question re. m116's and the 07 Std Catalog

[Archive]

Posted By: peter ullman

I am currently and have been for the last 20 years a "type" collector so for most issues I have merely a general knowledge. Regarding M1116's I was always under the impression the blue background cards were in shorter supply and therefore commanded higher prices. The o7' "bible" lists the pastel Cobb at almost double the blue background? Mistake? In general the blue back vs. pastel prices seem kinda random. What gives?

pete in mn

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

It must be a mistake.

The Blues have always been higher. Not just Cobb, but all M116's.

What does it say about the other players' cards in blue vs. pastel?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Blue backgrounds have always been more....there were some other sort of crazy prices on M116's too. Something like 3k for a Matty in vg? I don't have the book with me but some of the m116 prices looked a little high....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: peter ullman

here are a few:

cobb
blue 6000 3000 1800
pastel 18000 9000 5400

while i'm perusing the list i'm realizing it's kinda confusing they differentiate blue vs back back...I guess and blue vs. pastel background which makes things a little confusing. most blue backs are valued higher than the pastels...the cobb must be a mistake.

pete in mn

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Have you looked to see if there is a glut of pastel cards for sale on EBay?

If so, it means the dealers saw this mistake and are trying to sell while people might be mistaken!

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

The catalogs do have typos. I recently had a Goodwin Round Album and noticed that the Kelly page was listed for more than the Anson. I emailed Bob Lemke and asked him how this could be, and he said it was just an error and they would change it. The book has a zillion numbers, and some of them will be wrong.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Years ago when I came near completing this set (260+ cards), I do recall that some
of the PASTEL counterparts of the 24 BLUE cards in this set were indeed tougher.
However, that might have been just my anectdotal experience in collecting the M116's.
In general the BLUE cards should be tougher and should be priced accordingly. And,
for sure, the BLUE version of the Cobb card is more valuable.

T-Rex TED

[Archive]

Posted By: paulstratton

In series 1 the blues are tougher and in series 2 the pastels are tougher. I think.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Heck, you can have my PSA 3 pastel Matty for $2,000 Don't knock each other over on the way to my door...

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Masson

There are two different variations including the color "blue." First there are the blue backgrounds (vs. pastel). The blue backgrounds have always traded at higher prices, but I have found a handful of the pastels to be tougher.

The second variation is in an individual series, where the cards in that series were issued with the backs in either blue ink or black ink. The "black backs" trade at a slight premium to the backs printed with regular blue ink. Tinker, Young, Waddell and others are in that series.

[Archive]

Posted By: paulstratton

According to Lew L.

Series 1
Bender, Chance, Cobb, Collins, H. Davis, Dooin, Doyle, Jennings, McQuillan, Wagner, Mathewson

...the blue backgrounds are tougher than the pastels to find. They may seem to show up more often because of who is in the series.

Series 2
Bresnahan, Brown, Crawford, Donovan, Gibson, D.Jones, Jordan, Lajoie, Leach, Lord, Tenney, Thomas

...in this series the reverse is true. The pastels are harder to find.

This probably does not reflect prices much because the blue backgrounds are more sought after.