Standard Catalog Response from Lemke. [Archive]

View Full Version : Standard Catalog Response from Lemke.

Archive

10-29-2005, 12:25 PM

Posted By: FYSIn case anyone missed this weeks SCD response from Lemke on the 2006 catalog. 1. Chronological Index error will not be fixed. A correction can be downloaded off the SCD site. 2. Overwhelming majority of catalog purchasers are strongly against reduction of new card listings. The actually are requested more coverage on minor league, foreign and non-card sets. 3. Majority also wants to continue to see one catalog volume that stays at the same price. 4. A strong enough market does not exist to make a separate book of 1980 and prior cards i.e. it is not commercially feasible. 5. In the future, obscure vintage single card sets etc. will continue to be removed to make room for modern cards. There are many more unlisted modern regional sets that are undiscovered than vintage. Examples of vintage removed from 2006 catalog include: 1916 M101-5 with Sporting News backs and many Colgan Chips.

Archive

10-29-2005, 12:44 PM

Posted By: robert aThat's really too bad for so many reasons. I guess there's really no reason to buy another one in the future. I've never used the book to price things, only to check out info on certain issues, but if that issue is slowly diminishing year by year, why not just stick with the previous books that I already have. The chronological error this year has really stopped me using the book this time around anyways. robert a

Archive

10-29-2005, 02:08 PM

Posted By: warshawlawhow about making the information on the deleted sets available on the web so that information isn't lost? I think it would be a real shame to lose access to important information. While we're at it, how about a list of the deleted card sets from the vintage section of the 2006 catalog?

Archive

10-29-2005, 02:26 PM

Posted By: GenoI bought the 2006 guide and have since put it in the back of the closet and stuck with my 2004 guide since it has more postcard info (although still very much incomplete). The new one does have some good checklists for the Venezuelan cards for the first time, but other than that, I'll take the old one! Geno

Archive

10-29-2005, 02:28 PM

Posted By: PaulTo me, the most tragic thing would be the information that would be lost if obscure vintage sets are cut out of the catalog. Rather than scrapping the information, why not put it on the SCD website? Just the checklists, that way Bob wouldn't need to update the prices for these sets. And only the deleted sets would need to be on the website. That way, the website would not take sales away from the book. The fact is, there is probably no one in the world with more basic checklist information for obscure vintage sets than Bob Lemke. Whenever someone finds an uncataloged card, Bob is the person that people notify (unless they want to keep it a secret). It would be a shame for all of that knowledge to go to waste.

Archive

10-29-2005, 02:50 PM

Posted By: Chris Mc I for one don't care for the shinny stuff so there will be no point in me ever buying a new price guide. If enough people take the same course and sales decline it is possible that someone will publish a pre 1970 guide that actually reflects current price trends. Nothing againts the publishers but where do they get the pricing for some of these issues? Not only do they appear to be guessing, but at times are two to four + times off the actual market trends. So I will save my $26 dollars from now on.( Half of the new guide ends up in the wood stove anyway.)

Archive

10-29-2005, 02:56 PM

Posted By: Lee BehrensSad to say but I think we a major minority in the whole skeem of card collecting. My last one I bought is 2003 with no plans to buy in the future. Great book but no new info I am interested in. Lee

Archive

10-29-2005, 03:03 PM

Posted By: dan mckeeLee is right, you guys are wasting your time. The reason the book hasn't been split is because there just isn't enough vintage collectors to buy the vintage only book. Also, the shiny toilet paper collectors like having the vintage section in case something real ever walks into their junk shop. We have to live with burning 3 quarters of the book each year. Dan.

Archive

10-29-2005, 03:03 PM

Posted By: Brian H (misunderestimated)Although we often harp on the errors in the Standard Catalogue with respect to the pricing of cards that are sufficently rare that they are pretty hard to put values on I think the unstated assumption has always been that it is great resource and that we just like to make it perfect. After all I don't see complaints about any of the other guides on here too much and certainly none that are as ambitious as The Standard Catalogue. That is a complement to the work Mr. Lemke has done over the years if ever there was one. Sadly, it doesn't surprise me that the market forces are essentially driving the more obscure (and more fascinating to many of us) cards out of the big book. I don't know how economically feasible it is but I wonder if a CD (Compact disc, not an investment vehicle) could be sold with ALL the sets along with the Big Book (or perhaps separately).

