quote:

Originally posted by WOMBLE:

quote:

Originally posted by X:

quote:

Originally posted by WOMBLE:

quote:

Originally posted by X:

So because you don't personally know of any dealers who will be busting 3 cases these cards automatically become unobtainable?

To me yes.

Well, if you'll forgive me, that seems like a situation to which the phrase: "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face," might apply.

These throwback sets will be readily available elsewhere and I would imagine for a lot less than the cost of a single sealed box (I'd guess nearer half, give or take a few quid). Your loss I guess.

You think so? It's confirmed that there are only 3 Throwback cards per film per box, having cards that are approaching the rarity of the Gold/Silver parallels is just pointless to me. My guess would be around $1 per card at least.

Well, it's only guesswork but most collectors still seem unwilling to pay much money for chase sets. I might end up eating my words(!) but I don't think they'll be stupid money. We'll just have to see.

The throwbacks are 3 per box but the rarity of the sets will depend upon the final box count. At 1x Casino Royale gold per box, and x99 cards in the set, we're talking 9,900 CR gold cards in total. Which means at a max. we're talking 9,000 boxes depending on how much is held back back for damages, Archive boxes etc. but the fact they have decreased the number per box from 4 to 3 for each film suggests the box run may be higher than lower especially with the strong autos shown so far.

If that is the case, assuming collation is perfect:
7,000 boxes = approx. 210 sets of TB, 175 sets of LALD, 225 sets of TND
8,000 boxes = approx. 240 sets of TB, 200 sets of LALD, 260 sets of TND
9,000 boxes = approx. 270 sets of TB, 225 sets of LALD, 290 sets of TND

Also, thanks for posting the link to RA's latest announcement.

quote:

Originally posted by RP01:
Cheers for the info AUST!

Looks like another nice set in the making. Base sets aplenty, and some nice surprises already on the autograph line-up. Charles Edghill and Yvonne Shima are great additions for fans of Dr. No. Am also pleased to see Karin Dor back in the fold - I've been hoping for a 40th Ann. version from her for a long time. If they could only get Mie Hama back again too, I'd be very happy!

Anyone have any thoughts on the list so far?

Plus, it looks like Rittenhouse are introducing a new style 'silver series' autograph. With three styles already, I don't really see the need for this, but I guess it's something new!

Looking forward to getting the full details in the coming months.

Always nice to see Connery era signers, particularly from the very first films. For a film 52 years old I think RA haven't done half bad with Dr. No signers. Behind the scenes crew and singers aren't my thing but people have been asking for them and RA seem to limit them to significant contributors. I think autos from Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli would be nice to have at some point (Wilson in one of his cameo roles!).
Nice to see several new names but I hope we have some new ones that are bigger names too.

I don't think the silver series autos will be too much of another style to worry about. I'm imagining that it will be similar to the Leonard Nimoy silver Series auto from last year and will only be used for a handful of actors rather than a comprehenisve style.
http://www.scifihobby.com/prod...ardsamples/6case.jpg

Looking at the new images on RA's website I am the most excited I have been in a long time for a Bond release. I was happy with the base sets and Skyfall expansion cards but I'm drooling over these autographs...
The Skyfall Craig is the full-bleed of his I have been waiting for, not loving the previous ones of his. One of my top five Bond films and from one of the best scenes in the movie. As for Moore, I regretted selling my TMWTGG Roger Moore Dangerous Liaisons full-bleed a few years back as it is too expensive to replace now and I've not liked the images used on his newer autos since. Then they go and show this one, a second FB card for TMWTGG using what is probably my favourite publicity still of Moore! I am over the moon with these two cards. And the Jane Seymour FB uses a very nice shot.

I am also VERY VERY happy to see some more Women of Bond autos. We've been without them for so long I wouldn't have cared who was on them but to have Hatcher and Berry is a big deal, although I am very nervous to see what prices Berry will command.

Great that people will have another shot at a Brosnan full bleed, and as a massive Brosnan fan I'm glad I don't like this Tomorrow Never Dies card more than his last one. If they have more Brosnan full bleeds held back it's a clever touch to release this TND style auto with the TND base and gold cards.

The way things are going I wouldn't be shocked to see more autos from Brosnan in the next few years using images from The World Is Not Enough and Die Another Day as well as another auto for each new Craig film seeing as he has done one FB for each so far, 3x 40th anniversary cards and 2x costume autos.
Roger has signed 10(!) different cards now: 1x 40th style, 2x double autos, 1x silver series, and 6x single autos for 4 of his 7 Bond films. I reckon we'll see him on Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only and Octopus*y autos before RA hang up their Bond hat.

I think it's just fantastic to see the like of Brosnan, Craig and Moore are clearly happy to sign. I know every actor has their reasons but it makes me turn my nose up at the likes of Robbie Coltrane who flat out refuse to sign, or the likes of Grace Jones who want so much money to do it she is somehow a less viable option that Brosnan or Craig!!!

Another Lazenby full bleed, in his blue jump suit, would have capped this set off nicely with all the Bonds RA have managed to get so far all in one release.

Despite the frequent griping at RA when it comes to master set building, do the repeats such as these not show that they are indeed very collector focused? Getting the main stars in decent quantities, offering them again and again, so collectors have more chances at obtaining the 'best' cards is surely a collector's dream come true? And whilst dealers may not like it, it does bring down the prices of all of that signers' cards to more reasonable levels because collectors now have more options of what to buy.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: X,

X, I asked this earlier. But, it might have got lost in the shuffle. Has RA ever approached Jeffrey Wright to sign? Thanks!

I'll throw Dalton in the mix again. I have read he was proud of his Bond films, as he should be, so am so disappointed he hasn't signed yet.

Connery I just assume no chance and that's that.

ts - WOMBLE said it earlier: RA approached Jeffrey Wright a good few years back and he turned them down, same story with Eva Green sadly.

Goldfish - Dalton is my most wanted Bond card (probably more than Connery). He always speaks enthusiastically of his time in the role so I hold some hope.

Listed on Scifihobby, the first listing, fantastic so far, seeing the 3 Bonds full bleed and a lovely Jane Seymour as well.


and Oona Chaplin is on the list

So if my math is correct, you need to open at least 26 boxes to complete the Live and Let Die, Tomorrow Never Dies, and Thunderball chase, and not get duplicates.

quote:

Originally posted by David R:
So if my math is correct, you need to open at least 26 boxes to complete the Live and Let Die, Tomorrow Never Dies, and Thunderball chase, and not get duplicates.

swap with your friends

quote:

Originally posted by David R:
So if my math is correct, you need to open at least 26 boxes to complete the Live and Let Die, Tomorrow Never Dies, and Thunderball chase, and not get duplicates.

If you are getting 3 cards per box, you'll need at least 40 boxes worth to complete the 120 card Live and Let Die set. I don't know why Rittenhouse need to make them so rare, but if you are unhappy about it let your dealers know, or send an email to Rittenhouse. They have altered their plans before when collectors have complained.

Not with me they haven't and I like to complain
I practically begged for an Oona Chaplin auto, they also know I am a devoted full bleed collector, she's on the auto list for this set, what's the betting she'll be 4oth anniv style.

quote:

Originally posted by X:

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

In other words its complicated and how you view it, good or bad, depends largely on what your own budget will allow.

This feels odd as I rarely disagree with you Raven but that last bit seems like an over simplistic summation.

I have less these days but enjoy my collection so much more for it. It also means funds are spread less thinly so that certain expensive cards can be picked off more easily by ignoring the stuff I don't want.

The sad truth is most people can't have everything they want - myself included! The days of easy to make sets for popular titles are long gone. Why people still have not come to terms with this is surprising.

Perhaps it is simple, but you know what they say, KISS. And it is valid to note that different views do come from where you are standing.

I think that all collectors know they can't have everything they want, you could say the same thing about every aspect of life, even for a wealthy person.

The modern card collector had better well learn how to tailor their collection so that they can enjoy it without feeling deprieved. Saying that I love this, but won't get any of it because I can't get it all, is like saying I won't learn to drive because I will never be able to afford a Lamborghini Veneno Roadster. Yeah I looked that one up.

However, while I rarely disagree with you too X, I don't feel that a popular title has to be difficult to complete or have a large number of cards that hit the high notes. If there is a large demand, why would a manufacturer not want to feed that demand? Why throw everything but the kitchen sink into one set and make it so difficult to obtain when it will discourage some people from even starting it? For fans of a series, there is something very nice about sets like Castle or Grimm where nothing is really so expensive that an average collector couldn't find it at his price if he looked long enough. Just asking.

Otherwise I have to say that the new Bond autograph list in here is very good and I feel the same way you do about having more copies of the big names available, a greater supply will help those collectors who are content to pick and chose.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

quote:

Originally posted by X:

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

In other words its complicated and how you view it, good or bad, depends largely on what your own budget will allow.

This feels odd as I rarely disagree with you Raven but that last bit seems like an over simplistic summation.

I have less these days but enjoy my collection so much more for it. It also means funds are spread less thinly so that certain expensive cards can be picked off more easily by ignoring the stuff I don't want.

The sad truth is most people can't have everything they want - myself included! The days of easy to make sets for popular titles are long gone. Why people still have not come to terms with this is surprising.

However, while I rarely disagree with you too X, I don't feel that a popular title has to be difficult to complete or have a large number of cards that hit the high notes. If there is a large demand, why would a manufacturer not want to feed that demand? Why throw everything but the kitchen sink into one set and make it so difficult to obtain when it will discourage some people from even starting it? For fans of a series, there is something very nice about sets like Castle or Grimm where nothing is really so expensive that an average collector couldn't find it at his price if he looked long enough. Just asking.

It is so hard to answer that question without having the knowledge RA do - nobody truly knows how in demand these Bond sets are, or the specific types of cards contained therein. I'd guess it is fairly consistent demand as box counts have remained fairly similar over the last 12 years, and even in these times of premium packs etc., Bond still sticks to a traditional pack/box/incentive set up and it is clear to see they act on collector/dealer feedback.

I would say for the most part they do an excellent job of meeting demand ( repeat autos being a good example) but it's a find line between meeting demand and overproduction killing collectibility - the best example being base sets you can't shift at £2, no matter their quality or the work put into them.

A lot of negative comments have come from the parallels and throwbacks. But even without them how many collectors can afford a £200 Berry card? I know I can't - but does that mean in shouldn't be in the set?

There is nothing wrong with sets like Castle or Grimm being easier to obtain, in the same way there is nothing wrong with the way RA build a Bond set in comparison to how Topps handle Star Wars. With the latter, with so many 1/1 cards not even ONE master set could be build by ONE collector.

If people force themselves not to buy cards they actually want through stubbornness, that's their prerogative. But it's Bond! We're talking 50 years worth of films and 23 movies featuring many very popular celebs. RAs efforts with Bond are ambitious, and they have to be, to make best use of the licence and cover the material available.

Just seen the pictures of some of the autographs on the Rittenhouse website and I have to ask....what are they thinking????

Over the years, Rittenhouse has surely amassed a nice collection of WoB autographs that would be perfect for a Women of Bond 2 collection, off the top of my head: Halle Berry, Teri Hatcher, Olga Kurylenko, Gemma Arterton, Shirley Eaton, Tania Mallet, Berenice Marlohe, Naomie Harris, Caterina Murino. Add to that some of the others like Nadja Regin, Marguerite Lewars, Belle Avery, and if possible some new names (Diana Rigg, Carole Bouquet?), and this is a pretty amazing list that could give the first Women of Bond collection a run for its money. But instead of that, two of the huge selling points of a potential WoB 2 set are being included in this latest Bond Archives collection, whilst making the full-bleed collectors wait even longer to get their hands on these names!

Am I the only one thinking a golden opportunity is being lost here??

quote:

Originally posted by RP01:
Just seen the pictures of some of the autographs on the Rittenhouse website and I have to ask....what are they thinking????

Over the years, Rittenhouse has surely amassed a nice collection of WoB autographs that would be perfect for a Women of Bond 2 collection, off the top of my head: Halle Berry, Teri Hatcher, Olga Kurylenko, Gemma Arterton, Shirley Eaton, Tania Mallet, Berenice Marlohe, Naomie Harris, Caterina Murino. Add to that some of the others like Nadja Regin, Marguerite Lewars, Belle Avery, and if possible some new names (Diana Rigg, Carole Bouquet?), and this is a pretty amazing list that could give the first Women of Bond collection a run for its money. But instead of that, two of the huge selling points of a potential WoB 2 set are being included in this latest Bond Archives collection, whilst making the full-bleed collectors wait even longer to get their hands on these names!

Am I the only one thinking a golden opportunity is being lost here??

I like the mixed approach they have gone with. Whilst I like and collect The Women of Bond cards, it's an acquired taste, and to have a set with no chance of pulling James Bond is probably not good for sales. I think they therefore have got it just right this time.

quote:

Originally posted by RP01:
....Am I the only one thinking a golden opportunity is being lost here??

I hope a 'Women of Bond in motion series 2' could be made, but I can understand how much harder it would be to do than a more regular release.

Would love to see a second Women of Bond set, and Steve has hinted as much (which would explain the distinct lack of this style in sets over the last few years).
Then again, in the last 6 years we've had a grand total of 3(!) WOB autos. Forget some of the cards full bleed/40th collectors have had to wait for, WOB auto collectors need the patience of a saint. I'm not loosing any sleep over people waiting for the full bleeds of anyone.

I'm very happy to see WOB Berry and Hatcher, and any more for that matter. Who knows when a second WOB set may materialise? A bit more variety - at last.

Hi,

I am new on these boards, and really am not replying to any of the previous posts. But I am also looking forward to the new Bond set. I have collected all of the Caroline Munro signature cards, plus some of the various subset cards that feature her. I also have started to collect Martine Beswick's signature & subset cards, but am far from obtaining all of hers.

I have met them on many occasions at conventions and shows here in the U.S., and really was drawn to start collecting their cards after meeting them. Sorry for getting off-topic, but I also am really looking forward to seeing what this new set has to offer.

Thanks,

Nathan

Regarding Eva Green, looks like she had another miss with "Sin City 2" which bombed this weekend

Maybe she should consider signing some Bond cards.

Has anyone ever heard if RA has tried or asked Christopher Wallken and Benicio Del Toro to sign for the Bond sets?

quote:

Originally posted by Darth Vader Fan:
Has anyone ever heard if RA has tried or asked Christopher Wallken and Benicio Del Toro to sign for the Bond sets?

I think it's clear on their web-forum Rittenhouse have tried, and continue to try to get as many stars from the Bond films as possible. Sometimes they get turned down flat, sometimes the actors are just too busy and sometimes it's just down to waiting to strike the right deal which satisfies the company and the actor.

quote:

Originally posted by WOMBLE:

quote:

Originally posted by Darth Vader Fan:
Has anyone ever heard if RA has tried or asked Christopher Wallken and Benicio Del Toro to sign for the Bond sets?

I think it's clear on their web-forum Rittenhouse have tried, and continue to try to get as many stars from the Bond films as possible. Sometimes they get turned down flat, sometimes the actors are just too busy and sometimes it's just down to waiting to strike the right deal which satisfies the company and the actor.

Out of curiosity, whom has flat out refused to sign for the Bond box sets in the past? Dalton and Connery not included, as they're obvious.