A Modern Objective View of E90-1 Rarities

[pkaufman]

I love the sunset variation Miller card.....I think it was a great find. I tried to get SGC to put "sunset variation" on the label of mine, but they said it was not recognized yet in any publications. Perhaps we need to do a little more lobbying. It is certainly a very obvious and striking artwork variation. Will try to get a scan up for Scott a little later.

[ullmandds]

i tried to get sgc to label it too...and they would not!!!!

[ScottFandango]

Psa told me they wouldn't recognize new discoveries until (at the time) Bob Lemke agreed to it and added it to the baseball bible...

[deadballfreaK]

OK. Here's mine. Had no idea there were two varieties.

[smtjoy]

Nice research, thanks for working it up.

I will add one thing when looking at pop reports on sets. If the set has a few very expensive cards, they tend to be graded a lot more than the commons, your list bears this out. In some exhibit sets the stars (Ruth, Cobb, Gehrig, etc) can have pops 2-4 x the commons. Just something to keep in mind.

[ScottFandango]

Thanks for the detailed scans.....

I wonder if more collectors can post their millers....

[ullmandds]

Guess which back is which?

[ScottFandango]

The left is sunset variation...

Red ink residue ...Maybe


Interesting that vintage card prices shows the sunset version....

It would be interesting to have a thread where people show scans of this card only and we can make a tally....

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by smtjoy

Nice research, thanks for working it up.

I will add one thing when looking at pop reports on sets. If the set has a few very expensive cards, they tend to be graded a lot more than the commons, your list bears this out. In some exhibit sets the stars (Ruth, Cobb, Gehrig, etc) can have pops 2-4 x the commons. Just something to keep in mind.

+1

I'd add to Scott's comment that the pop reports are less an accurate reflection of the total number of cards out there and more strongly indicative of choices made by collectors and dealers to get cards slabbed. I'd suggest, with all due respect, that the real population of many of the lower tallied cards is actually far closer to the real populations of the high tally HOFers but is not reflected in the pop because not enough people care to slab them. For that reason I am always leery of using pop reports as the foundation for a rarity analysis. Since my forte is Exhibit cards, I can speak to an example from there. In the 1939-46 Salutations set the Johnny Rizzo card is a real bastard to find. PSA has slabbed 8. Gehrig and Klein are two of the other ridiculous short prints. PSA has slabbed 16 and 14 of them, respectively. Now, are they twice as easy to find as Rizzo? Heck no. They happen to be popular candidates for slabbing is all because they're HOFers, while Rizzo has limited audience appeal. In the E90-1, Miller is a good example. Miller is listed in a pioneering work as a rarity so even someone who doesn't collect the set but is aware of what cards are reputed to be rare and who comes across one is more likely to slab it to try and cash in. That said, I've done analyses like this before for boxing issues and they are quite useful for exposing rarities, so I do appreciate the effort. I'd suggest following up with a VCP analysis of how many have transacted and how many are offered for sale. I've found that to be the most accurate indicator of rarity. When a card regardless of grade simply doesn't have much of a transaction history over a few years, that's a pretty solid indicator that it is a toughie.

[ScottFandango]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

+1

I'd add to Scott's comment that the pop reports are less an accurate reflection of the total number of cards out there and more strongly indicative of choices made by collectors and dealers to get cards slabbed. I'd suggest, with all due respect, that the real population of many of the lower tallied cards is actually far closer to the real populations of the high tally HOFers but is not reflected in the pop because not enough people care to slab them. For that reason I am always leery of using pop reports as the foundation for a rarity analysis. Since my forte is Exhibit cards, I can speak to an example from there. In the 1939-46 Salutations set the Johnny Rizzo card is a real bastard to find. PSA has slabbed 8. Gehrig and Klein are two of the other ridiculous short prints. PSA has slabbed 16 and 14 of them, respectively. Now, are they twice as easy to find as Rizzo? Heck no. They happen to be popular candidates for slabbing is all because they're HOFers, while Rizzo has limited audience appeal. In the E90-1, Miller is a good example. Miller is listed in a pioneering work as a rarity so even someone who doesn't collect the set but is aware of what cards are reputed to be rare and who comes across one is more likely to slab it to try and cash in. That said, I've done analyses like this before for boxing issues and they are quite useful for exposing rarities, so I do appreciate the effort. I'd suggest following up with a VCP analysis of how many have transacted and how many are offered for sale. I've found that to be the most accurate indicator of rarity. When a card regardless of grade simply doesn't have much of a transaction history over a few years, that's a pretty solid indicator that it is a toughie.

fair point, however:

how do you account for 106 Howell follow through, 100 Summers, and 90 Baileys being graded? these represent the most commonly graded cards yet have no more significance than Leach Throwing or Stone LH or Bescher...

also, I feel that if you search for the current availability of these low pop cards, you will have a hard time finding one for sale....I agree that the frequency seen is important and I believe the pop reports for these low pop cards is reflective in its current availability...