![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. Last edited by stlcardsfan; 12-06-2013 at 12:17 PM. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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.
__________________
Successful transactions with: Chesboro41, jimivintage, Bocabirdman, marcdelpercio, Jollyelm, Smanzari, asoriano, pclpads, joem36, nolemmings, t206blogcom, Northviewcats, Xplainer, Kickstand19, GrayGhost, btcarfango, Brian Van Horn, USMC09, G36, scotgreb, tere1071, kurri17, wrm, David James, tjenkins, SteveWhite, OhioCard Collector, sysks22, ejstel. Marty Last edited by brob28; 12-06-2013 at 03:18 PM. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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.
__________________
Member of OBC (Old Baseball Cards), the longest running online collecting club www.oldbaseball.com Last edited by robsbessette; 12-07-2013 at 07:00 AM. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wasn't there a story about 2 guys that went to as many shows as possible (in the early years) to buy every 1967 Brooks Robinson they could find, because it was a high number, and Brooks, and possibly a SP? The sole purpose was to hoard them for future sale.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I made this post 2 years ago -- nothing has changed since then
was Card Collectors Company had a warehouse fire and for whatever reason a ton of the 70 Benches were destroyed in that fire (or water damaged). While other cards may have had similar issues, the Bench was the most in demand of those cards As for the SCD article on Brooksie, iIRC Gary Sawatski and his then partner in the business Duane Scrhoen (sic) had sorted 5,000 or more 67's without finding ONE of those cards. You do have to remember that in 1979 Bench was among the leading superstars in the game and Brooks had just retired and was beloved. Plus, both players were World Series heroes in the days when being a World Series hero may have been the only 90 percent of the country saw you play So, those cards being tougher cards in tough series were thus being not only sought after by collectors but also being kept by both advance and not so advanced collectors Growing up in NY, we had tons of baseball to watch in the 70's on free TV and the games of the week as well. But if you grew up in a city like LA, I believe the only Dodgers games televised were Sunday road games and all the National games. And in cities without major league teams, probably less games to see as well. Rich Last edited by Rich Klein; 12-07-2013 at 09:12 AM. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lot of 13 different 1965 Topps High Numbers | vintagetoppsguy | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 08-16-2013 07:01 PM |
F/T: 1970 Topps high numbers | SmokyBurgess | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 3 | 11-29-2012 07:26 AM |
Did You Buy '52 Topps High Numbers As A Kid? | toppcat | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 3 | 03-25-2010 10:42 PM |
O/T - Did You Buy '52 Topps High Numbers As A Kid? | toppcat | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 33 | 03-03-2010 11:12 PM |
Nice lot of 52 Topps high numbers | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 02-21-2006 08:23 PM |