Most over-valued card

[stargell1]

What in your opinion is the most over-valued baseball card?

[Danny Smith]

Every e105 Mello Mint I do / try to buy.

[darwinbulldog]

1952 Topps #311.

[KCRfan1]

Any Mike Trout, Harper, or Bryant rookie card.

[ALR-bishop]

It seems like everyone who does not have that card has that opinion :)

[Billy5858]

EVERY post war PSA 8 thru 10 centered Rookie card at this time

Unless I owned one of course

[clydepepper]

I'd have to go with the Mantle because it is no longer available to a lot of us.

I realize it is an iconic card in the industry, but it price level should NEVER have reached the Wagner neighborhood.

Let's say there are 60 known Wagner cards in existence...how many '52 Mantles are there? Several thousand? I have no idea.

Now, I realize that a lot of you guys put them in your bicycle spokes :eek: ,
but give me a break...

Honorable mention now goes to the M116 Sporting Life - Smoky Joe Wood, a PSA-7 copy of which just sold for $1,925- give me another break.

The Wood card was one of only seven personal white whales I was still looking to land...the Mantle has long since been removed...for realism sake. I will continue to search for a Wood in EX graded condition, but I am not very optimistic.

[Billy5858]

I'd have to go with the Mantle because it is no longer available to a lot of us.

I realize it is an iconic card in the industry, but it price level should NEVER have reached the Wagner neighborhood.

Let's say there are 60 known Wagner cards in existence...how many '52 Mantles are there? Several thousand? I have no idea.

Now, I realize that a lot of you guys put them in your bicycle spokes :eek: ,
but give me a break...

Honorable mention now goes to the M116 Sporting Life - Smoky Joe Wood, a PSA-7 copy of which just sold for $1,925- give me another break.

The Wood card was one of only seven personal white whales I was still looking to land...the Mantle has long since been removed...for realism sake. I will continue to search for a Wood in EX graded condition, but I am not very optimistic.

I bid on that Wood card in the early stages.................Then it took off....Just forget it. I bailed

[granite75]

I'll go with Jordan's rookie.

[pokerplyr80]

I still think the 52 Topps Mantle will keep going up, quite a bit from current levels. If I had enough money I would be buying more.

There are a couple of rookies that have recently went nuts that I think will come back down.

[irv]

1952 Topps #311.

No way! :D

I think the current, Rose RC is a bit much, but that's just my opinion.

[BeanTown]

1993 Finest Refractors!

[celoknob]

All PSA 9 and 10s.

[bcbgcbrcb]

All T206 "errors".......

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Honorable mention now goes to the M116 Sporting Life - Smoky Joe Wood, a PSA-7 copy of which just sold for $1,925- give me another break.



That sounds like sour grapes. To me that's a pretty sane price for a great player with very few cards in fantastic condition.

I have a 1939 Play Ball graded set around 60% complete averaging about 5.5 and I'm worried I'll never get the Williams now even if I go to my absolute bottom on the card which would be a 3. 3-4 months ago that wasn't an issue.

[zachclose21]

I would have to say the 1952 topps #1 Andy pafko. I know it's the #1 card in the set and hard to find in nice shape but $5000 for an ok player.

[Luke]

[QUOTE=Aquarian Sports Cards;1555991]That sounds like sour grapes. To me that's a pretty sane price for a great player with very few cards in fantastic condition.

Agree with this 100%. It's his only portrait and his most beautiful card. His T207 could rival it but just isn't very pleasing the eye. Supply and demand.

[JustinD]

Logic completely dictates it would be the double printed 1952 topps Mantle.

Not even the true rookie and should be valued in the same range as the 51 bowman. Yes, those that have them will say no, but there is nothing but hype supporting those values and that is most certainly not a foundation of stone to hold up investment.

[bbcard1]

Not prewar, but certainly Vintage, the Reggie rookie has always been a tough sell.

[packs]

Ten Million Obak (got one for sale?)

[bravos4evr]

I think the price on high graded Rose RC's are out of hand. there are a lot of em out there compared to some of the other rarer cards that bring big $$$ but $150,000??? that's nuts

[Billy5858]

[QUOTE=Aquarian Sports Cards;1555991]That sounds like sour grapes. To me that's a pretty sane price for a great player with very few cards in fantastic condition.

Agree with this 100%. It's his only portrait and his most beautiful card. His T207 could rival it but just isn't very pleasing the eye. Supply and demand.

Sold for 4 X SMR....... But yeah I know the story

[Billy5858]

I think the price on high graded Rose RC's are out of hand. there are a lot of em out there compared to some of the other rarer cards that bring big $$$ but $150,000??? that's nuts

+1 There's a PSA 10 coming up on HA
gonna be crazy!!

[bravos4evr]

+1 There's a PSA 10 coming up on HA
gonna be crazy!!

it's gonna be the card that breaks the high grade bubble IMO, it's gonna go for some crazy price like $750k or a million and the entire house of cards will collapse.

[pokerplyr80]

[QUOTE=LukeLyon;1555995]

Sold for 4 X SMR....... But yeah I know the story

VCP Data for 1911 M116 Wood, PSA 7:

Latest Auction Prices for: PSA 7 - Average Price: $1,925.00

Listing Type: Show:
Date Auction Link Seller Buyer Bids Price Extra
6/27/16 eBay Auction | Image nanite76 a***s 18 $1,925.00
3/29/15 Love of the Game Image 7 $2,280.00
8/24/14 Memory Lane Image 21 $3,659.09

For PSA 6:

Latest Auction Prices for: PSA 6 - Average Price: $2,875.00

Listing Type: Show:
Date Auction Link Seller Buyer Bids Price Extra
2/2/13 eBay Image wvshoebox y***k BIN $2,875.00
11/13/11 eBay Image just_collect o***o 2 $2,499.99
12/16/07 eBay Image davidbvintage cards711 2 $2,551.00



I agree with the sour grapes assessment. The price seems low given previous sales.

[Billy5858]

[QUOTE=Billy5858;1556004]

VCP Data for 1911 M116 Wood, PSA 7:

Latest Auction Prices for: PSA 7 - Average Price: $1,925.00

Listing Type: Show:
Date Auction Link Seller Buyer Bids Price Extra
6/27/16 eBay Auction | Image nanite76 a***s 18 $1,925.00
3/29/15 Love of the Game Image 7 $2,280.00
8/24/14 Memory Lane Image 21 $3,659.09

For PSA 6:

Latest Auction Prices for: PSA 6 - Average Price: $2,875.00

Listing Type: Show:
Date Auction Link Seller Buyer Bids Price Extra
2/2/13 eBay Image wvshoebox y***k BIN $2,875.00
11/13/11 eBay Image just_collect o***o 2 $2,499.99
12/16/07 eBay Image davidbvintage cards711 2 $2,551.00



I agree with the sour grapes assessment. The price seems low given previous sales.


Yeah that's the "story" I'm talking about.
SMR is pretty much useless for some cards now
Days. I don't subscribe to VCP so never see that
Type of info. Looks like the 1950.00 was a great
Price. Still not diggin the Sour Grapes use though.
More like REALLY disappointed :-)

[Edwolf1963]

What in your opinion is the most over-valued baseball card?

