Are All Years of Dynasty Game Used Memorabilia?

[asymmetricalbet]

Was talking to a friend about Dynasty and I am so utterly confused by pre-2024 Dynasty. I am hoping someone can help me out. The front of the card says "game-used" memorabilia. But then the backs say "The relic contained on this card is not from an specific game, event or season." So are these relics game-used or not?

The thing that weirds me out is that Panini uses almost the exact same language to disclose patches that basically came off the rack at Wal-Mart. I know it's a different company but man it has me confused.

Thanks for your help.

[Chris P]

Originally Posted by asymmetricalbet

Was talking to a friend about Dynasty and I am so utterly confused by pre-2024 Dynasty. I am hoping someone can help me out. The front of the card says "game-used" memorabilia. But then the backs say "The relic contained on this card is not from an specific game, event or season." So are these relics game-used or not?

The thing that weirds me out is that Panini uses almost the exact same language to disclose patches that basically came off the rack at Wal-Mart. I know it's a different company but man it has me confused.

Thanks for your help.

The language Topps uses on most of their mem cards is just to say they aren't tying the game used cards to a specific game. If it says "game used memorabilia" on the front it's game used

[SaveMeTheGum]

I'd be shocked if any patches were ever really game used...

[asymmetricalbet]

Originally Posted by Chris P

The language Topps uses on most of their mem cards is just to say they aren't tying the game used cards to a specific game. If it says "game used memorabilia" on the front it's game used

Thanks for your help and confirmation. Poorly executed language by Topps or maybe I should really blame Panini.

[OhioLawyerF5]

Originally Posted by asymmetricalbet

Was talking to a friend about Dynasty and I am so utterly confused by pre-2024 Dynasty. I am hoping someone can help me out. The front of the card says "game-used" memorabilia. But then the backs say "The relic contained on this card is not from an specific game, event or season." So are these relics game-used or not?



The thing that weirds me out is that Panini uses almost the exact same language to disclose patches that basically came off the rack at Wal-Mart. I know it's a different company but man it has me confused.



Thanks for your help.

It's not really confusing if you focus on the words used. Copy language like this is written by legal for very specific reasons. If the front says game used, it's game used. The back might seem similar to Panini's famous "not associated" language, but very different. The Topps language simply says it's not from a specific game. The Panini language includes that it's not from a specific player. That is a HUGE difference, especially when they don't say it's game used or player worn.

[Noles939913]

Originally Posted by asymmetricalbet

Thanks for your help and confirmation. Poorly executed language by Topps or maybe I should really blame Panini.

It’s actually perfectly executed language overseen by a lawyer. 95% of Topps relics are game used with some even stating what game they came from courtesy of the authentication hologram. The only products I’ve seen that have player worn relics are Flagship and Inception and maybe a couple more.

[speedyjg13]

Without the MLB authentication sticker, assume not real.

[jetershelmet]

I'm old enough to have attended the Fleer liquidation auction back in the early 2000's and there were lots of bags of cut/partially cut/ready to be cut "game used" jerseys and was shocked to see how much it was at best questionable. Mind you this was also the golden era of likes of Brad Wells from ASI, Bradley Horne, Jarrod Oldridge from JO Sports, Bernard Gernay who were all convicted of fraud, being some of the top GU memorabilia dealers in the industry who sold to the card companies. I know of at least 2 others who were heavily involved in this fraud but got away.

https://www.cardboardconnection.com/...ts-memorabilia

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...ederal-prison/

I only trust cards to be truly game used if the swatch has an MLB authentication hologram on it which most aren't due to the fact that card companies has to pay for each swatch to be authenticated.

[dream34]

I was under the impression that Topps/Panini started doing this because of liability more than anything - they may be gamers and probably have a nice system in place but don't want to be legally responsible down the line.

Should one of these cards become very expensive (5-7 figures) like a Lebron RPA and it be proven/discovered that a random employee they have no control over made a mistake years earlier they could just say that they clearly guarantee nothing on the card.

Add in the fact that it never really affected their sales anyway and why not just under state things on the card itself to protect legally. It's not ideal but I guess it's what our legal system encourages to stay financially safe.

[OhioLawyerF5]

Originally Posted by dream34

I was under the impression that Topps/Panini started doing this because of liability more than anything - they may be gamers and probably have a nice system in place but don't want to be legally responsible down the line.