Archive

10-29-2005, 03:31 PM

Posted By: leonI think #'s 2-5 suck. That is my personal view but it's not my business. As a business decision I am sure they're correct....and I still think it sucks for personal reasons. Ya gotta do what ya gotta do in business. At least the Peck and Snyders are being put back in..... <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

10-29-2005, 03:41 PM

Posted By: tbobSCD published an 1887-1947 Baseball Card Price Guide in 1993 which I still have and use all the time. The new large one (2006) just collects dust on my shelf. Although there were numerous page compilation errors in the '93 book, it was a great effort and I wish SCD would produce another one like it with updated prices.

Archive

10-29-2005, 08:42 PM

Posted By: Rick McQuillanHi folks, I usually lurk and don't post, but I have to put my 2 cents worth in on this one. I faithfully buy a new Standard Catalog every year, specifically for the vintage information. Several of the cards sets that were in the 2004 catalog disappeared in the 2005 version, and more have gone from the 2006 catalog. I don't care so much about the pricing, but I am more interested in being able to identify older cards, learn a little about their history, and take a look at the checklists. I can buy the Beckett Baseball Card plus for current pricing on new cards, and I don't need a catalog to tell me that the 1995 Post Cereal set only books for a few bucks (good luck finding someone who will give you a quarter for the full set). The prices listed for most cards newer than 1980 are mostly just wishfull thinking on the part of the price guide editors, with real prices running 10%-20% of book value for most cards. I won't be buying the 2007 version of the Standard Cstalog, and maybe if enough of us stop it will force the editors to rethink their position. Have a great day and enjoy your cards! Rick

Archive

10-29-2005, 08:47 PM

Posted By: Julie VognarGot any of the missing ones? Regret loss of real vintage stuff, though. The P and S are listed in the chronologicsl index, but it's mistake...

Archive

10-29-2005, 09:51 PM

Posted By: PaulOther than Peck & Snyders, what vintage sets have actually been dropped from the catalog?

Archive

10-30-2005, 05:40 AM

Posted By: Stufflestreet, ChrisA CD-ROM with all known vintage set checklists would be a great idea. It would cost little to produce (less than $1), and I'm betting a lot of collectors would be willing to pay $15 or so a pop to get them. As for the Standard Catalog, I have one that's really old (2nd edition I think). Since all I collect is vintage and I'm not one to keep up with price changes, it's all I need. But I'd but a CD-ROm if for no other reason than the fact that it's smaller than what I have and it'll be more complete.

Archive

10-30-2005, 06:07 AM

Posted By: GenoMaybe the reason that there is little demand from vintage collectors is because we all just keep the old ones since there is little reason to buy a new one. It is not price prohibitive, rather it just takes up space and contains 70% junk. If it were broken into two volumes, I think vintage collectors like ourselves would gladly pony up $25 a year for one of them with updated prices. The reason there is no perceived demand is because the product supplied does not meet the demand. I looked at the website and saw stuff like the Professional Wrestlers Encyclopedia - I mean come on, there has to be more vintage baseball collectors than Hulk Hogan collectors!

Archive

10-30-2005, 08:11 AM

Posted By: AndrewSeeing 3/4 of the book devoted to glossy, super platinum coated, limited edition whatever is nauseating. There's always this notion about collect what you want, to each their own, etc. I suggest the author create a book, "The Herd Mentality of Modern Cards as Investments." For obvious reasons, I rarely see Venezuelans mentioned on this board. What's different about the Venezuelan listings this year compared to previous? I will not be purchasing the new edition. “A smooth sea never made a skilled mariner.” - English Proverb

Archive

10-30-2005, 08:23 AM

Posted By: jackgoodmanJust to add my 2 cents, I was planning to buy the 2006 issue to replace the one I had been using, but after reading the above - will pass. Perhaps if enough of us say something, Mr. Lemke and the powers that be will adjust their marketing targets. After all, look at the money spent and interest in older cards and Net54 website hits. I don't see a Net54 Glossy, Holographic, Chromium Group on the internet (but honestly, I've never really looked.)

