1967 Topps high # "unofficial" price guide
 

I've been feverishly chasing '67 high numbers for a couple years to try and complete my set. Other than the Seaver (which is a whole different animal), I'm almost done. I've purchased on forums, eBay, or at local card shows/shops. Early in my chase, after a couple times of paying too much for a card labeled as a 'SP' that I found was selling for much less on eBay, I decided to create my own price list to help me know when to pull the trigger.

I like to buy raw, crease free, well-presenting cards that would typically grade a 5 or 6 or so. The prices I list, I define as "good deals" and basically if you can purchase an EX or better card at that price, do it.

The Topps Archives blog had a well researched post (link) in 2011 about price guide labeled single prints and sheet layout.

534 Bauer DP $5
535 Clendenon $25
536 RCs (Niekro) $35
537 Estrada DP $4
538 Martin $10
539 Egan DP $6
540 Cash $35
541 Gibbon $8
542 RCs (Monday) DP $10
543 Schneider $8
544 Indians $25
545 Grant $15
546 Woodward $8
547 RCs DP $5
548 Gonzalez DP $5
549 Sanford $8
550 Pinson DP $8
551 Camilli DP $8
552 Savage $15
553 RCs $25
554 Rodgers DP $10
555 Cardwell $18
556 Weis DP $5
557 Ferrara $13
558 RCs (Belanger) $40
559 Tracewski DP $5
560 Bunning $40
561 Alomar $20
562 Bass DP $10
563 Adcock $18
564 RCs DP $8
565 Krausse $8
566 Geiger DP $5
567 Hamilton $15
568 Sullivan $15
569 RCs (Carew) DP $140
570 Wills $25
571 Sherry $12
572 Demeter $30
573 White Sox $20
574 Buchek $15
575 Boswell $12
576 RCs (Hernandez) $30
577 Short $15
578 Boccabella $12
579 Henry $12
580 Colavito $55
581 RCs (Seaver) $350
582 Owens DP $5
583 Barker $15
584 Piersall $10
585 Bunker $12
586 Jimenez $10
587 RCs (Sutherland) $30
588 Klippstein DP $5
589 Ricketts DP $5
590 Richert $8
591 Cline $12
592 RCs (Shellenback) $35
593 Westrum $20
594 Osinski $15
595 Rojas $25
596 Cisco DP $8
597 Abernathy $8
598 RCs $8
599 Duliba DP $5
600 Robinson $100
601 Bryan DP $8
602 Pizarro $15
603 RCs $12
604 Red Sox $55
605 Shannon $50
606 Taylor $15
607 Stanley $40
608 RCs DP $5
609 John $35

In summary, other than Carew, the 'DP' cards are easily available for < $10 and seem to consistently demand a lower price suggesting they're all correctly identified as double prints. However, there's a wide range of selling prices among the "common" non-DPs. With some "no name" guys selling in the $30+ range and others for < $10 which suggests a wide variance in demand among single prints (be it artificially created or by production numbers).

Anyway, thought this might help somebody else out there chasing '67 high numbers.

1967
 

Robert-- thanks for sharing your findings and good luck in finishing the set. One of my favorites. How many do you still need ?

It is a great set. The photography is, in my opinion, one of the best Topps released. Still need 30 or so low #s but I haven't been chasing them very much. Need 14 high numbers, most notably Seaver then Cash and the rest are relatively common.

1967 is to my mind the best looking set of the 60's and I would say it could even be the best design of any Topps set if pressed (my top designs in chrono. order: 52 55 57 67 71 72). I find the high numbers fascinating and did a bit of an update on the math in a post about four years ago. Worth a look if you are interested in the SP and DP theories.
Link

Dave:

I know we have had this discussion but I'm in agreement with the OP's list of 67 Hi #'s

I know from my dealing days back in the day -- that most of those cards listed as DP's were

1) Much easier to find in lots

2) Much Harder to sell to collectors

3) Available easily from other dealers

Rich

Somewhere that other half of the sheet is out there. I'm hoping Mulder and Scully can find it.

If talking nm
 

There are several I would buy every copy you can get me at some of those prices.

Totally agree. My "price guide" is essentially an if you can buy an EX or better copy at that price, do it.

Having spent a lot of time with this set a few years ago, i am with DaveH, and there really aren't dp and sp, but 4p, 3p, and 2p....and those prices listed are super low for many....a 583 barker for $15? only a beater.

specifically, summaryizing dave's post:

for each FULL 264-card 7th series sheet:

44 cards are printed 4 times - these are the true fairly-easy "double prints" - and we have solid evidence that these are truly 2x rows on each sheet.
22 cards are printed 3 times - these are in between!
11 cards are printed 2 times - these are the true TOUGHIES (including seaver rookie). "single prints"

I don't know why topps didn't just print all 88 cards 3 times across the two sheets....thus they would all be regular prints.

