1952 Topps numbers??

[Bigdaddy]

I'm working on a 1952T Low Number set (VG/EX) and am down to needing six cards out of the first 310. I'm going to set the Mays aside for this discussion, so that leaves five with one of them being the highly sought after, yet seemingly common #1 Pafko.

I've got a saved eBay search for the five and it usually seems like the results are flooded with Pafkos. I did the numbers, and here are the results showing the number of cards that are available on eBay this morning (12/22):

Pafko - 86
Avila - 23
Palica - 23
Boyer - 10
Murray - 43

I know everyone says "the Pafko is tough in high condition because he was the top of the stack being #1 and always took the brunt of the violence that was wrought upon baseball cards in the 1950s."

So my question is "Why do all the Pafkos carry this premium?" VG/EX examples are certainly not scarce or even difficult to find, yet they are 10-15x the price of similar condition/player/team/series cards.

Excuse me for howling at the moon, but it just chafes me a bit to drop that much coin on a common card.

[Republicaninmass]

I'd wager to say, he ain't a common!

Brooklyn Dodger, 4x all star, cubs hall of fame.

Certainly the allure of card #1 in topps foray into a post war monster must be the rest of the premium!

[cardsagain74]

Yep the 15-20x premium for all Pafkos has never made sense to me either. I guess the mystique and notoriety it gained from being tough in high grade filtered down to all of them.

I agree with Ted that it wouldn't be a common, but I don't think it should command more than maybe triple the typical low # common in low-mid grade.

And it actually used to be even more expensive (relative to the rest of the set) in mid grade. While Mickey, Willie, Jackie, and other notable '52s have obviously gone to the moon, a PSA 4 Pafko cost about the same today as it did a dozen years ago

[G1911]

Agreed, I have a red back and need a black back. It’s annoying the going rate for a common is so high. Pafko doesn’t carry much if any premium in most sets. His card is no tougher than any other in the 1st series.

[Kutcher55]

It’s a famous card and it’s the #1 card in the set. Not exactly rocket science. The other thing to mention is that the lower grade versions haven’t appreciated much at all in the past two years while most star cards from this era have exploded in value.

[ALR-bishop]

My theory is the Bartirome guy is secretly hoarding Pafko as well

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by Kutcher55

It’s a famous card and it’s the #1 card in the set. Not exactly rocket science. The other thing to mention is that the lower grade versions haven’t appreciated much at all in the past two years while most star cards from this era have exploded in value.

Apparently the rest of us are too dense to figure out the matter as clearly as you have, but it's not that famous (outside of serious collector circles).

As mentioned, it's an easy card to get in low-mid grade. And most are a little surprised that it carries such an extreme card #1 premium (even for '52) relative to other vintage sets in those grades.

That's not exactly rocket science either.

[Gorditadogg]

I don't get why low grade Pafkos are so expensive either. It's not a short print any more than the other low-series cards. I get that high-grade Pafkos are rare because #1 cards sat on the top of the stack and got beat up. But shouldn't that mean there would be a lot more beat-up Pafkos out there than other low-series cards?

By the way, nice Pafko Dale. (But you paid too much for it.)

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[irv]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

I don't get why low grade Pafkos are so expensive either. It's not a short print any more than the other low-series cards. I get that high-grade Pafkos are rare because #1 cards sat on the top of the stack and got beat up. But shouldn't that mean there would be a lot more beat-up Pafkos out there than other low-series cards?

By the way, nice Pafko Dale. (But you paid too much for it.)

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I assume you were watching/following it as well, Al?
I honestly forget what I paid for (would have to do some digging) but, IIRC, it was offered to me from GM cards at a discounted price so I jumped. Also, IIRC, I paid less for it than what I had offered, which was definitely a first for me.

[irv]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

I don't get why low grade Pafkos are so expensive either. It's not a short print any more than the other low-series cards. I get that high-grade Pafkos are rare because #1 cards sat on the top of the stack and got beat up. But shouldn't that mean there would be a lot more beat-up Pafkos out there than other low-series cards?

By the way, nice Pafko Dale. (But you paid too much for it.)

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by irv

I assume you were watching/following it as well, Al?
I honestly forget what I paid for (would have to do some digging) but, IIRC, it was offered to me from GM cards at a discounted price so I jumped. Also, IIRC, I paid less for it than what I had offered, which was definitely a first for me.

Did some digging, Al, and it looks like I paid $133 for it. What surprised me the most was that was a year ago last November!

[BobC]

Not 100% sure this is another possible explanation for the '52 Pafko card's value, but you know how collectors will pay up for first appearance rookie cards, right? Think about it, the '52 Topps baseball card set was the first ever true baseball card set put out by Topps. The '51 Red and Blue Backs were actually game pieces, and the Connie Mack and Major League All Star die-cuts were not the normal, regular issue card sets which Topps is so well known for and has now been putting out for 70 years. So to many, many, many people out there that Pafko card is the very first ever Topps card, from the very first ever main Topps set, kind of like the overall Topps rookie card of all time if you will. It has a sort of historic significance unlike any other card ever printed. No other card manufacturer has been doing it consistently as long as Topps has.

Think of it like when Upper Deck first came out in 1989 with Ken Griffey Jr.'s rookie card as card #1. Talk about UD hitting a home run with that selection. And just think if UD was to then continue to print sets for 70 more years, how that could effect and increase the value of that iconic card in the eyes of many collectors. Now imagine if Topps had picked and made Mickey Mantle the #1 card in that '52 Topps set instead of Pafko!!! WOW, just WOW had that happened!!!

[irv]

Originally Posted by BobC

Not 100% sure this is another possible explanation for the '52 Pafko card's value, but you know how collectors will pay up for first appearance rookie cards, right?
Think about it, the '52 Topps baseball card set was the first ever true baseball card set put out by Topps. .

Not beyond the realms of possibility, Bob, as I also have thought the same thing.
Certainly an iconic card in that respect.