Examples of HOF card earlier year cheaper than a later year card?

[1952boyntoncollector]

I noticed that 1955 Jackie Robinson PSA 8 cards sell for more than 1954 Jackie Robinson PSA 8 cards even though POP is lower for the 1954 condition

Usually the earlier the card, the more expensive it is to obtain. Some exceptions are if the POP is much rarer for the later year card or the set is much more desirable I would assume.

I would guess a Mantle 67 is cheaper than a 66, or Mays 55 is cheaper than a 54. The 1971 set i assuming with the difficult black borders, im assuming is harder to get a PSA 9 in some HOFs than in 1970 and that would be the reason for the price difference. However POP being less in the 1971 would explain this.

However, I know the 1955 Jackie is far more available then the 1954 Jackie yet it sells for more right now .

Im sure there are some Mantle collectors out there than may know of a earlier year card that is cheaper than a later year card but Im going to assume POP is thinner for the later year card..

Anyone know of any other HOF cards where the later year card is more expensive than the earlier year card of the same manufacturer even though the earlier year has less POP.

I am also going to mention I am talking about PSA 8 or better.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I noticed that 1955 Jackie Robinson PSA 8 cards sell for more than 1954 Jackie Robinson PSA 8 cards even though POP is lower for the 1954 condition

Usually the earlier the card, the more expensive it is to obtain. Some exceptions are if the POP is much rarer for the later year card or the set is much more desirable I would assume.

I would guess a Mantle 67 is cheaper than a 66, or Mays 55 is cheaper than a 54. The 1971 set i assuming with the difficult black borders, im assuming is harder to get a PSA 9 in some HOFs than in 1970 and that would be the reason for the price difference. However POP being less in the 1971 would explain this.

However, I know the 1955 Jackie is far more available then the 1954 Jackie yet it sells for more right now .

Im sure there are some Mantle collectors out there than may know of a earlier year card that is cheaper than a later year card but Im going to assume POP is thinner for the later year card..
Anyone know of any other HOF cards where the later year card is more expensive than the earlier year card of the same manufacturer even though the earlier year has less POP.

I am also going to mention I am talking about PSA 8 or better.

1951 Bowman is still available to those not in the 1%, but the 1952 Topps is not- even if it's been run over by a tractor!

A PSA-8 '51 would not be 'reachable' for more than a very few, but those folks would pass on the '52 and get a yacht instead...a very tripped-out yacht!


.

.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

1951 Bowman is still available to those not in the 1%, but the 1952 Topps is not- even if it's been run over by a tractor!

A PSA-8 '51 would not be 'reachable' for more than a very few, but those folks would pass on the '52 and get a yacht instead...a very tripped-out yacht!


.

.

right but im talking cards from the same company...topps to topps...not bowman to topps....so are there any 1952 topps HOF card that a later card of any year in Topps is more expensive? I don think the 1953 Hoyt Wilhem or 54 Hoy will be more expensive than the 52..

Like is there a brooks robinson card in a later year thats more expensive to get in an 8 than any earlier year in which the POP for the new year is greater? Perhaps cards that qualify for this are great candidates to buy...

but can try with other years not just 1952..

[Laxcat]

The '67 Brooks & perhaps the '63 Killebrew. The Killer is tough to find in high grade.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

right but im talking cards from the same company...topps to topps...not bowman to topps....so are there any 1952 topps HOF card that a later card of any year in Topps is more expensive? I don think the 1953 Hoyt Wilhem or 54 Hoy will be more expensive than the 52..

Like is there a brooks robinson card in a later year thats more expensive to get in an 8 than any earlier year in which the POP for the new year is greater? Perhaps cards that qualify for this are great candidates to buy...

but can try with other years not just 1952..

A 1967 Topps Brooks in PSA-8 would probably cost more than most of the earlier Topps Brooks, and as you said, much lower quantity of the later card (in the high number series) caused this.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

A 1967 Topps Brooks in PSA-8 would probably cost more than most of the earlier Topps Brooks, and as you said, much lower quantity of the later card (in the high number series) caused this.

Right, however the Jackie in the 1955 topps , the later card has MORE quantity than the 1954 Topps yet it has sold for more in a psa 8. The 1955 goes for $2,000+ (and a recent auction of over $3000+ in that 1955 set break auction) while the 1954 hasnt touched $2000 yet for what i have seen. The POP is far less in 1954 in an PSA 8 than in 1955.

I would assume these earlier year cards that sell for less and have less POP than later year cards would be good cards to buy value wise. However i not sure if any others exist

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Right, however the Jackie in the 1955 topps , the later card has MORE quantity than the 1954 Topps yet it has sold for more in a psa 8. The 1955 goes for $2,000+ (and a recent auction of over $3000+ in that 1955 set break auction) while the 1954 hasnt touched $2000 yet for what i have seen. The POP is far less in 1954 in an PSA 8 than in 1955.

I would assume these earlier year cards that sell for less and have less POP than later year cards would be good cards to buy value wise. However i not sure if any others exist

Another possible reason for the 1955 Robinson having more 'market value' is that 1955 was THE year for Brooklyn Dodgers' Fans!

[irv]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I noticed that 1955 Jackie Robinson PSA 8 cards sell for more than 1954 Jackie Robinson PSA 8 cards even though POP is lower for the 1954 condition

Usually the earlier the card, the more expensive it is to obtain. Some exceptions are if the POP is much rarer for the later year card or the set is much more desirable I would assume.

I would guess a Mantle 67 is cheaper than a 66, or Mays 55 is cheaper than a 54. The 1971 set i assuming with the difficult black borders, im assuming is harder to get a PSA 9 in some HOFs than in 1970 and that would be the reason for the price difference. However POP being less in the 1971 would explain this.

However, I know the 1955 Jackie is far more available then the 1954 Jackie yet it sells for more right now .

Im sure there are some Mantle collectors out there than may know of a earlier year card that is cheaper than a later year card but Im going to assume POP is thinner for the later year card..

Anyone know of any other HOF cards where the later year card is more expensive than the earlier year card of the same manufacturer even though the earlier year has less POP.

I am also going to mention I am talking about PSA 8 or better.

I have noticed some things with my Beehive hockey cards. Unlike Baseball cards and the stars being very popular and pricey, my Beehive prices are based on the numbers that exist only.

One would think such stars as Howe, Sawchuk, Apps, Kennedy, Clapper to name a few would carry a premium but they don't based on how many that exist.

The most expensive card in the set, (that I have learned) is a Cy Wentworth in a Montreal CDN's sweater.
The last copy sold for over $8000 dollars and only so based on the very low numbers that exist. (rarest)
His first card was in a Montreal Maroons sweater but because (assumed) most already had this copy they didn't choose the copy when the Maroons became the CDN's.

There are also some short prints of other cards, which carry a premium compared to others, but none are remotely close to the price of Wentworth's in a CDN's sweater.