Most of the BINs on eBay

[Bosox Blair]

[QUOTE=Billy5858;1556004]

VCP Data for 1911 M116 Wood, PSA 7:

Latest Auction Prices for: PSA 7 - Average Price: $1,925.00

Listing Type: Show:
Date Auction Link Seller Buyer Bids Price Extra
6/27/16 eBay Auction | Image nanite76 a***s 18 $1,925.00
3/29/15 Love of the Game Image 7 $2,280.00
8/24/14 Memory Lane Image 21 $3,659.09

For PSA 6:

Latest Auction Prices for: PSA 6 - Average Price: $2,875.00

Listing Type: Show:
Date Auction Link Seller Buyer Bids Price Extra
2/2/13 eBay Image wvshoebox y***k BIN $2,875.00
11/13/11 eBay Image just_collect o***o 2 $2,499.99
12/16/07 eBay Image davidbvintage cards711 2 $2,551.00



I agree with the sour grapes assessment. The price seems low given previous sales.

I bought the one from Love of the Game in 2015 for $2280 and I was thrilled to get it. I had been hunting that card for many years for my collection and I considered $2280 to be a bargain...still do.

That card is extremely tough, and has always sold for a LOT more than what I paid, let alone the deal someone got at $1925.

Overpriced? Sorry, but that is not supportable at all except for wishful thinking.

Now '52 Topps Mantles...that is a joke. There are boatloads of them. This postwar madness - a clear bubble - will burst harder than Upper Deck rookies (I guess nobody learned from that...if people even remember). It won't take that long.

Cheers,
Blair

[pokerplyr80]

I'm surprised how many people are picking the 52 Mantle, the most iconic card in the hobby. It's not one of the cards that has tripled in value in a month with rumors of market manipulation. Historically in any grade it has shown a consistent increase in value from year to year. It's the best card, of the most popular player, from the most famous team in history. Not to mention it's the best card from the first Topps set, one of the two most popular and widely collected sets in our hobby. The card has a lot going for it. Yes there are a lot of them compared to most expensive cards. But demand is far greater than supply in any grade. All hype? Nothing could be further from the truth.

Yes I am biased as I own one, and my collection is focused on Mantle cards. But I believe if you polled knowledgeable collectors which one card has the most long term investment potential the 52 Mantle would win by a landslide.

[MetsBaseball1973]

Those waiting for the 52 Topps Mantle to be worth less in any grade will be sitting a long while with their bitterness. Decades and decades of history support its status within the baseball card hobby.

[stargell1]

Some good answers.

I agree with the 52 topps Mantle because its not a rookie card. The 51 Bowman should be worth more.

Someone mentioned the Jordan rookie but that is a basketball card lol.. I disagree if you mean the 84 star because that's his rookie and Jordan has worldwide popularity. The 86 Fleer is way overvalued in my opinion because its not a rookie card.

My vote goes to the 71 topps Munson. I understand the guy was popular among Yankee fans and Yankee fans are everywhere, but non-rookie/non hall of fame card makes this the most over valued post war card in my opinion.

[the 'stache]

I would agree on Harper and Bryant. They have a long way to go before they prove they're going to be consistently great players.

But Trout? The guy is in his sixth season (well, fifth full season). The last four, he's either won an MVP, or been MVP runner up. He was Rookie of the Year, he's been a four-time All Star, and has won four Silver Sluggers. He has a career 42.5 WAR, and he's not even 25 yet. He's hit 156 home runs, stolen 123 bases, has a lifetime .306 AVG, and is slashing .399 OBP/.560 SLG/.959 OPS after 3,212 plate appearances. His 169 OPS + is eighth highest all-time for players with over 3,000 plate appearances.

Trout is a superstar, and his cards really aren't overvalued considering what he's done.

http://i.imgur.com/hudM9iG.png
Best $99 I ever spent on my hobby.

Any Mike Trout, Harper, or Bryant rookie card.

[the 'stache]

Again, respectfully, I have to disagree. Strongly. And I don't own the card.

Mantle is one of the ten greatest offensive players in the annals of Major League Baseball. He was the star for the most successful professional franchise in American sports history, in the biggest metropolitan area in America, at a time when television was exploding, and that team was still winning World Championships. Every kid in America wanted to be the Mick. Fathers named their kids after him. Women threw themselves at him. The Commerce Comet was ripped, charming, if not a little soft spoken initially, and looked like a movie star.

Take all those factors, and then consider that the biggest baseball card company of them all, Topps, made its major set debut in 1952. The 1952 Topps set is to vintage what the T206 set is to pre-war. And Mantle's card was the set's lynchpin.

Oh, and it was short-printed.

Logic completely dictates it would be the double printed 1952 topps Mantle.

Not even the true rookie and should be valued in the same range as the 51 bowman. Yes, those that have them will say no, but there is nothing but hype supporting those values and that is most certainly not a foundation of stone to hold up investment.

[pcoz]

Mantle was an iconic figure and his 52T legendary for the hobby, but there are 2000 graded and over 11000 rumored to be printed...11k!!! If a 7 Mantle goes for 225-250k, then the Ruth RC in a PSA 7 coming in Heritage should be 750k, with probably 75-80 Ruth's graded(some crossed). Clemente's RC is insane too, how can a PSA 8 which was 12k two years ago now go for what a Ruth PSA 4 goes for, 150k!!!! I'm a pre-war guy and have a Ruth, with no interest in the Mantle, so I'm a little biased, but I'm trying to be logical. I'm just astounded that the post war cards that are in tremendous supply are going for these INSANE prices. Can't imagine there are that many more who don't have one already going to bid up cards with populations in the thousands for years to come. Great for the hobby if it happens!

[JustinD]

Oh, and it was short-printed.

That would depend on your perspective.

The high series sheet did have a lower print run, however there are three double printed cards on that sheet: mantle, J. robinson and bobby Thomson.

I still stand by it, there simply are hundreds of more difficult cards to own and several even of Mick. The Dice Game card should be worth twice the 52 by logic. The 52 is a hype machine because of its draw to non collectors that buy them as investments and investors are a fickle crowd.

Yes, it has always held value and should for that icon reason, not for rarity. But 10s of thousands I will not scoff at. hundreds of thousands? Ridiculous.

[ullmandds]

Any "modern" rookie card.

[Rookiemonster]

The current prices for Clemente make him my answer .

[Econteachert205]

Rare back 06's. I personally care mostly about the front of the card, as in who is on it. Why a common with a rare back should bring 4-5 figures, I do not know.

[the 'stache]

Just curious as to why?

That base Trout Chrome card I posted-there are less than 2,000 of them in existence-1,695 if Topps has stayed consistent with the number of base chrome autos that were issued in 2004 (and it should be consistent; all the other numbers remain constant but blue, which has increased from /150 to /250). The refractor auto has a printing of /500. The blue refractor auto is limited to /250. The gold is /50, the orange is /25, the red is /5, and there's a /1 superfractor out there. That means, in total, there are about 2,526 autographed true Mike Trout rookie cards with his certified auto.

For how popular he is, that's a pretty short print run for all of baseball fans and collectors to fight over.

