1952 Topps House yellow tiger

[Brianruns10]

I've read a bit about this variety, and the growing consensus seems to be that it's a legit variety, not just a printing error.

But where I'm having difficulty is valuation, since the price guides I have access to don't yet seem to recognize this variety, and there are few auction prices.

I ask because there's one on ebay now, a PSA 2, and it's at $305 with one day to go. I'm considering giving it a try, if this card could wind up someday being as prized as the Campos black star. And because I've so seldom seen this one up for sale.

What are your thoughts? Worth trying? Or overpriced/overrated?

[ALR-bishop]

While this card has high recognition among collectors of the Topps 1952 set, it is not in the super or master PSA set checklists, nor was it in the last issue of the SCD Standard Catalog. Not sure about Beckett, maybe Rich will know.

I got my copy shortly after it was mentioned in an SCD article quite awhile back, I think by Bob Lemke.

If it makes into the PSA Registry list, or SCD Catalog, master set collectors will need it and the value will soar. A similar card is the 52 Campos with the partially missing front border. Some sellers are offering it for high dollars but getting no takers. But if it makes the PSA, Beckett ot SCD checklist, it's value will soar as well.

I'm glad I got mine early . My guess is that the final price on that auction will be a good deal higher.

Mine is not in great shape, but that seems to true of many of the ones I have seen on ebay so far

http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/jj555/Bishop539/WhitenOldClothes719_zps8495ee7d.jpg
http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/jj555/Bishop539/img557_zps77b20073.jpg

[Republicaninmass]

IMO soon added to the registry. Sales can price collectors want this card

[Brianruns10]

So given your thoughts, would $300 to $500 be a reasonable price for a PSA 2 Yellow Tiger? I'd imagine the card I'm watching will fetch somewhere toward the north end of that range.

[ALR-bishop]

I am not a graded guy, but if Ted is right that it will eventually be added to the registry I think it would after that go for more than $ 500.

So Ted, if it really does exist in gray back as seemingly indicated in a prior thread, do you think that would be separately listed :)

[SMPEP]

It absolutely exists in the grey back variation. There are at least 3 known to exist.

But the partial yellow tiger is not known in the grey backs - at least not yet.

As for the value ... many have sold lately in the $900-$1,200 lately. (I think that's high ... there are definitely a few others that I think are more valuable.)

Cheers,
Patrick

[Brianruns10]

Thanks all. I feel confident this variety will be recognized, and I find it to be more interested of a variety than the Campos black star. I think it has real potential for the future, so I may give this one a shot.

Thanks all!

[Republicaninmass]

Al, I can prove that the yellow tiger is caused by some sort of masking error and the red ink. Would that make it qualify as an error, or variation? The red is absent from the yellow tiger, and make the appearance of his throat green on some cards, but the red tiger logo on his cap is still present. Also, some yellow tigers have a spot of red on the tongue, I'm guessing before the mask covered the tiger and throat entirely during the red ink process.

IMO it is only a matter of time before PSA recognizes this as prices are dictating there is two distinct cards. Where partial yellow, red tongue and the rest lie pricing wise, will be up to collectors.

I think this is as rare, and a much more interesting variation than the Campos as well as being clearly visible on the front of the card. I assume the number of the print run are close to the same, or slightly less for the House.



When the yellow tiger is listed with PSA, I don't believe they will add the Yellow gray back. There simply cannot be enough examples to prove the case for addition to the registry. However die hard collectors will regret not bidding higher when the last one came for sale on ebay. I decided against going after it as one of my comrades set a nuclear bid, and sometimes it isnt "right" to outbid certain someones. Morals, amazing I know!

As far as pricing, once it is added, it should be close to where the campos has settled, maybe with an initial spike. Many collectors have been scooping them up, but registry guys will always need the card for their "supersets", either raw or graded (Al) :)




Here is a close up of the splotchy red, on an orange tiger, most likely just before whatever happened... happened.

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j46/teddytouch7239/For%20Sale%20or%20Trade/zzcards541_zps38be9bcd.jpg

Here is an example of a lower grade one where the throat is green, more likely in the 500 range. Every once in a while one comes up on ebay and the biddig is strong, but if it isnt mentioned in the title, once in a while a deal can be had in the 300 range.

