Cards some collectors think are rare, but are not.

[parkplace33]

I had some fun over at gem rate today looking up the top 1000 cards (by grading pop). Website is https://www.gemrate.com/top-cards.

One cards I see for sale online all the time is the 1958 Topps Mickey Mantle AS #487. I sometimes see these posted as "rare Mickey card". Lets look up the pops on this card:

PSA - 12,832 graded
SGC - 4,402 graded
Beckett - 2,197 graded

Over 19,000 graded. And who knows how many raw. Not a rare card.

What is a card or cards you see listed as rare, but are not?

[darwinbulldog]

I'll tell you what's rare -- for a card that's listed as rare to actually be rare.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I'll tell you what's rare -- for a card that's listed as rare to actually be rare.

True

Or that rarity always equals value. It may, or it maybe just a selling tactic.

[Al C.risafulli]

That's a triple-printed card, if I'm not mistaken.

I always was bothered by the perception that the 1938 Goudey high number cards are somehow more difficult than the lower numbers. My experience was the exact opposite, especially when trying to find them in high grade. People pay a premium for the high numbers, but I think the low numbers are tougher.

-Al

[bbcard1]

I used to own a 1960s convertible that a car collector friend of mind described as rare and undesirable.

[raulus]

Do you want to poke the 311 Mantle bear by hinting at the possibility that it's a DP?

[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

[ALBB]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

I used to own a 1960s convertible that a car collector friend of mind described as rare and undesirable.

Now that funny !

[jsfriedm]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

I used to own a 1960s convertible that a car collector friend of mind described as rare and undesirable.

Reminds me of the old line from an academic book review: "This book fills a much-needed hole in the literature."

[BioCRN]

I've noticed a lot casual collectors and new vintage collectors confuse "costs a lot" + "old/vintage" with rare.

T206's aren't rare. 1968 Nolan Ryan rookies aren't rare. There's no reason a 1989 Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr should cost anywhere near what it goes for...

Demand is there, though. That drives the cost.

Some of the rarer non-HOF/star stuff I own doesn't even have much of a market compared to same-player cards of other issues.

[packs]

The rarity in question:

[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

[KCRfan1]

Originally Posted by packs

The rarity in question:

Packs,

You always have some of the coolest stuff!

[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.

[ClementeFanOh]

Cory- It bothers me when people say common back T206s are rare on ebay
because it's either ignorance or a lie. I'm not referring to the Demmitt or
O'Hara PBs which truly are rare, and I think you knew that. When some
guy on ebay has a store of 100 cards from 2020+ and one common player
T206 with a PB back and decides to call that T206 "rare", he's just wrong.
There are plenty of "common" back T206s in my collection that I'm proud to
own, but I'm not going to call them "rare" to impress people. This is what I
mean, and it's in line with the thread topic. Trent King

[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).

[irv]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

I used to own a 1960s convertible that a car collector friend of mind described as rare and undesirable.

Well, he is/was not entirely wrong, but there are many factors involved in saying that too.

Year, make and model, and when he said that, and of course where one lives/resides all comes into play with whether the car will be desirable or not.

Like a lot of things, trends come and go and it is no different in the collector car hobby/industry too.

Rare, one offs or limited production runs of convertibles will no doubt be highly collectable/valuable, but other cars, say muscle cars, convertibles are not sought after as much, unless, of course, like I said, they were rare/limited production runs to begin with.

[here2havefun]

I collect Topps Venezuelan cards, it's very common to see super stars from the 1964 and 1966 sets described as "extremely rare!!1!", when there's 60-100 graded copies floating around. Not really rare.

[darwinbulldog]

I would say basically the entire list of PSA's "Top 250 Sportscards in the Hobby" is composed of cards that a) are often described as rare and b) are not rare.

For comparison, I would say the Ned Garvin card that is the image in my Net54 avatar (of which I believe there are 2 graded copies, but which I do not think of as being particularly rare) is probably rarer than at least 98% of the cards on PSA's list.

[ullmandds]

For anyone to think/state a 1958 topps as mantle is rare...they either have no clue about the issue...or its just a sales tactic.

[Lucas00]

A saying I've created is, if it's on ebay it's probably not rare. Lol.

Of course that's way too much of a generalization but it's true 90% of the time. There is rare stuff but it's always extremely overpriced and most of it has been sitting price unchanged with offers disabled for half a decade.

[BuzzD]

Not appreciating the difference between rarity and scarcity has cost me a lot of dough...

[rjackson44]

Darby choclates complete box ,,now we are talking

[raulus]

Serious question:

Any chance we’ve become rarity snobs?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by raulus

Serious question:

Any chance we’ve become rarity snobs?

I have always collected rarity and it doesn't necessarily mean value, whatsover. It's always the demand side that equates to value. And that would be "scarcity."

As to the original subject, I can't count the number of times I have seen people say the '52 Mantle is rare.....it's not.

And whomever said ebay doesn't have rare stuff any longer isn't looking on there 7x24 like some of us ....

[Cory]

Originally Posted by ClementeFanOh

Cory- It bothers me when people say common back T206s are rare on ebay because it's either ignorance or a lie. I'm not referring to the Demmitt or O'Hara PBs which truly are rare, and I think you knew that.

No - that's my point. Demmitt Polar Bear or O'Hara Polar Bear aren't any more rare than - Armbruster, or Atz or Abbott (or essentially any other front with a polar bear back).

The issue is that Demmitt & O'Hara STL were both ONLY printed with a PB back. All the other issues also had other backs. In fact looking at just the PSA pop reports the others are much more rare - Demmitt & O'Hara STL both have around 200 graded, while the random players above mentioned have 30 to 40 Polar Bears graded. I assume similar pops for each - just the Demmitt & O'Hara have a much higher incentive to grade given the value.

