Comparing a cards scarcity/rarity to a T206 Wagner

[x2drich2000]

Lets look at two other cards from T206: Red and Green Cobb.

Red (2365 PSA/1378 SGC/3743 Total) = .93 % total percent of set
Green (1009 PSA/619 SGC/ 1628 Total) = .40 % total percent of set

Something tells me few people are going to call either of these cards scarce but by your thinking both are more scarce than the BN and E92 and the Mitchell is between the two.

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Lets look at two other cards from T206: Red and Green Cobb.

Red (2365 PSA/1378 SGC/3743 Total) = .93 % total percent of set
Green (1009 PSA/619 SGC/ 1628 Total) = .40 % total percent of set

Something tells me few people are going to call either of these cards scarce but by your thinking both are more scarce than the BN and E92 and the Mitchell is between the two.

+1 agree I understand your approach but to me scarcity is based on the population of itself. So as mentioned above the Baltimore News Ruth is a lot scarcer than the Wagner.
And to me it is even scarcer because of how frequently the Ruth comes up compared to the Wagner that seems to be 3 or more a year and last 2 years more than that

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Lets look at two other cards from T206: Red and Green Cobb.

Red (2365 PSA/1378 SGC/3743 Total) = .93 % total percent of set
Green (1009 PSA/619 SGC/ 1628 Total) = .40 % total percent of set

Something tells me few people are going to call either of these cards scarce but by your thinking both are more scarce than the BN and E92 and the Mitchell is between the two.

No now you're back to comparing cards outside their set and if you do that there are thousands of cards that are rarer than the Wagner but most are not as scarce as the Wagner is in the T206 set.

Using the E90-1 Mitchell Compared to an E90-1 Cobb and Dougherty which many consider tougher than Mitchell and the pop report shows that it is.

Mitchell 56 of 11,603 graded E90-1 = 0.48%
Cobb 374 of 11,603 = 3.22%
Dougherty 35 of 11,603 = 0.30%

[JustinD]

I honestly would not call this a reasonable measure as I know of no ungraded T206 Wags but there are astronomical numbers of ungraded T206 cards in collections and drawers. I have several personal friends with ungraded cobbs both red and green and I certainly do not know every person.

I see where you are going, but using comparison to sets such as Baltimore News with most known examples graded in comparison to a set that I personally would believe more ungraded examples exist just seems to have a lack of defense.

The Wagner in truth is far smaller to known set examples, likely a couple more positions past that decimal.

However, I think pure numbers is a strong measurement and this measurement proposed is disregarding far more rare cards simply because the entire set is rare. I guess it’s perspective for the collector, I like pure rarity as my ultimate dream card is a 1910 Washington Times Ty Cobb. I see that even with unlimited funding, as there is one, I would still likely never own it. With the Wags, it is rare based on production numbers but a guess is that at least 4 have come up for sale in around the past 18 months. I could certainly have one.

That’s my measurement, could I possibly find one? With the Wagner, it’s a resounding yes.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by JustinD

I honestly would not call this a reasonable measure as I know of no ungraded T206 Wags but there are astronomical numbers of ungraded T206 cards in collections and drawers.

7 of the known T206 Wagners are ungraded, 5 of which IMO would rank in the top 10 condition-wise.

[cubman1941]

Just my nickel worth - everyone makes great points. If I remember right, when the 1st T206 was going to be sold, there was a greart deal made that it was 1 of only 5 known (at that time) ones. That fact and the person who bought it was really publicized in newspapers and magazine articles. In otherwords. it got lots of publicity. Everytime after that it sold there was more of the same. It was always touted as THE rare card. No one ever mentioned or, if it was, it was ignored that more Wagners had been found. My point is the publicity is what makes this such a "rare" card. Only inside the hobby can the points made above and discussed, outside the hobby publicity reigns.