The non-autographed cards don't typically command anywhere near that kind of a price. For instance, this Bryce Harper is considered one of his most desirable non-auto releases. A Beckett 9.5/10 goes for under $300, last I checked. An ungraded one goes for under $100, unless it's dead centered.

http://net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=627&pictureid=15477

This one was selling for around $1,200 earlier this season with Harper's hot start. It's dropped back down to about $8-900, and this is an exceptionally high grade card with all 9.5 subs.

http://net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=627&pictureid=15317



Any "modern" rookie card.

[4815162342]

Just curious as to why?



That base Trout Chrome card I posted-there are less than 2,000 of them in existence-1,695 if Topps has stayed consistent with the number of base chrome autos that were issued in 2004 (and it should be consistent; all the other numbers remain constant but blue, which has increased from /150 to /250). The refractor auto has a printing of /500. The blue refractor auto is limited to /250. The gold is /50, the orange is /25, the red is /5, and there's a /1 superfractor out there. That means, in total, there are about 2,526 autographed true Mike Trout rookie cards with his certified auto.



For how popular he is, that's a pretty short print run for all of baseball fans and collectors to fight over.



The non-autographed cards don't typically command anywhere near that kind of a price. For instance, this Bryce Harper is considered one of his most desirable non-auto releases. A Beckett 9.5/10 goes for under $300, last I checked. An ungraded one goes for under $100, unless it's dead centered.



http://net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=627&pictureid=15477



This one was selling for around $1,200 earlier this season with Harper's hot start. It's dropped back down to about $8-900, and this is an exceptionally high grade card with all 9.5 subs.



http://net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=627&pictureid=15317



If that's what you like to collect, more power to you, but listing print runs of modern inserts just proves that they are manufactured rarity.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

I guess it doesn't make a difference how a card got rare, but I've never been a fan of the "artificial" rarity of the modern cards. Printing a card to intentionally make it rare to me is like the Franklin Mint intentionally only making a few of a given crappy collector plate. Sure it's rare, but....

EDIT: What Daryl said....

[ullmandds]

If that's what you like to collect, more power to you, but listing print runs of modern inserts just proves that they are manufactured rarity.

and there is a very high likelihood that most copies will remain in pristine...as new condition.

[Leon]

I guess it doesn't make a difference how a card got rare, but I've never been a fan of the "artificial" rarity of the modern cards. Printing a card to intentionally make it rare to me is like the Franklin Mint intentionally only making a few of a given crappy collector plate. Sure it's rare, but....

EDIT: What Daryl said....

When something is manufactured to be scarce, rare or collectible it sort of takes the shine off of the collecting to me. For those that collect the manufactured rarities, good luck!! You will need it.

[ALR-bishop]

Since I collect Topps and Bowman sets I find myself indifferent to the issue of whether his first Bowman card should be worth more than his first Topps card. But as a person who adds variations to my sets the Mantle ( along with the two other DP high numbers, Robinson and Thompson), added a good deal of expense to my 52 set build

The 3 DP variants do not have a great deal of hobby recognition, but the Mantle has both back ( stitches on ball on back run right or left) and front differences ( the most noticeable being the top line of stars is wavy or straight and the end of the e in the auto is full or truncated). I don't think the Registry lists the two versions in it's master list, but the SCD Standard Catalog does.

I assume, but do not know if both versions exist in the hobby in approximately equal numbers. Nor have I heard that one or the other carries any premium. But for variation set guys, the Topps Mantle is a dilemma...whether overvalued or not :)

[darwinbulldog]

No way! :D

I think the current, Rose RC is a bit much, but that's just my opinion.

You should make that picture your new avatar.

[darwinbulldog]

Yes I am biased as I own one, and my collection is focused on Mantle cards. But I believe if you polled knowledgeable collectors which one card has the most long term investment potential the 52 Mantle would win by a landslide.

If I'm not mistaken you just insinuated we're not knowledgeable collectors. Is that correct?

[darwinbulldog]

I'm just gonna leave this here.

Player: Mickey Mantle
Elo Rank: #16
WAR Rank: #21
JAWS: #4 (CF)
Card: 1952 Topps
Rookie: No
Age of card: 64
PSA Population: 1358
Last auction price: $17,100

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-Mickey-Mantle-311-PSA-2-Great-Opportunity-to-Own-This-Iconic-Card-/252422752316?hash=item3ac591883c%3Ag%3AVHEAAOSwepJ XUaQr&nma=true&si=4UU1%252BMIXaMX3f2xC59xHhWduBgo%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

Player: Eddie Collins
Elo Rank: #8
WAR Rank: #13
JAWS: #2 (2B)
Card: W600
Rookie: Yes
Age of card: 110
PSA Population: 0
Last auction price: $531

http://www.goodwinandco.com/1902-11-sporting-life-w600-eddie-collins-sgc-1-lot28084.aspx

[JTysver]

'68 Ryan Rookie.
It was valued at $25 until the mid 80s and took off with the Card Boom of the late 80s. Its a very common card also.

[rats60]

I'm just gonna leave this here.

Player: Mickey Mantle
Elo Rank: #16
WAR Rank: #21
JAWS: #4 (CF)
Card: 1952 Topps
Rookie: No
Age of card: 64
PSA Population: 1358
Last auction price: $17,100

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-Mickey-Mantle-311-PSA-2-Great-Opportunity-to-Own-This-Iconic-Card-/252422752316?hash=item3ac591883c%3Ag%3AVHEAAOSwepJ XUaQr&nma=true&si=4UU1%252BMIXaMX3f2xC59xHhWduBgo%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

Player: Eddie Collins
Elo Rank: #8
WAR Rank: #13
JAWS: #2 (2B)
Card: W600
Rookie: Yes
Age of card: 110
PSA Population: 0
Last auction price: $531

http://www.goodwinandco.com/1902-11-sporting-life-w600-eddie-collins-sgc-1-lot28084.aspx

OPS+ Collins 142 Mantle 172
Championships Collins 4 Mantle 7

[cammb]

1952 Topps #311.


Without a doubt!

[packs]

Chick Gandil Obak
Chick Gandil C46
Roger Peckinpaugh D311


Pretty expensive key cards of guys who weren't very good from sets full of guys who weren't very good.

[darwinbulldog]

OPS+ Collins 142 Mantle 172
Championships Collins 4 Mantle 7

Championships:
Frank Crosetti 8
Ty Cobb 0

[Joshwesley]

Rare back 06's. I personally care mostly about the front of the card, as in who is on it. Why a common with a rare back should bring 4-5 figures, I do not know.



BINGO.
Don't understand and will never understand the "Back-game" with T-206's.

Having said that I have a lennox and a CB with common players on the front.

I've always thought that I need to cash those in for some star players...

When you're showing your cards off.... a t206 with Oscar Stanage and a lennox back.... doesn't quite play as well as a Red Cobb portrait or a Mickey Mantle etc. etc.

[glynparson]

People have been saying 1952 mantle since I started collecting in 1980 they were wrong then and wrong now. There is far to much demand for that card from even people that don't own any baseball cards for it to be that one just like it's not the Honus. I'd honestly go with Psa 9. 1968 topps Nolan Ryan right now. Or possibly rose or even my favorite player Stargell. The leaps they have taken in the last month are unprecedented and don't look sustainable.