Archive

10-30-2005, 08:35 AM

Posted By: AndrewJust check all the major auction house listings, post 1980 material (especially the encased NASA cobranded holders that can withstand sub zero temperatures) are hot. Forget OJs, this is where the smart money is. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> “A smooth sea never made a skilled mariner.” - English Proverb

Archive

10-30-2005, 08:44 AM

Posted By: Robert {Bigb13}I think after the screw up last year they should have been more careful this this years. And to say they will not fix it and they are deleting more vintage sets I will also stay away from this years. Maybe there is someone out there that can make a price guide for us vintage people.  Rob

Archive

10-30-2005, 09:50 AM

Posted By: PaulNot to be a shill for SCD, but I think the reality is that it doesn't make sense to publish a book with a potential market of three or four hundred buyers. I'd love to see a vintage only book, but I don't think Lemke is just feeding us a line when he says he can't publish a book for such a small number of people. And I don't think he's misjudged the size of the market. It is small. As I mentioned in my previous post, my hope is that Bob Lemke and SCD will at least save all the information they've collected, and hopefully continue collecting new information about vintage discoveries, and publish it all on their website to supplement whatever they leave out of the big book. They could even charge a fee for accessing and downloading the information. I think Bob genuinely enjoys reporting on vintage discoveries, so I have some hope that this will happen.

Archive

10-30-2005, 09:56 AM

Posted By: jackgoodmanIt probably does not make sense to publish a vintage only book, but the major work of compiling and collecting the data has already been accomplished and it shouldn't cost that much to create a disc with just the vintage data and checklists on it. Since the data is already there, I would think it was minimum effort to create an additional income stream. Which should make sense to the publishing executives.

Archive

10-30-2005, 09:59 AM

Posted By: Steve DawsonI just cancelled my Amazon order for the new catalog. I also suggest that in the future, SCD remove the word "Comprehensive" from the cover of the book. Since they are deleting sets from the book, and not providing information about many important cards, they are NOT providing "comprehensive coverage". Also, and probably most important and unfortunate, future new collectors who buy the catalog expecting to see what cards are out there to collect, will not find any information about the early pre-war cards. They won't even know alot of the cards exist, and the hobby will not grow as it should <img src="/images/sad.gif" height=14 width=14> Valuable information is being lost to the wind, and for that we should be ashamed! Steve

Archive

10-30-2005, 10:10 AM

Posted By: barrysloateWe have to remember that while 100% of the board loves vintage material, we are not a cross section of the collecting community as a whole. I would think 98% of all collectors have only post WWII material.

Archive

10-30-2005, 10:16 AM

Posted By: scottOK guys (and gals): It sounds like the SCD/Lemke position is going away from the interests of the vintage collector. If this is the case and no effort is going to be put forth by SCD to somehow hang on and distribute their supply of vintage information, then what makes the most sense to those of us in the vintage universe? What is the universe of catalogues, etc that a vintage collector would need to feel comfortable they have access to most info (there will always be some bits and pieces out there unknown)? Why don't we each list 5-10 resources that we think would be valuable for all in the vintage community and start making our own lists and databases--obviously some version of the SCD would be a starting point and cover maybe 80-90% of the vintage types, then we start chronicling other sources to fill in the gaps.

Archive

10-30-2005, 10:23 AM

Posted By: FYSPre-War collectors are by FAR the minority of overall collectors. One other interesting note is that the typical person that buys the catalog is Grandparents and Wives that have children or husbands that collect cards and they see this book on Amazon or Barnes and Nobles and pick it up for them. It is not SCD readers and Network 54 forum members that make up a majority of the catalog purchases, unfortuantely.

Archive

10-30-2005, 11:14 AM

Posted By: GenoEven though the numbers are less, I think you could sell a decent product for more money to people on this board. The folks who collect vintage stuff are more interested in the quality of the book than the cost... By the way, does anybody have a link to the new Chronolgical Index? Take Care, Geno

Archive

10-30-2005, 11:45 AM

Posted By: warshawlawHow about we each volunteer to take a letter in the vintage section and compare as many versions of the catalog as we can to compile a table of sets included in what edition? That way we won't lose information--if it isn't in the latest edition, we can share the copies we do have. I'll do "E" for Exhibits and I have the last 4 books to work from.

