Rittenhouse has posted the next Trek set:

Autograph signers include:

Whoopi Goldberg (Guinan/TNG)
Leonard Nimoy (Spock/TOS)
Malcolm McDowell (Dr. Soran/Generations)
Chris Sarandon (Martus Mazur/DS9)
Michael Dorn (Worf/TNG)
Armin Shimerman (Quark/DS9)
Virginia Madsen (Kellin/Voyager)
Adrienne Barbeau (Sen. Cretak/DS9)
Jeffrey Combs (Weyoun/DS9)
Robert O'Reilly (Gowron/TNG)
Robin Curtis (Saavik/STII)

* Featuring Whoopi Goldberg's (Guinan/TNG)
First-Ever Official Autograph Cards! *



Jeri Ryan (Seven of Nine/Voyager)
Marina Sirtis (Deanna Troi/TNG)
John De Lancie (Q/TNG)
Tim Russ (Tuvok/Voyager)
Daniel Davis (Prof. Moriarty/TNG)
Martha Hackett (Seska/Voyager)
Scarlett Pomers (Naomi Wildman/Voyager)
Lawrence Montaigne (Stonn/Decius/TOS)
J.G. Hertzler (Martok/DS9)
Olivia d'Abo (Q/TNG)
and many more!

100-Card Set Featuring Aliens from all 5 Classic Live-Action TV Series and 10 Classic Star Trek Movies

Bonus sets include:

100 GOLD Parallel Base Cards
(1:24 packs)
18 Star Trek Aliens Sticker Cards
(1:16 packs)
9 "First Appearances" Cards (1:24 packs)
9 "Quotable Klingon" Cards (1:24 packs)
10 Alien Ships Cards (1:24 packs)
6 Star Trek Aliens Badge/Pin Cards (1:288 packs)
60+ Autograph Cards (1:8 packs



Case Toppers (1 Per Case):
Borg Poster Card by Juan Ortiz (CT1)
Klingon Poster Card by Juan Ortiz (CT2)

6-Case Incentive:
STAR TREK ALIENS Hand-Drawn
Sketch Card by Warren Martineck Card

9-Case Incentive:
STAR TREK ALIENS Painted
Sketch Card by Mick and/or Matt Glebe

18-Case Incentive:
STAR TREK ALIENS Trading Cards
Archive Box, including exclusive relic card


https://scifihobby.com/product...Aliens2014/index.cfm

I really like the new autograph look. While I always like adding to the sets the make I think it will be more fun seeing a new design. I wonder if this is the 50th Anniversary look or if there will be a new one as well.

Personally I don't get that excited for more Star Trek, but I have to say that I like the autograph list here, so I think I will have to do some reshuffling.

I'm a fan of this one because of the autograph list AND the new autograph format.

I'm so tired of seeing the same old format. I know people like consistency, but when you have a couple hundred autos that look the same it gets old to me.

I also like that it should cover ALL trek, like the Women of Star Trek set did. That brings in all sorts of fans that might not want another TOS set.

Ed

SUPER excited for this one, I must have the Whoopi auto and I like the picture for the new Deanna Troi(although I have sooooo many Marina Sirtis auto cards already...) I am also glad they finally got Daniel Davis to sign cards.

Val

quote:

Originally posted by CordeliaChase_Fan:
I am also glad they finally got Daniel Davis to sign cards

With you on Daniel Davis (and Whoopi)

I look foreward to this one. Whoopi, Daniel Davis. My biggest concern is sketchcards. I'm not shown akot of restraint in regards to them

Interesting looking set and a good list of signers.

Jeri Ryan on a TNG card is just sloppy though. I couldn't and wouldn't own that. Who's on QC on these things? People who don't watch Trek???

Still on the fence on this one. Too many Star Trek releases.

quote:

Originally posted by X:

Jeri Ryan on a TNG card is just sloppy though. I couldn't and wouldn't own that. Who's on QC on these things? People who don't watch Trek???

You are being too picky X. Bond sets pull in autographs from the whole spectrum of movies, often times with no relationship to each and every one. Why is it OK for Bond, but wrong for Star Trek? It is a general title after all.

Ryan had a popular character and she is still one of the better autographs in any ST set. If RA can get her to sign again, then they should include her for the fans.