[the 'stache]

For the prospect autos I buy, the "how many of them are being printed" is the last thing on my mind. I could care less if there are 100 of them printed, or 1,000. I enjoy prospecting. I've always enjoyed learning about up-and-coming players, and these offer the opportunity to get one of their first cards with a certified autograph.

[glchen]

I think the Pete Rose rookie card in 8 or above is overvalued. Just too much supply. I like Pete Rose, and believe he should be in the HOF, but you can't tell me that he's even in the Top 20 of best baseball players ever. That floating head 4-1 rookie card isn't even a nice image of him on a card either.

I can understand why some vintage postwar RC's have a greater "multiplier effect" than many prewar greats like Ruth or Cobb. Then reason is that many collectors stick with only Topps cards. For others, it can be very difficult to determine what the correct rookie card is for a prewar player. For Ruth, there different back variations for the M101-5 and M101-4. And some publications (Beckett, I believe) don't even consider that his rookie card but say something like the 1933 Goudey is Ruth's rookie card due to national distribution. That can confuse many collectors. For Cobb, it's even harder to pin down what his "best" rookie card could be.

[clydepepper]

Again, respectfully, I have to disagree. Strongly. And I don't own the card.

Mantle is one of the ten greatest offensive players in the annals of Major League Baseball. He was the star for the most successful professional franchise in American sports history, in the biggest metropolitan area in America, at a time when television was exploding, and that team was still winning World Championships. Every kid in America wanted to be the Mick. Fathers named their kids after him. Women threw themselves at him. The Commerce Comet was ripped, charming, if not a little soft spoken initially, and looked like a movie star.

Take all those factors, and then consider that the biggest baseball card company of them all, Topps, made its major set debut in 1952. The 1952 Topps set is to vintage what the T206 set is to pre-war. And Mantle's card was the set's lynchpin.

Oh, and it was short-printed.

I always understood the DP listed next to Mantle, Jackie and Thomson to mean Double Print.

[ALR-bishop]

Raymond--see Justin's post #35. It was a DP card on the sheet but given it was a late summer run and the ocean dumping legend, there may have been fewer sheets for that series

[SMPEP]

Every PSA 7, 8, 9 and 10 card.

I have no idea why buyers have allowed themselves to be duped by the sellers/dealers (who have a vested interest) into believing pristine looking cards are worth more money.

Either you have a 52 Mantle or you don't. It's a binary event. Having the "best looking 52 Mantle" (whatever that means to 2,000 different people) shouldn't command a premium of many multiples - if the market behaved rationally.

No one here would pay $10,000 for a "better" sandwich than the one that cost $15. Yet folks willingly over pay this for cardboard every single day.

But I'm glad all these people buy all these overpriced cards - because if they didn't, I wouldn't be able to have a collection in the first place.

[begsu1013]

i think each and every card mentioned is a qualified candidate, especially the "manufactured rare" cards.

of course, 98% of us will probably be eating our words in the next couple years.

only time will tell.


i did go back and search this forum using key words like:

"top of the market"
"prices"
"insane prices"

and in just about every year* there were threads about what cards were realizing, folks posting it had to be a complete sham or simply utter disbelief.

and most of those prices would be no-brainers and absolute steals now.

dmitri young prices equal an exemplary proving ground.


* not as many during the 07-08 years for obvious reasons.

[steve B]

well, since everyone is going with the whole "manufactured rare" argument, I suppose we can add

33 Goudey Lajoie
R300 Ivy Andrews
US Caramel Lindstrom

And pretty much any other prize winner card.

Sorry, if it applies to one era it must apply to all.


And nobody has mentioned the Wagner yet? Not really hard to get, just hard to afford, just like the 52 Mantle.

Of course, all of those will continue to appreciate reasonably well.

So it all depends on how one figures "overvalued"
To me the Lajoie etc are cards that are probably appropriately valued.
The Wagner and Mantle are worth what they are not because of the card itself, but purely because of demand. What would a T206 common be worth if there were only around 60 known? There's a lot of front back combinations that are much tougher and will never be worth anywhere near what the Wagner is. Likewise, there are twice as many 52 Mantles as any other high number (Except the other two doubleprints) In fact, probably more than double since stars got saved more often. And again, none of the commons or even stars in the high numbers will ever get close.

So I consider them "overvalued" and have for a long time.

Steve B

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Every PSA 7, 8, 9 and 10 card.

I have no idea why buyers have allowed themselves to be duped by the sellers/dealers (who have a vested interest) into believing pristine looking cards are worth more money.

Either you have a 52 Mantle or you don't. It's a binary event. Having the "best looking 52 Mantle" (whatever that means to 2,000 different people) shouldn't command a premium of many multiples - if the market behaved rationally.

No one here would pay $10,000 for a "better" sandwich than the one that cost $15. Yet folks willingly over pay this for cardboard every single day.

But I'm glad all these people buy all these overpriced cards - because if they didn't, I wouldn't be able to have a collection in the first place.

Not to be a jerk, but a sandwich isn't a collectible. Condition has ALWAYS mattered in EVERY collectible market, coins, antiques, stamps, Tonka Trucks, whatever. While you may have a point to make about infinitesimal differences between 9's and 10's, calling 1952 Mantle ownership a binary event is a little out of touch with, well, the entire rest of the world.

[Leon]

Not to be a jerk, but a sandwich isn't a collectible. Condition has ALWAYS mattered in EVERY collectible market, coins, antiques, stamps, Tonka Trucks, whatever. While you may have a point to make about infinitesimal differences between 9's and 10's, calling 1952 Mantle ownership a binary event is a little out of touch with, well, the entire rest of the world.

I am about to go collect either some hot wings or Chinese food. I won't collect it for long most likely :)....(that made me laugh)

[ALR-bishop]

You guys who think food is not a collectible need to pay closer attention to what you are eating

http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrTcc_FD3RXRAQAoMMnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTE0bzM0Z2s 3BGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMyBHZ0aWQDRkZVSTNDMV8xBHNlYwNzc g--/RV=2/RE=1467252806/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.roadsideamerica.com%2fstory%2f 10166/RK=0/RS=_mmjBp00vvkfZXhGRvrw9kPhOMY-
http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A86.Jyb2EHRXiygAb8MnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTE0cWI0YnF rBGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDRkZVSTNDMV8xBHNlYwNzc g--/RV=2/RE=1467253110/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.buzzfeed.com%2farielknutson%2f people-who-found-jesus-in-their-food/RK=0/RS=WqEY0up2hGt6bucHMcKWWrsKjzg-

[begsu1013]

.

[clydepepper]

I am about to go collect either some hot wings or Chinese food. I won't collect it for long most likely :)....(that made me laugh)


Leon- regrettably, we are 'collecting' from the same places...and I see my collection every morning in the mirror- UGH!

CONDITION really DOES matter. :rolleyes:

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

I am about to go collect either some hot wings or Chinese food. I won't collect it for long most likely :)....(that made me laugh)

those would be intestinal differences, not infinitesimal ones...

