Cards some collectors think are rare, but are not.

[JollyElm]

Coming soon to a 'Collectorisms' thread near you...

Rarefied Blare
The seemingly obligatory and kneejerk practice of exclaiming “Rare!!!” to describe any card that clearly is nothing of the sort.

See also: Rawmeater (slang) - a seller who habitually overuses the word “rare” in his listings.

[ClementeFanOh]

Cory- It bothers me when people say common back T206s are rare on ebay
because it's either ignorance or a lie. I'm not referring to the Demmitt or
O'Hara PBs which truly are rare, and I think you knew that. When some
guy on ebay has a store of 100 cards from 2020+ and one common player
T206 with a PB back and decides to call that T206 "rare", he's just wrong.
There are plenty of "common" back T206s in my collection that I'm proud to
own, but I'm not going to call them "rare" to impress people. This is what I
mean, and it's in line with the thread topic. Trent King

[Cory]

Originally Posted by ClementeFanOh

Cory- It bothers me when people say common back T206s are rare on ebay because it's either ignorance or a lie. I'm not referring to the Demmitt or O'Hara PBs which truly are rare, and I think you knew that.

No - that's my point. Demmitt Polar Bear or O'Hara Polar Bear aren't any more rare than - Armbruster, or Atz or Abbott (or essentially any other front with a polar bear back).

The issue is that Demmitt & O'Hara STL were both ONLY printed with a PB back. All the other issues also had other backs. In fact looking at just the PSA pop reports the others are much more rare - Demmitt & O'Hara STL both have around 200 graded, while the random players above mentioned have 30 to 40 Polar Bears graded. I assume similar pops for each - just the Demmitt & O'Hara have a much higher incentive to grade given the value.

I guess what it really boils down to is what each person's definition of rare is.

[irv]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

I used to own a 1960s convertible that a car collector friend of mind described as rare and undesirable.

Well, he is/was not entirely wrong, but there are many factors involved in saying that too.

Year, make and model, and when he said that, and of course where one lives/resides all comes into play with whether the car will be desirable or not.

Like a lot of things, trends come and go and it is no different in the collector car hobby/industry too.

Rare, one offs or limited production runs of convertibles will no doubt be highly collectable/valuable, but other cars, say muscle cars, convertibles are not sought after as much, unless, of course, like I said, they were rare/limited production runs to begin with.

[here2havefun]

I collect Topps Venezuelan cards, it's very common to see super stars from the 1964 and 1966 sets described as "extremely rare!!1!", when there's 60-100 graded copies floating around. Not really rare.

[darwinbulldog]

I would say basically the entire list of PSA's "Top 250 Sportscards in the Hobby" is composed of cards that a) are often described as rare and b) are not rare.

For comparison, I would say the Ned Garvin card that is the image in my Net54 avatar (of which I believe there are 2 graded copies, but which I do not think of as being particularly rare) is probably rarer than at least 98% of the cards on PSA's list.

[ullmandds]

For anyone to think/state a 1958 topps as mantle is rare...they either have no clue about the issue...or its just a sales tactic.