[BobC]

Rarity has to do with the how many there actually is of an item. Scarcity has to do with how many of an item there is versus how many people want one (ie: demand). That is why I suggested somehow bringing in that demand factor to the numbers Pat had worked. Technically, what Pat is measuring is just the rarity of particular cards to the total number of all other cards in the same particular sets. It doesn't necessarily speak to how rare a particular card is to how many of each of all the other cards are out there. T206 Wagners are rare in relation to most all other T206 cards out there, but are by no means that rare when compared to all the other cards out there in all the other sets that have fewer existing cards than there are T206 Wagners. And there are an unbelievable number of very many cards that are much, much rarer than T206 Wagners are. But because so many people collect T206 cards and want/need that Wagner for their collection, the number of those Wagner cards that exist can't even come close to satisfying the demand for them, making them extremely scarce. Much more scarce than most all cards that are actually much rarer than a T206 Wagner.

To put it another way, if only one of a particular card exists, that is the rarest an item can be, a true one of one. But now say there is only one person in the whole world that really cares about and collects that card, and they go out and buy it. There was a total supply of only one of that card, and it completely satisfied the entire demand there was for that card. And since that one single card fully met the demand that was out there for it, the card isn't scarce at all. Extremely rare, yes, but scarce, absolutely not.

The bigger problem then is how do you actually measure and quantify that demand? And compounding it even further is how do you then accurately measure supply as well, and also take into consideration that just because supply exists, it doesn't mean it will always be made available for sale. In this regard, a card that is scarce, but not particularly rare, can be considered rare in regard to how often it becomes availabe for sale. And as others have pointed out, the use of just two TPG's pop reports is likely not a very accurate measure of supply in many cases. Interesting to talk about and discuss. Just not sure a wholly accurate formula or measure can be created to truly measure and compare a card's level of scarcity to that of other cards. Maybe the best and only real way we have to even somewhat accurately measure and compre scarcity among different cards is simply their price.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by BobC

Rarity has to do with the how many there actually is of an item. Scarcity has to do with how many of an item there is versus how many people want one (ie: demand). That is why I suggested somehow bringing in that demand factor to the numbers Pat had worked. Technically, what Pat is measuring is just the rarity of particular cards to the total number of all other cards in the same particular sets. It doesn't necessarily speak to how rare a particular card is to how many of each of all the other cards are out there. T206 Wagners are rare in relation to most all other T206 cards out there, but are by no means that rare when compared to all the other cards out there in all the other sets that have fewer existing cards than there are T206 Wagners. And there are an unbelievable number of very many cards that are much, much rarer than T206 Wagners are. But because so many people collect T206 cards and want/need that Wagner for their collection, the number of those Wagner cards that exist can't even come close to satisfying the demand for them, making them extremely scarce. Much more scarce than most all cards that are actually much rarer than a T206 Wagner.

To put it another way, if only one of a particular card exists, that is the rarest an item can be, a true one of one. But now say there is only one person in the whole world that really cares about and collects that card, and they go out and buy it. There was a total supply of only one of that card, and it completely satisfied the entire demand there was for that card. And since that one single card fully met the demand that was out there for it, the card isn't scarce at all. Extremely rare, yes, but scarce, absolutely not.

Interesting comparison, I like it.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Interesting comparison, I like it.

I edited what I said and added a little more to it after you posted. Sorry!

[drcy]

Interesting numbers I hadn't thought of before.

[RCMcKenzie]

If you have the money, all of the above are available to you at the click of a button. Maybe the Ruth is difficult, the others are just pricy. Dave Shean is probably the toughest e90-1 without considering demand.

[EddieP]

Originally Posted by BobC

Rarity has to do with the how many there actually is of an item. Scarcity has to do with how many of an item there is versus how many people want one (ie: demand). .

A memory technique to remember Rare vs Scarce.

Scarce = Demand / Supply and is directly proportional to $.
“ Rare” is a low pop report. Something Scarce doesn’t necessarily have to be rare and vice versa.

