the card companies pay players to sign cards and I dont think it should be up to them how the player signs the card and the quality of the signature. In Ang's instance there is a part of the K in Kobe missing its not ideal but aside from that the auto is pretty good.
As a comparable example, should upperdeck hold back MJ autos when he doesnt add the little loop on the Jordan part of his signature?......no of course not cause Jordan has signed the card and thats what he has been paid for. Is it his best auto.... Probably not but its still signed by him.
There is also the cost factor involved here......companies pay the players X to sign Y number of cards. They need to maximise those cards as cost effectively as possible. If they start judging players autos and end up throwing half of them away because they have judged the auto as poor, thats added cost for them to have more signed, and that cost is eventually passed on to you. not to mention the time and effort involved in reviewing every card released.
I understand where Ang is coming from, but the best thing to do is sell it off and buy a mountain of cards he likes. I just dont think Panini is to be blamed for this one.
Cheers
Matt
Nick, it's not half the K that is missing - it's only small fraction of the loop. I honestly think you are just blowing this out of proportion in effort to get across your bias against panini. Practically everyone else has said the exact opposite of you and yet you continue to argue.
Pretty sure card companies used to print extra's for exactly this reason. What they would do is get the damaged card returned and destroy it and replace it with one of the extra's they had in their inventory. Have you not seen all the fleer bancruptcy cards floating arounf without serial numbering?nick, if they the same card re-printed and signed by the player that then defeats the purpose of a stated print run. And in a product like Timeless treasures - it is all limited print runs, not unlimited.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?