[pokerplyr80]

If I'm not mistaken you just insinuated we're not knowledgeable collectors. Is that correct?

Actually that's not correct. I am amazed at the knowledge many members possess on this site, and have learned a lot since I joined reading various threads and having discussions with several of these members.

I simply stated that I believe if one were able to poll a large group of knowledgeable collectors the 52 Mantle would come out on top as the card with the most long term investment potential. It sounds like this is a debate that has been going on for years. As another member pointed out people were saying the card was over valued 30 years ago. It has appreciated quite a bit since then, and I believe it will do so again over the next 30 years.

The T206 Wagner is not his rookie, not the rarest prewar card, and it's not even the rarest Wagner card. Here's a link to a Wagner RC for sale on ebay:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/JOHN-HANS-HONUS-WAGNER-1902-RC-W600-SPORTING-LIFE-CABINETS-UNIFORM-PSA-2-5-/141939378268?hash=item210c3f085c:g:tcQAAMXQL99Scwi B

Total PSA population of 9. I have never seen a thread or post arguing that this card should sell for more than the t206 because it's his true RC, or because it's more rare.

[sportscardpete]

anything with a ghost image/printers scrap

[poorlydrawncat]

When something is manufactured to be scarce, rare or collectible it sort of takes the shine off of the collecting to me. For those that collect the manufactured rarities, good luck!! You will need it.

I actually disagree with this to some extent, in regards to the value of manufactured rarities (appeal is a different story). I think the early years of artificial scarcity will not only hold their value but increase tremendously. I'm specifically talking about cards manufactured from ~1996-2000. There were loads of innovations during this period, and it was a time when pulling a sequentially numbered card was near impossible (there would usually be a main set and a parallel set and that was it). Ultimately the card companies went too far with the concept and started serial numbering everything. If everything is sequentially numbered, then nothing is.

In addition to being scarce, these cards also feature players you can't find on vintage cards. I love Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb, but I grew up watching Griffey. If I want his best card, I look to the ones that are the scarcest, whether or not that scarcity is artificial doesn't really bother me too much, as long as the item is truly unique. The 1997 SPx Force autograph is one of my favorite cards in my collection, and I appreciate knowing exactly how many were made and which one I own. And as much as I love the aesthetics of my vintage collection, there's something I love about the ridiculous "in-your-face" 90's design. Maybe just because it reminds me of the aesthetics I grew up in...

I think this will apply a lot more to the basketball cards from that era though than baseball. Like Mantle did for baseball cards, Jordan heralded the modern era of card collecting and cards from his era will always carry value. I also think basketball benefits from a strong international market (particularly from China/SE Asia). I think there will be a time when low serial numbered Jordan cards from the 90s appear on the covers of auction magazines right next to the t206 Wagner. And if you look at auction results, it's not that far off I don't think.

But who knows, I could be totally wrong. I actually hope I'm wrong and the late-90s bubble will burst. I'd love to be able to afford all the cards from my childhood again...

[irv]

I would have to say the 1952 topps #1 Andy pafko. I know it's the #1 card in the set and hard to find in nice shape but $5000 for an ok player.

You stated exactly why it is priced the way it is. It isn't because of who he is, but because of where this card belongs, the #1 card in the set of the most iconic set in the world.
Personally, I am surprised higher graded copies don't sell for more, and no, I do not own one.
http://www.ebay.com/gds/1952-Topps-Baseball-Card-Set-/10000000002638733/g.html

Some good answers.

I agree with the 52 topps Mantle because its not a rookie card. The 51 Bowman should be worth more.

Someone mentioned the Jordan rookie but that is a basketball card lol.. I disagree if you mean the 84 star because that's his rookie and Jordan has worldwide popularity. The 86 Fleer is way overvalued in my opinion because its not a rookie card.

My vote goes to the 71 topps Munson. I understand the guy was popular among Yankee fans and Yankee fans are everywhere, but non-rookie/non hall of fame card makes this the most over valued post war card in my opinion.

I was also going to mention that one. Referring to the one I posted that sold for over $30,000 but thought mentioning the current, Rose RC was enough.

You should make that picture your new avatar.

Great idea!

Thanks :)

[darwinbulldog]

My other nominee:
http://smalltraditions.com/1986-topps-690-ryne-sandberg-psa-10-gem-mint-ultr-lot2473.aspx

[darwinbulldog]

Sooooooooooooooooo much nicer than this card:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/3835-1986-Topps-690-RYNE-SANDBERG-Cubs-/371490523749?hash=item567e8f8a65:g:DAgAAOSwlV9WTrz v

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

My other nominee:
http://smalltraditions.com/1986-topps-690-ryne-sandberg-psa-10-gem-mint-ultr-lot2473.aspx

Holy crap that is the funniest thing I've ever seen. You'd think by 2013 people would understand lo pops because nobody has bothered to grade the damn things lol.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Pop on Sandberg is now up to 6, but there's only 4 Andre Dawson in PSA 10, must be worth a grand right?

[glchen]

People have been saying 1952 mantle since I started collecting in 1980 they were wrong then and wrong now. There is far to much demand for that card from even people that don't own any baseball cards for it to be that one just like it's not the Honus. ....

I'm not saying that this card value is going to drop anytime soon. It is, without a doubt, one of THE iconic cards in the hobby. However, saying that, I still have trouble with the thinking that this card (or cards like this), will always continue to go up in value.

First, people also once upon a time thought that real estate could never drop in value because people had to live somewhere. However, that has now been thoroughly disproven even with the rebound in housing prices. I know this isn't the best analogy, but more aimed at the thinking that card prices for these iconic cards will never drop.

Also, demand for these cards has to come from somewhere. I could have missed them, but I still haven't seen many articles saying there is a rebound in kids collecting baseball cards. I have two boys, ages 5 & 7 (almost). Even though I am an avid collector, they have ZERO interest in cards. I've never seen anyone in their school collect cards. At Target, I see ZERO kids in the baseball card aisle (and in some ways, shocked they still sell them there). Joe Orlando's column in the latest SMR magazine notwithstanding, I've never seen or heard anyone in "real" life randomly talking about cards since I was in middle school nearly 30 years ago. (not including these boards, ebay, or card conventions)

I know there are a lot of folks from my generation who collected cards as a kid, who now have disposable income, who are now spending it on cards to buy a lot of cards they couldn't even think of affording as kids and expanding into other areas. However, it also makes me think that a lot of the folks buying cards these days are purely investors and not even collector/investor. And for investors, if they think the value of a stock has peaked out, they'll drop it like yesterday's Yahoo stock.

[glynparson]

People have been grading 1986 topps stars for about 10 years now because 10scarevrelatively difficult. I agree the price is absurd but you are wrong if you think nobody was submitting them.

[nsaddict]

I'm going with the 52 Topps Mantle also. As a choice, in PSA8's for about the same dough you could have:
51 Bowman Mantle
51 Bowman Mays
52 Bowman Mantle
52 Bowman Mays
53 Topps Mantle
53 Topps Mays

And still have money left to buy a house!

Some would still pick the 52 Mick? Thought it was funny reading Brent's post from PWCC, he still thinks that card is undervalued. For sure, he gets a huge commission on that sale! (nothing against him, I buy from him).

