When have Bazooka, Milk Duds, Nabisco been cut up?

[Bestdj777]

Hi Mike,

Hope you didn't take my grumpy rant as directed at you. The reason I think people are cutting up panels is that, while the panel itself might not be in the best condition (grading a one or so because of a card or two), you usually have a shot of getting a high grade card out of the middle of the panel. And, for some reason, a PSA 9 single brings more than a PSA 1 panel. I'd always rather have the panels.

[MCoxon]

Originally Posted by Bestdj777

Hi Mike,

Hope you didn't take my grumpy rant as directed at you. The reason I think people are cutting up panels is that, while the panel itself might not be in the best condition (grading a one or so because of a card or two), you usually have a shot of getting a high grade card out of the middle of the panel. And, for some reason, a PSA 9 single brings more than a PSA 1 panel. I'd always rather have the panels.

Totally agree - I've been focusing on panels/boxes more than singles lately. I had started with singles, but like the panels and boxes more.

[toppcat]

I like the Bazooka's in panels myself. Really, if something has survived this long in original form, why desecrate it?!

[Empty77]

I apparently take a different view than most comments here, and in response to the various references to "original form", the fact is that they were meant to be cut out and separated by the original owner. To me, keeping them in panel form is actually sort of an odd happenstance of the hobby. Logically it would seem to make most sense to either preserve the whole box in tact, or cut into singles the way they were meant to be used, as individual cards. However, I recognize the charm of the panel and will collect them both ways.

I would point out though that PSA carries much of the blame for the concern in this thread, for its insistence in making the singles and panels as separate items in a master set. I have always felt a more sensible decision would be to treat it as an either/or, as in either you own the panel or you own the single and both could count as possessing the item, but since the set requires both "versions" as distinct items, they are forcing a demand to keep up a supply of singles as well as panels.

(you might guess my contempt for even referring to them as "versions", since they aren't different versions of a card, it's the same f-ing card, just because a panel has it still attached to its neighbor doesn't make it a different issue, and to me the master set should be all the different issues of a player, not every conceivable manner it which the same issue may have been preserved)

[MCoxon]

Originally Posted by Empty77

I apparently take a different view than most comments here, and in response to the various references to "original form", the fact is that they were meant to be cut out and separated by the original owner. To me, keeping them in panel form is actually sort of an odd happenstance of the hobby. Logically it would seem to make most sense to either preserve the whole box in tact, or cut into singles the way they were meant to be used, as individual cards. However, I recognize the charm of the panel and will collect them both ways.

I would point out though that PSA carries much of the blame for the concern in this thread, for its insistence in making the singles and panels as separate items in a master set. I have always felt a more sensible decision would be to treat it as an either/or, as in either you own the panel or you own the single and both could count as possessing the item, but since the set requires both "versions" as distinct items, they are forcing a demand to keep up a supply of singles as well as panels.

(you might guess my contempt for even referring to them as "versions", since they aren't different versions of a card, it's the same f-ing card, just because a panel has it still attached to its neighbor doesn't make it a different issue, and to me the master set should be all the different issues of a player, not every conceivable manner it which the same issue may have been preserved)

I agree that graded cards and registries cause strange behavior. For the most part, if I have a panel (say, a 1965 Clemente, Veale, etc.) then I don't bother with the single. Of all, I do like the boxes most, then panels, then individual cards.

the thing that drives me most nuts is the black dotted line rule, at least in terms of how so many earlier hand cuts get graded A, even though they are well cut (especially 1959 Bazookas and Jellos). Someone, at some point, figured out not to cut the black dots, it seems like after 1959 or 1963 (jello)

[ArmourPhil]

I have to think the panels are much rarer and therefore much more valuable. Unfortunately PSA does not give SMR pricing for the panels. If a bazooka Mantle single is selling or $1000 or more (which they are) what is the much rare panel worth ?? 2x ? 3X or more ??

I am personally chasing a complete bazooka 1960-71 panel set which you can see here https://www.psacard.com/PSASetRegistry/composite/14552

PSA included "panels" from 1968 which I wish they hadn't done but it is what it is. Will anyone ever have this complete graded set ??

[ksks]

Hi guys ..... I love the Bazooka boxes ..... it my mind , at same grade , boxes sells at higher price than panels , and panels more than singles. Always looking to trade. Steve

[hcv123]

That PSA has "motivated" people to cut these up, bothers me sooooo much. I have been an avid collector of complete bazooka boxes for some time now. I have owned complete sets of boxes from 1963, 1966, 1967, 1968 and 1971.

A 1960 box with Clemente is the white whale on my want list currently. I am also looking for other boxes from 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1964 and 1965. Have some to trade if any one has what I need.

[ArmourPhil]

I'm 100% on board with Mike. PSA master set requirements that you have 3 of the same card , i.e. box, panel and single are ridiculous. The option should be to have the ard in any one of those forms. I personally collect in panel form when they are available like 1960 - 71 Bazooka, 1975-79 Hostess, 1986-88 Drakes, but that should be my choice.

To me the ultimate has to what's being added to the Master sets like match book covers and those pics from the side panels of trans-o-gram boxes. THOSE ARE NOT CARDS, THE CARDS ARE ON THE BACK !

[brian1961]

No doubt about it, Phil. The adding of some of these very questionable items as "cards" to the PSA Master Set Registry (just to gain points, and pad one's set rating) is so much of a stretch, it's way outside the range of Willie "Stretch" McCovey, and that's saying something. --- Brian Powell