Selling 80% of your collection for ‘52 Mantle - would you?

[Foo3112]

Interesting reading all the replies. I don't think there's any wrong or right in this situation. Just personal preferences is all. Me, personally, I would go for it. As someone mentioned, everyone who has bought that card and sat on it for at least 10 years has always done well and come out on top. That part isn't even up for a debate. Just know that the excitement of owning one will eventually wear off just like any other big purchase (like a new vehicle for example). If you are the type that who gets bored easily and would perhaps sell it in a year or two, then I would not purchase one but would rather have a variety of cards in my collection.

The main issues I see about doing something like that are:

1 - You have to make sure you'll get/win the card you are wanting. To sell off about 80% of your collection and then not get the card you wanted would straight up suck.

2 - A card that big usually continues climbing in price as time goes on. By the time you sell off everything, that card in the grade of a 1.5 may not even be in your price point anymore and so you now would either have to settle for a 1 or even an "authentic". Would you be willing to accept that.

[Vintage Vern]

Well, I'm a single player collector and I'm glad he's not a HOFer or I would be a zero card collector. I can without a doubt tell you if I ever purchased a high dollar card anyone else that held that card would be in trouble. You would see the market tank like no other time period in history, that's just how "luck" in my world, works. At some point there will come an end, there always is and I'd hit the market at that exact point. Every hobby I've been a part of hits that point and it usually happens when deep pockets take over the hobby. The normal Joe gets left out, and fewer people that loved something, just can't justify or afford it any longer. The $ ruins everything for most of us. Can you imagine what any of these players would think of the $ people pay for an old piece of cardboard? Boggles the mind.

[MR RAREBACK]

1914 cracker jack ty cobb
1933 goudey ruth any pose , but I like 181
1948 leaf paige

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by MR RAREBACK

1914 cracker jack ty cobb
1933 goudey ruth any pose , but I like 181
1948 leaf paige

That Cobb in a 2 might be close to 40k now.

[MR RAREBACK]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

That Cobb in a 2 might be close to 40k now.

yah I was thinking 1 grades on all of them but the window is closing

[Chris-Counts]

If you don't need the Mantle to complete your 1952 Topps set or a complete run of Mantle cards, what's the point? There are far better looking Mantle cards (1953 Bowman, 1956 Topps, etc.) available for a fraction of the price. If you're looking at it as an investment, a good argument can be made that the 1952 Topps Mantle card is the most overrated of all cards. It's not very rare at all, just super-hyped. I believe the 1951 Bowman Mantle or the 1952 Topps Jackie Robinson are far better investments if that's what you're after. The same goes for 1951 Bowman and 1952 Topps cards of Willie Mays.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by Chris Counts

If you don't need the Mantle to complete your 1952 Topps set or a complete run of Mantle cards, what's the point? There are far better looking Mantle cards (1953 Bowman, 1956 Topps, etc.) available for a fraction of the price. If you're looking at it as an investment, a good argument can be made that the 1952 Topps Mantle card is the most overrated of all cards. It's not very rare at all, just super-hyped. I believe the 1951 Bowman Mantle or the 1952 Topps Jackie Robinson are far better investments if that's what you're after. The same goes for 1951 Bowman and 1952 Topps cards of Willie Mays.

+1 Well said and I could not agree more.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Chris Counts

If you don't need the Mantle to complete your 1952 Topps set or a complete run of Mantle cards, what's the point? There are far better looking Mantle cards (1953 Bowman, 1956 Topps, etc.) available for a fraction of the price. If you're looking at it as an investment, a good argument can be made that the 1952 Topps Mantle card is the most overrated of all cards. It's not very rare at all, just super-hyped. I believe the 1951 Bowman Mantle or the 1952 Topps Jackie Robinson are far better investments if that's what you're after. The same goes for 1951 Bowman and 1952 Topps cards of Willie Mays.

As a collector, I've always been about more cards of lesser value: why have one really nice Ruth when I can have ten messy ones instead? 10 Ruths are better than one, duh! As a collector, give me a run of Mantle cards instead of a 1952 T. If I am trying to make money, though, I don't see it that way. I would rather put my eggs in one marquee card than in a card I hope might some day become a marquee card. The Mantle is so expensive that a small % movement on price equates to a much larger % movement on a cheaper card. A PSA 1 Robinson can be had for about $3,000-$3,500; a Mantle is $25,000+. A 10% bump on the Mantle is an 80% bump on the Robinson, in $$ terms. Is it more likely that a Mantle will go up 10% or a Robinson will go up 80%? I realize that the investment on Robinson is much smaller, but is it necessarily a better way to make money? If that's the goal. Not that there's anything wrong with that...