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j46/teddytouch7239/For%20Sale%20or%20Trade/img480_zps3bb91e3f.jpg

[SMPEP]

I agree that the last House Yellow Tiger grey back went too cheaply. Way too cheaply. There are 3 known to exist. There are 2,000 Mantles known to exist. Some day I think the market will recognize that the grey back yellow tiger is the holy grail in this set.

Not sure how PSA can deny that it exists. If you recognize the mainstream one, and you know that 3 of the 25 known grey back House's have the same variety, I'm not sure how you can recognize one and not the other. But that's just my opinion.

Wait ... you knew someone set a nuclear bid ... and you didn't bid them through the roof! I thought you were a card collector! You know that isn't done.:D

Cheers,
Patrick

[ALR-bishop]

Sometimes folks seem to get offended in this debate. But as far as I know there is no recognized hobby definition of a variation, and so from my standpoint everyone is entitled to their own view. I personally view variations as cards changed intentionally in the printing process. I stretch that to include DP variants like the 52 Mantle, since while the differences were not specifically intended, it was intended the card would be a DP and that resulted in the difference. Same for all the CL differences in all of the 60s and 70s sets, and for the 13 DP card cropping differences in the 1963 set discussed by George Vrechek in his SCD article

I use the term variant for cards that are different from their counterparts due to some recurring unintended print defect.

I collect both, and some cards that I think of as variants get hobby recognition as a variation, such a s the 58 Herrer and 57 Bakep and 61 Fairly. Obviously if the card gets recognized by PSA or Beckett or SCD as a variation, master set or player collectors will have to have it and the value will soar

Some folks have told me they think the Campos black star is a variation. I tend to view it as a variant, since there are some partial black stars. But what matters more is how the hobby views it

I like front more than back variations, and so agree with you that the House is more interesting than the black star. But if it ever gets recognized, I think the Campos missing front border, a print defect from my standpoint, will be harder to get and more valuable than the "normal" yellow House. If the gray back House gets recognized, that may be rarer still.

As to whether the House is a variation or print defect, I have heard it argued both ways but people who know more than me about the print process have told me they think it qualifies as a variation. Whatever it is, if PSA, Beckett or SCD recognizes it, that is that

I am mystified by the recognition process, is it a science or a whim...I lean to the latter :)

I have come to really believe that if you take any Topps card from the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and early 90s ( as far as I have looked so far), and you look long enough and hard enough, you will find some variant ( difference) resulting from some fault or defect during the printing process

[Brianruns10]

But as far as I know there is no recognized hobby definition of a variation, and so from my standpoint everyone is entitled to their own view.

For what it's worth, to me a variant or variation comes down to one thing: Repetition. If it only occurs once, or each occurrence is unique in its own way (like a missing dye layer or mis-registration or a miscut) then it is an error. But if the occurrence is reproducible, like the black star or the yellow tiger, then it is a variant or variation. Same goes for transitions as well.

I used to collect coins, and in the Lincoln series there was a similarly controversial issue: The 1922 Plain cent. In that year only the Denver mint issued cents, and so they were dated 1922-D. But a few coins turned up with the D missing. Turned out the dies made to create the coins were overused to make up for the lack of production from the other two mints, and the D was worn away, as proven by coins that also emerged with partial Ds. Then to further muddy the waters, the no-D cents had two reverses, one that was very weak and worn and one that was crisp and brand new, evidence that late in the run a worker swapped out the old reverse die for a fresh one, but did not bother for the Obverse. So you wind up with four distinct variations for the 1922-D.

And so while even though this cent was created in error (as was the black star and the yellow tiger) it was nevertheless reproducible, and with a definite set of characteristics that they all shared. The prices reflected the desirability of the stages . The partial Ds go for hardly any more than a normal example, because they are transitional. The No-D weak reverse, slightly more, but again, it is seen as a transition. But the final stage, with no D and the strong reverse, is highly prized as a variation in the set, because it was now distinct.

So what we might see shake out with the Yellow tiger are similar prices being fetched for transitional copies that have partial red/orange on the tiger, and then the final ones that are absent any yellow.

