Card scarcity

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Since I seem to have opened up an interesting can or worms with my uncatalogued thread, this try this paralell to it:

Since some seem to find it unethical to not to disclose uncatalogued cards, what about not disclosing scare or rare cards in a set taht is not reflected in the price guides notes or prices?

Aught to be interesting to hear from the OJ collectors on this one.

Jay

Wow upside down is Mom. Mom upside down is what dad wants to see.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

on ebay, and it's only a SGC 30 because of some back damage," or do you mean discusss rare cards in our own collections?

The people I know with really large collections often don't like to give others the full scope of the collection with all its rarities, even if they keep most of them in the bank.

Children have been held for ransom for less.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Elkins

their children being held for ransom (although it could happen) as much as they are about people aggravating them for scans and/or to sell the card(s). I know this b/c I am always aggravating Leon to sell me his remaining Crfot's Cocoa cards (and they are not really rare).

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

clarification, I meant scarce and rare cards that are not known to be such. The perfect examples are in the OJ set. Scarcities and rarities are not publicly noted on many cards. Is this any less ethical in not disclosing this knowledge than a person not disclosing an uncatalogued card?

Jay

Wow upside down is Mom. Mom upside down is what dad wants to see.

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

Jay, if it is alright with you, I think I will sit this one out. I left that last thread of yours in pieces. I may not recover from that bashing. dan.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rich Klein

We'll have a nice friendly debate on this -- trust me, I know both sides of this argument too

Rich

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

Jay i believe the reason you dont let on that certain OJ cards might be rare is you will cost yourself money if you need it. There are alot of scarce players in the set that are marked as commons but would go for many times the value if put in a visible public auction.I know a lot of cards that as much rarer than others but i cant share for 3 reasons:
1)if i do ill never be able to buy the card on the off chance it comes up for sale
2) ill have my Old Judge bus pass revoked
3) prices from certain sellers will go up because i leaked the secret


True story
once i hit 100 total old judges in my collection i was given a sheet of paper with rare cards on it which i had to memorize then swallow.I was also given a tattoo of the old guy from the OJ box and im forced to wear a shock bracelet around my ankle which can be activated from the OJ main office in Danbury,Conn. in case i leak any secrets

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Is the expertise of knowing what OJ's are more rare, and keeping it to oneself (and rightfully so, imo), any different from the "uncatalogued", and keeping it to oneself, thread ? Dan- you need not reply if you wish not to later

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Not knowing something exists is different than knowing it exists and also knowing how rare it is relative to other items. The former is detrimental to the collecting hobby as a whole for the reasons already discussed; the latter reflects a particular collector's opinion as to rarity which others may not share and which may or may not be accurate.

It is not necessary for a collector to publicly disclose what he or she owns; I am certain that Bob Lemke or the folks at Becketts (sorry, don't buy the book so I don't know who edits it) would keep the info on who owns what secret if a contributor asked. Someone really concerned with security could send in the item image in confidence.

[Archive]

Posted By: J Levine

Interesting topic. In my research, I have seen scarcity issues often arise even with this popular set. No one can come to a consensus on to which is the most scarce after the Hobby no stats and the Wallace mo cap one 1910...There are rarities that are nearly as rare and for years commanded little or no premium, the Moran w/ stray line was one of these...I purchased both my Morans for less than $30 each...now you cant find one for less than $300...
And for those of you out there watching t-205s, there are some scarce t-205 cards that I still think are undervalued in the the SCD guide. Although there are two that are overvalued.

-Joshua

As an aside...I will say this, I don't often tell what rarities/scarcities I own just so I will not be bothered. I also rarely give out the city I live in, guess I am little paranoid about my meager collection.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ray

There is a difference...

If I collected OJ's, which I don't, I would learn through my puchases and dealings which cards seemed to be harder to come by. Information like that can be picked up along the way. From day 1, I would know that those certain scarce cards are out there, it would just take time for me to realize i rarely see one of them, and when I do, it's selling for like 3-4x what I thought it would.

Question about OJ's... are the cards that are considered scarce, that way because there really are less of them, or is it because most people only collect subsets of the OJ's and therefore there is more demand for the cards in those subsets?

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

ok, so the claim is that you don't want to divulge the true rarity of cards because then you can take advantage of some unknowning and unsuspecting sucker that doesn't know any better than to sell you this card as a common. Then this isn't that much different than taking advantage of an unknowing and unsuspecting sucker that can't tell a real card from a fake card.

In both cases, you are cheating the person out of money. In the first case he isn't getting all the money he could for his card, in the second case, you are actually taking money from him. Seems kind of shady to me, either way

Jay- this post was written to be inflamatory, so don't hammer me personally since I don't actually believe it myself, but I am sure there poeple that look at it that way.

Wow upside down is Mom. Mom upside down is what dad wants to see.

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

There are old judge subsets and cards within the sets that arent as rare as people would believe and it might be because the player/set is popular so you never see it available.There are also cards in subsets that are legitimately tough and you learn that based on experience.

