1966 Topps high numbers frustration

[rsdill2]

I completely share your frustration. I'm within 3 cards as well (two of which are relatively easy and the third is Snyder).

It's taken me about 5-6 years for a raw set that would probably grade a 5 or 6. I've just been patient and relentless in my search. Occasionally I've been lucky at local card shows with dealers who think that Beckett is the Bible and will sell them for about half book. Some I've got lucky on eBay in the same fashion where it shows up on my saved search and I jump on a low buy-it-now before anyone else sees it.

I've heard all the stories about the "SP-ier" SPs like certain dealers/collectors hoarding them. Not sure if I buy that or not but there's no denying that for some reason or another there's more people trying to buy them than selling them now.

I'm also in the same boat as you on '67s. It's the only '60s set I haven't started and that's just because I'm scared of the high numbers. I remember when I completed the '61 set and thought I had done something (I hadn't yet started '66). For me, '66 has been undoubtedly more difficult than '61.

[Zach Wheat]

I hear you. I have never completely understood this as well. I am working through these issues with a '72 Topps set. Most seem to think the semi-high numbers and high numbered cards were probably produced in equal numbers - yet often there is a noticeable price difference (even in the high numbered series). I am still trying to figure this set out and don't understand all of the nuances yet.

In modern cards, a number of dealers price higher graded Desert Shield cards based upon population reports and hence perceived scarcity. This is a different issue but the principal appears to be the same. Every card was produced in equal numbers, so logic would seem to dictate that the short term scarcity of a highly graded card should not necessarily dictate a higher price. Population scarcity of higher-graded cards should even out as more cards are graded. I guess in this case pricing is based upon demand, as it should, as demand is affected by perceived scarcity...but still....

Zach Wheat

[Griffins]

I had the same issue. I was just very patient and eventually got the last few for a decent price, but it shouldn't have taken nearly as long as it did.
I found them tougher and more expensive than the '67 high numbers.

[stlcardsfan]

I have completed both 66 and 67. The 66 high #s are probably slightly tougher in terms of scarcity, but 67 is brutal because Seaver, Carew and B. Rob are high #s. If the 66 highs had that kind of star power no telling what they would sell for.

I completed both by a combination of Ebay and card shows. There was a 3 day show in STL where I was lucky to find a dealer (Roger Neufeldt, some on this board may know him) that had just purchased a 67 set and was breaking it up. I bought a bunch of high #s from him. I also bought a bunch of high #s from a local place in my hometown of O'Fallon, IL that specialized in postcards but also had a bunch of baseball cards. They were permanently closed but I somehow made it in, talked to the owner, and got to know his son, who was handling the baseball card liquidation.

For 66, mostly Ebay and some card shows. I actually picked up the Grant Jackson for $7 from a dealer in STL (Tony Schaefer, Monster Cards). Pretty low grade, but I bet it would sell for close to $50 on Ebay. You are right about those 66 highs skyrocketing.

[brob28]

I don't have personal experience with 66 or 67, but I'm 9 cards shy of a 1961 set which has some pretty tough high numbers. I'm pretty condition sensitive and shy away from OC cards so when there's one I'm interested in there's usually some pretty spirited bidding on ebay. I also put together '71 and '72 sets a couple of years back and definately got high number burn-out/frustration. For me as frustrating as it can be I had to stay patient so I did not overpay. I think each set has some that are even more pricey than the "normal" High #'s, the G. Jackson card seems to be the poster child for that. One thing I see often is a set where condition drops off with the High #'s - to me a sure sign of burn-out or impatience.

[glynparson]

Ive been "hoarding a few of them for a while. Some are definetly tougher than others. Grant does seem to pop up less in collections and definetly has a very strong demand. For a grant to only sell for $50 on ebay it would have to be in the fair to good range. The prices on ebay for that card are REAL strong.

[robsbessette]

I know people have talked about it on here before, but the Jackson is crazy. Just for the fun of it I was watching one last night on eBay. VG condition and it went for $140!!! That could buy you a low VG 1956 Mantle (which I'd rather have any day of the week)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1966-Topps-B...vip=true&rt=nc

I think the key thing on these sets is patience. There are always more out there and every once in awhile you can get lucky or find a good deal. You just have to know it when you see it.

[Samsdaddy]

Reading this thread makes me glad that I am not building this set or the 67 for that matter as I think I would get too frustrated.

The only high number I seek from the 1966 set is one of my all time favorite players, Billy Williams.