As a postwar set builder, I was curious about how Beckett assigns their values to complete sets. Decided I'd do a little analysis on how they value a complete set versus the sum of its individual cards.
A couple caveats:
1. Yes, I know the Beckett price guide is pretty much useless as anything other than a checklist.
2. I used the HI column values for all listings in the 2008 Beckett Almanac (I don't think anything has changed since then).
3. I didn't include variations as part of them complete set (I don't think they're figured into the complete set value anyway) i.e. Bakep, Herrer, red/black back, white/cream back, yellow letters, white letters, etc.
4. I only looked at Topps issues from '52-'72.
Below is what I found:
My observances:
-Seems like a complete set value is usually around 50-70 % of the total value of each individual card in the set.
-The '72 set value is way out of line with the others. The total book value of all cards in the '72 set add up to more than, or nearly as much as, the cards from each year '68-'71, yet the set value of a '72 set is much less. Beckett guide says a '69 set is 2x as valuable than a '72 set; however, the individual cards in '72 are valued more than those in '69.
-The '59 and '69 sets seem to be overpriced. Individual cards from '59 add up to significantly less than those of '58, yet the '59 set value is $2,000 higher than '58!?!?!?
So in summary, I analyzed a bunch of meaningless numbers and came to some meaningless conclusions. But, all the same, it was somewhat interesting to me and thought I'd share. Any thoughts?