View Full Version : A question about Old Judge cards
Archive
11-06-2005, 01:16 AM
Posted By: <b>Bob S</b><p>Hi Folks. I have just signed up as a member of network54, so please bear with me as I learn the ropes. Thanks. :-)<br><br>I have several OJ cards, and they all have the factory name neatly cut off the bottom of the cards.<br><br>Since there are so many experts here, I thought I would ask what effect this would have on the cards' values.<br><br>I have gotten various opininions ranging from "very little to no effect on the value", running the gamut all the way to "the value would be reduced by 90% or more"<br><br>I would be very grateful for any and all comments/opinions about this.<br><br>Thanks, again, and I feel very privileged to be a new member of this great forum.<br><br>Bob
Archive
11-06-2005, 03:18 AM
Posted By: <b>John S</b><p>Any time a card is altered in this manner it will reduce the value significantly. The level of rarity influences how much the value will be reduced. OJ's are not particularly rare, but many collectors would be willing to accept cards in this condition. Another factor would be the player pictured. If you have a Kelly, an Anson, or a Ward the percent decrease in value as compared to an intact card would be less than for a common player.
Archive
11-06-2005, 12:09 PM
Posted By: <b>Bob S</b><p>Thanks, John S.<br /><br />Does anyone else have any opinions? <br /><br />Thanks.<br /><br />Bob
Archive
11-06-2005, 12:59 PM
Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p>It matters how badly the cards are trimmed and then which player/pose it is.You might have a card that 2 people have been looking for,for awhile in which case they will pay as much as possible for it.<br /><br />If theyre common players,and the cards look nice otherwise they may be worth 1/5th the value of an untrimmed copy
Archive
11-06-2005, 01:28 PM
Posted By: <b>Jay Miller</b><p>As a rough rule of thumb assume 2/3 of the card's value has been lost. That is, an intact $300 card with the ad trimmed off the bottom would now be worth $100. Certain factors may change this percent slightly but surely more than half the value is gone.
Archive
11-06-2005, 01:46 PM
Posted By: <b>tbob</b><p>I don't know if other Old Judge collectors feel the same way but as someone just getting in to 19th Century cards, the grades on the slabs have less meaning (for me) than do 20th Century card grades. An oj with great contrast and nice eye appeal which is a 20 because of back writing or small paper loss on the back is far preferrable to a 40 or 50 with light contrast or that ugly pinkish tint.
Archive
11-06-2005, 02:15 PM
Posted By: <b>Kevin Cummings</b><p>All that has been said so far is on the mark. With all the new interest in the Old Judge set, one cannot be nearly as picky as one might have been able to be in the past since many cards are being snapped up as quickly as they are listed. <br /><br />Still, a trimmed common, California Brown for example, is not worth nearly as much as a trimmed Ed Delahanty. <br /><br />And new collectors are becoming more savvy about the quality of the picture. Simply because a grading company has said that an Old Judge is VGEX might not mean as much if the potential purchaser feels that the image is light or out of focus.<br /><br />As a big Old Judge fan I can tell you that the character of the image is paramount.
Archive
11-06-2005, 02:39 PM
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>I don't mind the pink tone so long as the image is strong. Below are examples of a few pink toned cards:<br /><br />Flint is a bit light, the Howes and Werrick are ok but kind of light.<br /><br />I tend to shy away from the OJs with the ads cut off the bottom unless they are really inexpensive. The goop on the back of cards doesn't bother me too much. Paper loss on the front and holes bother me as does trimming but I wouldn't turn down a reasonably priced altered/damaged card. Like most people have mentioned, it also depends upon WHO is on the card. <br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1131316588.JPG">
Archive
11-06-2005, 02:50 PM
Posted By: <b>Bob S</b><p>Thanks to everyone for their comments. Unfortunately, I paid about $75 each for these cards in 1998. I guess I've learned a lesson. :-(<br><br>Thanks, again, to everyone who responded.<br><br>Bob S
Archive
11-06-2005, 03:03 PM
Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p>I wouldnt assume theyre all bad deals Bob until you know if the players on the cards truly are commons.Just because theyre not hall of famers doesnt mean theyre worthless in an Old Judge sense.Theres some players id pass on if they were trimmed but theres a few cards id pay alot for despite being trimmed because they might not be readily available<br><br>this is my signature
Archive
11-06-2005, 07:17 PM
Posted By: <b>Julie Vognar</b><p><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/jphotos/OJwright001.jpg">
Archive
11-06-2005, 07:27 PM
Posted By: <b>ramram</b><p>Bob S. - who are the players and what poses? Some of the board members can tell you just how common the card actually is.
Archive
11-07-2005, 05:15 AM
Posted By: <b>Bob S</b><p>Thanks everbody. ramram, I've got the cards stored away from my house and I'm recovering from a battle with Lyme disease. When I feel able, I will get them and post a list as you suggested. <br>Thanks, again.<br><br>Bob