Should one of these cards become very expensive (5-7 figures) like a Lebron RPA and it be proven/discovered that a random employee they have no control over made a mistake years earlier they could just say that they clearly guarantee nothing on the card.

Add in the fact that it never really affected their sales anyway and why not just under state things on the card itself to protect legally. It's not ideal but I guess it's what our legal system encourages to stay financially safe.

Topps does guarantee that it is game used on the card. So does Panini on their game used cards. If your theory were correct, none of their cards would say game used and the copy would be the same for all cards.

Again, legal writes the copy very precisely. They say what they mean, no more, no less.

[BlowoutBuzz]

The "specific game" ambiguousness comes from people wanting to link the swatch to the exact jersey/bat on the card and complaining if it's obviously not. I'm sure somebody sued in the past and that prompted the legalese.

[Triple B]

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

Topps does guarantee that it is game used on the card. So does Panini on their game used cards. If your theory were correct, none of their cards would say game used and the copy would be the same for all cards.

Again, legal writes the copy very precisely. They say what they mean, no more, no less.

The problem with Panini is that, although their swatches are game-used, a trend from earlier this summer showed that they weren't necessarily used by the player on the card.

Topps puts "game used" on the front and back of the card, so it's their own guarantee unless someone can prove otherwise (hello, Donruss Jim Thorpe game used jersey).

[Osfan81]

Originally Posted by SaveMeTheGum

I'd be shocked if any patches were ever really game used...

Ummmm…have you seen some of the ones with dirt on them? Jerseys are honestly relatively easy for Topps to buy. If you look at auctions or team stores where they sell them, most go for under $1,000 for jerseys, top players for $2-4000. I assume pants are much cheaper. It’s pretty easy for Topps to get them.

[Noles939913]

Originally Posted by Triple B

The problem with Panini is that, although their swatches are game-used, a trend from earlier this summer showed that they weren't necessarily used by the player on the card.

Topps puts "game used" on the front and back of the card, so it's their own guarantee unless someone can prove otherwise (hello, Donruss Jim Thorpe game used jersey).

Virtually none of Panini’s stuff is game used anymore. The vast majority is player worn or just “authentic memorabilia”.

[jimz]

Originally Posted by Osfan81

Ummmm…have you seen some of the ones with dirt on them? Jerseys are honestly relatively easy for Topps to buy. If you look at auctions or team stores where they sell them, most go for under $1,000 for jerseys, top players for $2-4000. I assume pants are much cheaper. It’s pretty easy for Topps to get them.

Originally Posted by Noles939913

It’s actually perfectly executed language overseen by a lawyer. 95% of Topps relics are game used with some even stating what game they came from courtesy of the authentication hologram. The only products I’ve seen that have player worn relics are Flagship and Inception and maybe a couple more.

Thanks to the circlejerkery that is the Lanham Act Topps needs to cover their ass not against consumers but actually other competitors who actually have a cause of action when a company makes provably false statements on descriptions used in the promotion or advertising of their products. As a result, if you got one of the Jackson Holliday Topps Now SSP relic cards from last season, you'd get something like a card that has an authentic piece of a base from the game, on a card that purports to be about his first MLB home run. Great, a base that he touched on his trot around the infield. And of course Topps promoted the thing like it promotes all Topps Now items and it would not surprise me if Panini's in house (and UD, and really anyone who's in the business even if they don't make MLB related anything, because you know, legal monopoly and all shields MLB from violating the Sherman Act but not Topps from making provably false statements to sell items arising from the monopoly's graces). In a pretty real sense none of this is actually related to the consumer. If you buy something, great, Topps will take your money gladly. But Topps is really doing this whole charade for other makers of sports cards and memorabilia, since the law protects them from unfair competition, not you or I or anyone else from buying Topps Now cards with relic pieces that are basically para-relics to the event depicted. If NBA floors are replaced as often as MLB bases you'd probably get a ton of cards containing pieces of the floor but they don't buy a whole new floor for each game so it's probably far cheaper and easier to get some jersey piece worn by the player at some point. Topps 3 Basketball's relics are just "worn by the player". Not game worn, just worn. Does anyone want shotglasses from which Kelly Olynyk and 2 of John Stockton's kids took shots from? Witnessed by a pretty drunk me and attested by several equally drunk members of the State Bar of Washington State? It's basically as removed as the relics in the cards. The anonymous Topps representative making the attestation doesn't have to be a Topps employee or anyone vetted for their in house counsel to see if they aren't, say, someone recently released from prison for forgery or anything (although even that doesn't tell anyone anything about their reliability. Thanks to coercive plea bargaining the whole point of the criminal justice system is basically collecting points at this point, it punishes the actual perpetrator of a crime by happenstance and coincidence, not by choice or deliberation).