Archive

10-30-2005, 11:50 AM

Posted By: jackgoodmanWon't we need the current book in order to know what's missing? I have a book from 1995 in the closet I'd be willing to refer back to if needed.

Archive

10-30-2005, 11:51 AM

Posted By: warshawlawAs I recall, they started slashing vintage items last year or the year before. I will take this year's version for my letter and compare it to all the prior years I have and note which items were deleted. I think you could start with this year or last year's book

Archive

10-30-2005, 12:37 PM

Posted By: davidcyclebackI beleive Krause is the largest publisher in its field in the world, with hundreds of emplyees. They won't publish a book for an audience of 50 over even a few hundred. This is more than understandable, when you consider the salaries paid to the editors and printers of a book, not to mention the janitor ... Wanting a super low run book from Krause is comparable to wanting XBox to produce a game for you and your brother.

Archive

10-30-2005, 01:21 PM

Posted By: jay behrensI have to agree that it makes more sense for them to just make a CD-rom with checklists, pictures and data of all the vintage sets. Forget about prices. Most of us really don't care about them since they are far from accurate. Notes as to rarities within a set would be a must. It it's product that would require minimal updating and Cds are a whole lot cheaper to produce than books. Jay I'm incompetent at being incontenent.

Archive

10-30-2005, 01:34 PM

Posted By: Scott ForrestTbob - I have that 1993 SCD book as well. The sort-of-weird articles at the end are really neat. I have always liked the idea of a printable vintage section with a few columns for updated prices. By doing this, update pages could be created and when prices change, you could enter the new amount and date to keep track of trends. Maybe a publisher that caters to smaller markets (OC) might be able to arrange some deal with Krauss to purchase and distribute that information?

Archive

10-30-2005, 02:16 PM

Posted By: davidcyclebackFor a book publisher or writer, the best protection against unauthorized reprinting is printing it as a paper book. Considering these days of CD burners, email attachments and people posting copyrighted online articles on this very chat board, you'll have to have a really good argument to convince a publisher to convert a good selling book to a CD ROM or download attachment. A possibility for Krause would be to highlight the omitted issues as articles in one of their magazines or their wesbites.

Archive

10-31-2005, 12:47 AM

Posted By: jay behrensAccording them, the vintage section isn't worth printing, so why not put it on CD? How many more years will it before the all pre-war issues are removed from the book? They will probably only keep t205, t206, 33 & 34 Goudeys and that's about it. Maybe Diamond Stars and 1941 Play Balls would survive too. Jay I'm incompetent at being incontenent.

Archive

10-31-2005, 12:59 AM

Posted By: davidcyclebackThe website of the game used equiupment authenticators MEARS has databases and articles, but you have to pay a year's subscription to access it. In a Groucho Marx-like situation, I wrote two articles for the site but can't see them as I'm not a member.

Archive

10-31-2005, 01:44 AM

Posted By: GenoStill no answer on the link to an updated Chronological Index - has anyone been able to find it??? Thanks! Geno

Archive

10-31-2005, 05:10 AM

Posted By: Scott ForrestI agree with Lee - if we are such a small percentage of the books buyers, then why not leave the vintage stuff in the book for the "modern" collectors who comprise the vast majority of the book's buyers, but also make it available separately to us on a printable c.d. for a slightly lower price? Most of us would buy both versions anyway, and you wouldn't lose any of the "modern" card collectors.

