Cards some collectors think are rare, but are not.

[ClementeFanOh]

I’ll admit this example is low hanging fruit, it just happens to rankle me. How about when eBay sellers list T206 Polar Bear and Old Mill backs as “Rare”? Trent King

[Cory]

Originally Posted by ClementeFanOh

I’ll admit this example is low hanging fruit, it just happens to rankle me. How about when eBay sellers list T206 Polar Bear and Old Mill backs as “Rare”? Trent King

Why would this bother you? They are both only 4% to 6% of the total t206 population vs. 52-54% for Piedmonts or 25-30% for Sweet Caps. So they are roughly 1/10 as common as the most common back, or 1/5 as common as the 2nd most common back. No they aren't Drums or Uzits or Lenox, but to stick with this thread - the TOTAL PSA graded PB population is around 10K - less than ALL of the PSA graded Mickeys noted in the first post (just 1 card from 1 set).

Link to backs by % from PSA - https://www.psacard.com/articles/art...ifferent-backs

To further drive the point - 2 of toughest cards outside of the big 4 - are Polar Bear backs. That's the only thing unique about Demmitt & O'Hara STL - they are only available in Polar Bear backs - so they only have roughly 5% the population of other cards. With the exception of my green Cobb - they are the priciest cards in my collection (among the worst shape, too).

I do understand that on a relative basis they aren't nearly as scarce as the actual "rare" backs - Broadleafs, Carolina Brights, etc. But I have seen other members complain when the "lesser" rare backs like Polar Bears or Old Mill or Sovereign get referred to as "off-backs" If you can't call them rare backs and you can't call them off-backs what the hell are you supposed to call them? Uncommon backs? Less than rare backs? Not quite rare backs?

Sorry if this comes off as hostile - as it isn't meant to be, I'm just curious on how everyone else views this.

[G1911]

I think there’s a big gap between things the hobby believes to be true but are demonstrably false (like the 1966 Topps Grant Jackson being some special short print, when it is just as common as every other card on its row and multiple other rows) and the people who are just completely lying. Nobody truly thinks the 1958 Mantle all-star is rare, it is someone lying who just lists everything they want to juice as ‘rare’ with no regard for honesty or an objective truth.


What counts as rare is up for debate but there are numerous hobby short prints that aren’t. 1955 All-American is another example of a classic popular set with numerous popular fictional rarities that make no sense if you examine it.

[brianp-beme]

It all seems to depend on differing perspectives of the word 'rare' and the era that the card comes from. To me, a prewar card needs to be in the low double digits for population to be considered as such.

Because of this, the T206 Honus Wagner is not in my opinion rare, as there are something like 60 to 70 known examples. But it is constantly described by most as being rare. Desirable and scarce, yes. Rare, in my opinion, no, unless you judge it against postwar levels of availability for cards in mainstream sets..

Brian

[Exhibitman]

I would not go with # known as the key determinant of rarity because I don't see a hard cut-off as anything more than random: is 9 rare but 11 is not? Why, other than a round number bias?

I'd rather look to frequency of transactions in the card. With the tsunami of cards out there for sale every year, a card that transacts only a few times a year or less is what I would see as a rare card.

As for sales listings proclaiming a card as rare, that's just sales jackassery.

[Rhotchkiss]

This is exactly why Cobb and Wagner (among other prewar) cards are not over-valued even at recent high prices and why, I think, they have lots of room to grow further. For example, there are 67 total graded 1910 Tip Top Wagners on the combined SGC and PSA pop reports. That’s nothing. Only 67 people get to own one, assuming nobody has two!! Considering what a t206 Wagner goes for, and this is the closest thing to that, it should be a $200k card!

[JollyElm]

Coming soon to a 'Collectorisms' thread near you...

Rarefied Blare
The seemingly obligatory and kneejerk practice of exclaiming “Rare!!!” to describe any card that clearly is nothing of the sort.

See also: Rawmeater (slang) - a seller who habitually overuses the word “rare” in his listings.

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

This is exactly why Cobb and Wagner (among other prewar) cards are not over-valued even at recent high prices and why, I think, they have lots of room to grow further. For example, there are 67 total graded 1910 Tip Top Wagners on the combined SGC and PSA pop reports. That’s nothing. Only 67 people get to own one, assuming nobody has two!! Considering what a t206 Wagner goes for, and this is the closest thing to that, it should be a $200k card!

Ryan, the reason the 1910 Tip Top Wags isn't a $200K card is because there aren't all that many collectors of the Tip Top set (probably far less than 67).