Basically every part of what is an elaborate house of cards is guaranteed on the bare minimum of an honors system. Hype does the rest. You want actual memorabilia? Go to the park (unless you're Zach Hample) and catch a ball. If you want guarantees? Befriend employees at the park, actually hang out, get to know them, and treat them like human beings and you can learn a helluva lot just because people gripe about their work like you probably would. MLB dogfoods their own authentication stickers to sell stuff and while it's generally a good sign if software companies use their own tools to make software, if they're selling something as authentic on the rationale that "because I said so", the unsaid half is always "what are you gonna do about it?" I buy ballpark memorabilia sometimes, but they are essentially 1/1s and I don't put down cash unless people I know who work at the park can tell me that the actual thing was removed from the park and that kind of thing is harder to hide especially if it's a fixture visible to the outside. The funniest thing is that Mike Trout apparently donated some of his actual wardrobe for sale as the "Mike Trout Home Collection". There are still 5 items left (they've been trying to sell them for at least 9 months or so) and MLB authentication authenticates the auto but they didn't go to Mike Trout's closet at his house. During his first short callup stint some Angels fans got him to follow back but unless you're in that small group, he won't respond to your DMs. And don't bother messaging those guys either, if there's anything Angel fans are protective of, it's Trouty.

But if you actually have questions, figure out who he plays golf with. A few of them are people you have no chance of getting in touch with, but not everybody. And Mike Trout loves golf so much his private golf course is on the same street as his high school, a few miles down the road. You can't join without an invite and he has a day job anyway, but golf is a social sport. You play golf with your buddies. Some of them are way more accessible and think what you'd do if you discovered that your golf buddy's closet got put on sale online as his "home collection".

[OhioLawyerF5]

Originally Posted by jimz

Thanks to the circlejerkery that is the Lanham Act Topps needs to cover their ass not against consumers but actually other competitors who actually have a cause of action when a company makes provably false statements on descriptions used in the promotion or advertising of their products. As a result, if you got one of the Jackson Holliday Topps Now SSP relic cards from last season, you'd get something like a card that has an authentic piece of a base from the game, on a card that purports to be about his first MLB home run. Great, a base that he touched on his trot around the infield. And of course Topps promoted the thing like it promotes all Topps Now items and it would not surprise me if Panini's in house (and UD, and really anyone who's in the business even if they don't make MLB related anything, because you know, legal monopoly and all shields MLB from violating the Sherman Act but not Topps from making provably false statements to sell items arising from the monopoly's graces). In a pretty real sense none of this is actually related to the consumer. If you buy something, great, Topps will take your money gladly. But Topps is really doing this whole charade for other makers of sports cards and memorabilia, since the law protects them from unfair competition, not you or I or anyone else from buying Topps Now cards with relic pieces that are basically para-relics to the event depicted. If NBA floors are replaced as often as MLB bases you'd probably get a ton of cards containing pieces of the floor but they don't buy a whole new floor for each game so it's probably far cheaper and easier to get some jersey piece worn by the player at some point. Topps 3 Basketball's relics are just "worn by the player". Not game worn, just worn. Does anyone want shotglasses from which Kelly Olynyk and 2 of John Stockton's kids took shots from? Witnessed by a pretty drunk me and attested by several equally drunk members of the State Bar of Washington State? It's basically as removed as the relics in the cards. The anonymous Topps representative making the attestation doesn't have to be a Topps employee or anyone vetted for their in house counsel to see if they aren't, say, someone recently released from prison for forgery or anything (although even that doesn't tell anyone anything about their reliability. Thanks to coercive plea bargaining the whole point of the criminal justice system is basically collecting points at this point, it punishes the actual perpetrator of a crime by happenstance and coincidence, not by choice or deliberation).