I think the 583 Barker $15 is pretty close. Checking ebay recent sales there's over a dozen that have sold for < $20 including several solid raw examples and even a PSA 5 that sold for $20 BIN. Again, my prices listed are what I consider a "don't pass up" price. If you can buy an EX or better one at that price, do it.

I have been working on this set for a while, and other than the Mantle and Seaver, the high numbers are what is slowing my progress. I'm not too condition conscious, but some of the cards are hotly contested even in less than perfect shape.
I really enjoy reading the information found on this board, and recently found this thread, and the above post has me confused. There are 75 cards from 534-609, yet the post suggests printing "all 88". Am I missing something? I'm guessing there's a simple explanation, but my mind isn't as sharp as it used to be. :)
Thanks in advance for any help.

My mistake, there are 77 cards in the 7th series, the 66 from 534-609 + the 7th series checklist #531 (which was printed on 6th series sheets AND on 7th series sheets). Its all there in dave hornish's blog post linked above as post #4.

By the way, one VERY likely reason that Rich Klein's data from the vending hoard find regarding cards less printed than others (like brooks) is that many times topps will offer vending lots that only come FROM ONE HALF sheet. I see this today with some Heritage offerings where large retail excess product that i have access too at deep discounts cards from one entire 110 card half-sheet run printed in much lower quantities.

now its still a mystery to me why topps would be missing half the print run, but its also possible that back in 1967 there was another vending case "find" that represented the other half sheet.....that was consumed by the public long before it was around to be found.

Me too. I have built two 67 sets in the last 3 years and auctions and set breaks are really competitive. Most of those seem like some of the VG+ stale BIN prices honestly. If this is as you said "see that price grab it" then yes, absolutely. I've never seen a Belanger at that price but I haven't had to look in about a year...THANK GOODNESS...lol.

I think it needs to be said that prices are pretty strong on some of the 6th Series cards as well. Shoendists and McCarver come to mind...very auction competitive...

Red S and Tim M are higher priced for 2 reasons

1) I think they are legit harder in that series

2) They are both popular Cardinals and for whatever reason the 6th series did NOT hit the St Louis area in 1967 -- but the 7th series was released in much larger than expected quantities for a final series. I suspect the 7th series has something to do with the Cardinals coasting to the NL Pennant and then the World Series win versus the Red Sox (probably the last time I ever rooted for the Red Sox other than 75 vs the Reds)

Yes, anything is possible with the 67 Hi series and yes I bet some of the "Tougher" cards are cheap at the listed price but that list approaches realty for the most part.

Rich...great stuff and thanks for that info, makes a lot of sense.

There is a trend, especially in commons, for certain years for certain teams to carry a slight premium -

1964 - Mets
1968 - Tigers
1969 - Mets

I am sure there are more but 67 in Cardinals in general would probably make that list. Crazy to learn an entire market didn't get a series of cards. No different than my childhood with 75 Topps...I didn't see a large card until a show in the late 80s...all we had were mini's. And those dreaded OPeeCHee cards (I lived close to the border north of Seattle)...we hated them..ripped them up and threw them out...haha...I still have a few beaters in my childhood collection from the late 70's....

Thanks again for that...I love that info

I updated my want list last night, and I am done with 1-533, except for Mantle, but still need 42 high numbers, including Seaver. I checked some cards on Ebay last night, and got sticker shock on some of them, and noticed that many had no VG examples, which is what I'm after. Time to do some searching.
I know I will eventually finish this off, but it looks like it may take a little longer than I thought.

Don't you mean 62 Mets :) The only interesting thing about 64 Mets is ALL the high numbers they have. Oh and the Tim Harkness #45 card is far easier than Amado Samuel (#128)

Rich

There were some low priced 67 highs on BST and they didn't last long. I have a bunch of dupes, but I'll probably sell them in a lot with my lows, lest I be stuck with the lows. Still stuck at 2 for the set...

535 Donn Clenendon
586 Manny Jimenez

The 61s are the ones that are killing me right now. I am trying to finish it (birth year set) but it's a grind.

I'm putting my first 1962 Topps together now, and I haven't noticed any premium on Mets...yet?

I am on my second 64 set...I have a few cards in my notes on common cards like -

#95 George Altman
#345 Frank Thomas
#361 Jay Hook
#422 Jack Fisher
#447 Mike Joyce
#442 Pumpsie Green
#457 Jessie Gonder

All seem to carry a premium over non Met commons...just my observations? There is no doubt on #477 Joyce...this must be a SP card.

Sorry to hijack the thread a little. BlackandGold...I do believe I have some VGish 67 highs sitting in my "lot" boxes. I will see what I have and PM you later in the week when I get back home.