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

People have been grading 1986 topps stars for about 10 years now because 10scarevrelatively difficult. I agree the price is absurd but you are wrong if you think nobody was submitting them.

I looked at the pops, a couple hundred of most HOF'ers. Considering that conservative estimates are 6 -10 MILLION of each card, I stand by my assertion. Nobody, relatively speaking, is grading these.

[glynparson]

several hundred for cards that book at a less than a dollar is a lot. Never said people were submitting all of them and if you've ever looked at the issue for 9-20 quality it's less than 1 in 10 cards. People aren't subbing these at 8 level on purpose heck they aren't even shooting for 9 they only want the 10

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

One last thought and then we can just agree to disagree I don't need for you to say I'm right, and I can't be bothered accusing you of being wrong.

Let's go back to the very card in question. There have been 224 Sandbergs submitted. even if we go lowball and say there were 5,000,000 made that is less than one half of one hundreth of a percent or .00005. 6 have gotten PSA 10's. Let's say the world goes on a 1986 Topps grading spree driven by the overwhelming market forces that drive the price of a Sandberg to $2,000, and an additional 1,000 are graded. At current rates that would yield about 31 more PSA 10's. Now a whopping .0002448 of the possibles have been graded and we have 37 PSA 10's. Still worth $2,000? If it is maybe another 5,000 get graded. now we have about 160 MORE PSA 10's for almost 200 TOTAL and we've still only graded .0012448 of all the possible examples.

Let's take a look at the assertion that the "10" is necessarily rare. 6/224 = 2.67%. Not super easy, but far from impossible, especially considering the available cards to draw from! Also you maintain people are only trying to get 10's on this card. Well people must be pretty awful judges of cards because of those 224, 76 have graded 8 with a qualifier or lower. Kind of a side issue to be sure, but again the fact of the matter is paying a premium for a 1986 Topps card because it's "rare" in PSA 10 after 224 have been graded is the kind of thing that will drive people from this hobby, or attract leeches to it.

EDIT: OOPS missed one point, you say that "several hundred for cards that book at a less than a dollar is a lot." Well actually it's only a couple hundred. Also MORE 1985 Sandbergs have been submitted than 1986, and 1987 Sandbergs are virtually identical at 213. They must be tough in PSA 10 also? I'm going to start cracking junk wax for 50¢ cards and turn them into $2,000 apiece...

[Sean]

The most overvalued card is the MAGIE error. It's just a typo. If it wasn't a T206, it would be forgotten.


236743

[xplainer]

PSA 10 1986 Topps = PSA Registery + Ego.

[mechanicalman]

[QUOTE I'm going to start cracking junk wax for 50¢ cards and turn them into $2,000 apiece...[/QUOTE]

Ha. The thought has crossed my mind at times, but then I figured, with grading fees, exorbitant shipping, and the low likelihood of getting a 10, it might cost $3000 to land a $2000 card. :D

[Wayne]

any superfractor 1/1

[Gary Dunaier]

I am about to go collect either some hot wings or Chinese food. I won't collect it for long most likely :)....(that made me laugh)

I doubt that people who buy souvenir beers or souvenir sodas at the ballpark actually keep 'em as souvenirs. :eek:

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8266/8684541287_6011d24e1e_c.jpg
(Photo taken April 24, 2013. © Gary Dunaier. Link to upload on Flickr.com: here (https://www.flickr.com/photos/gary_dunaier/8684541287/in/photolist-eeqxyt-4X7xqt).)

[Gary Dunaier]

That Stephen Strasburg 1/1 that sold for $16,000 a few years ago has to fall into this category on some level. The guy who paid $16K quickly flipped it for $24K. What makes this more amazing is that both transactions took place before Strasburg ever threw a pitch in the majors!

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

wasn't there some ultra rare Alex Gordon error or recalled card or something that went absolutely berserk? I pay no attention to new stuff so I may be confusing it with something else.

[Koufax32fan]

This Alex Gordon?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/2006-Topps-Alex-Gordon-Cut-Out-BGS-9-5-Royals-Rare-297B-/370618653697

[KCRfan1]

I'm too much into the cards from the '50's , '60's , and early '70's to even begin to understand or justify prices for " current " rookies.

As a side note, I wonder how many who have said the '52 Mantle is overvalued are actual owners of the card?

And if you presently own the card, do you believe the card is in fact, overvalued?

I don't own a "52 Mantle, nor will I ever be able to afford one. But like it or not, this IS the definitive card in card collecting.

Rarity and scarcity does not always translate to big dollars. While other cards are more difficult to find, the '52 Mantle is iconic and THE card to own.

I'll never forget a post I read form a longtime member that read ( in part ), " The only people who feel Mantles are overvalued are people who don't own one ".

[Leon]

I'm too much into the cards from the '50's , '60's , and early '70's to even begin to understand or justify prices for " current " rookies.

As a side note, I wonder how many who have said the '52 Mantle is overvalued are actual owners of the card?

And if you presently own the card, do you believe the card is in fact, overvalued?

I don't own a "52 Mantle, nor will I ever be able to afford one. But like it or not, this IS the definitive card in card collecting.

Rarity and scarcity does not always translate to big dollars. While other cards are more difficult to find, the '52 Mantle is iconic and THE card to own.

I'll never forget a post I read form a longtime member that read ( in part ), " The only people who feel Mantles are overvalued are people who don't own one ".

I have (For now) a '52 Mantle and I think they are priced about right. :)

.

[KCRfan1]

I have (For now) a '52 Mantle and I think they are priced about right. :)

.

Dare I say there may be a part of you that believes the card may be a tad undervalued!!! :D

[Leon]

Dare I say there may be a part of you that believes the card may be a tad undervalued!!! :D

Only when I bought it :).


.

[darwinbulldog]

I'll never forget a post I read form a longtime member that read ( in part ), " The only people who feel Mantles are overvalued are people who don't own one ".

It's true, but the causal arrow runs in the direction opposite of what is being insinuated; only the people who don't think Mantles are overvalued are buying (and not selling) Mantles. They are outliers in any model that tries to predict the prices of cards strictly as a function of card age, rarity, condition, and player quality -- for all the reasons people have already stated -- and those are not reasons that make me want to own the cards anyway (other than the '51 as a rookie card collector) nor are they reasons that lead me to believe that the run-up is likely to continue over the next several years, let alone decades. I have owned a '52 Topps Mantle once. I got a pretty good deal on it and quickly flipped it for a small profit just over a decade ago. I'm not looking to buy one now, but if the same opportunity arose I'd do the same thing and spend the profit on a card or cards that I want to keep. I wish I had my E126 Ruth back, so maybe I'd go with that. Better player, tougher card, and better-looking card if you ask me.

The only people who own Mantles are the people who feel they aren't overvalued.

[ALR-bishop]

I have 2, both variations. Bought them years ago. I have no idea if they are overvalued or not. I am glad I bought them long ago and not needing to get them now.

I have them because I am an obsessive Topps set collector who tries to get all recognized variations with all my sets. It's hobby for me. I know it is an investment for some, or a combination hobby and investment. It's a broad hobby. Room for all

[Dpeck100]

Every PSA 7, 8, 9 and 10 card.