I’m sure there must be an economist on this Board that has a formula that takes into the account of Demand because they study scarcity all the time.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by BobC

Rarity has to do with the how many there actually is of an item. Scarcity has to do with how many of an item there is versus how many people want one (ie: demand). That is why I suggested somehow bringing in that demand factor to the numbers Pat had worked. Technically, what Pat is measuring is just the rarity of particular cards to the total number of all other cards in the same particular sets. It doesn't necessarily speak to how rare a particular card is to how many of each of all the other cards are out there. T206 Wagners are rare in relation to most all other T206 cards out there, but are by no means that rare when compared to all the other cards out there in all the other sets that have fewer existing cards than there are T206 Wagners. And there are an unbelievable number of very many cards that are much, much rarer than T206 Wagners are. But because so many people collect T206 cards and want/need that Wagner for their collection, the number of those Wagner cards that exist can't even come close to satisfying the demand for them, making them extremely scarce. Much more scarce than most all cards that are actually much rarer than a T206 Wagner.

To put it another way, if only one of a particular card exists, that is the rarest an item can be, a true one of one. But now say there is only one person in the whole world that really cares about and collects that card, and they go out and buy it. There was a total supply of only one of that card, and it completely satisfied the entire demand there was for that card. And since that one single card fully met the demand that was out there for it, the card isn't scarce at all. Extremely rare, yes, but scarce, absolutely not.

The bigger problem then is how do you actually measure and quantify that demand? And compounding it even further is how do you then accurately measure supply as well, and also take into consideration that just because supply exists, it doesn't mean it will always be made available for sale. In this regard, a card that is scarce, but not particularly rare, can be considered rare in regard to how often it becomes availabe for sale. And as others have pointed out, the use of just two TPG's pop reports is likely not a very accurate measure of supply in many cases. Interesting to talk about and discuss. Just not sure a wholly accurate formula or measure can be created to truly measure and compare a card's level of scarcity to that of other cards. Maybe the best and only real way we have to even somewhat accurately measure and compre scarcity among different cards is simply their price.

The demand is the tough part but you can get some kind of idea by comparing the information equally the E90-1 Mitchell and Dougherty are a good example some say the Mitchell is scarcer and others say the Dougherty is, no offense to the Mitchell group but Ed who is probably one of the most knowledgeable members on the set says that Dougherty is scarcer than Mitchell and all the numbers support that using the same sources to measure how many are graded and how often they come up for sale. The Mitchell in general probably gets more recognition for being scarce in the set so the demand on that aspect is probably higher for Mitchell but is it enough to balance out the scarcity and sales difference?

Population %

Dougherty 0.3016
Mitchell 0.4826

Cardtarget sales

Dougherty 11
Mitchell 49

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Pat R

The demand is the tough part but you can get some kind of idea by comparing the information equally the E90-1 Mitchell and Dougherty are a good example some say the Mitchell is scarcer and others say the Dougherty is, no offense to the Mitchell group but Ed who is probably one of the most knowledgeable members on the set says that Dougherty is scarcer than Mitchell and all the numbers support that using the same sources to measure how many are graded and how often they come up for sale. The Mitchell in general probably gets more recognition for being scarce in the set so the demand on that aspect is probably higher for Mitchell but is it enough to balance out the scarcity and sales difference?

Population %

Dougherty 0.3016
Mitchell 0.4826

Cardtarget sales

Dougherty 11
Mitchell 49

All great points Pat, this is a very interesting thread you started. It is one of those issues where it is virtually impossible to truly measure and somehow quantify all the different factors that can impact and influence any particular card's overall desirability and ultimately its price in the marketplace.

Rarity is the simple part of it, and extremely easy to measure and compare. If there is only one known example of card A, and two known of card B, it is empirically shown and proven that card A is the rarer card. But then if/when those two cards show up for sale, and card B always sells for some ridiculously higher price than card A, that clearly demonstrates card B is scarcer than card A as more people apparently want and have a greater desire/need for card B, as shown by the higher price they're willing to pay for it versus the rarer card A.

