2012 All-Vintage Standard Catalog of BBC

[Bob Lemke]

Rich, Thanks for expressing your understanding. By the way, I have not been associated with Collect.com Auctions for about a year now.

[alanu]

Got mine today and on the good side, the pictures seem clearer and it's visually clearer and easier to read.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Wish I would have read Bob's post a few hours earlier, at which time I ordered my copy from Amazon.

[alanu]

Upon further review, it will take a little while to get used to finding some things, but overall I like the look of it.

The biggest differences I see so far is:

The Topps inserts/test issues are now included alphabetically be name and not by year.

The "E", "T", etc. issues are not lumped together but are listed alphabetically throughout the catalog.

The exhibits are not all grouped together, but are listed alphabetically throughout the catalog.

Just my thoughts

-Alan

[campyfan39]

+1

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Wish I would have read Bob's post a few hours earlier, at which time I ordered my copy from Amazon.

[ValKehl]

I ordered my 2012 Catalog on Sept. 28th and received it on Oct. 3rd. I have thus far only given it a cursory look, but I am already frustrated by the "new alphabetization protocol." I was shocked to find the 1951 Topps CM All-Star cards listed on page 523 and the 1951 Topps ML All-Star cards on page 528!!

I am even more most disappointed to learn that most of Bob Lemke's updates were not incorporated into the book. My practice has been to buy a new Catalog every 2 or 3 years to save $$. Last year, I was going to buy the 2011 edition to replace my 2008 edition, but Bob kindly suggested to me that I wait until the 2012 edition because his updates would not make it in time for the 2011 edition. Bob, thanks again for the heads-up; I only wish things had worked out as you intended.

It is my great wish that someone or some organization would undertake to produce a truly first-rate, more-comprehensive, and more-informative catalog of vintage bb cards. I could see this being undertaken by an organization such as Old Cardboard or VCP, with lotsa assistance and input from knowledgeable collectors. I think an electronic/online product would work best, as revisions and updates could be made at any time. A collector would buy a subscription to access the Catalog (similar to a VCP subscription).

Val

[JLange]

Bob: thank you for your hard work on the catalog over the years, and I really enjoy your blog with checklist updates and uncommon commons. I have purchased the Standard Catalog several times over the years and I have the 2012 edition in transit right now.

Since the latest does not incorporate all of the changes / updates desired, and since over the years prior some issues and sets (particularly less collected regionals, etc.) were dropped due to editing constraints, I am wondering what year volume offers the most comprehensive information to the hobby, if you disregard price?

I have a 2000 version that I still reference quite often because it seems to have more older sets and issues than some of the more recent catalogs, but I would pursue a different year volume if it might be more comprehensive. In short, which year would be considered the "best" reference volume, for most comprehensive information (on older stuff, of course)