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

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

quote:

Originally posted by X:

Jeri Ryan on a TNG card is just sloppy though. I couldn't and wouldn't own that. Who's on QC on these things? People who don't watch Trek???

You are being too picky X. Bond sets pull in autographs from the whole spectrum of movies, often times with no relationship to each and every one. Why is it OK for Bond, but wrong for Star Trek? It is a general title after all.

Ryan had a popular character and she is still one of the better autographs in any ST set. If RA can get her to sign again, then they should include her for the fans.

I don't know what you mean Raven. Have you actually seen the front of the Ryan card? It says TNG when all the other cards shown say TOS, DS9 and Generations (i.e. the show or movie the character is from) - that's a fairly school boy error putting arguably the biggest character from Voyager on a TNG card.

For the record I'm equally dissatisfied by poorly put together Bond cards such as their Samantha Bond/Moneypenny 40th card with a GoldenEye pic but with 'The World Is Not Enough' text. Or their Moneypenny FB auto with a Die Another Day pic and 'GoldenEye' text on the back. Robert Brown with a Licence to Kill pic with 'Living Daylights' text or Caroline Bliss with a Living Daylights pic and 'Licence To Kill' text. Or the absolute best (i.e. worst) example in recent years being RA having Kenneth Tsang sign 40th style cards with his name on the front but with a picture of his co-star Vincent Wong!

Now, I appreciate the more casual fan may not as accurately be able to differentiate what film a still from a bit-parter like Caroline Bliss came from, but I think even the casual Trek fans have no recollection of Jeri Ryan popping up in 7 seasons of The Next Generation.

It's sloppy quality control and I expect more.

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

I think people can collect whatever they want, however they want for any reason they want, including QC.
All I'll say is I never noticed prototype was spelled wrong on the Generations S1 or Villains on one set. I also noticed *I* spelled Villains wrong 67 times in my store.

quote:

Originally posted by X:

You are being too picky X. Bond sets pull in autographs from the whole spectrum of movies, often times with no relationship to each and every one. Why is it OK for Bond, but wrong for Star Trek? It is a general title after all.

Ryan had a popular character and she is still one of the better autographs in any ST set. If RA can get her to sign again, then they should include her for the fans.

I don't know what you mean Raven. Have you actually seen the front of the Ryan card? It says TNG when all the other cards shown say TOS, DS9 and Generations (i.e. the show or movie the character is from) - that's a fairly school boy error putting arguably the biggest character from Voyager on a TNG card.

For the record I'm equally dissatisfied by poorly put together Bond cards such as their Samantha Bond/Moneypenny 40th card with a GoldenEye pic but with 'The World Is Not Enough' text. Or their Moneypenny FB auto with a Die Another Day pic and 'GoldenEye' text on the back. Robert Brown with a Licence to Kill pic with 'Living Daylights' text or Caroline Bliss with a Living Daylights pic and 'Licence To Kill' text. Or the absolute best (i.e. worst) example in recent years being RA having Kenneth Tsang sign 40th style cards with his name on the front but with a picture of his co-star Daryl Kwan!

Now, I appreciate the more casual fan may not as accurately be able to differentiate what film a still from a bit-parter like Caroline Bliss came from, but I think even the casual Trek fans have no recollection of Jeri Ryan popping up in 7 seasons of The Next Generation.

It's sloppy quality control and I expect more.[/QUOTE]

No, I had not seen the card, and I thought your original objection was that she did not belong in this release. But I looked now and see that the error is what bothered you. If that is the card that will be in packs it is wrong and you are right.

However I still have to repeat my first thought. I really don't think casual or rabid ST fans will care that much, at least not to the extent that they would not want to own the card. They will be happy to have another Ryan autograph and Lynn is correct in that many people won't even notice.

I could rattle off a slew of quality control issues that have come up with recent card releases from major manufacturers who should know better. I won't, just read other threads. By comparison this one is pretty far from the worst.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
However I still have to repeat my first thought. I really don't think casual or rabid ST fans will care that much, at least not to the extent that they would not want to own the card. They will be happy to have another Ryan autograph and Lynn is correct in that many people won't even notice.

I could rattle off a slew of quality control issues that have come up with recent card releases from major manufacturers who should know better. I won't, just read other threads. By comparison this one is pretty far from the worst.

