How does this happen???? UD up to shananagins!!!!

[No No No.....The other Steve]

Okay so I have been working on the 08/09 UD Ultimate auto/jersey sets (single and dual) and have been down to four for quite awhile. I wento over the checklist many times to see if they would remove the Zetterberg, Kovalchuk, Malkin and Turco as none had surfaced for a very long time (still have yet to see any of these except the Malkin but have heard of Turco's recently coming out as replacements). Now out of nowhere the checklist has changed and they added Ovechkin to it. LINK. How does this happen as when this set was released Ovechkin wasn't even under contract with UD??? Now I'm forced to chase down one that never was part of the set and they still haven't got my redemptions done yet (even though the Kane patch variation was live in packs) and the Zetterberg and Kovalchuk were never even inserted into the product as far as I know.

 

[JohnnyDrama]

You think you got it bad, try talking to the poor schmucks who tried to piece together the 07/08 Ultimate Signatures set. They're STILL seeing new, unreleased cards popping out from UD.

 

[SkyFire47]

i dont' think it's that big a deal. if you're chasing the set, chase the set.

as for Ovy ... if you recall, UD thought they had the Ovy deal under wraps at one point. they announced he would be in all the products going forward and then Ovy backed out. UD only managed to secure the deal shortly afterwards. guess this card was one of them and Ovy eventually returned it.

if anything, i'd be happy i could add the Ovy to the set since it would seem some of the other cards don't exist (at this point).

 

[FrozenInferno]

You think you got it bad, try talking to the poor schmucks who tried to piece together the 07/08 Ultimate Signatures set. They're STILL seeing new, unreleased cards popping out from UD.

Lest we forget the 07/08 Sweet Shot Puck Signings set as well, a Matt Stajan recently appeared two years after the product went live.

 

[WildforCup10]

This is nothing new. They been doing this crap for awhile now.

This is one of the reasons why I stay away from building sets.

:beer:

 

[slckrsx]

As a former set builder this was one of the main reasons I quit collecting.

 

[geplimestone]

i think alot of this can be blamed on us....we asked for less redemptions, so in turn UD just did'nt include some players who never returned there cards in time for the products release...and now that some have returned signed years later, they use them for redemption replacements....they paid for the autographs why can't they use them...


thanks, Geoff

 

[jaywings19]

i think alot of this can be blamed on us....we asked for less redemptions, so in turn UD just did'nt include some players who never returned there cards in time for the products release...and now that some have returned signed years later, they use them for redemption replacements....they paid for the autographs why can't they use them...

thanks, Geoff

Nothing wrong with using them... but they should be marked appropriately because they were not on the original checklist or pack issued.

I'll refer you to this discussion: LINK
(scroll down to Post #13)

 

[KJ555]

How are the Ovechkins showing up in the market? Are they being used as replacements?

 

[jernst2]

Nothing wrong with using them... but they should be marked appropriately because they were not on the original checklist or pack issued.

I'll refer you to this discussion: LINK
(scroll down to Post #13)

I like that idea kinda like an update set.

 

[No No No.....The other Steve]

My beef isn't so much with it showing up now. I knew it would eventually happen. My beef is with them altering the posted checklist almost a full year after the products release with a player who couldn't heve been on the checklist in the first place because they didn't have him under contract.

 

[chadsexington]

My beef isn't so much with it showing up now. I knew it would eventually happen. My beef is with them altering the posted checklist almost a full year after the products release with a player who couldn't heve been on the checklist in the first place because they didn't have him under contract.

That brings up an interesting dilemma of sorts. We've been asking UD for more accurate checklists, especially with these post market packouts...now that they're sort of doing it, do we hold it against them?

Maybe it's fair to get all Barry Bonds on the checklist? Add an asterisk to the card on the checklist denoting it was a post-release addition?

 

[bidds55]

I think in general both UD and ITG need to do a much better job with keeping accurate records of cards they release (or don't release). I have no problem with adding to or subtracting from the checklist of a given set after release, as long as a)it is reasonable that the cards added exist (ie. the player belongs in the set - no "backdated production" allowed), and b)any deletions are permanent. No flip-flopping allowed.

It is extremely frustrating for any collector to now have an accurate idea as to whether or not a card they "need" exists or doesn't exist, or is being produced, or isn't being produced. It takes some of the joy out of collecting IMO.
This applies not only to regular issued cards, but show stamped/show produced/premiums etc. I'm looking at you ITG.