Autos don’t always trump patches; buy what appeals to you
I was sitting there looking at my phone last month, staring at “Recently Added” Clayton Kershaw cards on COMC (link) when I saw two 2018 Panini Flawless cards pop up. (link) One was an autographed card serial numbered out of 25. The other was a game-used (it actually says that on the rear) patch card serial numbered to just 5 copies that I instantly recognized as being part of the Dodger’s away team insignia across the chest.
They were both priced relatively close to each other ( I think the auto was $20 more) and I had just enough in COMC credits to acquire one of the two. The way we’ve been trained to prioritize cards made the autograph instantly more attractive than the patch card. But my mind wouldn’t let the patch go.
Personally I own about a dozen Kershaw autos already and aesthetically the Flawless auto didn’t please me. Meanwhile, the patch card grabbed my attention immediately and seemed like a card I may not own again, especially at the reasonable price at which it was listed.
I wrestled with the notion for a moment, even threw the question out on Twitter followers, and then I pulled the trigger .. on the patch card. The auto sold later that day from what I gather.
The Flawless patch, serial numbered 2/5 , arrived as part of a recent COMC mailday and I don’t regret the decision one bit. The moment I had it in my hand I used the flashlight trick to verify the swatch was actually labeled underneath as a Kershaw card and then I smiled.
This hobby is a lot more fun when you buy cards that you enjoy, rather than feeling the need to own a card simply because it is “rarer” than others, or because on the hierarchy of cardboard usually dictates autos over patches.
Collect what you enjoy, that is mantra we all should be following.
January 3, 2019 at 9:32 am
What’s “the flashlight trick”?
January 6, 2019 at 6:36 am
I wrote a brief piece about the flashlight trick yesterday: https://cardboardicons.com/2019/01/04/revisiting-the-flashlight-trick/