Basically every part of what is an elaborate house of cards is guaranteed on the bare minimum of an honors system. Hype does the rest. You want actual memorabilia? Go to the park (unless you're Zach Hample) and catch a ball. If you want guarantees? Befriend employees at the park, actually hang out, get to know them, and treat them like human beings and you can learn a helluva lot just because people gripe about their work like you probably would. MLB dogfoods their own authentication stickers to sell stuff and while it's generally a good sign if software companies use their own tools to make software, if they're selling something as authentic on the rationale that "because I said so", the unsaid half is always "what are you gonna do about it?" I buy ballpark memorabilia sometimes, but they are essentially 1/1s and I don't put down cash unless people I know who work at the park can tell me that the actual thing was removed from the park and that kind of thing is harder to hide especially if it's a fixture visible to the outside. The funniest thing is that Mike Trout apparently donated some of his actual wardrobe for sale as the "Mike Trout Home Collection". There are still 5 items left (they've been trying to sell them for at least 9 months or so) and MLB authentication authenticates the auto but they didn't go to Mike Trout's closet at his house. During his first short callup stint some Angels fans got him to follow back but unless you're in that small group, he won't respond to your DMs. And don't bother messaging those guys either, if there's anything Angel fans are protective of, it's Trouty.



But if you actually have questions, figure out who he plays golf with. A few of them are people you have no chance of getting in touch with, but not everybody. And Mike Trout loves golf so much his private golf course is on the same street as his high school, a few miles down the road. You can't join without an invite and he has a day job anyway, but golf is a social sport. You play golf with your buddies. Some of them are way more accessible and think what you'd do if you discovered that your golf buddy's closet got put on sale online as his "home collection".

[boxbuster7]

Originally Posted by jimz

Thanks to the circlejerkery that is the Lanham Act Topps needs to cover their ass not against consumers but actually other competitors who actually have a cause of action when a company makes provably false statements on descriptions used in the promotion or advertising of their products. As a result, if you got one of the Jackson Holliday Topps Now SSP relic cards from last season, you'd get something like a card that has an authentic piece of a base from the game, on a card that purports to be about his first MLB home run. Great, a base that he touched on his trot around the infield. And of course Topps promoted the thing like it promotes all Topps Now items and it would not surprise me if Panini's in house (and UD, and really anyone who's in the business even if they don't make MLB related anything, because you know, legal monopoly and all shields MLB from violating the Sherman Act but not Topps from making provably false statements to sell items arising from the monopoly's graces). In a pretty real sense none of this is actually related to the consumer. If you buy something, great, Topps will take your money gladly. But Topps is really doing this whole charade for other makers of sports cards and memorabilia, since the law protects them from unfair competition, not you or I or anyone else from buying Topps Now cards with relic pieces that are basically para-relics to the event depicted. If NBA floors are replaced as often as MLB bases you'd probably get a ton of cards containing pieces of the floor but they don't buy a whole new floor for each game so it's probably far cheaper and easier to get some jersey piece worn by the player at some point. Topps 3 Basketball's relics are just "worn by the player". Not game worn, just worn. Does anyone want shotglasses from which Kelly Olynyk and 2 of John Stockton's kids took shots from? Witnessed by a pretty drunk me and attested by several equally drunk members of the State Bar of Washington State? It's basically as removed as the relics in the cards. The anonymous Topps representative making the attestation doesn't have to be a Topps employee or anyone vetted for their in house counsel to see if they aren't, say, someone recently released from prison for forgery or anything (although even that doesn't tell anyone anything about their reliability. Thanks to coercive plea bargaining the whole point of the criminal justice system is basically collecting points at this point, it punishes the actual perpetrator of a crime by happenstance and coincidence, not by choice or deliberation).

Basically every part of what is an elaborate house of cards is guaranteed on the bare minimum of an honors system. Hype does the rest. You want actual memorabilia? Go to the park (unless you're Zach Hample) and catch a ball. If you want guarantees? Befriend employees at the park, actually hang out, get to know them, and treat them like human beings and you can learn a helluva lot just because people gripe about their work like you probably would. MLB dogfoods their own authentication stickers to sell stuff and while it's generally a good sign if software companies use their own tools to make software, if they're selling something as authentic on the rationale that "because I said so", the unsaid half is always "what are you gonna do about it?" I buy ballpark memorabilia sometimes, but they are essentially 1/1s and I don't put down cash unless people I know who work at the park can tell me that the actual thing was removed from the park and that kind of thing is harder to hide especially if it's a fixture visible to the outside. The funniest thing is that Mike Trout apparently donated some of his actual wardrobe for sale as the "Mike Trout Home Collection". There are still 5 items left (they've been trying to sell them for at least 9 months or so) and MLB authentication authenticates the auto but they didn't go to Mike Trout's closet at his house. During his first short callup stint some Angels fans got him to follow back but unless you're in that small group, he won't respond to your DMs. And don't bother messaging those guys either, if there's anything Angel fans are protective of, it's Trouty.