I have no idea why buyers have allowed themselves to be duped by the sellers/dealers (who have a vested interest) into believing pristine looking cards are worth more money.

Either you have a 52 Mantle or you don't. It's a binary event. Having the "best looking 52 Mantle" (whatever that means to 2,000 different people) shouldn't command a premium of many multiples - if the market behaved rationally.

No one here would pay $10,000 for a "better" sandwich than the one that cost $15. Yet folks willingly over pay this for cardboard every single day.

But I'm glad all these people buy all these overpriced cards - because if they didn't, I wouldn't be able to have a collection in the first place.



This post boggles my mind.


Why are there different prices for similar models of cars? Is every Porsche created equal?

Condition has mattered in card collecting since I got started in 1985. It will never change.

Would you be more comfortable owning a painting that was ripped and stained then one that is in pristine condition and you can clearly see the image without any distractions to the eye?

[Leon]

This post boggles my mind.


Why are there different prices for similar models of cars? Is every Porsche created equal?

Condition has mattered in card collecting since I got started in 1985. It will never change.

Would you be more comfortable owning a painting that was ripped and stained then one that is in pristine condition and you can clearly see the image without any distractions to the eye?

Agreed. ...It's almost exactly opposite of what is stated :). And as for condition, it has always been something collectors have focused on since at least the 1930s. Better looking specimens are more desirable and therefore more valuable. It seems like common sense to me.

.

[begsu1013]

.

[Dpeck100]

so all toilet paper isn't created the same? :D

Not like Charmin Ultra Soft!

[Eggoman]

Agreed. ...It's almost exactly opposite of what is stated :). And as for condition, it has always been something collectors have focused on since at least the 1930s. Better looking specimens are more desirable and therefore more valuable. It seems like common sense to me.

.

Does that hold true for WOMEN too??? :D

[bravos4evr]

This post boggles my mind.


Why are there different prices for similar models of cars? Is every Porsche created equal?

Condition has mattered in card collecting since I got started in 1985. It will never change.

Would you be more comfortable owning a painting that was ripped and stained then one that is in pristine condition and you can clearly see the image without any distractions to the eye?

This is true sure, but lately the difference between super excellent and super duper excellent has gone off the reservation. There once was more of a graduated price ramp from "poor" all the way to "mint" and you could see a logical path along the way. Now, you see some cards are "poor" at $500 and "mint" at $500,000 and that doesn't seem to follow any path of logic at all. I mean people spend what they want and buy what they want, and that's their bidness (the high end market doesn't impact me much) but eventually, this is all going to crash and burn as the prices don't seem to reflect any sort of rational decision making but rather a falsely manufactured profit chase. People buying $90,000 Rose PSA 9's then flipping em for $150k to another who buys hoping to flip for $200k....etc eventually, someone is gonna lose their shirt and the resulting domino effect could bring the entire high end market crashing down (thus impacting the lower markets along the way)


edited to add: paintings aren't really applicable because fine art is "one off" creations whereas cards are a manufactured commodity. There aren't 50,000 "Starry Night" original paintings floating around out there in various states of condition.

[Republicaninmass]

Greater fool theory

[bn2cardz]

I'm too much into the cards from the '50's , '60's , and early '70's to even begin to understand or justify prices for " current " rookies.

As a side note, I wonder how many who have said the '52 Mantle is overvalued are actual owners of the card?

And if you presently own the card, do you believe the card is in fact, overvalued?

I don't own a "52 Mantle, nor will I ever be able to afford one. But like it or not, this IS the definitive card in card collecting.

Rarity and scarcity does not always translate to big dollars. While other cards are more difficult to find, the '52 Mantle is iconic and THE card to own.

I'll never forget a post I read form a longtime member that read ( in part ), " The only people who feel Mantles are overvalued are people who don't own one ".

This quote "The only people who feel Mantles are overvalued are people who don't own one" ignores a few logical follow up questions.

a) Are the people that own and think it isn't over-valued the ones hyping the value?
b) Is the reason people that don't own it continue not to own it because they feel it is over valued and have other cards they would rather spend their money on?

I don't own a 51 Bowman Mantle and believe it is under-valued in comparison to his second year card with several design flaws that was double printed.

I would not call it the "definitive" card in card collecting. It is the definitive card in card investing.
Yet there is no "definitive" card in collecting because collecting varies by people. There are collectors that don't collect Topps or any card made since their inception. Also, though I have heard of HOF rookie collections, I have never heard of a 2nd year HOF collection.

[begsu1013]

.

[Touch'EmAll]

I went through the top 4 pages of PWCC looking for pre war cards from highest priced all the way down to $600. Saw not one single pre war card. No Cobb's, No Ruth's, No Gehrig's, No Walter Johnson's, etc. Hmmm.

Would love to see when some HOFer T206's or other pre war HOFers come up for auction what they go for. Then will be able to get a better handle on the stuff "we" collect.

[KCRfan1]

If we only had a crystal ball!

[Dpeck100]

This is true sure, but lately the difference between super excellent and super duper excellent has gone off the reservation. There once was more of a graduated price ramp from "poor" all the way to "mint" and you could see a logical path along the way. Now, you see some cards are "poor" at $500 and "mint" at $500,000 and that doesn't seem to follow any path of logic at all. I mean people spend what they want and buy what they want, and that's their bidness (the high end market doesn't impact me much) but eventually, this is all going to crash and burn as the prices don't seem to reflect any sort of rational decision making but rather a falsely manufactured profit chase. People buying $90,000 Rose PSA 9's then flipping em for $150k to another who buys hoping to flip for $200k....etc eventually, someone is gonna lose their shirt and the resulting domino effect could bring the entire high end market crashing down (thus impacting the lower markets along the way)


edited to add: paintings aren't really applicable because fine art is "one off" creations whereas cards are a manufactured commodity. There aren't 50,000 "Starry Night" original paintings floating around out there in various states of condition.



My post from another forum on Bren't post that is did on both boards. I think this sums up the current market.


Nice to see you post on the forum about the topic Brent.

One of the hardest parts of investing is being early in a trend and staying on the bull. It is so much easier said than done. Scads of people have said I wanted to buy that stock at $10 and now it is $100. Had I put x amount in it I would have x. Yeah sure. Along the way you have to deal with death defying pullbacks that can easily shake a human out. The easy part is you can go right back into the market and get your shares back essentially anytime you want just at a different price good or bad. With rare cards you can't so there is a much different attachment and fear of selling.

You make a great point about supply. The total population is only one metric to look at. The immediate supply is more important and there are a multitude of cards locked up in collections that buyers know aren't coming to market.


I personally view most high end cards as appealing to a persons bragging rights. The higher the prices go the more bragging rights associated with them and the more others want them.

I sum up the market with a line from this clip.

The illusion has become real and the more real it becomes the more desperate they want it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVjCRWbvM4c


My wrestling cards were considered garbage, worthless, only for losers, gay and any other negative comment one can make. It wasn't just people in the card collecting community but personal friends and associates in the financial services industry. Now that they aren't worthless they are cool, awesome, so unique and so on. People hate things at low prices and love them at high prices.

