Net54baseball.com Forums

Net54baseball.com Forums (http://www.net54baseball.com/index.php)
-   Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) (http://www.net54baseball.com/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Question regarding 1968 Milton Bradley Nolan Ryan (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=256855)

deepstep19 06-29-2018 10:37 AM

Question regarding 1968 Milton Bradley Nolan Ryan
 
Just wanting to get some input on this card. In particular the PsA 6 for regular Topps and Milton Bradley Nolan Ryan's are both VCP around 600. However the PSA population for the all regular Topps PSA is 8164 and the Milton Bradley total is 257. Just curious as to why the Milton Bradley is not worth more since apparently it's way more scarce?

rsdill2 06-29-2018 10:50 AM

I'm no expert on the '68 MBs but here's my thoughts:

-PSA only recently began labeling MBs - so for 20 years all 68 Ryan's have been labeled Topps, thus skewing the pop report

-Lots of people don't know / don't care about the MB variation. Simple supply/demand

swarmee 06-29-2018 02:07 PM

Also, people are putting together complete graded 1968 Topps sets; very few are putting together graded Milton Bradley sets.

toppcat 06-29-2018 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swarmee (Post 1790848)
Also, people are putting together complete graded 1968 Topps sets; very few are putting together graded Milton Bradley sets.

This. MB too is almost a reprint if you think about it.

ALR-bishop 06-29-2018 05:01 PM

I have a set, ungraded. In a way the entire set is sort of a variation, and two MB cards are in fact listed as official variations to the 1968 Topps set. That caused me to get two copies of the Cox and Brinkman yellow name cards, one pair for the MB set and one for the base set, even though all the Brinkman and Cox variations are MB card

Like the 62 green tints I think graders would have a hard time accurately identifying MB cards unless they had a regular version of the card in hand to compare

Zach Wheat 06-29-2018 05:07 PM

I think it has more to do with demand caused by the difficulty in distinguishing between the Topps and MB version.

Z

horzverti 06-30-2018 10:59 AM

For me, the difficulty distinguishing regular issue Topps vs. MB cards is what make MB cards most appealing. I like the 1968 regular set, but I really like the MB set.

MBs are not reprints. They are a special issue which were produced for a game in a close time frame relative to when the regular 1968s were produced/distributed (only months apart). In our hobby, the word reprint has a negative connotation attached to it. The fake 1963 Rose rookies printed in the 1980/90s are reprints. The MB cards are not reprints.

I respect your deep knowledge on everything Topps Dave. We may just have different opinions. I didn’t miss your use of the word “almost” in your post. :)

swarmee 06-30-2018 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by horzverti (Post 1791039)
The fake 1963 Rose rookies printed in the 1980/90s are reprints. The MB cards are not reprints.

Most people would say those are not reprints, as they were not made with the approval of the copyright holder. Therefore, they are counterfeits. Topps does make officially licensed reprints, and there is a distinction to be made. Especially when you're also splitting hairs.
Plus, most MBs are notable due to the white border from the non-baseball cards being next to the burlaps on the printing sheet. So the ones that are easily recognizable due to the white edge are also therefore off-center... ;-)

horzverti 06-30-2018 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swarmee (Post 1791041)
Most people would say those are not reprints, as they were not made with the approval of the copyright holder. Therefore, they are counterfeits. Topps does make officially licensed reprints, and there is a distinction to be made. Especially when you're also splitting hairs.
Plus, most MBs are notable due to the white border from the non-baseball cards being next to the burlaps on the printing sheet. So the ones that are easily recognizable due to the white edge are also therefore off-center... ;-)

I would lump counterfeit cards in with the reprint designation.

ALR-bishop 06-30-2018 01:41 PM

I agree with John’s distinction between a reprint and a counterfeit, but personally do not view the MB cards as either. Like the 62 green tints,
produced in a separate print run by possibly a different printer I would classify them as variations.

But I will leave it up to whoever is in charge of the hobby to decide :)

horzverti 06-30-2018 10:37 PM

I am probably using the words counterfeit and reprint synonymously. If I go through a stack of cards and I spot one that looks fake, I would call it a reprint. I am not sure I would use the word counterfeit. That is just me. I am not saying that anyone is incorrect.

I remember seeing many of the fake Rose rookies actually stamped “counterfeit” on the back. I understand why John would refer to this card, which I used as an example of a reprint card, as counterfeit.

Here is a question for everyone: Fake 1952 Topps Mantles - counterfeit or reprints? Both?

