Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJJ
Perhaps in the industry we should have a common definition of "rare" - for pre-war, under 1,000? examples - for post-war, under 10,000?. and then perhaps a common definition of "ultra scarce" - for pre-war, under 100? - for post-war, under 1,000? and then perhaps a "handful" for pre-war under 10, and post-war under 100? Trying to assign numerical value to terms I think would be an interesting idea.
Becomes a little more interesting with T-206 of course as a Frank Chance T-206 may not be rare, but one with a particular back might be.
Ideas/views with regard to setting terms for number of examples that survive?
Best,
J
|
If you're referring to determining value then Your proposal really seems to not matter to the collecting world. Take the T209 Presley/Pritchard I sold a few years ago as an example. Maybe a handful of that card known at best. Or, the T206 Lundgren w/ PD 350 back which I currently own one of five known. Neither card has a value of more than $1,000 in the condition they are normally found. But, take the T206 Cobb/red background which is available to buy by the dozens in a PD or SC back and grade it a 4, you can exceed the purchase price of a card that only a handful of are known. The often used "rare", "scarce", "tough", etc. to describe a card go in one eye and out the other with me. If I like it and can afford it then I buy it. A Higgs Boson is rare, not a piece of cardboard. At the end of the day it's about how a card is marketed and how many want it.