what's so special about this card-part 2 (non-vintage)

[Archive]

Posted By: nolemmings (Todd)

About a week ago I posted about a '53 common Jim Delsing that was sold on E-BAy for more than $1100, and I saw a lot of useful info about how difficult this card was. Well now I have a similar question about a 1961 Bob Allison, PSA 8, that is going to sell for at least $360.00, as can be seen at: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1814325733&r=0&t=0&showTutorial=0&ed=1017162785&indexURL=0&rd=1
Now I do collect this set, and have at least 3 of this card. Mine are ungraded and might not get 8s, but the wear is general, i.e. there are not centering problems or print defects. In short, I do not believe it is a condition sensitive card. It is not a high number nor a short print. What's the fuss?
Maybe this a pop report situation. if so, isn't this the same ego argument that applies to the set registry issue; in fact, maybe this is a show-down between collectors working on their registered sets. Someone feels they must have the best (assuming the pop report even bears this out) example of a card that really has no superior value to several hundred others in the same set. Anyway, would appreciate info from those in the know about this set-- maybe there's some scarcity of which I am unaware.
Regards.............Todd

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

Todd:

I think that you primarily have set collectors at work here. The Bob Allison card, with a population of 8, none higher, is one of the lower population common cards of the set.

Additionally, this seems to be a highly competitive set on the PSA Set Registry:

http://www.psacard.com/new_set_registry/display_rsets.chtml?setid=113&set_name=1961%20Topps

It seems as if there are at least four people actively completing and upgrading their 1961 Topps sets (plus some others who are probably not on the Registry). That leads to a very competitive environment, with premiums resulting from the low population and the upgrade-my-set mentality. Whether it is a matter of ego or something different, I think that these set collectors realize there may be few opportunities to find that card in PSA 8 in the future.

Another 1961 Topps common went for over $400 a short time ago, and that definitely went to one of the set collector.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1812098230

Now -- I conceded that there does seem to be a large amount of ego driving these sales prices, spirited by the competition in the registry. On the flip side of the coin, cards like these are often very low population commons, and opportunities to upgrade them will be very limited. That there may be 40-50 such cards in the 1961 Topps set, with only one or so appearing each month leads to the increased competition.

This sort of competition seems to permeate many sets. The ones that come most to mind are 1933 Goudey ($10,000+ for some PSA 8 commons), 1952 Topps, 1951 Bowman, and possibly T-205, T-206.

The only advantage to this phenomenon is that I think it helps collectors identify which commons are legitimate hard to find in top grade. And almost every set has a few examples of that.

One set that I collect is 1955 Bowman. The hardest card in the set, in my opinion, is #314 Dale Mitchell. To this day, there have only been seven copies graded, with zero PSA 7's, two PSA 8's, one PSA 9, and two qualified cards. I can tell you that these numbers are so low because it is exceptionally difficult to find this card in above excellent condition -- in any case. As I have no record of this card being traded in above PSA 6 in the last three years, and knowing a few set collectors who need this card, any example to hit the market would command a deserved premium. (though there is a limit between a sensible premium and a non-sensical one).

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd (nolemmings)

I find the whole set registry thing quite interesting, and your post informative. One observation, however; the $400 common you linked was for hi-number Joe Gibbon, which is one of the four most difficult (in my opinion--I've not examined the pop report) cards in that series, along with Gentile, Cerv, and Sheldon. I can see paying extra for that card.

One thing I like about the registry is that I can see what cards certain collectors are either lacking or have not yet graded. Heck, I'll look closely at my Allison and other '61s and have the top ones graded. It's by far my favorite set, but if can get $300+ on commons, I finally will have found away to drum up some cash for vintage.

About your Dale Mitchell card, I am curious as to why it is so difficult in high grade. Because it's a high number, I expect it is more difficult period than other commons. But is it gerally found off-center, rough cut, out of register or what? If none, what explains why a particular common would be not be randomly encountered in high grade as frequently as another common?
Regards>>>>>>>>>>Todd

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

Todd:

I certainly would suggest that when there is a set registry "Craze" going on, that it is often the best time to sell your low population commons. I know of one set registry where the #1 set builder will even purchase duplicate PSA 9's just to keep others from being able to get the card. Sort of silly, it seems.

As for #314 Dale Mitchell, I wish I knew. More than anything else, I would simply say that I just don't see the card. When I do see it, it is left to right (looking at the card horizontally). However, I just don't see the card that often.

I would generally say that cards #310 - #320 and #225 - #240 are two very difficult runs in the High Series. (#225 - #240 features nine cards with PSA 8 populations of five or less, including Birdie Tebbets with only 1 PSA 8). If I had to speculate, I would imagine that two things drive this a) sheet placement. I think that the ways these cards were cut may have had a significant impact on the beginning and ending rows on a sheet. Additionally, the rubber-band theory -- with kids beating up those cards near the beginning and ends of a series more than other cards. Cards #2 - #8 are also pretty tough to find in top grade.

No clue on why the Mitchell is harder to find than it scarce neighbors. I simply don't see the card. With two of the seven graded being qualified, I think it is safe to say that most are off-center. Even SGC has only mustered one graded copy, an 84. Just a very tough card. Don't know why! (Nor have I ever seen a sheet to further my theories).