Hey John,
No worries! Thanks for checking for me, I really appreciate it.
Todd, let me know if you decide to sell. What 61's do you need, and what condition are you looking for? I don't have a lot of them, but I'll be happy to check for you.
Matt

Interesting, when I lived in NY I dealt very heavily in Mets cards and this makes sense but none of these were super popular compared to 62 or 69. My memory does seem to indicate these are slightly harder in their series than other 64's. I'll throw Harkness in there as well.

Rich

I'm just glad to have a complete 67 set-definitely needs some upgrades, although I think the high # SP's are in decent shape. I plan to go through it and put it into a better album (and sheets) after Xmas. The only card I remember paying a lot for, other than Seaver, was the Red Sox team card but I bought it a while ago and can't remember the exact price anymore.

Guys, sorry for intruding on your thread. I am really enjoying reading it. For quite a while I have heard collectors discuss how tough the '67 highs can be. This thread is about as good as anything I have read on the subject. At least one of you referenced hunting for highs in the VG range. Is that about the overall grade of your '67 sets, or do you build the rest of the set a little higher grade compared to the highs? (I didn't know if elements of the rest of the set were tough like the highs.)

I ask all of this because in the next year or so I will be looking for a new set to start. Along with '61 and possibly '66, '67 is on my list of possibilities. Gotta polish off '54 or '65 first though. :D

Robert,
Most of my 67's are from my childhood and spent lots of time being handled and bound by rubber bands. I pick up EX when I can find a deal, but these high numbers are really a challenge.

For high numbers, the ratio of nice vs lower condition cards is larger than for the lower numbered cards simply because they did not have enough time to be handled. Once the season was over they got put away in a box with the earlier, more handled cards.

Very interesting information guys. I'm working the '67 set now and am down to 32 cards with Brooksie being the tall pole.

I had put together the '66 and '61 sets quite a while ago and had sworn never to start another set with premium high numbers - I just can't get excited over paying more for Mickey Stanley than many hofers. But I was lured by a starter set and already had the Mantle, Seaver and Carew, so I took the plunge.

I just completed my '67 Topps Braves run and the 546 Woodward and 591 Cline were two of the last cards I got because the pricing was always more than I wanted to spend; I mean $20+ for a centered common just because it's a high number? I just couldn't pull the trigger. Thankfully, with a lot of patience, I was able to get both for $11 and $13 respectively. I would definitely put the Woodward as EX, but the Cline could definitely grade better; and both were centered so I'm more than thrilled with that outcome.

As I had mentioned before, I am working on a nice (Ex or better) 61 set. It is expensive but not difficult, at least relative to some other sets I have worked on. I honestly got lucky (kind of) on the 1967s. I bought two pretty near sets in two weeks (after I had had relatively few 67s) and got down to four cards needed. I am sure i could use a couple of upgrades, but nothing cries out. Picked up the Niekro in a smaller auction, found the Jimenez at a reasonable BIN on eBay, treated myself to the Colavito.

If a collector is looking for Ex-Mt or NM ungraded copies of 1967 High numbers, generally how much more should he expect to pay above the prices listed in this very intesting post? 2 times as much? More? Less?

Thanks!

Good question. I'd say it's logarithmic based on the EX price. I.E. a common DP I list at $8 above should be able to be found for about $12-15. A Seaver in NM is going to be 3-4x what I priced it at above.

How about common non-DP's?
Thanks!

I'd say it depends and can vary widely based on the card but for the lower valued non-DPs listed above, I would guess most of them could be found for around $20 in NM. Again, as a reminder, my price list is from a buyer's perspective of being a good deal. If I had these for sale, I would probably list them at 1.25x or 1.5x above prices as a starting point.

Here's a doozy. Just ended the other day. If you don't want to click on the link a raw NM-MT Brooks Robinson ended at $709.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1967-Topps-S...53.m1438.l2649

It was sold by Greg Morris Cards and I know he gets good prices but dang!

Glad I finished this set several years ago.

It’s been several years since I finished my 67 set. I know the last card I needed was 605 Shannon. I finally ended up paying around $100 after losing out on several for $80-$90.

Boy, I coulda used this thread 10 years ago when I completed my 1967 set! Great information. And it's very comforting to know I'm not the only person who balked at paying big bucks for the likes of Ray Barker and Bill Bryan (Yankees premium, I know, but still...). I have pushed specific prices out of my mind but I still have vivid recollections of losing out on a Norm Cash auction at the last second and scoring a bargain on the A's rookies.

Here's a question: All the Rookie Stars cards had a yellow background in 1967 but the super-tough Orioles rookies with Mark Belanger has a red background. Why is that?

George, not sure on Belanger but that is an awesome group shot of the last series!