I guess what it really boils down to is what each person's definition of rare is.

[Aug06]

Its not baseball...But the 1986 Fleer Michael Jordan RC is not a rare card.

[Cory]

And I think the real issue is rarity vs. scarcity as mentioned above. Just because something is rare doesn't make it valuable. And just because something isn't "rare" in you definition doesn't mean it can't be valuable if there is more demand than supply. It all boils down to supply and demand.

t206's are the perfect ecosystem to demonstrate this -

The Armbruster PB mentioned above is presumably just as rare as the Demmitt STL. But most t206 collectors chasing the monster don't care if Armbruster has a Piedmont or Sweet Cap or Polar Bear back as long as they have one, which broadens the supply. However, everyone that wants to complete the 520 needs a Demmitt (and O'Hara) STL which was only printed with a PB back. There are only 200 in the PSA pop, so if this is half the available population, say 400 exist. If there are 1000 people chasing the monster there is more demand than supply so the price goes up- so the Armbruster is just as "rare" as the Demmitt STL, but not nearly as scarce.

[rjackson44]

Originally Posted by Leon

I have always collected rarity and it doesn't necessarily mean value, whatsover. It's always the demand side that equates to value. And that would be "scarcity."

As to the original subject, I can't count the number of times I have seen people say the '52 Mantle is rare.....it's not.

And whomever said ebay doesn't have rare stuff any longer isn't looking on there 7x24 like some of us ....

i enjoy going thru leons auction catalog for ideas ..ill never part with it

[ClementeFanOh]

Cory- you’re fixated on 2 T206 cards. The reality that those 2 are only available PB makes them difficult and coveted. If you don’t want to call that “rare”, that’s up to you. But Atz cards are much more plentiful due to all the backs…and let’s no gloss over my original point, which is flippers on eBay claiming the one T206 they’ve ever owned is “rare”, even when it’s a common back Atz SGC 30. Is that card still cool and desirable? Yep. Rare? Nope. Trent King

[MR RAREBACK]

Rare desirable Miscut

[Hankphenom]

I think everybody should picture or name a card they think is truly rare and let us take shots at it one way or another. Here's one: WaJo Washington Times. I'd like to see somebody argue with that.

[bandrus1]

any M101 holmes to homes issue?

[JackR]

There’s only a handful of graded 1910 PC796 Postcards of Wagner, maybe one tenth of the number of graded t206 Wagners, but you probably can buy one for much less than 1% of a t206. It’s a wonderful hobby!

[Rhotchkiss]

i think the T206 Wagner is the perfect combo of rarity and scarcity. With 60-70 known, there are not many. But it is not "rare", at least not compared to other cards (even Wagner cards) where less than 5 are known to exist. Yet, the demand for the T206 Wagner exceeds its supply, making it scarce and thus ever-increasing in value.

If there were 1,000 T206 Wagners, I doubt they would be as valuable as they are, because the supply may be sufficient to support the demand in a way that puts less upward pressure on the card's value. At the same time, if there were only 5 T206 Wagners, it similarly may be worth less because the pure rarity may limit its overall desire. That said, the T206 Doyle NY Nat'l has only 9 graded and its low pop (combined with relative-nobody subject) does not seem to have hurt its value, so maybe the t206 Wagner if there was only 5, would be worth 10x more!

[brianp-beme]

Eat this, rare cardmongers...only one known of Martin, and one of less than a handful known of any card from the large size R308 Tattoo Orbit set. And not for sale...hands off my Pepper!

Brian (in my scan it is neither the colorful Tattoo Orbit card nor the smaller size R308 Tattoo Orbit that I am speaking oh so eloquently about. Those are shown for size and design comparison. And it would probably sell for 200X less than the Washington Times Walter Johnson that Hank showed)

[Eggoman]

Only 8 cards TOTAL graded in the PSA POP Report... These are BOTH 1 of 1s...

[robinsonmantle]

PSA 1 of 2


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[packs]

If either of these guys ever get in the HOF I will be happy these cards were very cheap while also being nearly impossible to find:

[jingram058]

Expensive does not = rare.

Or, perhaps it does. If you don't have the cash, it's pretty darned rare.

[familytoad]

I don’t disagree that there are fewer Tip Top set collectors, but that’s a bit different than saying the Wagner itself isn’t collected at the same rate as any other highly regarded card.

Many collectors are ignoring sets in favor of singles from what I see.
I’d rather have the Wagner and forego the rest of the 1910 Tip Top set…

Originally Posted by ValKehl

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).

[chalupacollects]

How about Ware's Dept store cards? Store was in my hometown, Mom actually worked in the building in the 60's. Never saw one and even asked in BST for someone to sell one... crickets!

I found 38 total graded for SGC and none for PSA...

[raulus]

Good luck finding another one.

[mantleman]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

I had some fun over at gem rate today looking up the top 1000 cards (by grading pop). Website is https://www.gemrate.com/top-cards.

One cards I see for sale online all the time is the 1958 Topps Mickey Mantle AS #487. I sometimes see these posted as "rare Mickey card". Lets look up the pops on this card:

PSA - 12,832 graded
SGC - 4,402 graded
Beckett - 2,197 graded

Over 19,000 graded. And who knows how many raw. Not a rare card.

What is a card or cards you see listed as rare, but are not?

I believe that card is actually Triple Printed !!

[Gorditadogg]

1965 Topps Charlie Smith?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/14566232729...mis&media=COPY

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[DeanH3]

I have found that certain "common" cards are still extremely difficult to find with desirable attributes. That can make the hunt fun and frustrating at the same time.