Back to MBs...super set! :D

swarmee 07-01-2018 07:15 AM

The distinction is based on the intent of the person/company who printed them. If the intent is to deceive (sell as the original), then they are counterfeits. If the intent is to reproduce as a novelty, then it is a reprint. Appropriate reprints make changes to the original card so that they can be easily spotted and not used as a fake version later on. For example, 1933 Goudey reprints have Reprint printed on them. T206 reprints have "Capital Reprint" printed on them. Topps reprints of earlier cards are made on different stock and normally have "Topps Reprint Series #x of y cards" printed on them.

swarmee 07-01-2018 07:15 AM

*double post*

toppcat 07-01-2018 08:31 AM

I would call a card reissued by the manufacturer after the original run a reprint, or a reissue. A counterfeit is just that, a fake card. The MB's, to me, are "almost" a reprint and to others they may or may not be considered a true one. Either way I think it impacts the value a little. The MB Baseball are also a subset, as are Football and Hot Rods, of the larger set and I assume that you lose full set collectors in that scenario.

ALR-bishop 07-01-2018 09:19 AM

Are the 62 green tints reprints ?

swarmee 07-01-2018 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toppcat (Post 1791248)
The MB Baseball are also a subset, as are Football and Hot Rods, of the larger set and I assume that you lose full set collectors in that scenario.

The MB cards are a set unto themselves, IMO. They were not co-mingled with 1968 cards and put in baseball, or 1967 football, or 1966 hot rods packs (those only had pink backs, right?). They were only packaged with the game. If you're putting together a set of MB cards, you need all the ones that were in the game, not just the baseball ones.

The Green Tints are a variation of cards in the 1962 Topps Baseball set, because they were pack issued in baseball card packs that year.

CobbSpikedMe 07-01-2018 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swarmee (Post 1791307)
The MB cards are a set unto themselves, IMO. They were not co-mingled with 1968 cards and put in baseball, or 1967 football, or 1966 hot rods packs (those only had pink backs, right?). They were only packaged with the game. If you're putting together a set of MB cards, you need all the ones that were in the game, not just the baseball ones.

The Green Tints are a variation of cards in the 1962 Topps Baseball set, because they were pack issued in baseball card packs that year.

Completely agree with John here. MBs are a separate set unto themselves and green tints are variations.

ALR-bishop 07-01-2018 01:08 PM

I could agree that the MBs are a separate set. Could also see them as variations. But, if a separate
set maybe the Cox and Brinkman should/could be eliminated as variations to the 68 set.

Agree green tints are variations. I do not think a second printing makes them or the MBs reprints

savedfrommyspokes 07-01-2018 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop (Post 1791312)
I could agree that the MBs are a separate set. Could also see them as variations. But, if a separate
set maybe the Cox and Brinkman should/could be eliminated as variations to the 68 set.

Agree green tints are variations. I do not think a second printing makes them or the MBs reprints

I agree with John, Al and Andy.....the 68 MBS are a separate set and the 62 GTs are merely a second print run. I would consider the 68 MBs similar to the BK cards from the 70s, produced by Topps for another company. I wonder what Carltons definition of the MB set would be?

To answer the op's original question, in line with other responses, lack of demand keeps the prices for these cards down. When Carltons article came out a few years back, there was a small surge in prices due to a brief increase in demand, but as time has passed, so has the small spike in demand.

tschock 07-02-2018 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop (Post 1791312)
I could agree that the MBs are a separate set. Could also see them as variations. But, if a separate
set maybe the Cox and Brinkman should/could be eliminated as variations to the 68 set.

The Cox and Brinkman are a great example of supply and demand. Even those who know they were not issued as part of the Topps set still collect those as variations of the Topps set. They were issued in the same quantity as any of the other MB cards, yet they hold a relatively much higher value than the other Topps counterparts (including the Ryan). However as anyone who is putting a true MB set together, the toughest cards by far to find (years later) are the Hot Rod cards.

ALR-bishop 07-02-2018 11:49 AM

Taylor— the reason people collect them as part of the 68 set, even if they know them to be MB cards, is that PSA, Beckett and SCD include them as part of a master set. That’s why I have them in both of my sets. Most 1968 set collectors want them, as well as any MB collectors, hence the demand you point out that drives up the price more than that for other MB cards

We need Carlton to pop in here

toppcat 07-02-2018 04:55 PM

Cox and Brinkman are more popular because they have been in the guides as a legit 68 Topps variation since the beginning, or close enough to it that they are considered part and parcel of the 68 Topps set.

Hot Rods are intriguing since they also show up in the salmon backed "Fun Pack" reissues that also include 67 Who Am I? (no coating) and Target: Moon. What was the purpose of that "set" originally, since Fun Packs were for overstocked and returned cards?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:10 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.