[SMPEP]

I liked Brian's definition of what is a variation. I think it all comes back to the printing process. If the "mistake" was intentionall corrected ... then it's a variation. If the mistake is just a one time printing error ... well ... I collect those ... but don't go crazy for them.

And Al, I respectfully disagree that there is a variant of every card. I've studied some sets very closely. There are cards that have reoccuring errors that have been corrected ... there are cards that have no reoccuring errors. The 1952 Mantle is the perfect example. That is a reoccuring difference. Jut like the House in my opinion.

But like you said Al ... everyone can make their own definitions and collect what they like. And with that said ... will you all stop collecting 1952 Topp Grey Backs - especially the Reiser! :D

Cheers,
Patrick

[Brianruns10]

And.....I'm now the owner of a Frank House yellow tiger! Now lets just hope for my investment's sake that it hits that master list :)

[SMPEP]

No clue if it's a good investment or not ... but you paid $300-$400 less than what I've seen lately.

Congrats!
Patrick

[Republicaninmass]

Congrats!

[ALR-bishop]

Good for you Brian

[cammb]

Reading the threads makes me wonder when this insanity will stop. Its a printing error period. it should be no more valuable than the original. You can find a multitude of such errors on every logo in the set. Because one person says its valuable, must we all drink the kool aid. You can have all of this bulls---. missing colors, border, backward stitching and the like. Fools and their money are soon parted

[Republicaninmass]

Good, I'll buy yours at the price of the original, you don't happen to have any do you?

[Brianruns10]

Reading the threads makes me wonder when this insanity will stop. Its a printing error period. it should be no more valuable than the original. You can find a multitude of such errors on every logo in the set. Because one person says its valuable, must we all drink the kool aid. You can have all of this bulls---. missing colors, border, backward stitching and the like. Fools and their money are soon parted

Now stop right there. I respect your opinion on error cards, but don't you call me or anyone else foolish because we add them to our collections.

This isn't about ignorance. We KNOW these cards are errors. Of course Topps ddn't intend to leave off the orange, or to give Campos that black star, or to swap Sain and Page's bios. But it happened, and they're scarce and people want them for their sets. It's all about supply and demand. Low supply, high demand. I for one took the opportunity to buy one now, not because I'm some speculator trying to make a buck, but because I believe this card WILL be tougher to get. I believe it'll be recognized by the graders as a legit variety, and when that happens, a lot more people will be interested. Frankly I feel I bought this card as a low based upon what it can do.

But that's just me. NO one's holding a gun to your head telling you you must recognize these cards and collect them. If you don't like them, don't buy them.

But DON'T insult me or anyone else here because of what we choose to collect. It's rude and it's infantile, and it's the sort of vitriol more suited to that pair of scamsters still trying to sell their phony Honus Wagner.

[cammb]

If you were insulted by the truth then that's your problem. I have a few boston braves cards that are missing some color in. The bonnet. I will sell you three for $900, then I can create my own error card and make a lot of money.

Ted, if I had this so called error House card I would gladly sell it to you for $400. I would be a fool not to make some money .

[glynparson]

It is the truth as you see, please don't ever tell me how to spend my money. It is my business not yours. Most people think any amount we spend on cardboard is foolish. So to the general public you are as a big a jackass as any of us variation collectors. How about some pics maybe one of us will buy it from you, even with that pathetic sales pitch you made.

[bnorth]

Reading the threads makes me wonder when this insanity will stop. Its a printing error period. it should be no more valuable than the original. You can find a multitude of such errors on every logo in the set. Because one person says its valuable, must we all drink the kool aid. You can have all of this bulls---. missing colors, border, backward stitching and the like. Fools and their money are soon parted

I completely understand your opinion. I am one of those fools who pay a premium for print errors but at least I am not one of those fools that actually pay huge premiums for a card in a plastic holder, those are the real fools. I do really mean that but I am also smart enough to know that several members do like plastic holders with the cute little # on them. So I do not come on here and make an ass out of my self talking crap about what someone collects because any BB card collecting is good collecting as long as you enjoy it.

Please post pictures and prices of these so called junk error cards you have in the appropriate B/S/T section and one of us fools might just buy them.

