View Single Post
  #34  
Old 11-02-2009, 08:42 AM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 8,098
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman View Post
Although ESCO did legitimately reprint some cards (1948 HOF) in the early 1970s, the problem is that they aren't authorized reprints (like the 1948 HOF reissue) but were created anonymously to cheat collectors. They, like Broders, have basically no collectible value; I paid a few bucks for a full run primarily to use as autograph bases.
The cards being anonymous does make a difference, and they certainly aren't worth much, but it's still a set that could be collected on its own merits or lack of merits. In stamps, some groups of forgeries are avidly collected, sometimes ending up worth more than the originals. Nope, I don't think that's going to be the case here.
I don't really buy the unlicensed =no value argument. Most of the old sets we collect are probably unlicensed, or were at the time. And I know of at least one newer set that wasn't licensed, but hasn't been stigmatised by that label. I also believe that many 70's collector sets wouldn't pass current licensing standards, but were fine in their own time. I do also collect broders, but usually only if they're part of a collection, or are very cheap.
Reply With Quote