But if you actually have questions, figure out who he plays golf with. A few of them are people you have no chance of getting in touch with, but not everybody. And Mike Trout loves golf so much his private golf course is on the same street as his high school, a few miles down the road. You can't join without an invite and he has a day job anyway, but golf is a social sport. You play golf with your buddies. Some of them are way more accessible and think what you'd do if you discovered that your golf buddy's closet got put on sale online as his "home collection".

which AI wrote this?

[Triple B]

Originally Posted by jimz

Thanks to the circlejerkery that is the Lanham Act Topps needs to cover their ass not against consumers but actually other competitors who actually have a cause of action when a company makes provably false statements on descriptions used in the promotion or advertising of their products. As a result, if you got one of the Jackson Holliday Topps Now SSP relic cards from last season, you'd get something like a card that has an authentic piece of a base from the game, on a card that purports to be about his first MLB home run. Great, a base that he touched on his trot around the infield. And of course Topps promoted the thing like it promotes all Topps Now items and it would not surprise me if Panini's in house (and UD, and really anyone who's in the business even if they don't make MLB related anything, because you know, legal monopoly and all shields MLB from violating the Sherman Act but not Topps from making provably false statements to sell items arising from the monopoly's graces). In a pretty real sense none of this is actually related to the consumer. If you buy something, great, Topps will take your money gladly. But Topps is really doing this whole charade for other makers of sports cards and memorabilia, since the law protects them from unfair competition, not you or I or anyone else from buying Topps Now cards with relic pieces that are basically para-relics to the event depicted. If NBA floors are replaced as often as MLB bases you'd probably get a ton of cards containing pieces of the floor but they don't buy a whole new floor for each game so it's probably far cheaper and easier to get some jersey piece worn by the player at some point. Topps 3 Basketball's relics are just "worn by the player". Not game worn, just worn. Does anyone want shotglasses from which Kelly Olynyk and 2 of John Stockton's kids took shots from? Witnessed by a pretty drunk me and attested by several equally drunk members of the State Bar of Washington State? It's basically as removed as the relics in the cards. The anonymous Topps representative making the attestation doesn't have to be a Topps employee or anyone vetted for their in house counsel to see if they aren't, say, someone recently released from prison for forgery or anything (although even that doesn't tell anyone anything about their reliability. Thanks to coercive plea bargaining the whole point of the criminal justice system is basically collecting points at this point, it punishes the actual perpetrator of a crime by happenstance and coincidence, not by choice or deliberation).

Basically every part of what is an elaborate house of cards is guaranteed on the bare minimum of an honors system. Hype does the rest. You want actual memorabilia? Go to the park (unless you're Zach Hample) and catch a ball. If you want guarantees? Befriend employees at the park, actually hang out, get to know them, and treat them like human beings and you can learn a helluva lot just because people gripe about their work like you probably would. MLB dogfoods their own authentication stickers to sell stuff and while it's generally a good sign if software companies use their own tools to make software, if they're selling something as authentic on the rationale that "because I said so", the unsaid half is always "what are you gonna do about it?" I buy ballpark memorabilia sometimes, but they are essentially 1/1s and I don't put down cash unless people I know who work at the park can tell me that the actual thing was removed from the park and that kind of thing is harder to hide especially if it's a fixture visible to the outside. The funniest thing is that Mike Trout apparently donated some of his actual wardrobe for sale as the "Mike Trout Home Collection". There are still 5 items left (they've been trying to sell them for at least 9 months or so) and MLB authentication authenticates the auto but they didn't go to Mike Trout's closet at his house. During his first short callup stint some Angels fans got him to follow back but unless you're in that small group, he won't respond to your DMs. And don't bother messaging those guys either, if there's anything Angel fans are protective of, it's Trouty.

But if you actually have questions, figure out who he plays golf with. A few of them are people you have no chance of getting in touch with, but not everybody. And Mike Trout loves golf so much his private golf course is on the same street as his high school, a few miles down the road. You can't join without an invite and he has a day job anyway, but golf is a social sport. You play golf with your buddies. Some of them are way more accessible and think what you'd do if you discovered that your golf buddy's closet got put on sale online as his "home collection".

Whoa.

[mattglet]

I didn't have that on today's bingo card.