High end Heritage lots, which would you rather have?

[Republicaninmass]

. Buyer is far from a moron. He just increased the value of his Bradshaw and Smith rookies that he is sitting on so when he dumps them onto the market he will have a nice pay day.


Provided there is a great fool.

The t206 set is far from complete, in fact it is missing the toughest and most expensive cards. Why is that aspect so difficult for people to grasp. No other set would be considered complete missing cards, but it's fine in the t206 case. I never understood it, and it's deterred me from collecting the set

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

. Buyer is far from a moron. He just increased the value of his Bradshaw and Smith rookies that he is sitting on so when he dumps them onto the market he will have a nice pay day.


Provided there is a great fool.

The t206 set is far from complete, in fact it is missing the toughest and most expensive cards. Why is that aspect so difficult for people to grasp. No other set would be considered complete missing cards, but it's fine in the t206 case. I never understood it, and it's deterred me from collecting the set

If the collector says it is complete at 518 or 520, who is to say he is wrong? Do you have to have every error and variation to have a complete Topps set? Do you have to have both #66 Williams and Piersall to have a complete 54 Bowman set? The great thing about t206 is that it can be collected any way you want. We can argue about what makes it complete, but unlike a modern set where one of each number is needed, there is no right answer.

I know in the 80's when the hobby took off, the Big 3 (4) were not considered to be part of the set. Beckett listed a complete set price as 520 cards with sperate prices for the others. So, saying it is a complete set of 520 is a valid opinion, everyone knows what you are talking about.