Why is (this card) worth more than (this card)?

[puckpaul]

My favorite Joe D card, the R303B. I also prefer the 41PB to the 39, just a nicer looking card in color.

[darwinbulldog]

I find that my aesthetic preferences are more or less uncorrelated with the preferences of the hobby in general. In some cases I diverge pretty dramatically. I think, for example, that about 95% of T205s are ugly, compared to about 50% of T207s. The b/w American Caramel issues and 1939 Playball cards look great to me, but 1941 Playball and 1949 Leaf are garish at best, and hideous in quite a few cases. The '52 Topps Mantle I think is the absolute least attractive of all his Bowman and Topps cards from 1951-1956, and don't get me started on the #144 Ruth Goudey (let alone his atrocious-looking M101-5/6s).

I used to be genuinely disappointed that everyone else seemed to have such tacky taste, but now I'm just happy with all the money my unusual preferences have saved me.

[jingram058]

This subject has been covered ad-nauseum, but I have yet to read a real reason as to why the 52 Topps Mantle is so insanely more valuable than the 51 Bowman?

[Bestdj777]

Originally Posted by jingram058

This subject has been covered ad-nauseum, but I have yet to read a real reason as to why the 52 Topps Mantle is so insanely more valuable than the 51 Bowman?

The 1952 Topps is a much nicer looking card, in a more impressive size than the 51 Bowman, and is in a more significant set. All my opinion, but I prefer my 52 Topps to my 51 Bowman. I see the appeal of the 51 Bowman as it’s his rookie card, but, if that wasn’t the case, I don’t think there be any discussion or debate about what is the better card. Add in the fact that people have been convicted 52 Topps high numbers were dumped and that a first Topps issue is the equivalent of a rookie for Mantle, and it all makes sense, to me anyway.

[pclpads]

I think the same arguments for JD's '41PB over his '39 can be made for Teddy's '41 PB. Admittedly, his '39 is an action shot, while his '41PB is a head shot, but for me, the color just jumps out. Maybe someday I'll own one . . .

[rats60]

Originally Posted by jingram058

This subject has been covered ad-nauseum, but I have yet to read a real reason as to why the 52 Topps Mantle is so insanely more valuable than the 51 Bowman?

It is because the 1952 Topps High numbers are the toughest cards from the Topps and Bowman sets to find. Even though Mantle is a DP, the fact that he was the big name in the high series drove demand for the card and it became the post war card to own.

The 1951 Bowman is a beautiful card where as the 1952 Topps Mantle is the ugliest card ever made. Its yellow bat is as ridiculous as the caricature on the 1951 Bowman Paul Richards. There really shouldn't be a price discrepancy between the two, but there will probably always be price memory driven by 70s and 80s set collectors.

[BobbyVCP]

Do you think since 1941 is the year of the 56 game hitting streak it might have something to do with the increased value.