I must be in the minority by being discerning and caring about what I collect. I find it hard to buy that fans of TNG, Voyager, or Jeri Ryan wouldn't pick up this error (it being slap bang in the middle front of the card) and that they wouldn't be somewhat disappointed it tarnishes an otherwise very cool card.

Besides the typo on Harrison Ford's Ender's Game auto that I'm aware of, I'd appreciate any other examples for curiosity's sake. But whatever things other companies may be getting wrong, is a comparison even relevant? These aren't grey area issues with room for interpretation. If it's wrong, it's wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by STCardGeek:
I think people can collect whatever they want, however they want for any reason they want, including QC.
All I'll say is I never noticed prototype was spelled wrong on the Generations S1 or Villains on one set. I also noticed *I* spelled Villains wrong 67 times in my store.

"People can collect whatever they want, including for reasons of Quality Control". What does that even mean?

Of course people can collect whatever they want, but your nonchalance at a pretty glaring error seems to be giving RA something of a free pass, which I find rather odd coming from a huge Trek fan such as yourself. What if a Nimoy auto said "Wil Wheaton" on the front - would that be OK too? How many mistakes before a company can do no wrong? Or what is 'too much' of an error to be tolerated? (Not a dig at RA, but a question in general)

We're all guilty of typos but if you're paying for a licence, and producing a product for collectors who are expected to pay good money for these things, I don't think rookie errors such as this are acceptable.

quote:

Originally posted by X:
We're all guilty of typos but if you're paying for a licence, and producing a product for collectors who are expected to pay good money for these things, I don't think rookie errors such as this are acceptable.

Well we could go round and round about this and neither one is likely to budge because the error on this card bothers you greatly and it doesn't bother me at all.

I'm not saying you're wrong, quite the contrary, its a sloppy error. And I'm not saying I'm right either. I'm not the standard bearer for quality control and Star Trek card collectors could be marching on RA headquarters about this mistake for all I know.

I'm just saying that it's a nice looking autograph card and I would be happy to own it. Should RA be more careful in the future? Yes, they should.

The phrase should have been can decide NOT to collect, but then I suppose we all knew that and I find it pretty funny to make a typo in a thread about typos and QC
What I like about Star Trek and what I like about cards is unrelated to the ooops that get made by companies. I read an article the other day that NASA uses Armageddon on new hires. Has them find as many discrepancies as they can. THe record is 168. That movie makes me cry. Neil De Grasso Tyson has strong opinions on accuracy vs. entertainment and is quite happy to cut slack with truth if it's entertaining. (see here- Disneys' Back Hole, Armageddon, Gravity)
THere is a series of books called Nitpicker's Guide to...Star Trek...TNG...etc etc. Great books, good read. Pages and pages of mistakes by the CREATORS of ST.
I have a customer who can literally spend hours IMing me the errors he finds on cards. I have suggested on several occasions that if bothers him to the degree it seems to, he should stop collecting. It's not worth the hassle. I am pretty sure we can all agree, this is a visible ooops. But, to me it's like, oh well, THAT'S embarrassing and I move on. To me, the themes that Trek represent, the utopia I see there and want to have myself, isn't marred by wrong logo on the card. If your expectations are otherwise, act on that. It's all good.
On a side note, I think it's very daring of you to use the words rookie and schoolboy. I'd be nervous to use those words and then fall flat on my nose after having made a mistake myself In front of everyone!

Oh, you asked what error would be *too much* for me? A card saying it was a Trek card that was really a Star Wars card. THAT would be too much for me. I expect at least THAT much knowledge of the source material

You could argue Seven of Nine isn't actually an 'Alien' as well.

Yeah, is an ex-human, ex-borg, now human Alien or one of us. That's is a tad too deep a philosophy for someone like me. What IS known, is she sells cards And philosophy aside, that is the bigger issue (says the girl who likes Archer in the shower scenes)

I'm sure Rittenhouse are somewhat embarrassed about not picking up this error at any stage of it's production. Jeri Ryan must have been totally confused as to why she was being asked to sign it but not confused enough to turn the money down and send them back.

Having got the cards made and signed it would seem a decision was taken that even though it was wrong collectors would rather have it than see it thrown in the bin.

As to weather you wish to buy it or not well that is up to you.