Telling someone you own a perfect mint Michael Jordan rookie sounds great. The first question is how much is it worth. (2010) $6,500. Wow that is pretty cool. Fast forward to 2016 and it is $35,000+. Man that is so awesome!!! Bingo.

[Stampsfan]

Does that hold true for WOMEN too??? :D

Having been through a couple of hot "crazies", I'd have to say no.

[jason.1969]

This is true sure, but lately the difference between super excellent and super duper excellent has gone off the reservation. There once was more of a graduated price ramp from "poor" all the way to "mint" and you could see a logical path along the way. Now, you see some cards are "poor" at $500 and "mint" at $500,000 and that doesn't seem to follow any path of logic at all. I mean people spend what they want and buy what they want, and that's their bidness (the high end market doesn't impact me much) but eventually, this is all going to crash and burn as the prices don't seem to reflect any sort of rational decision making but rather a falsely manufactured profit chase. People buying $90,000 Rose PSA 9's then flipping em for $150k to another who buys hoping to flip for $200k....etc eventually, someone is gonna lose their shirt and the resulting domino effect could bring the entire high end market crashing down (thus impacting the lower markets along the way)


edited to add: paintings aren't really applicable because fine art is "one off" creations whereas cards are a manufactured commodity. There aren't 50,000 "Starry Night" original paintings floating around out there in various states of condition.
Yep.

[glchen]

I went through the top 4 pages of PWCC looking for pre war cards from highest priced all the way down to $600. Saw not one single pre war card. No Cobb's, No Ruth's, No Gehrig's, No Walter Johnson's, etc. Hmmm.

Would love to see when some HOFer T206's or other pre war HOFers come up for auction what they go for. Then will be able to get a better handle on the stuff "we" collect.

PWCC regularly auctions all sorts of prewar card every month. I think the prewar section is already complete for June, which is why you don't see it. You can do a search on the auction history for PWCC here: Link (http://www.pwccauctions.com/auctions.php), and you'll see plenty of Ruth, Cobb, and Johnson cards.

[bravos4evr]

PWCC regularly auctions all sorts of prewar card every month. I think the prewar section is already complete for June, which is why you don't see it. You can do a search on the auction history for PWCC here: Link (http://www.pwccauctions.com/auctions.php), and you'll see plenty of Ruth, Cobb, and Johnson cards.

Yeah they started the month with the oldest stuff and worked in order to the newest stuff right now I think. I was ogling a lot of stuff that ended up out of my range.

must admit I blew it on the lot of cards with a musial auto tho, ended up going for $50 and I assumed it would go too high and let it lapse. DOH!

[glynparson]

You don't know what you are talking about. I know for a fact two different large submitters have handed in lots in the hundreds to thousand of various 1986 stars. They only had the tens or in a very few cases the 9s slabbed. These cards never make the pop but we're still subbed for grading. That's why some big submitters only have 9-10 cards for sale. Also 200+ of a 25 cent modern card seems like a lot of subs to me. I don't care how many were produced the average owner of a 1986 topps set doesn't even know what the hell Psa or sgc is. So sorry still think you're way off base.

[steve B]

Would you be more comfortable owning a painting that was ripped and stained then one that is in pristine condition and you can clearly see the image without any distractions to the eye?

Same artist or different?
There are quite a few artists whose work I like enough that I'd take a damaged painting - Or for many of them a print if they made them- than a nice example of a painting by an artist I don't like.

Of course, that's from an enjoyment perspective.

So, a really bad anything by da Vinci over a nice Picasso.
Or maybe even a genuine Escher print over a nice Picasso.

Now of course, if I'm not actually paying the "real" price for it I'll go with whatever is likely to sell for more


And I've never been all that picky about condition with cards, If I buy a boxful, and some are nicer than the ones I already have I'll upgrade, but I rarely go out of my way to upgrade.

Steve B

[stargell1]

This quote "The only people who feel Mantles are overvalued are people who don't own one" ignores a few logical follow up questions.

Do people that own it think it isn't over-valued the ones hyping the height of value?
Is the reason people that don't own it is because they think it is valued to high and would rather buy other cards with that money?

I don't own a 51 Bowman Mantle and believe it is under-valued in comparison to his second year card with several design flaws that was double printed.

I would not call it the "definitive" card in card collecting. It is the definitive card in card investing.
Yet there is no "definitive" card in collecting because collecting varies by people. There are collectors that don't collect Topps or any card made since their inception. Also, though I have heard of HOF rookie collections, I have never heard of a 2nd year HOF collection.

Well said.

[bn2cardz]

Well said.

Well I am glad you understood it. I reread it and couldn't. haha. I cleaned up some grammar and I hope it makes more sense now.

[HRBAKER]

I think there are great many people who would like a '52T Mantle and who could afford one at current levels who don't buy one bc they think it is overvalued.
It's simple really, it's not worth what it would cost them to them. Not everyone is green with envy to own this card.

[Eggoman]

I don't envy those who have a 1952 Topps Mantle - I wish I DID have one.

IF I had one, I'd keep it!

But I don't have one and would not pay the going rate to own one now. I would not be happy to own "a Beater", but I would NOT spend what it takes to own a "nice" one.

Does THAT make sense?

[Touch'EmAll]

OK. Recently a nicely centered PSA 5 Topps 1952 Mickey Mantle went for $125,000.

If you were given $125,000. and had to spend it on 1-3 cards, what would you buy?

I would go for a minimum PSA 5, T206 Cobb green and the best 1920's something Ruth's (1 or 2 cards) with remainder of money.

[ALR-bishop]

Maybe when Mr McGuire recommended plastics to Benjamin Braddock back in 1967 he was predicting PSA

[HRBAKER]

Maybe when Mr McGuire recommended plastics to Benjamin Braddock back in 1967 he was predicting PSA

Al you may be on to something.
I think I remember them also discussing flips and poppage in some of the outtakes.

[Republicaninmass]

Most overvalued card?


ANY I've posted on the bSt boards!


I own a 1952 topps Mantle, with the same pop as a PSA 9.

I'd have to think about selling it at a psa 9 price!

[BBB]

A lot of the new high rollers grew up in the era of 80-90s rookie cards. Back then, they couldn't afford 50s HOFers their parents told em about. So now they are buying their childhood back as collectors tend to do. They ignore the junk wax that burned them and go for the thing they could never afford as kids but ogled at card shops/shows/Beckett magazine. Demand for post war rookies is high accordingly. Investors manipulating prices only puts gas on the fire. If people hold out and don't dump in unison, this could sustain for awhile (I hope.)

The question I have is whether pre war will ever see another bump or if there's no new blood that will ever give a damn beyond the pantheon names like Ruth, Cobb, Honus. I don't see a massive spike in That category ever being possible. Though I bet it keeps getting propped up by the post war market.

At least I hope so as that's where my monies at. My dad told me stories about dizzy dean, George sisler and those types. So my interest in baseball history and collecting has remained there. I have a bunch of 48-69 stuff but am not as emotionally attached to it. It's going to auction and I'm hanging onto the pre war .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Econteachert205]

Greater fool theory


Yes. Like I tell everyone, I'm a terrible baseball card businessperson and even I have been doing ok. It scares me.