Is this a $5, $50, or $500 card? 1972 Pete Rose Blank back BGS 9

[thenavarro]

Those of you that know me, know that I mainly collect autographs, but I occasionally pick up an unsigned card that interests me for some reason. A couple years back, I picked up a 1972 Topps Pete Rose card that was in an SGC A slab and labeled as a 1972 Topps Pete Rose Proof card. I just bought it because I thought it was neat. Yesterday, I was going to Beckett in Dallas to get some graphs slabbed, and decided to take along my Rose to see if I could get it slabbed with a number. Beckett slabbed it with a 9 and they call it a 1972 Topps Pete Rose blank back card instead of a "proof" card.

Like I indicated above, I don't really dabble too much in unsigned cards, so I'm not too familiar with the difference between blank backs, proofs, etc.

It's a cool looking card, and came back with a strong grade. Do the masses think this is closer to being a $5 card, a $50 card, or a $500 card or some other number? I saw where some regular 1972 Topps Pete Rose cards that PSA had slabbed as a 9 were sold I thought for between $400-$500. I realize that not all grading companies are as popular as others, especially for those that pay high dollar for PSA Registry purposes, but just wondering what price range my card might be in?

Are blank backs generally more or less valuable than their standard counterpart?

[ALR-bishop]

While in general I think people would pay more for a proof card than a blank or wrong back card, I think in most sets it is impossible to tell a proof from a blank back unless there are, as in the case of the known 77 and 84 proof cards, front differences from the regular issue.

I also think the value of the card you have is hard to predict. But it is Rose, a 9, and an unusual blank back. I would guess more than $5 and less than $500 :-)

Nice to see you here Mike

[bnorth]

Blank backs are generally considered junk. If you can find a error collector you can get a small premium. If you can find a player collector that also collects errors you can get a nice premium.

I have collected these type of cards for close to 30 years. I only collect raw so not sure how much difference the Beckett or any other slab makes.

Also Topps printing errors are far from rare.

[Neal]

Cool card!

[rats60]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Blank backs are generally considered junk. If you can find a error collector you can get a small premium. If you can find a player collector that also collects errors you can get a nice premium.

I have collected these type of cards for close to 30 years. I only collect raw so not sure how much difference the Beckett or any other slab makes.

Also Topps printing errors are far from rare.

If it was a t206, it would be a 5000.00+ card.

[KCRfan1]

Nice card Mike!

[Mark70Z]

It's a '72 Topps card so it's a very cool looking card format, one of the best in my view, it's Rose and it's in pristine condition so to me it has value. What the value is, I'm unsure, but there are Rose collectors, and a fairly large group of die hard Cincinnati Reds collectors so it should be desirable to one of these groups of people.

I think blank backs are generally less valuable than finished cards. I'm sure it depends on the card, but that's been my experience. Also, I guess you can consider an unfinished card a proof card and in this case a blank back. Who really knows whether Topps used it as a proof.

My guess... $100 Very nice card by the way.

[thenavarro]

Thanks for the feedback so far.

M

[DBesse27]

Blank backs and proofs are kind of a funny thing. To a lot of collectors they're not very desirable. But to the right player collector, they could be worth quite a bit. In that condition, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see a die hard Rose collector drop a couple hundred on it.

[Exhibitman]

I collect error cards and have purchased similar blank backs of HOFers for under $200 so my guesstimate is between $100-$200.

[Bestdj777]

Originally Posted by DBesse27

Blank backs and proofs are kind of a funny thing. To a lot of collectors they're not very desirable. But to the right player collector, they could be worth quite a bit. In that condition, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see a die hard Rose collector drop a couple hundred on it.

Same here. I personally love picking up cards with printing issues for my player collection and will pay a premium to get them.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by thenavarro

Those of you that know me, know that I mainly collect autographs, but I occasionally pick up an unsigned card that interests me for some reason. A couple years back, I picked up a 1972 Topps Pete Rose card that was in an SGC A slab and labeled as a 1972 Topps Pete Rose Proof card. I just bought it because I thought it was neat. Yesterday, I was going to Beckett in Dallas to get some graphs slabbed, and decided to take along my Rose to see if I could get it slabbed with a number. Beckett slabbed it with a 9 and they call it a 1972 Topps Pete Rose blank back card instead of a "proof" card.

Like I indicated above, I don't really dabble too much in unsigned cards, so I'm not too familiar with the difference between blank backs, proofs, etc.

It's a cool looking card, and came back with a strong grade. Do the masses think this is closer to being a $5 card, a $50 card, or a $500 card or some other number? I saw where some regular 1972 Topps Pete Rose cards that PSA had slabbed as a 9 were sold I thought for between $400-$500. I realize that not all grading companies are as popular as others, especially for those that pay high dollar for PSA Registry purposes, but just wondering what price range my card might be in?

Are blank backs generally more or less valuable than their standard counterpart?

I'll bet it's a $500 card...no, wait...I'll bet it's a $5 card...oh, I mean...