Archive

10-31-2005, 06:03 AM

Posted By: leonNot sure if this is what anyone meant but I think, since SCD is deleting the stuff we collect, that one (*or some) of us should get all of the old Big Books....and make a listing of all of the series of vintage cards that they have deleted along with the ones they haven't. We could end up with a master vintage list and then SCD can do whatever they want. We just keep updating it each year. I will still get the Big Book but this will keep the info we need and love. Just a thought...and I am not trying to take money from them. If they would do something like this I would buy it. It doesn't sound like they will though (and financially rightfully so)....best regards

Archive

10-31-2005, 09:45 AM

Posted By: Lee BehrensAfter reading all these threads, a question has came up for me. If they have all this information all ready how toough is it to put a front and back cover to all the information? Is there alot more invlolved that I don't know or understand? Lee

Archive

10-31-2005, 10:08 AM

Posted By: JoshHere is the link to the .pdf for the updated Chronological Index for the 2006 SCD Yearly. Hope this helps. <a href="http://www.sportscollectorsdigest.com/portals/12/SB15_NewChronoIndex.pdf" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.sportscollectorsdigest.com/portals/12/SB15_NewChronoIndex.pdf</a>

Archive

10-31-2005, 02:46 PM

Posted By: Bob LemkeSome of you seem to have the wrong impression about past, current and future deletes from the vintage section of the Standard Catalog. The only significant deletions occurred between the 2004 and 2005 books when a number of "team picture" type issues were eliminated. These were deemed to be the farthest afield from "real" baseball cards, the least comprehensively covered, and of interest to the fewest book buyers. There were 513 pages in the Vintage Major League section of the 2005 edition. There are 518 in the 2006 book. There will likely be 518 or more in the 2007 book. We could easily produce 600+ pages of vintage coverage if we were to include the many non-card issues (in-store display signs, non-series buttons, team-issue photos, etc.) that we have in our data base, but the book's buyers want it concentrated on cards, including the newest issues. With the latest round of licensing cuts and promised brand deflation for new cards, I expect to be able to get by with adding needed new-card pages, rather than cutting vintage content for the next couple of years. That will likely entail a cover price increase somewhere down the road. If and when it becomes necessary to cut back on vintage coverage, the likely trims will come from "foreign" listings and picture packs, along with one-card sets. It is my intention to try to list these items at least once when they are "discovered," even if they have to be excised from future editions. That in itself should provide some incentive to buy a new book once in a while. Take it from me, the big book stores and on-line book sellers who eat up 80%+ of the copies are not clamoring for any new titles in the baseball cards/memorabilia field, especially one that is seen as essentially a subset of the existing book. And as much as I like all y'all, there is no way you (vintage-only) collectors can support me in the manner to which I have been accustomed. We've talked about a CD or on-line edition for more than a decade, but it is no closer to reality. Primarily because there is virtually nothing that could be done to secure such a presenation from piracy. The day may well come, though, that a ride-along CD of the less-mainstream memorabilia in our data base will be packaged with the big book. I appreciate your collective passion and your expressions thereof prove you really care about what we do with the Standard Catalog, but be mindful that unless the book is commercially successful year after year it will go the way of the nickel wax pack.

Archive

10-31-2005, 02:49 PM

Posted By: AlWould the Supreme Court's Feist decision allow someone (not me) to extract the checklists from the Standard Catalog and post them on a website for everyone's free access? Seems to me that would solve the problem.

Archive

10-31-2005, 06:37 PM

Posted By: PaulIf you omitted the commentary at the beginning of each set, as well as the prices, the Supreme Court's Feist decision SHOULD allow someone to reprint the checklists without being guilty of copyright infringement. However, anyone doing this should be prepared for a costly legal battle. And many of the lower courts have taken a very narrow view of the Feist decision, which raises the risk. Also, Congress is constantly considering legislation to prohibit the copying of data compilations, which would effectively overrule the Supreme Court's Feist decision.

Archive

10-31-2005, 07:52 PM

Posted By: Scott ForrestIf a kid gathered up all his 2004 Topps cards and wrote down all the numbers and players' names and sold the list, would that be a copyright violation? This is the same thing on a grander scale. Krauss did not do all the research to create these checklists - members of the hobby did it. Is Becketts infringing on Krauss' copyright by creating lists?

Archive

11-01-2005, 01:59 AM

Posted By: NickI, for one, would much prefer to see the SCD Standard Catalog sold as a 2-volume set than for sets, even pbscure peripheral ones, to be removed. I believe the additional prinnting and binding costs would be minimal, and it would make the books much easier to use for both collectors and dealers.

Archive

11-01-2005, 10:09 AM

Posted By: jay behrensLeon, sounds like your t231 Fans is on the chopping block Jay I'm incompetent at being incontenent.