What is your definition of "RARE?"

[Matt]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

It's unclear whether our hobby wants to employ a rarity scale, but it has worked successfully in the vintage coin market. One problem I see with it is it gives dealers yet another reason to charge even more. If a card was say a R5, be sure the price is going to be jacked up. So when you go to a show, instead of being offered a card at triple retail expect to pay quadruple.

I believe this is precisely what the population reports have done. "This is only 1 of 11 at this grading tier with only 3 higher..."

David - per my post above, I agree 100% with your comments on the term "scarce." It isn't even a case of agree/disagree; you are quoting the definition of the word.

[betafolio2]

Originally Posted by Matt

I believe this is precisely what the population reports have done. "This is only 1 of 11 at this grading tier with only 3 higher..."

Matt, you nailed it! I see sellers on eBay using this information all the time to make their cards sound more exciting and desirable! But it doesn't work on me. And besides, I know (or can pretty well assume) that if there are, say, 5 of a given card at a given grade in a population report, there are probably twice or thrice as many actually out there in the world, or maybe more, because there are lots of collectors like me who have never submitted anything for grading and never will. Of course, PSA et al. would prefer to pretend that collectors like me don't exist. I guess you could say they don't consider US part of the population!

[Exhibitman]

Paradoxically, the pop reports will often overstate the rarity of common cards and understate the rarity of the stars because people are more ready to drop the grading fees on having stars slabbed than commons.

[tbob]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Paradoxically, the pop reports will often overstate the rarity of common cards and understate the rarity of the stars because people are more ready to drop the grading fees on having stars slabbed than commons.

Good point. +1

[bestsmoke]

I think a Perfect Game is Rare, so 21 or fewer.

[terjung]

Seared on both sides, with about 75% still red in color, and an internal temperature of about 120 - 125 F.

Personally, I prefer the term scarce since that pertains more to the frequency that an item is available instead of how many exist. A card may not have a ton of examples out there, but may have one or two come up for sale every few months. I'm reminded of the frequency with which we see E107 Planks. Based on a recent ad, only 10 have been graded. Conservatively, if we assuming there are an equal number of ungraded residing in collections, that yields a high side estimate of 20 E107 Planks in existance. If we see one or two of them keep showing up for sale, we begin thinking they are very common cards - because we see them. In reality, they aren't all that prevalent, but they do grab attention when they surface. In doing so, they gain a perception of not being "rare".

We should be careful not to compare quantify card types with cards. With 147 players in the E107 set, it is not unusual to find a couple floating around and in auctions (REA has only one this year - not mine, btw). Talk to someone looking for specific examples from a particular set and then scarcity becomes much more clear. Many, many low to mid single digit graded populations in that set. Pretty scarce, IMO. So, I'd disagree with the earlier post which said that E107s are not rare. Once again, finding any common just to have "a type card", would not be tough, but finding a particular one is much, much tougher.

Sticking to the intent of the question, I tend to agree with those who describe a particular card's total population (not just graded) of < 20 is rare - if we insist on using that word.

[t206blogcom]

Originally Posted by betafolio2

I see sellers on eBay using this information all the time to make their cards sound more exciting and desirable! But it doesn't work on me.

Exactly - 'Rare' on eBay is more of a marketing tool than an accurate description. While most on this board will see through the false rarity claims on eBay, there are many others on eBay who don't and do pay premiums for relatively common cards. I don't fault the sellers as they're trying to get top dollar for their auctions. I fault the uninformed buyers who not knowing what they're buying.

[drc]

A problem with rarity numbers is no one knows how many of a given card exists.

After all, the Murphy's Law of Pre-War collecting is purchasing the "only one in existence" means a second will show up on eBay the next week.

If you guys decided a rarity scale was the way to go-- you'd have endless arguments of how many of the cards exists.

Start with the T206 Honus Wagner. Let's hammer out how many exist.

[joeadcock]

Another problem with population reports. Who knows how many of the cards were cracked out(lets say from PSA) and submitted to another grading company.

Hence, there is actually less supply of some cards out there(with respect to graded card only, of course).

What is stored in someone's home/vault or yet to be found, will only probably be partially known in the future.

[ctownboy]

It will never happen but the best way to truly find out what is rare and what isn't would be if the value of the card was based on the number that could be proven in existence.

I love using this as an example. I have a 1928 Star Player Candy card of Buddy Myer. Up until I displayed this card on the old board about six years ago, this card was unknown. Now, including mine, there are two known to exist.

You would think because of its rarity it MUST be extremely valuable. Not so.

Yes, I was offered $1,000 dollars for the card but compared to a T206 Honus Wagner, of which at least 60 more are known, this card is valued WAAAAAAAY less.

So, two Buddy Myer cards known to exist and you can buy them for the equivalent of a good computer and an iPhone. Thirty times more T206 Honus Wagners known and, for the same condition card, you are looking at paying the price of a decent sized house in a nice suburban neighborhood.

David

[Exhibitman]

[rarity + notoriety] x demand = price

I have lots of very rare but obscure cards. Rarity may be through the roof but notoriety and demand are low. This Ruth card is rare, with only a handful of known examples, but obscure:



A 1952 Topps Mantle is common--I could buy one within the hour if I had the scratch--so the rarity figure is relatively low but the notoriety and demand are way up there, so the price is strong even for a beater. Anyone want to swap the Ruth for a 1952 Topps Mantle?

[Matt]

one tweak based on your post:
[rarity + notoriety] x demand / ugliness = price

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

[rarity + notoriety] x demand = price

I have lots of very rare but obscure cards. Rarity may be through the roof but notoriety and demand are low. This Ruth card is rare, with only a handful of known examples, but obscure: