Super high end Mantle cards

[jsfriedm]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I disagree. Most people buying Mantle now never saw him. Nobody saw Cobb, or Ruth, or Gehrig. I think he's embedded in the consciousness of collectors for good.

I don't know what percentage of people buying Mantle today saw him play, but I'll bet it is significantly higher than the percentage of Cobb buyers who saw him play. Let's say, for argument's sake, that it's 30% (as opposed to 0% or 1% for Cobb). As those 30% go, it will likely shift the demand/supply balance for his cards. It doesn't mean they will go to zero or even on par with Mays, but they will at least grow at a slower rate.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jsfriedm

I don't know what percentage of people buying Mantle today saw him play, but I'll bet it is significantly higher than the percentage of Cobb buyers who saw him play. Let's say, for argument's sake, that it's 30% (as opposed to 0% or 1% for Cobb). As those 30% go, it will likely shift the demand/supply balance for his cards. It doesn't mean they will go to zero or even on par with Mays, but they will at least grow at a slower rate.

You are assuming your conclusion, that those 30 percent of people are buying Mantle because they saw him play and from that assumption concluding that demand will go down when that percentage drops. I think it won't. The demand for Mantle has steadily increased even though more and more buyers never saw him play. I see no reason that would change as we get farther and farther away from his career. He already has achieved Cobb like status.

[jsfriedm]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You are assuming your conclusion, that those 30 percent of people are buying Mantle because they saw him play and that demand will go down when that percentage drops. I think it won't. The demand for Mantle has steadily increased even though more and more buyers never saw him play. I see no reason that would change as we get farther and farther away from his career. He already has achieved Cobb like status.

No, I am providing a reason for my conclusion. There is some non-zero percentage of people who buy Mantle cards today that saw him play, which is not true for Cobb or Ruth. Therefore, there is a chance that their disappearance will shift the demand/supply equation on his cards, a risk that doesn't exist with Cobb or Ruth.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jsfriedm

No, I am providing a reason for my conclusion. There is some non-zero percentage of people who buy Mantle cards today that saw him play, which is not true for Cobb or Ruth. Therefore, there is a chance that their disappearance will shift the demand/supply equation on his cards, a risk that doesn't exist with Cobb or Ruth.

Then why does demand keep going up as that percentage goes down? If your thesis was correct prices should decline as we get further and further out from his career and the collector demographic naturally changes.

[jsfriedm]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Then why does demand keep going up as that percentage goes down? If your thesis was correct prices should decline as we get further and further out from his career and the collector demographic naturally changes.

As I said, the price premium of his early cards versus Mays' has declined over the past several years. The assumption you are making is that the collectors who saw Mantle play will be replaced by those who didn't, which means that you are assuming that younger generations will gravitate to Mantle at a higher rate than to Ruth and Cobb (otherwise their cards should see proportionally more demand since they aren't losing playing days collectors).

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jsfriedm

As I said, the price premium of his early cards versus Mays' has declined over the past several years. The assumption you are making is that the collectors who saw Mantle play will be replaced by those who didn't, which means that you are assuming that younger generations will gravitate to Mantle at a higher rate than to Ruth and Cobb (otherwise their cards should see proportionally more demand since they aren't losing playing days collectors).

Yes, I do make that assumption, at least as to replacing old collectors. Not sure I fully follow the rate part. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

[Snapolit1]

Lists like this are a dime a dozen, but Mantle's cache in the sports fandom world at large clearly is not anywhere near on par with what it is in the collecting hobby.

http://www.espn.com/sportscentury/athletes.html

[raulus]

Sometimes these things are driven by fundamentals, and sometimes they take on a life of their own, like the Kardashians who are largely famous for being famous. And I suppose sometimes it’s a combo, where it might start with fundamentals, and then takes off due to popularity and resonance in the popular imagination.

Much as it pains me to admit it as a proud Italian, the Mona Lisa is really only popular today because she was the Kardashian of last century. Stolen, widely publicized in an attempt to recover the piece, talked about all over the world, eventually recovered. Without that notoriety, she would have remained an obscure small piece by a master. Still a great work of art, yet nowhere close to the level of value it has today, because today she’s known all over the world by just about everyone.

I would draw parallels to Mantle cards. Definitely a great player and generational talent, but the price of his pieces is so high simply because everyone knows and wants them. The strong premium for his stuff relative to his contemporaries who were just as good (or better) on the field defies logic. But that’s because it’s simply a question of better marketing and popularity. And that all starts with the 311, and further burnished by all of the popularity enhancers mentioned above by others.

There’s certainly room to debate how enduring that popularity will be over the next 50-100 years. But it’s proven remarkably durable so far, and shows no signs of abating anytime soon.

[Snapolit1]

Great post. Totally agree. Popularity is often fickle and downright irrational. I could walk down Fifth Avenue today and find 100 woman I think are more beautiful than Kim Kardashian.

It's interesting to me that Mantle and Jordan were similar dudes in a lot of ways. Sort of aloof, enigmatic, didn't say that much, sometimes even surly to reporters and fans. Not saying bad guys, but both (like Derek Jeter) revealed very little of themselves to the outside world. Maybe when that's your M.O. it's easier for people to project on to you and make you larger than life.

Originally Posted by raulus

Sometimes these things are driven by fundamentals, and sometimes they take on a life of their own, like the Kardashians who are largely famous for being famous. And I suppose sometimes it’s a combo, where it might start with fundamentals, and then takes off due to popularity and resonance in the popular imagination.

Much as it pains me to admit it as a proud Italian, the Mona Lisa is really only popular today because she was the Kardashian of last century. Stolen, widely publicized in an attempt to recover the piece, talked about all over the world, eventually recovered. Without that notoriety, she would have remained an obscure small piece by a master. Still a great work of art, yet nowhere close to the level of value it has today, because today she’s known all over the world by just about everyone.

I would draw parallels to Mantle cards. Definitely a great player and generational talent, but the price of his pieces is so high simply because everyone knows and wants them. The strong premium for his stuff relative to his contemporaries who were just as good (or better) on the field defies logic. But that’s because it’s simply a question of better marketing and popularity. And that all starts with the 311, and further burnished by all of the popularity enhancers mentioned above by others.

There’s certainly room to debate how enduring that popularity will be over the next 50-100 years. But it’s proven remarkably durable so far, and shows no signs of abating anytime soon.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Great post. Totally agree. Popularity is often fickle and downright irrational. I could walk down Fifth Avenue today and find 100 woman I think are more beautiful than Kim Kardashian.

It's interesting to me that Mantle and Jordan were similar dudes in a lot of ways. Sort of aloof, enigmatic, didn't say that much, sometimes even surly to reporters and fans. Not saying bad guys, but both (like Derek Jeter) revealed very little of themselves to the outside world. Maybe when that's your M.O. it's easier for people to project on to you and make you larger than life.

Only 100?

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Only 100?

Kim doesn't much for me. What can I say. I'll take Brady's ex-wife.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Kim doesn't much for me. What can I say. I'll take Brady's ex-wife.

She's quite tall almost 6 feet.

[timzcardz]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Great post. Totally agree. Popularity is often fickle and downright irrational. I could walk down Fifth Avenue today and find 100 woman I think are more beautiful than Kim Kardashian.

It's interesting to me that Mantle and Jordan were similar dudes in a lot of ways. Sort of aloof, enigmatic, didn't say that much, sometimes even surly to reporters and fans. Not saying bad guys, but both (like Derek Jeter) revealed very little of themselves to the outside world. Maybe when that's your M.O. it's easier for people to project on to you and make you larger than life.

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Only 100?

It's been raining today!

[brooklynbotter]

Most people I know in modern cards (Late teens/early 20s) view Mantle's as the vintage cards to get. They won't dabble in anything else, but either have or want to buy a Mantle as a "flex." Like everyone has been saying, mantle has allure in the collecting world that I doubt goes away even with a generation that hasn't seen him play.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by brooklynbotter

Most people I know in modern cards (Late teens/early 20s) view Mantle's as the vintage cards to get. They won't dabble in anything else, but either have or want to buy a Mantle as a "flex." Like everyone has been saying, mantle has allure in the collecting world that I doubt goes away even with a generation that hasn't seen him play.

Like most luxury goods for rich people who aren't otherwise hard core collectors, buying highly graded Mantle cards can be a status symbol. Obviously for those of us who are hard core collectors, it has a very different meaning.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

It's interesting to me that Mantle and Jordan were similar dudes in a lot of ways. Sort of aloof, enigmatic, didn't say that much, sometimes even surly to reporters and fans.

Mantle and Jordan's championship greatness (at least the part from how they elevated their teammates) led to similar results But the path there was much different.

Mick's teammates seemed to genuinely like him. They appeared to love playing the game with him and made it a matter of competitive personal pride to try getting as close to his level as possible.

Jordan, on the other hand, was a total ass. He also got the most out of you, but that came from relentless preparation and (probably even moreso) from fear. You marched under his command, took his shit, and pushed your limits more than you ever thought possible, or you wondered if you'd be thoroughly embarrassed and then out of a job.

[talkinbaseball]

My dad took me to see the "Mick" in the middle '60's I could still hear the sound of the ball coming off his bat and It's 2023, "iconic", and the "say hey" kid was my favorite.
John

[Steve D]

Regarding the value difference between Mantle and Mays:

It was pointed out in a previous post, that Mantle seemed to have good luck in the art department with his cards...most of his cards portray him smiling, or just looking good; hell, he was a handsome dude.

Aaron too; most, if not all of his cards show him in a good mood, looking happy to be there.

Mays on the other hand, seems to be unhappy or brooding on most of his cards.

What would the difference be if Mays looked as good as Mantle on his cards?

Steve

[brunswickreeves]

By comparison for some key cards Mick & Mays shared in the 50s:
51B-Mick & Mays both batting stoic
52T-Both portrait stoic
52B-Both stoic
52B-Both stoic
53T-Both stoic
54B-Mick smiling Mays stoic
55B-Mick stoic Mays smiling
56T-Both portrait smiling
57T-Both batting stoic
58T-Both smiling
59T-Neither smiling

I surmise Mick’s higher card value has most to do with the sheer volume/demand of collectors vying for his cards, thus driving up prices. It would be interesting to see how many Mick cards are sold in a year vs. Mays and if there’s any correlation with higher pricing.

[gunboat82]

Originally Posted by Steve D

Regarding the value difference between Mantle and Mays:

It was pointed out in a previous post, that Mantle seemed to have good luck in the art department with his cards...most of his cards portray him smiling, or just looking good; hell, he was a handsome dude.

Aaron too; most, if not all of his cards show him in a good mood, looking happy to be there.

Mays on the other hand, seems to be unhappy or brooding on most of his cards.

What would the difference be if Mays looked as good as Mantle on his cards?

Steve

The subjective "mood" that a card brings is certainly a factor. I love the look of the 1953 Topps cards. The first three I chased were, in order, Paige, Robinson, and Mantle. When I tracked down the Mays, I didn't really feel any connection to it, even though the I like the pose. Mays' scowl reminds me of Jay-Z's serious face on the Hard Knock Life album cover. If he had been flashing the 1954-56 smile during those fake fielding drills, it would've been one of my favorite cards.

His 1952 Topps is an O.K. compromise between chaseability and aesthetics. He looks focused... maybe mildly constipated. But not pissed off at the world, the way he looks in the 1953 Topps set.

[Seven]

I'll say this much.

Mantle is my main collecting interest. He died a few months after my first birthday. I never saw the man play, I grew up on stories of him. The way he was talked about, he might as well have been Jesus Christ come again. His name amongst people who love baseball history, is well known. His fame in the cardboard community? Even greater so.

I would love to say that his prices would come down, but I don't think they ever do. They might stagnate for a bit, but then they'll keep going up.

[z28jd]

I think what people are missing is that Mantle also got passed down to generations from people who saw him to people who didn't. I went quickly to collecting T206/Old Judge cards when I got money, so I don't have a huge collection of 50s-60s cards. However, my dad was a huge Mickey Mantle fan, so he was buying me Mantle cards as gifts for birthdays/Christmas almost as soon as I started collecting cards at 5-6 years old. I even bought a few on my own later on.

Mantle was in Cooperstown before I was even born, so I really missed his career, but I have more of his cards than anyone else from the 50s and 60s because of that connection.

BTW, I clicked on this because I have a 1964 Mantle that has been untouched for at least 35 years that I got as a gift. Card is flawless looking. My dad bought it back then asking for the nicest condition Mantle the guy had, so it just happened to be a 1964 card. Just saw the price for a PSA 9 that just ended last week and now I've been contemplating getting it graded.