What creates this scarcity is the level of desire for something (demand) versus how easy it is to satisfy that desire (supply). Measuring/quantifying the reasons behind the obviously higher desire or demand for card B in my example is impossible though as there can be an almost infinite number of reasons someone may want or prefer it over card A. Ask 10 different people why they all want the same card, and you can very easily get 10 different answers. And the level of that desire or need also tremendously factors into the scarcity of an item.

As in the earlier discussion of the T206 Wagner versus the T206 Doyle N.Y. Nat'l card, you can possibly have a somewhat similar number of people want, need, and desire both cards, but different levels of that want, need, and desire will have them wanting one of those two cards more than the other. And regardless of which card is actually rarer, they'll ultimately show those different levels of want and desire (ie: demand) by how much more they're willing to pay for the card they want the most. And because of the almost infinite number of variables that can go into determining the public's reasons for their desire/need of a particular card, and the different levels of that desire/need that each person can then have, the prices people are willing to pay may be the only reasonable measure to somehow truly incorporate all the variables in determining the demand for a particular card, and thus its true scarcity.

[puckpaul]

Originally Posted by Pat R

No now you're back to comparing cards outside their set and if you do that there are thousands of cards that are scarcer than the Wagner but most are not as scarce as the Wagner is in the T206 set.

Using the E90-1 Mitchell Compared to an E90-1 Cobb and Dougherty which many consider tougher than Mitchell and the pop report shows that it is.

Mitchell 56 of 11,603 graded E90-1 = 0.48%
Cobb 374 of 11,603 = 3.22%
Dougherty 35 of 11,603 = 0.30%

You would also have to adjust for the fact that more people have cards like the Cobb graded (and the E90-1 Mitchell perhaps since it was a known scarcity moreso than the Dougherty), than other cards, so its a little distorted.

[Leon]

That is interesting too.... There are many raw cards but this a telling sign the Cobby is, most likely, more common than the other 2.

Originally Posted by Pat R

No now you're back to comparing cards outside their set and if you do that there are thousands of cards that are rarer than the Wagner but most are not as scarce as the Wagner is in the T206 set.

Using the E90-1 Mitchell Compared to an E90-1 Cobb and Dougherty which many consider tougher than Mitchell and the pop report shows that it is.

Mitchell 56 of 11,603 graded E90-1 = 0.48%
Cobb 374 of 11,603 = 3.22%
Dougherty 35 of 11,603 = 0.30%

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Leon

That is interesting too.... There are many raw cards but this a telling sign the Cobby is, most likely, more common than the other 2.

Most likely there wouldn't be as big of a separation with the raw numbers but the survivability of a Cobb over Dougherty or Mitchell over the years has to be a lot higher which relates to another impressive fact about the scarcity of the Wagner.

Cobb & Wagner Charlotte_Daily_Observer_Mon__Aug_9__1909_ (1).jpg

[Leon]

Really interesting read. Thanks for posting it.

Originally Posted by Pat R

Most likely there wouldn't be as big of a separation with the raw numbers but the survivability of a Cobb over Dougherty or Mitchell over the years has to be a lot higher which relates to another impressive fact about the scarcity of the Wagner.

Attachment 541140

[lowpopper]

There has to be more wagners out there...sitting in a box in an attic previously owned by an ATC worker

[RCFire82]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Most likely there wouldn't be as big of a separation with the raw numbers but the survivability of a Cobb over Dougherty or Mitchell over the years has to be a lot higher which relates to another impressive fact about the scarcity of the Wagner.

Attachment 541140

That is a great read. Couldn't help but think of POG mania (90's kid thing). Could you imagine seeing kids flipping Ty Cobbs through the air calling "heads or tails" to see who gets it? Lol.