I'll bet it's a $50 card...wait...can you just name a number & I'll bet, uh...I mean guess it's that price.

[David W]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I collect error cards and have purchased similar blank backs of HOFers for under $200 so my guesstimate is between $100-$200.

I've got a handful of blank back cards of Lou Brock, and prices are all over the place.

They sit in Ebay stores with high BIN's as well.

I'm just guessing, but I don't think I ever paid over $100 for my blank backs, and some probably less than $20.

Only player and some error collectors want them.

[JustinD]

Like all things it is supply and demand.

Post 80 Modern blank backs are dollar cards at best. However those earlier than 76 seem to draw a premium with the error collectors. That premium depends on the player collectors often. A player like Rose would have demand and I have seen few 72' blank backs or proofs. It might sit for a while looking for the right buyer, but I think the estimates of between 100-150 are realistic.

Personally, I have paid silly premiums for 72 color shifts as they really look great and accentuate the art. There's a buyer for everything, lol.

[Mark70Z]

If someone has a '72 Brooks Robinson #550 blank back in that type of condition I'd pay $100 for it...

[David W]

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

If someone has a '72 Brooks Robinson #550 blank back in that type of condition I'd pay $100 for it...

Here is a 64

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brooks-Robin...kAAOSwkNZUfLwo

[Mark70Z]

Originally Posted by David W

Here is a 64

Thanks for the heads up David; do have the '64 already.

[Exhibitman]

Here's one I bought a while back for my Aaron collection:



More blank back fun:



For Justin:




Color shifts can be fun in other years too:

[Leon]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Like all things it is supply and demand.

.....

Sort of disagree in a polite tone. Supply has little to do with our cards. It is all about demand (says the previous collector of some of the rarest pre-war cards). Just like the double print '52 Mick and the '86 Jordon, it is all about the demand, not as much the supply. (as both were made in very large quantities relatively speaking)

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Leon

Sort of disagree in a polite tone. Supply has little to do with our cards. It is all about demand (says the previous collector of some of the rarest pre-war cards). Just like the double print '52 Mick and the '86 Jordon, it is all about the demand, not as much the supply. (as both were made in very large quantities relatively speaking)

I actually agree to a point Leon.

It often is not as much supply and demand, but a combination. Some very rare sets have little supply and little demand, some type collectors might battle for them but they are a tough sale at times. On the contrary these error also have a small market, but player collectors like myself will pay large premiums for our guys. The demand is small, the supply is small and prices can skyrocket on the right day. Wrong day and you get a fiver.

As to those Mick's and Jordan's I am in the small camp that eventually those that want them will have them due to the supply and prices will equalize. Not bottom out, but equalize. Likely it will be Mick before Jordan as the collector crowd for Jordan is younger. However, if PSA starts grading the Star sets, I will revise that prediction to much sooner. Supply to me, is usually the long term winner. But I think in decades, not years.

[bbcard1]

Early blank backs don't come up that often (1972 is relatively early). I can only remember finding one "in the wild." meaning pulled from a pack. I probably have 50 or so accumulated or culled from collections and I think they are quite cool. I would bet it would be close to a $500 card because there are still a few Rose collectors around and the grade is strong. I'd pay $50 in a heartbeat.

[Exhibitman]

Early blank back:

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by DBesse27

Blank backs and proofs are kind of a funny thing. To a lot of collectors they're not very desirable. But to the right player collector, they could be worth quite a bit. In that condition, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see a die hard Rose collector drop a couple hundred on it.

Have to agree with Dan....I think there is a buyer around that price - but it is more an element of timing.

Nice card either way.

Z

[divecchia]

To me blank backs have value, but like Zach said it's a matter of timing. When I first started collecting Nolan Ryan over 20 years ago, I would have paid more money for a Topps blank back card of Ryan than the regular issue card for the same year. If that were a 1972 Ryan card I would have paid $250 for it 20 years ago, when you could get the regular Topps card for less than half that. Now because I'm a Registry whore and I have so many Ryan cards to upgrade I would probably offer $50 for one. So, I wish you the best of luck finding someone like me 20 years ago.

Donato

[ALR-bishop]

Donato-- can you say whore on here ? This is quite an admission.

Its value is going to depend on how much some one is willing to pay for it on any given day. Nice Card

[divecchia]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Donato-- can you say whore on here ? This is quite an admission.

Hi Al,

I hope I can since it is an opinion on myself, but just in case it's a problem I do have my name at the bottom of the post and my full name next to my avatar.

Hope all is well with you.

Donato

By the way it is a very nice Rose card that you have there, Mike.

[frankhardy]

Seriously, that is a very nice card. In my Cardinals collection, I do not pursue blank backs, so I would be the wrong person to assess a value. I would think it would be worth well in excess of $100, but maybe not as high as $500. If you were to auction it, I would guess it would bring $300.

If you want to sell, you could always put a high buy it now price and take offers.