Site Forum

I've been searching through the forums and it seems to be someone mixed on if these types of cards should be listed and how they should be listed.  If they are something that we can/should list then I want to get this one done, but I want to do it correctly.  I see that the 2017 Stadium Club has a separate listing for them.  Is this the correct way to go about it, or is there a different way we should list this?  Or should we not bother listing it at all?

https://www.tcdb.com/Checklist.cfm/sid/155876/2017-Stadium-Club---Autographs-Redemptions

I'm all for listing the redemptions. I pulled one that had long been expired, so I'll never see the card it was supposed to be exchanged for. But I still treat it as a card in my collection. 

*Note: the one I'm thinking of has team logos and nice graphics on it, looking like a decent card itself. I can understand where some would want to shy away from ones that look like coupons.

I checked with Admin a while back about these, they can be listed - in a separate set from the cards that were returned. They get a "RDM" Note.

Maybe they can create another card as a variant for redemptions rather than the actual card for those? 

Thank you.  I'll get this added at some point (after checking Ebay for any others I can find in the same set).  I scanned the back before scratching it off in order to upload it (in original form) if possible.

There are many instances of redemption cards in the database.

If the entire set was distributed via redemption, then the redemption cards get listed as their own Insert Set and the Autographed cards are listed as a separate Mail-In set.  For example, see 1996 Ultra (Racing):

https://www.tcdb.com/Inserts.cfm/sid/5911/1996-Ultra

If only certain cards from the set were offered as redemptions, for example when the athlete is too late in returning the autographed cards for them to be inserted in packs, the redemptions can be listed as variations within the autograph set.  In these cases, the inserted redemption card is usually an unsigned copy of the autograph card with a sticker applied with the redemption instructions.  For example, see 2013 Legends Autographs (Racing):

https://www.tcdb.com/Checklist.cfm/sid/87661/

If the redemption does not have the same card number as the Autographed card this method should not be used.  The redemptions should go in their own insert set and the Autographed cards are marked with the "EXCH" note to indicate that they were not found in packs.

There are other, more unusual situations too.  Was this redemption card inserted in the product that the Autograph card was from?  If not, the listing may be a bit different than described above.

Since "redemption" and "exchange" get mixed up a lot, just clarifying how this site refers to them:

-- "Redemption" (RDM) = the card you trade in
-- "Exchange" (EXCH) = the card you get in return

(What makes things confusing is when the card we get in return is labelled with "Redemption" directly.)

On this site, RDM and EXCH should never appear in the same checklist. RDMs should always be listed as inserts, separate from EXCHs. Depending on the set, the EXCH may be listed with the other packed cards of the base/insert/parallel if numbering is continuous, or they may be under "Mail-In" if the whole set was only available that way. RDMs that are plain white cards with black text (or something similar) don't get listed, but if they have a design and appearance like an insert set, they can be listed.