[cammb]

That pathetic sales pitch was said tongue in cheek. I suggest you grow another layer of skin. Lets put this to bed. I say you are foolish to spend that kind of money on obvious printing flaws. The cards are imperfections and technically should be destroyed. You say mind you own business on how I spend my money. There, that says it all.

[glynparson]

Stupid as you come across in your posts? Guess we should've thrown away those upside down airplane stamps too. Your logic is highly flawed and does not track even through other fields of collectibles. My skin is thick enough I'm just willing to call a jackass a jackass.

[autograf]

It's kind of like the same issue with T206's. I wouldn't pay the exorbitant prices for a printing flaw there nor would I pay (for any issue) a huge premium to get a PSA9 card from one of those sets. Neither are my collecting goals. Other people's take on collecting things is slanted differently than mine and that's okay by me. I look at every Campos that I see VERY closely. I look for 1958 Herrera/Herrer. I would be glad to find one and sell one of either--or the House variation. I think there's room enough for all of us under the tent. As long as at least a couple people collect some type of angle on the hobby, prices for cards that fit that bill will continue to escalate......JMO

[steve B]

Ah yes. The old "It's crap unless I'm selling it"

That's sooooo 1990.

In stamps, I've made a nice bit of spending money spotting the same sort of "junk" usually in the inventory of a dealer who thinks it's BS. And back In the day I picked up some less than common cards for the same reason. Moderately harder backs for T206.... Bah! Only dummies would pay more for those. Sadly those guys never got the really tough stuff, just the mid range. Probably because a lot with any really good backs got better offers from dealers with a clue.


Steve B

[Footballdude]

I am also a card collector with a stamp collecting background. Errors and variations have been a part of the stamp world since stamp collecting started over 150 years ago. There are dealers and collectors who specialize in this sort of thing and spend their lifetimes pursuing them. Some of them wind up writing books, and other reference works, detailing them.

So far I haven't seen card collecting get quite as involved as stamps, but I do see it slowly changing in that direction, which I think is awesome.

I see nothing wrong with adding interesting varieties of cards, errors, miscuts, whatever to a collection, to spice it up. I actually find the whole printing process fascinating and would, if I had the money, buy nothing but pre-production items like proofs, uncut sheets, original photos, etc.. These tell the story of how a card set was produced. The errors and variations are a part of that card sets' history.

True, Topps' quality control left something to be desired back in the day, but I am pretty sure they weren't too concerned with future collectors opinions of what they should be discarding. I am glad the let get by everything they did. If the quality then was as nice and uniform as it is now, it would really make them boring to collect, which is one reason why I don't collect modern cards.

Everyone can collect what they like, how they like, and spend what they want. That's what makes a hobby like this interesting, because there is no right or wrong way to collect. There is room for everyone.

Cards, in any form, have no real value other than what someone is willing to pay, period.

[cammb]

Stupid as you come across in your posts? Guess we should've thrown away those upside down airplane stamps too. Your logic is highly flawed and does not track even through other fields of collectibles. My skin is thick enough I'm just willing to call a jackass a jackass.

You're a real computer tough guy hiding behind you little laptop calling names like a real pansy.

[cammb]

It's kind of like the same issue with T206's. I wouldn't pay the exorbitant prices for a printing flaw there nor would I pay (for any issue) a huge premium to get a PSA9 card from one of those sets. Neither are my collecting goals. Other people's take on collecting things is slanted differently than mine and that's okay by me. I look at every Campos that I see VERY closely. I look for 1958 Herrera/Herrer. I would be glad to find one and sell one of either--or the House variation. I think there's room enough for all of us under the tent. As long as at least a couple people collect some type of angle on the hobby, prices for cards that fit that bill will continue to escalate......JMO


Well said, Tom. By the way, I am pretty sure that SGC removed the Herrara error from their registry.

[Brianruns10]

For what it's worth, I admire anyone who has found a passion with something to collect. For example, cards with registration errors. That's not something that I would personally collect, but I think it's great that there are people out there who derive joy from collecting those one of a kind freaks of nature. Whether you spend $1 or a $1000 on a card, if you love doing it, what's the foul? There's no right or wrong way to collect.

[cammb]

Brian, you are a 100% correct. Now that should be the end of this, I hope. LOL