Upper Deck False Advertising?

[MMarch]

In my opinion it's false advertising, not sure what else you would call it. I brought this up to their marketing people a couple months ago when the first sell sheet was released. They had a picture of a Jonathan Toews Auto RC /399 on the sell sheet, but he was tentatively listed as one of the SP's /99. I inquired as to whether or not his rookie was going to be /399 or /99. The response I received was, "If he's pictured /399 then it's most likely going to be /399." I inquired why one of the top rookies would be /399, and why he was listed on the sell sheet as /99, no response. So the new Beckett rag comes out a couple weeks ago, and what do you know. Right there on page 7 is a product preview with a picture of the Toews RC /399, gave me some hope that it might really be /399 and an affordable card. Fast forward to yesterday when Ultimate hits, and what do I find:

Yeppers, it is /99, and not even the same card they put on their sell sheet or in the mag's product preview. Different picture completely of Toews on the front of the card. I guess it must be really hard to get a real picture of the actual card you are making, or plan on making, so people have an accurate idea of what they are looking for. :|

 

[Jobu]

I'm so sick of UD that I rarely buy hockey anymore. On the rare occasion I do, I always find something to irk me!!!! Even when I get a nice pull it invariably ends up being damaged.

 

[lucky20]

This does not even enter the realm of false advertising!! Every checklist is subject to change until the release date of the product...every sell sheet for UD, Topps, ITG, Donruss, Playoff, etc, etc... (and in every sport) has this disclaimer.

 

[DredJAw]

This does not even enter the realm of false advertising!! Every checklist is subject to change until the release date of the product...every sell sheet for UD, Topps, ITG, Donruss, Playoff, etc, etc... (and in every sport) has this disclaimer.

I was just going to say, they (and other card companies) always have "checklist subject to change" so they really do cover their bases well.

Still- I see where Tony's going with this. It creates that buzz and false hope for some people (like Tony just insinuated) when UD likely knows full well it's going to be /99.

 

[lucky20]

Still- I see where Tony's going with this. It creates that buzz and false hope for some people (like Tony just insinuated) when UD likely knows full well it's going to be /99.

Just throwing this out there for the sake of argument.....

At the time of his call to UD how do you/we know for certain UD knew it was #/99 vs. #/399?

Look at the Artifacts redemption switch-er-roo this year.....do you think UD knew all long that Kane would be a Wild Card and Toews would be the Blackhawks redemption...most likely not, thus the reason for the statement that everything is subject to change......

Not defending UD (or any other company for that matter), just simply saying that it is tough to pass judgement on a company unless you are the one sitting in the board room actively participating in the decision making process...

 

[Khabby]

An example of "False Advertising" is putting a picture of Patrick Roy on the box cover and having absolutely no Patrick Roy cards in the product. {one of UD's strike year products}
Still can't believe they got away with that one!!!!

 

[The Great Zo]

Yeah, this is a stretch.

Wanna talk about UD false advertising? Howabout labeling an entire run of Young Guns press plates as 1/1s...