I think the oregon find in alot of cases is a good barometer of which cards are legitimately tough and which are just tough because they are popular.That collection doesnt look like it was collected with any certain preference in mind(for example,if my dad has his card collection from when he was a kid you would see about 40% yankees players)

Also when you get a good deal on a card i dont consider ripping someone off UNLESS they come to you and ask for help.Remember you dont get any credit for overpaying for cards why should you get negative credit for underpaying? Ive overpaid alot more times for cards ive wanted than times where i got good deals so except for situations where people ask for help then i dont consider it a bad thing

[Archive]

Posted By: Ray

but doesn't that happen whenever someone purchases a "find"? They obviously don't buy the cards for what they are worth.

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Masson

The reason some folks don't disclose an uncatalogued card is because that demonstrates it's uniqueness (and therefore value). If it is added to the list, it becomes a common and loses its uniqueness (and perhaps value to the unknowledgable). That is a problem.

Knowing which cards are scarce from a listed set is altogether another thing entirely. I see nothing unethical in a person not disclosing which checklisted cards are, in his opinion (apologies, Julie), tougher than others.

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

I think another problem with disclosing some of the rare old judge cards is that the set is so big and difficult to collect in its entirety that some of the harder to find cards are meaningless to some people.The only reason some people would want them then is to make money off selling them where as theres legitimate collectors who want the card as part of a collection.

Nobody is going to want a Joe Schmo Des Moines card unless they a) collect Des Moines cards or b) collect the set... and if they are doing either then theres a good chance they will find out soon enough its a tough card when they cant find it.

It brings up a good point that alot of knowledgable collectors here stress and that is,know what you collect before you collect it and the same could be said for sellers.Before i buy anything i make sure i know what im buying and i wouldnt find a card,have no idea what it is and then sell it to the first person who offers to buy it.Id find out what i had first.

If your main concern is people will look at a price guide,see some card is a common which really isnt,then sell it for that amount,doesnt that make the price guide at fault for giving a price that isnt right? Its just a guide,its not set in stone,but if they dont know a price why then do they give the price? what are they basing it on?

I would say that the scd is probably close to right on 95% of old judge prices but there are cards im sure they are no where near on.The flipside to that is if you get a rare card cheap,the only way you will be able to sell it for more is to another person who knows exactly what you know because no one will pay 10x value for a card if they go by price guides only.Basically its like school in that people who do their homework get rewarded

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I think there are different ways to look at this issue. A collector has the right to keep any information he has about rare cards, especially those in his own collection, to himself if he chooses. Some exceptions to this would be if he is asked by a major price guide to help analyze and price a set, and then leaves out key information and thus misleads collectors who depend on that information. If he chooses to keep his knowledge confidential, he should excuse himself from updating the price guide. Also, if a novice collector asks him to help appraise his collection, in the particular area of his expertise, he should not tell him his rare cards are common and then try to buy them. The distinction is when the withholding of information becomes a conflict of interest. Otherwise, a collector who has spent years researching sets and learns what is rare has every right to keep that to himself, the same way we are permitted confidentiality in all areas of our life. It's a matter of acting in good faith versus acting badly.

[Archive]

Posted By: Elliot

I agree 100% with Barry.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott M

I don't have a problem at all with anyone "holding" back knowledge that they've gained over the course of their collecting experience regarding what they feel the scarcity of a particular card or set is.

If another collector is attempting to collect that particularly rare card or set, they'll find out soon enough just how scarce it is because they never see it come up for sale or, when it does come up for sale, it'll likely go much higher than "book".

If looking at this from the sellers perspective and they don't have the knowledge of the rarity of a particular card or set then I would agree with others comments that the seller needs to research and know exactly what they are selling. If nothing else, the seller will still likely be pleasantly surprised when their rare card sells for "book" or more...

Scott

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

"If he is asked by a major price guide to help analyze and price a set, and then leaves out key information and thus misleads collectors who depend on that information"

I think this bears emphasis. Many of us are asked to revamp listings in price guides. If a collector takes on the task of revising a guide listing, I think it is reprehensible to omit information on what cards are scarce. Give it all to the editor and let the editor decide, or don't participate at all, but don't agree to provide expertise and leave a misimpression with people counting on your volunteered expertise.

[Archive]

Posted By: J Levine

Okay...I understand how people could take my post about finding cards that are not publicly aknowledged as scarce as immoral or wrong but we all do it. We all search auctions, ebay, flea markets, and shows for the great finds. Sometimes we find it, sometimes we don't. My two great finds this year, I told both sellers they probably could get more but both decided to bless me with the cards. Why? Not sure, I am a collector on a very strict budget. There have been other times where I missed out on a great deal because it was slightly out of my budget (turned down buying one of the Allegeny cards a few years ago in Anaheim for $150!--hate myself for that). I mean great other deals too. I have also shown friends great deals when I could not afford them.

The flip side is that I did the research, just as the OJ collectors have done the research. I put the time and money into it. Research, by the way, that anybody could do but most have not. This year was the first year I went truly public with it and I got many e-mail responses thanking me and even more saying things like, "I didn't even know that!"

If Bob L. wants to use my research for his price guide, I wouild be honored and would tell him what I know willingly. In fact, many people have asked me about T-205 cards over the years and I often tell them what I know.

I enjoy finding great deals and love searching ebay, flea markets, and antique shows for the next great find. I think hobby enthusiasts are really just a kind of treasure hunter.

-Joshua