1952 Bowman Baseball Picture Cards

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by toppcat

Just different stock, probably from a separate press run at the same printing plant. Topps did the same in certain years and series. The stock that stays white I call brilliant white.

Reminds me a little of '57 Topps, with some of the photography being a little brighter and some a little muddier.

[G1911]

Very nice Willie "May"!

I'm looking for a Werle still, I'd classify this as a recurring print defect, but it's tough to acquire. There are plenty of them out there, but those selling think they are worth like 10x the ones that have actually transacted.

[thatkidfromjerrymaguire]

Originally Posted by G1911

I'm looking for a Werle still, I'd classify this as a recurring print defect, but it's tough to acquire. There are plenty of them out there, but those selling think they are worth like 10x the ones that have actually transacted.

I think one thing that helps keep the actual price down for the Werle in a straight auction is that the 1952 Bowman is so much less popular than 1952 Topps. And as a collector, that is fine with me...as it feels like this set is a relative bargain, even though I personally greatly prefer them to Topps due to the artwork. I think a similar scarce variation/error/defect in 1952 Topps would sell for MUCH higher. If you look at the pop report on PSA and SGC, they are really low (but granted, I feel like some of them were graded PRIOR to it being identified as a variation).

Not much info here, but here is a short thread from 2007 with a couple Net54 members discussing the rarity:

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...ighlight=werle

With patience, it feels like a mid-grade Werle variation should be valued in the $50 to $80 range. But you're right, they are often listed with it Buy It Now price of about 10x that.

I feel like quite often, sellers don't really know what they have...so they aren't listed as "missing signature". Only those of us that are actively looking at the scans are identifying them.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by thatkidfromjerrymaguire

I think one thing that helps keep the actual price down for the Werle in a straight auction is that the 1952 Bowman is so much less popular than 1952 Topps. And as a collector, that is fine with me...as it feels like this set is a relative bargain, even though I personally greatly prefer them to Topps due to the artwork. I think a similar scarce variation/error/defect in 1952 Topps would sell for MUCH higher. If you look at the pop report on PSA and SGC, they are really low (but granted, I feel like some of them were graded PRIOR to it being identified as a variation).

Not much info here, but here is a short thread from 2007 with a couple Net54 members discussing the rarity:

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...ighlight=werle

With patience, it feels like a mid-grade Werle variation should be valued in the $50 to $80 range. But you're right, they are often listed with it Buy It Now price of about 10x that.

I feel like quite often, sellers don't really know what they have...so they aren't listed as "missing signature". Only those of us that are actively looking at the scans are identifying them.

I can only imagine what the rate would be if it was a Topps instead! I love the 1952 Topps issue as well, definitely prefer the larger size and the backs, but I like the artwork on the Bowmans better and the 'fun per $' equation makes me favor the Bowmans. Helps that the high numbers are not so nearly in demand with the Bowmans. If this issue had been done in the size of the 53-55 sets or had a Bowman Large version like the 1952 Footballs, I think it would be a lot more popular.

I don't think PSA recognized Werle until fairly recently; I've seen a fair number of them but usually not for sale or at museum BIN's. Definitely less than 10% of all Werle's though, I'll be patient and hopefully get one at a decent figure.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

Reminds me a little of '57 Topps, with some of the photography being a little brighter and some a little muddier.

Yup, card stock and coloring of the card itself can affect the look. Look at 1952 Topps 1-80 Red/Black or the 3rd series grays vs regular print cards. I try to weed the dingy ones out of my late 60's Topps sets, where the crummy stock was prevalent. It's really noticeable on the reverses in 1967 and '68 especially.