1969 Topps SP Question

[johnmh71]

I went to the Wilmington show last weekend and picked up a 1969 Wilhelm, Perry, and Santo for $2 each. It seems as though the SP's from that year tend to sell at fairly low prices. Does everyone tend to see the same? Thoughts?

[hangman62]

What do you mean SP 's....69T players like that..I didnt think they were tough to find ??

[ALR-bishop]

sp,,,,,,,single parent:)

[johnmh71]

I should put that a different way. I was thinking along the line of higher numbered cards, similiar to what you would find with the price variance in the '71 set. Were more cards distributed in 1969?

[ALR-bishop]

John---I do not think the price guides put a premium on any of the 1969 series of cards. It was a weird year, maybe in part because of expansion, but also likely because Topps was in a serious dispute with Marvin Miller and the Players Association over license fees. As a result almost all the photos in the first 4 series are older ones from prior years. Hence a lot of cap less poses and airbrushed caps due to team changes. Newer photos show up in the last few series, starting around card 416, I think because an agreement was reached. After that players start showing up in current uniforms. That may have also resulted in more print runs of those latter series.

Many of the early Astos cards in the set are airbrushed Colt 45 photos from 1965. Same problem with Oakland/KC players in the first part of the set.

Of the 48 rookies appearing on 24 Rookie cards, 20 are in their minor league uniforms. For example in card 189 both players are in Louisville Cardinals uniforms.

The cards for Dalrymple as an Oriole and Chris Short show the Polo Grounds, where there had not been a game for 6 years

Team cards also disappeared from this set, which maybe had more to do with expansion.

The Mays photo ( # 190) in from 1966. The Aaron ( # 100) is from 1968

SCD had articles in the past by Olberman and TS O'connel on the 69 set and was my source for much of this

[johnmh71]

Good information Al. Thanks.

[mintacular]

I do believe there is a "High series" with a slight price premium like x2 but not as tough as some "High Series" from other sets...I do believe the price guides reflect this fact

[ALR-bishop]

You are likely right Patrick, I built the set a long time ago and do not follow the price guides much, especially graded prices. The SCD Standard Catalog for 2011 and 2012 does not reflect a premium, although I rely on that source more for a checklist that a price guide.

It is my belief that after Topps came to agreement with Miller and the Players they started churning out new pictures and cards from the 4th series on and likely produced more of the later series cards in 1969 than in prior years, and as a result there is not a series in 1969 that commands significantly higher prices.

[Gr8Beldini]

The cards for Dalrymple as an Oriole and Chris Short show the Polo Grounds, where there had not been a game for 6 years


Chris Cannizarro is posed in an airbrushed Mets uniform in the Polo Grounds also.

[Gr8Beldini]

Actually, I find the toughest cards come from the lower series, Steve hamilton being particularly tough.

[hangman62]

I seem to recall ..back in the day....the price guides didnt even list high # series in 68T or 69T ??

[toppcat]

For some reason Topps evened out the series printing a bit in '69. Not sure why when the highs are so markedly tougher over the next three years but maybe the strategy from their standpoint was not a total success in 1969.